DIPLOMATIC

 

Jeddah, Diplomacy, and a Question of Judgment: Has Sri Lanka Misread a Critical Consular Posting?

ColomboWire | Diplomatic Affairs | Analysis

Diplomatic appointments are rarely neutral acts. They signal priorities, cultural literacy, geopolitical awareness, and—sometimes—blind spots. The recent appointment of D. D. P. Senanayake as Sri Lanka’s Consul General in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, authorised under the purview of Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, has opened an unexpected but serious debate: Was this a routine administrative decision, or a misjudgment of one of Sri Lanka’s most sensitive overseas missions?

At the centre of the controversy is not the individual’s competence, integrity, or professional credentials. By most accounts, D. D. P. Senanayake is a capable public servant. The question instead lies elsewhere—in the unique religious, cultural, and operational realities of the Jeddah Consulate itself, a posting unlike almost any other in Sri Lanka’s diplomatic network.

Why Jeddah Is Not Just Another Consulate

The Consulate General in Jeddah is not comparable to missions in Melbourne, Frankfurt, or even Riyadh. Historically and operationally, Jeddah has functioned as Sri Lanka’s primary Hajj and Umrah coordination hub, handling one of the largest annual movements of Sri Lankan citizens abroad.

Each year, tens of thousands of Sri Lankan Muslims travel to Saudi Arabia for Hajj and Umrah. This requires:

• Continuous engagement with Saudi Hajj and Umrah authorities

• Coordination on visas, quotas, accommodation, health, and security

• Emergency response capacity for pilgrim deaths, stampedes, illnesses, or evacuations

• Diplomatic access to Mecca and Medina authorities

Crucially, many of these engagements take place within restricted holy zones where non-Muslims are not permitted.

This is not a symbolic issue. It is a functional constraint.

The Practical Reality of Religious Access

Saudi Arabia’s regulations concerning Mecca and Medina are unequivocal: non-Muslims are prohibited from entering the holy cities. While Jeddah itself is accessible, key operational discussions—especially during Hajj season—often require:

• On-site coordination with Hajj authorities

• Attendance at emergency briefings near or within holy zones

• Direct intervention during pilgrim crises

For decades, successive Sri Lankan governments—regardless of political orientation—acknowledged this reality by appointing Muslim Consuls General to Jeddah, not as a matter of religious favouritism, but operational necessity.

This practice was not accidental. It was pragmatic diplomacy.

A Break from Convention—or a Failure to Assess?

The appointment of a non-Muslim to this post therefore represents a clear departure from precedent. Supporters of the decision argue that:

• Diplomatic postings should not be religiously determined

• Professional competence should override identity considerations

• Saudi officials engage with states, not individuals

All of these arguments are valid—in theory.

But diplomacy is not conducted in theory. It is conducted in context.

The central question is not whether a non-Muslim can serve in Jeddah, but whether Sri Lanka has weakened its own operational capacity by appointing someone who, by law and practice, cannot fully access the most critical components of the job.

Can the Job Be Done “With Full Capacity”?

This is the question now being quietly asked not only by critics of the government, but by NPP supporters themselves.

Can a Consul General:

• Personally intervene during a Hajj emergency inside Mecca?

• Engage directly with Medina-based authorities during pilgrim fatalities?

• Attend high-level coordination meetings held in restricted zones?

If the answer to any of these is “no,” then the appointment is not discriminatory—it is functionally constrained.

Delegation to deputies or intermediaries may partially compensate, but in crisis diplomacy, presence matters. Authority matters. Cultural fluency matters.

Saudi Sensitivities and Sri Lanka’s Fragile Reset

This appointment also comes at a delicate moment in Sri Lanka–Saudi relations.

Saudi Arabia’s relationship with Sri Lanka suffered a serious rupture during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly over the forced cremation policy imposed on Muslim COVID victims, including Sri Lankan Muslims. That decision caused deep offence across the Islamic world, with Saudi Arabia quietly but unmistakably expressing displeasure.

Relations began to improve only recently, aided by:

• The election of the NPP government

• Signals of policy rationality and institutional reform

• Re-engagement with Middle Eastern partners

Against this backdrop, any diplomatic decision that appears culturally inattentive—even if unintentionally—risks reviving distrust.

Saudi diplomacy is subtle but firm. Appointments matter. Signals matter.

Optics vs Intent: A Political Weapon Emerges

Predictably, opposition forces have seized on the appointment, portraying it as:

• Evidence of NPP inexperience

• Cultural insensitivity toward Muslims

• Administrative negligence

Some critics have gone further, framing the decision as emblematic of a broader governance weakness—likening it to “sending the wrong specialist to the wrong job.”

Yet it would be intellectually dishonest to reduce this issue to partisan point-scoring.

This is not about embarrassing the government. It is about institutional judgment.

Did the Foreign Ministry Properly Vet the Role?

A more serious concern lies in process.

Was this appointment:

• Properly reviewed against the job’s operational requirements?

• Assessed for religious-access constraints?

• Cleared with Saudi counterparts informally, as is common diplomatic practice?

Or was it treated as a routine posting, divorced from the ground realities of Hajj diplomacy?

If the latter, then the problem is not ideological—it is bureaucratic.

The Risk of Delegation-by-Proxy Diplomacy

Some officials privately argue that:

• Day-to-day Hajj matters can be handled by Muslim deputies

• The Consul General’s role is primarily administrative

• Saudi authorities are flexible

This argument underestimates the symbolic authority of the Consul General.

In emergencies—stampedes, mass illness, deaths—Saudi officials expect to deal with the head of mission, not intermediaries. Delegation-by-proxy weakens responsiveness and credibility.

A Test Case for the NPP’s Governance Ethos

The NPP government came to power promising:

• Evidence-based decision-making

• Institutional professionalism

• Sensitivity to social diversity

This appointment has become an unintended test of those claims.

The issue is not whether the government acted maliciously—it did not. The issue is whether it fully understood the consequences of a technically neutral but contextually loaded decision.

Course Correction Is Not Weakness

If, after review, it becomes clear that the appointment limits Sri Lanka’s consular effectiveness in Jeddah, course correction should not be seen as capitulation.

Diplomacy values adaptability. Governments gain credibility not by insisting on flawed decisions, but by acknowledging complexity.

The Larger Lesson

This controversy underscores a broader truth:
Not all diplomatic posts are equal, and not all neutrality is functional neutrality.

Cultural competence is not political correctness—it is strategic intelligence.

 A Question That Must Be Answered

The appointment of D. D. P. Senanayake to Jeddah is not inherently wrong. But it raises a legitimate, unavoidable question:

Can Sri Lanka’s Consul General in Jeddah engage the full scope of his responsibilities without restriction?

If the answer is uncertain, then the decision was not malicious—but it may have been a misjudgment.

In diplomacy, especially in the Islamic world’s most sacred geography, misjudgment is a luxury Sri Lanka can no longer afford.