In early August 2015, the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu J Jayalalithaa played host to Prime Minister Narendra Modi at her Poes Garden residence in Chennai. During the "lunch pe charcha" she took up with Modi a slew of issues. Among the issues placed on the table was a demand to retrieve Katchatheevu, an islet in the Palk Strait, from Sri Lanka.
Fast forward. Nearly a decade later, Katchatheevu is back in the spotlight. With polls ahead, it's a custom for political parties to rake up long-running disputes with neighbouring countries in a bid to silence their rivals. Going by that tradition, Modi invoked the name of Katchatheevu to fire salvos at the opposition Congress.
Modi takes to platform X
Modi took to platform X on Sunday (March 31) to blame the Congress party for giving away Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka. This ‘callous’ decision by the grand old party “has angered every Indian” and convinced people that Congress is not a party that can be trusted, Modi wrote on social media platform X.
Modi added, “Weakening India’s unity, integrity and interest has been Congress’ way of working for 75 years and counting.”
The prime minister’s post comes after documents obtained by BJP Tamil Nadu chief K Annamalai suggested that the Congress never attached much importance to the tiny, uninhabited island, according to The Times of India. The report said that Jawaharlal Nehru once even remarked that he would not hesitate “in giving up claims to the island” altogether.
Rebuttals
The Congress and its key ally in Tamil Nadu, the ruling DMK, were quick to react.
The Tamil Nadu Congress Committee (TNCC) president K Selvaperunthagai asked why Prime Minister Narendra Modi failed to retrieve Katchatheevu during the past 10 years if he is really concerned about its ceding to Sri Lanka. "Why did Modi fail to protect Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh? China has encroached on many thousand square kilometres of Indian space. Why is the PM silent on this," he said.
DMK spokesperson S Manuraj retorted that after 10 years in government, the incumbent party is afraid to campaign on its achievements. It's still busy blaming the opposition parties. "Either way, this is a woeful and outdated campaign issue," he noted.
285 acres of uninhabited land with a shrine
Katchatheevu , a 285-acre piece of uninhabited land, is located 33 kilometres from Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu and 24 kilometres off the coast of Neduntheevu in Sri Lanka. It has been a disputed territory between the two countries over fishing rights. Reports about Tamil Nadu fishermen coming under attack and their detention by the Sri Lankan navy while fishing near Katchatheevu are quite common. The death of a fisherman would spark protests in Tamil Nadu following which political parties would make a hue and cry till the issue drowns in the Bay of Bengal.
A silver lining to the thorny issue is the participation of fishermen from Tamil Nadu in the St. Antony's Church annual festival held during the month of February-March at Katchatheevu. The shrine was constructed in 1913. Though the islet was ceded to Sri Lanka following the 1974 Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement, the right to worship at the shrine was retained.
Historic background of Indo-Sri Lanka agreements
The Sri Lankan Tamils have their historic origin from Tamil Nadu. The question of the adjustment of Tamil minority in the Sri Lankan society after independence in 1948 resulted in a hostile relationship between the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil minority. The agreements signed in 1964 and 1974 could not satisfactorily resolve the issue...(Fahmida Ashraf, Indo- Sri Lanka Agreeement to Establish Peace and Normalcy in Sri Lanka, JSTOR, digital library of academic journals and books).
India–Sri Lanka maritime boundary agreements were signed in 1974 and 1976 to define the international maritime boundary between the two countries. The first agreement was regarding the maritime boundary in waters between Adam's Bridge and the Palk Strait, and came into force on July 8, 1974. The second agreement, which was signed on March 23 and entered into force on May 10, 1976, defined the maritime boundaries in the Gulf of Mannar and the Bay of Bengal.
Indo-Sri Lanka Agreement of June 28, 1974
The governments of India and Sri Lanka signed an agreement to determine the boundary line in the historic waters between the two countries and "to settle the related matters in a manner which is fair and equitable to both sides." As a part of the agreement, Indira Gandhi ceded the islet to Sri Lanka. At the time, according to a report, she thought the island had little strategic value and that ceasing India’s claim over the island would deepen its ties with its southern neighbour.
However, Article 5 of the agreement clearly states that Indian fishermen and pilgrims will enjoy access to visit Katchatheevu as hitherto, and will not be required by Sri Lanka to obtain travel documents or visas for these purposes. Similarly, Article 6 says, "That the vessels of India and Sri Lanka will enjoy in each other's waters such rights as they have traditionally enjoyed therein." But the agreement has not been followed by Sri Lanka in letter and spirit.
Agreement in favour of India?
Rajni Gamage and Isha Gupta in their paper (Institute of South Asian Studies) Resolution of the India-Sri Lanka Maritime Border Conflict and Fisheries Dispute say, "The 64 kilometres of ocean between Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka – the region of the Palk Bay – has been fraught with conflict and violence over the past few decades... The internal politics in India and Sri Lanka have contributed to rising tensions and the lack of resolution. This has deeply affected the bilateral relations between the two states, as seen by the longstanding dispute over the sovereignty of Kachchatheevu."
"To India’s benefit, the 1974 agreement split the area in the Palk Bay – consisting of 2,100 square miles – between India and Sri Lanka in a ratio of 1.02:1 in favour of India, and protected Indian fishermen by allowing the free travel of vessels through the Palk Bay (fishing was not explicitly stated in the agreement) and free travel to Katchatheevu for drying fish and nets," the paper said.
Civil war in Sri Lanka
Following the agreement, there was relative harmony between cross-border fishermen for a period. "However, the Sri Lankan civil war from 1983 to 2009 diminished the country’s capability to enforce borders and protect its territorial waters...At the height of the conflict, the Sri Lankan government prohibited fishing on the Sri Lankan side to improve security in the region and, from time to time, the Sri Lankan navy would detain and harass Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen. Fearing persecution, many Sri Lankan Tamil fishermen sought refuge in India during this period and were often employed by Indian trawler owners," the paper added.
After the civil war ended in 2009, Colombo beefed up its maritime defences resulting in harassment, detention and fatal shooting of Indian fishermen, claiming that they had crossed the international maritime boundary line (IMBL) into Sri Lankan waters.
Legal stalemate
The then Congress government's stance at the Supreme Court has been that the question of retrieval of the island did not arise as no Indian territory was ceded. The claims of retrieving the island are reported to be weak in international law and an order issued by the Supreme Court is not binding on Sri Lanka.
