Factum Perspective: Marine science research in Sri Lanka – Pitfalls and Potentials

By Rear Admiral Y. N. Jayarathna (Retd)

Given recent media reports, mostly Indian, marine science research appears to have become a hot topic yet again. Whilst debates linger over this, I wish to share some of my thoughts for readers to understand these issues from a Sri Lankan point of view. I consider this important, because the Sri Lankan point of view is often refracted through a Western or an Indian lens. Our voice appears not to be strong enough, and it stands to be ignored.

For an island state like us, marine science research remains a vital necessity, which has a direct impact on grand strategic objectives. To fully appreciate this, it is imperative that we have what is called “maritime affinity”, from the top leadership down to high officials and to academia. Our oceans are our first and final frontier; how we want to utilize this space for our growth and geostrategic survival therefore needs to be understood by statesmen, political officials, and scholars. In Sri Lanka, however, there appears to be a lack of understanding regarding this, and as a result we almost always end up in the same hot spot.

The United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which we signed on December 10, 1982, and ratified on July 19, 1994, gives us a clear enough mandate to exercise our rights within our maritime jurisdiction. Marine Science Research is a national necessity and when the State does not invest in it, someone else will be bound to. The Seabed 2030 Initiative of GEBCO-Nippon Foundation is such an exercise, where the State is responsible to fulfil its obligations in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Moreover, Part XIII of UNCLOS covers coastal state rights, which more or less empowers us to have a say on our own needs. Given that the maritime sphere is a global concern, there is no need to be defensive about these initiatives. Sri Lanka is a vital component of any research into the maritime domain in the northern region of the Indian Ocean. My belief is that it is high time we worked in a way that enabled our location to benefit us.

Sri Lanka lacked scientific research in her own maritime domain until Norway came from 1978 to 1980 with the Fridtjof Nansen survey. Once the Norwegians understood the potential of our oceanic space, they established two agencies: NORAD and Cey-Nor. In doing so, my view is that they found the ideal partner for their long-term strategic goals, the Tamil fishing community. I will leave the rest for you to decipher, especially with regard to Norway’s intervention in the three decade long separatist terrorism, including its decision to invest time and effort in a non-state actor, and a separatist outfit at that. In any case, this episode serves as a good example of how far marine science research can go if leaders lacked maritime affinity.

The problem today is our policies, or the virtual absence of them. No one seems interested in understanding or learning about marine science research. Sri Lanka tends to be treated as a “pressure-based decision maker” and not a “policy-based decision maker”, given our past handling of matters in these domains. Our actions invariably become a concern to India, and the Indian media complicates matters for our decision makers.

How, then, are we to handle these dilemmas and problems? First and foremost, irrespective of nationality or the flag of the vessel, if the research vessel is engaged in partnership with Sri Lanka’s entity for the betterment of the island or for the common good of the world, in line with the provisions of UNCLOS, there is no reason not to support it. We need to be an active partner from the planning to execution in such endeavors.

Marine science research tends to be planned years ahead, and it involves a number of activities, from diplomacy to logistics. These processes are informed to relevant stakeholders in advance. That gives us ample time to engage anyone for marine science research within our maritime jurisdiction. For instance, if a vessel is making a call for operational or logistic turnarounds at our ports, advance notice will always be given. Once the rules and regulations for these vessels are communicated, these vessels must then abide by them.

Research vessels or warships which traverse the oceans collect marine data as a routine navigational and operational procedure. In 1995 I underwent my Category B Hydrography training at the National Hydrographic School of the Indian Navy in Vasco-da-Gama, Goa. My course senior sailor was a Chief Petty Officer with over 15 years of experience as a Survey Recorder. He was pulled out from the school for a month to go onboard an Indian Naval vessel which was undertaking its maiden port visit to Israel.

After his return he shared his experience and even taught us how to verify the accuracy of the nautical charts, especially the depths, isobaths, and details of tides, using onboard instruments like Echo Sounders (which ships use to measure depth), Tide Tables (which are being replaced by online programs today), and Anemometers (which measure humidity, wind speed, direction, and make other observations relevant to naval applications and marine science).

Indeed, as a routine procedure, our naval vessels, which regularly visit the various regional ports and corners of the Indian Ocean, log the marine weather and assess the accuracy of electronic charts with regard to depths and currents. All these data serve a dual purpose, though the Sri Lanka Navy does not operate any submarine or aircraft.

In that regard, it is vital that we groom our academia on how to approach these fields. Our younger generation should go to the sea and spend time there to become marine scientists. However, the question of State patronage crops up here. When the State does not support these areas, our universities come to depend solely on foreign collaborations.

The problem lies here, as mostly it is the foreign entity, either a university or a think-tank, that proposes to the local university a marine science research plan, about which the local university has little knowledge. More problematically, the local university does not disclose any of these offers to the government, fearing a loss of their foreign grant, which is attractive in comparison to the State’s allocations. As a result, in the end, whatever data we collect gets lost.

In 2019, I was part of the team that began drafting the guideline for Marine Science Research in Sri Lanka. Back then the Navy was developing a Marine Science Data Repository. As the Chief Hydrographer to the Navy and the Joint Chief Hydrographer to the Government, I found that many local institutions did not have the required data with them. Needless to say, it was rather exhaustive to trace who was involved in the research, who held responsibility, and who actually possessed the data. At times it seemed as though we were going nowhere.

The findings were alarming, particularly since there was no proper preservation of old data that the next generation could use and data that could be brought up for analyzing long-term evaluations. In the course of our futile search several scenarios confronted us. Either the person involved was abroad or not present, the data shared happened to be untraceable in CDs and pen drives, nobody appeared to be aware of whether the data was shared, or the available data were useless because the software system simply could not support them!

This was the case even with the National Hydrography Office under NARA, when I was instrumental in designing a Marine Spatial Data Infrastructure (MSDI) for the country. The upshot of it all was that their data could not be shared because they did not have any! In any case, data in files and cupboards were as good as no data, unless they had made good use of them. My experience has been that if a State agency refuses to share data, it means that they do not have the required data or that their data is of substandard quality.

These shortfalls can be addressed by having centralized control, through which we can develop marine science research that caters to the needs of our country. Sri Lanka has produced a number of world-renowned marine scientists. They are willing to step in and help, provided that there is a clear aim and genuine effort to cooperate. All marine science related issues crop up because of our indecisiveness. There is no point in blaming another party.

When India becomes confident of our efforts in marine science and when they see that Sri Lanka is in control of the situation and no one else is in control of its marine science research, many geostrategic concerns ailing the island will go away. Sri Lanka, at this juncture, is in dire need of a decision maker, it does not need more rules, regulations, or SOPs. More rules, more regulations, and more SOPs are only going to restrict us and the potential for foreign assistance, ultimately barricading us and leaving us in a state of deprival.

If our country is to be an active partner in regional maritime affairs, we need to engage with our partners with a clear understanding and knowledge of what we are doing. This requires strong personalities who are cognizant of maritime matters. Once our domestic affairs are in order, external concerns are bound to disappear. This will create an atmosphere conducive to foreign collaborations in marine research, providing more opportunities and much needed exposure for the younger generation in Sri Lanka.

Rear Admiral Y. N. Jayarathna (Retd) was the Chief of Staff and Chief Hydrographer of the Sri Lanka Navy and Joint Chief Hydrographer to the Sri Lankan government. On retirement his services have been secured by the United Nations as an International Consultant for Undersea Cables. He can be reached at ynjayarathna@hotmail.com.

Factum is an Asia Pacific-focused think tank on International Relations, Tech Cooperation, and Strategic Communications accessible via www.factum.lk.

The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the organization’s.