The Paradox of Solidarity: Sri Lanka's Diplomatic Positioning, the Kashmir Attack, and the Silence of May Day 2025

President Nila
May 6
5 min read

In May 2025, Sri Lanka's capital, Colombo, witnessed a powerful rally on May Day, organised by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), which also included the National People’s Power (NPP) coalition. Drawing a crowd of over 150,000 people, this rally was more than a demonstration of workers' solidarity—it was a geopolitical statement.

On this occasion, A.R. Sindhu, the national secretary of the All India Federation of Anganwadi Workers and Helpers (AIFAWH) and a key member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI(M)), appeared as a prominent international figure. The event featured speeches from Sri Lankan political leaders, including the President, Prime Minister, and the JVP General Secretary, as well as international delegations from China’s Communist Party (CPC), the CPI(M), the CPI, the All India Forward Bloc (AIFB), and Sri Lankan Muslim leaders.

However, amid this apparent display of leftist international solidarity, a glaring contradiction remained. The rally, which ostensibly symbolised a unified stance against imperialism, conspicuously excluded the voices of Eelam Tamils—the island’s most oppressed ethnic group, historically marginalised by the Sri Lankan state.

Sri Lanka's Silence on the Kashmir Attack

The international context surrounding the May Day rally was particularly notable in light of the recent terrorist attack in Kashmir on 22nd April 2025. As India and the West strongly condemned the violence and rallied in support of the victims, Sri Lanka’s silence was conspicuous. Unlike its usual positioning, where it would align with India or at least offer diplomatic condolences, Sri Lanka refrained from commenting on the Kashmir attack. In fact, Sri Lanka’s alignment with China and its increasing geopolitical independence were showcased more prominently during this period.

This decision to remain silent in the face of a terrorist attack in Kashmir, particularly at a time when India was grappling with internal political tension, raises important questions. Why, when so many countries in the region and globally rallied behind India, did Sri Lanka—host to multiple Chinese officials and Sri Lankan Moors—remain silent? The diplomatic implications of this strategic non-alignment seem clear: Sri Lanka's stance on Kashmir and its ongoing relationship with China point to a desire to challenge India’s regional dominance.

A.R. Sindhu and the CPI(M): Paradoxes of Solidarity

While A.R. Sindhu has consistently opposed the BJP's decision to abrogate Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, this raises a complex point. The CPI(M), under Sindhu’s leadership, has unequivocally rejected the BJP’s actions as undemocratic and in violation of the rights of Kashmiris. The CPI(M) has made it clear that it stands for federalism, autonomy, and minority rights.

However, Sindhu’s participation in Sri Lanka’s May Day rally complicates this stance. Despite her party’s opposition to authoritarianism and centralisation, the CPI(M)’s involvement in a rally that was tied to Sri Lanka’s growing alignment with China, and which excluded Tamil voices, suggests a paradox in leftist solidarity. While the CPI(M) criticises the centralising forces of India’s ruling party, it appears willing to overlook similar dynamics at play in Sri Lanka, where Tamil aspirations have been crushed in the name of state unity.

Sri Lanka’s Political Calculus: A Geopolitical Balancing Act

The Sri Lankan JVP/NPP-led government, headed by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, has been engaging in a delicate diplomatic balancing act. On the surface, it projects a narrative of anti-imperialism, labour rights, and anti-centralisation, while quietly advancing an agenda of growing ties with China. The May Day rally, in this light, was not simply a celebration of the working class but a carefully staged geopolitical event. Sri Lanka, despite its domestic tensions and Tamil marginalisation, positioned itself at the centre of a leftist alliance—one which included China, Sri Lankan Moors, and Indian communist parties.

This alignment with China, and the exclusion of Eelam Tamil leaders, makes Sri Lanka’s positioning clear: the island nation is asserting its geopolitical autonomy while still maintaining historical links to China as a counterbalance to India’s regional hegemony. China’s growing economic and military influence in Sri Lanka has become a key pillar of this new direction, with strategic infrastructure projects like the Hambantota Port underscoring Beijing’s vested interests on the island.

India and the Regional Implications

Sri Lanka’s actions in the wake of the Kashmir attack, alongside the strategic choices it has made to align with China, present a direct challenge to India’s geopolitical leadership. By standing in solidarity with China’s Communist Party, while ignoring the geopolitical sensitivities of its closest neighbour, Sri Lanka is sending a message that it no longer sees India’s influence in the region as an unquestionable truth.

The Indian leftist groups, including the CPI(M) and CPI, should reflect on this paradox of solidarity. While they stand against authoritarian centralisation within India, their support for Sri Lanka's current leadership—which has shown a selective disregard for Tamil voices—raises concerns. The absence of Eelam Tamil representation on this international stage is not just an oversight but an intentional exclusion of the region’s most oppressed ethnic group. This exclusion speaks volumes about Sri Lanka’s realpolitik and its growing distance from the concerns of Tamils, despite their long-standing struggle for autonomy.

China’s Role: Shaping the Future of South Asia

At a broader level, Sri Lanka’s decision to align with China while remaining silent on the Kashmir attack is part of a strategic shift in regional geopolitics. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) continues to shape the island’s infrastructure and economy, embedding Beijing’s influence in a region that is historically tied to Indian dominance. Sri Lanka’s participation in a leftist-dominated event, where it framed itself as an ideological partner of China, was not just about workers’ rights; it was a carefully curated geopolitical move.

Conclusion: Sri Lanka’s Geopolitical Positioning

In conclusion, the May Day 2025 rally in Colombo will be remembered not only for the international left-wing unity it projected but also for the clear geopolitical signals it sent to India and the world. By aligning with China and excluding Eelam Tamil voices, Sri Lanka revealed the realpolitik at play in its foreign policy.

As for A.R. Sindhu and the CPI(M), their presence in Sri Lanka was an uncomfortable alignment with a regime that has continued to suppress Tamil rights. The paradox of solidarity is a striking reminder that ideological unity often obscures realpolitik contradictions. For the global left, solidarity must extend beyond symbolic alliances to genuine struggles for all oppressed peoples, especially those whose voices have been silenced for too long.

Balananthini Balasubramaniam (Nila Bala)

19:19

02/05/2025

London, UK.

***************************************************************

SMALL DROPS