What is the importance of the small island of Sri Lanka in India’s election?

A strange controversy over the events of 50 years ago is emerging as a major issue during the election campaign in India. The country is set to vote in just two weeks, after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) handed over a small uninhabited island to Sri Lanka in 1974, the country’s main opposition. Criticized.

A large number of fishes are found in the area of ​​Kachathivu Island in the Indian Ocean.

The island has a Catholic church where the Christian community visits every year. Devotees from both India and Sri Lanka come here. Otherwise, the place is unimportant and unlikely to matter to political parties in contesting elections that will affect the lives of 1.4 billion Indian citizens.

India ceded the island to its southern neighbor in 1974 under the Maritime Treaty signed during the Indira Gandhi government. It was a pragmatic decision at the time, but giving up even a small piece of independent Indian territory is now unthinkable to Modi’s right-wing nationalist base.

The problem came to light partly due to increased clashes between fishermen from the two countries.

Fishermen from both India and Sri Lanka have historically caught fish from the fishing grounds around Kachathivu, located 21 miles from India in the Palak Strait.

In recent years, tensions over fishing rights have escalated and the Sri Lankan navy arrested more than 240 Indian fishermen last year alone.

Modi and his party have focused on a report by the Times of India newspaper, which analyzed the background of the Congress party’s decision to leave the island.

Official records obtained by Tamil Nadu state BJP president Annamalai include comments attributed to Jawaharlal Nehru, India’s first prime minister, indicating his unwillingness to attach importance to the island.

The report also implicated the local Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party, which is now a Congress ally and governs the southern state of Tamil Nadu near Kachathivu.

Newspaper reports allege that in 1974 the DMK secretly agreed to a deal to hand over Kachathevu to Sri Lanka while publicly opposing the move.

This situation has given the BJP an opportunity to criticize both the national and regional opposition in Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu is seen as a major electoral battleground state.

Tamil Nadu is among the first states where voting will begin in India’s seven-phase elections starting April 19.

Modi posted on X (formerly Twitter) earlier this week that abandoning Kachathivu was a ‘cruel’ decision, which had ‘harmed the interests of our poor fisher men and women.’

Modi said that ‘apart from rhetoric, DMK has done nothing to protect the interests of Tamil Nadu. The new details that have emerged on Kachathivu have completely exposed the double standards of the DMK.’

Modi said that ‘Congress and DMK are family units. They only care that their own sons and daughters thrive. They don’t care about anyone else.’

Modi’s statement sparked a war of words between the BJP and the Congress, which continued throughout the week.

Congress president Mallikarjan Kharge in his post on X said: ‘You suddenly stand up in the 10th year of your government with issues of territorial integrity and national security, probably because of the elections. Your frustration is palpable.’

He reminded Modi that the BJP government had ceded 111 areas to Bangladesh as a ‘friendly gesture’ under the 2015 land boundary agreement.

Modi’s External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar criticized both the Congress and the DMK over the Kachathivu agreement, claiming that for years it had seized and confiscated Indian fishermen and fishing boats due to the transfer of territory to Sri Lanka. Arrest of fishermen has started.

Speaking to reporters in the capital Delhi on Monday, he said that ‘in the last five years, the issue of Kachathivu and fishermen has been repeatedly raised by various parties in the Parliament.

He further said that ‘Congress and DMK looked at this matter as if they had no responsibility in this regard. Now we not only know who did it, but also who covered it up.’

Annamalai, a BJP leader from Tamil Nadu, had earlier claimed that the Modi government was taking steps to reclaim the area. Jaishankar did not respond to a question about whether the Indian government intended to take back the island, saying the matter was before the Supreme Court.

Sri Lanka did not attach much importance to the issue and Infrastructure Minister Jeevan Thondaman told the newspaper Indian Express that Colombo had not received any message from New Delhi on the Kachathivu issue.

“As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, Kachathevu Island is within its line of control,” he said.

A DMK party spokesperson said: ‘It is wrong to talk about an issue without studying its history. In 1974, the DMK staged protests and rallies across the state opposing and condemning the extradition of Kachathevu to Sri Lanka.’

Senior DMK leader RS ​​Bharti also joined the debate and said that if Modi really cared about Kachathivu, he could have claimed the island during his 10-year rule. He asked, ‘Why did they not raise the issue of Kachathevu?’

The DMK says the Gandhi government refused to consider its approach before signing the 1974 accord, which led the party to protest at the time.

In the 50 years since the treaty was signed, every government in Tamil Nadu has repeatedly raised concerns about it. He highlighted its impact on the livelihood of fishermen, the socio-economic stability of coastal communities and the cultural and social fabric of the region.

Chief Minister MK Stalin from Tamil Nadu DM also raised the issue of increasing arrests of Indian fishermen and seizure of boats by Sri Lankan authorities and urged Modi to resolve the issue through diplomacy. deal with

In a letter to Modi last year before a visit by Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, he said: ‘The traditional fishing waters that Tamil fishermen have depended on for generations are becoming increasingly limited. , making it difficult for these communities to sustain their livelihood. (And) the economic condition of these communities is being affected. It also threatens the cultural and social fabric of the region which revolves around the fishing industry.’