Sri Lanka’s Civil War: The Political Trump Card That Never Fades

 

UK Sanctions and Sri Lanka’s Response

The recent UK sanctions on Sri Lankan officials, including three former military leaders, have reignited debates on accountability and reconciliation in the country. While the UK government argues that these measures are aimed at addressing human rights violations during the Sri Lankan civil war, the Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry has strongly opposed what it calls a "unilateral action." According to the ministry, such sanctions complicate the national reconciliation process rather than assist it.

The press release issued by the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) on March 24, 2025, announced travel bans and asset freezes on four individuals, three of whom are former military commanders. The statement referenced the UK government’s commitment to ensuring that those responsible for wartime abuses do not enjoy impunity. In response, Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath conveyed to British High Commissioner Andrew Patrick that Sri Lanka is strengthening its domestic mechanisms for accountability and reconciliation and insists that any past human rights violations should be addressed through local mechanisms rather than foreign intervention.

War Responsibility as a Political Shield

Beyond diplomatic responses, the issue of war-time responsibility continues to hold significant political weight within Sri Lanka. Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has openly stated that he takes full responsibility for the war, a move that aligns with his long-standing position as a wartime leader. Similarly, opposition leader Ranil Wickremesinghe has largely defended the military operations, even in international interviews such as one with Al Jazeera. The strategic positioning of political figures on war-related issues highlights the enduring role the war plays in Sri Lanka’s political landscape.

The War: A Vote-Winning Strategy

For Sri Lankan political parties, the war is not merely a historical event; it remains a potent electoral tool. Sinhala nationalist factions often emphasize military victory to consolidate their voter base, while Tamil parties invoke wartime grievances to rally their own constituencies. The ability to invoke the war as a political trump card is not limited to Sri Lanka alone. International actors, including Western governments, also leverage the war to exert influence over the island nation, as seen in the UK’s latest sanctions.

A Legacy That Shapes the Future

The Sri Lankan war remains a multi-faceted tool of political leverage—both domestically and internationally. While the government asserts its commitment to national reconciliation, the use of war narratives continues to shape political strategies on all sides. With each new development, the war’s legacy remains an active force in shaping Sri Lanka’s future.