Dilrook Kannangara

Too much of a good thing can be toxic. A nation must invest only so much in education that its economy needs and can sustain. Investing too much in education is a sure way to invite disaster. This is the main root cause of violent youth uprisings in South Asia. They all started in universities or started by university students. This happened in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan and now Nepal. It will not happen in Maldives, India and Bhutan as these countries don’t waste too much on education compared to other sectors of the country; and their economies are growing faster than the growth of education spending. However, if they too end up spending more on education than their economies can sustain, then they too will collapse into violence. Prior to coming to South Asia, Libya and Tunisia also suffered the same fate due to the same reasons.

According to economic theory, spending on education must be driven by available economic opportunities. Overspend leads to waste and underspend leads to lower productivity. Sri Lanka does not get the benefits of its tertiary education. Most graduates leave the country without making a sufficient contribution back to the nation. The cost of brain drain runs into billions of dollars every year considering the value of their qualifications in their new home countries and is far worse than corruption by politicians.

In other words, poor taxpayers of the nation don’t get anything from their massive investments in educating most doctors, IT professionals, engineers, commerce graduates, etc. Certain other study streams like arts produce little economic worth anyway. Money spent on tertiary education is mostly wasted. Had these funds been kept with taxpayers or invested in tangible investments, the country would have a better economy for everyone to enjoy.

On the other hand, the large university population have their grievances and they often boil over into the public. The poor economy simply cannot meet their expectations. Had the numbers been kept under control, they would not have been able to create such a big impact.

Investing too much in university education has this twin evils – brain drain on one side and unrest on the other. It’s one or the other and both cost the nation dearly.

The Premadasa approach of 1989 to 1993 is not a sustainable approach to manage it. That approach is inconsistent with modern humanitarian and human rights laws and still cannot stop brain drain and the massive loss it creates.

The right approach is to reduce the university intake to a sustainable number that the Sri Lankan economy can sustain (sustainable spend and sustainable brain drain loss) and the number the local economy can take in (employ). Producing Toronto’s doctors at the expense of poor Lankan taxpayers is insane. Compulsory 10 years of local employment or foreign employment as a Sri Lankan taxpayer should be a condition that should be enforced. If both fail, free education should be restricted to schools only as it was originally intended.

Blaming social media is unwise. Social media is an essential element of modern life. It cannot and should not be banned. The switch is elsewhere.

New laws and means should be introduced to handle financiers of violence, financiers of those who engage in violence and financiers who sustain the basic needs of those who engage in violence. These financiers are accustomed to a comfortable life and basic third world military tactics are sufficient to tame them. Democracy should not be allowed to be hijacked through violence.

However, regimes should not instigate violence by indulging in corruption and waste, disregard of public grievances and taking sensible governance for granted. Ultimately it is the fault of the rulers that creates violent uprisings and possibly lead to the end of their regimes.