The Defence Advisor to the High Commission of Pakistan in Sri Lanka, Colonel Muhammad Farooq made his maiden call on the Defence Secretary General Kamal Gunaratne at the Defence Ministry, today (Aug 16).
The Defence Secretary accorded a warm welcome to the new Pakistani Defence Advisor and had a cordial discussion with him.
During the discussion, Col. Farooq expressed gratitude to the support to his country during times of need by Sri Lanka and said that he wishes to work towards strengthening the existing bilateral defence ties. He also spoke on holding of the upcoming Defence Dialogue.
Reciprocating the DA’s gratitude Gen. Gunaratne also recalled the cooperation and assistance that Pakistan had extended to Sri Lanka in the past. While wishing him success in the new post Defence Secretary also said that he looks forward to continue the existing mutual ties. Military Liaison Officer Brigadier Dhammika Welagedara was also present at the occasion
The Prime Minister stated this today (2023.08.16) in Kunming, China, while participating as the chief guest at the 7th China-South Asia Exhibition jointly organized by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and the Yunnan State Government.
60 countries are participating in this huge trade exhibition, including all South and Southeast Asian countries as well as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Cooperation (RCEP) member countries.
The exhibition includes 15 exhibition halls, including a biomedical and healthcare pavilion, a resource economic pavilion and a regional cooperation pavilion, with a total area of 150,000 square meters. This exhibition is scheduled to be held until the 20th of August under the theme of ‘cooperation and coordination for development’.
State Ministers Taraka Balasuriya, Janaka Vakkambura, Kanaka Herath, Member of Parliament Yadamini Gunawardena, Secretary to the Prime Minister Anura Dissanayake, Foreign Ministers and businessmen are participating in this visit.
Speaking on this occasion Prime Minister stated that
Mr Chairman of Expo, Firstly, I wish to convey my appreciation for the invitation to the beautiful city of Kunming in Yunan and for the excellent hospitality extended to my delegation from Sri Lanka. It is an honour to attend as the Chief Guest at the 7th China – South Asia Exposition and at the 27th Kunming Import and Export Fair. This occasion will mark another historical milestone in our bilateral relations, as we come together to further strengthen centuries of warm friendship and cooperation between our two countries.
At the very outset let me congratulate and extend fraternal warm wishes to His Excellency President Xi Jinping, the Communist Party of China, and to the People of China for the tremendous leadership given to People across the World in delivering the impossible and achieving unprecedented landmarks in human civilization. Especially, the alleviation of hundreds of millions of Poor People out of Poverty, and showing continuous economic growth. Last year too, I was invited by Yunan Government to electronically address the South Asia Expo. It was the time when China was opening after the post-covid era for economic recovery. And I wish to recall how scientifically advanced Miracle Rice variety was introduced at that platform.
At the same time on behalf of the Government of His Excellency Ranil Wickramasinghe and People of Sri Lanka, I take this opportunity to convey warm best wishes to our friends in China, especially in Yunnan Province for the success of China – South Asia Exposition, brining a larger segment of Asian countries in participation. This proudly speaks achievements in the backdrop of the 10th anniversary of the Belt and Road Initiative. Friends, let me recollect the warm friendship shared between China and Sri Lanka dating back to many centuries, pioneered by Buddhist Priest Fa Hien. I would also like to note that Admiral Zheng Ha, who was born in Kunming, the city where we are here today celebrating this important event, came to Sri Lanka in early 15th century, and placed an inscription marking his visit to Sri Lanka. These historical relations were fostered by thriving trade exchanges along the Maritime Silk Route and far reaching cooperation in culture and knowledge. Yapahuwa is a historical Kingdom in Sri Lanka which boasts the largest collection of Chinese coins and Chinese porcelain found in Sri Lanka. Your Excellencies, the People’s Republic of China was promulgated after the long successful victory march towards 1949 Revolution, with a long and arduous journey led by the Communist Party of China with Great Leader Mao Tse Tung along with other leaders. Soon after our two countries have enjoyed 66 years of excellent diplomatic relations. Even prior to establishing formal diplomatic ties, China and Sri Lanka entered to Rubber-Rice Pact”, which marked the 70th anniversary last year, and marked a new chapter in international trade. Since then, China and Sri Lanka regarded each other as good friends and a special relationship has existed between our two countries. I wish to acknowledge with gratitude the unwavering support of the People’s Republic of China to Sri Lanka for national sovereignty and integrity and for continuing to stand by us during challenging times. I would like to reiterate that Sri Lanka continues to uphold the ‘One China Policy’ in all spheres including bilateral and multilateral fora and I wish to affirm our commitment in this regard. At a time when Sri Lanka was faced with difficult economic hardships, the Hon Governor of Yunnan Province visited Sri Lanka, in May 2023, and committed to multifaceted areas of cooperation. During the devastating global covid pandemic and Sri Lanka’s recent economic crisis, China helped Sri Lanka through various humanitarian assistance, including RMB 500 Mn for fuel to farmers and fishermen, staple diet of rice to school students, and 70% of school uniform requirement for the year 2023.
We acknowledge with appreciation that China has extended much-needed support in debt restructuring process, which was essential to secure international support. We are confident that China will extend continued cooperation in the future towards Sri Lanka’s broader economic recovery. The most significant recent Chinese development projects in Sri Lanka include the Hambantota Port, Hambantota Industrial Zone, Mattala Airport, and Colombo Port City project and all other major sectors. Colombo Port City project is Sri Lanka’s flagship project on achieving a financial and commercial hub in the region, with clear strategic advantage of being located at the very centre of the East-West Maritime Trade Lanes. Therefore, investments from China are critical to propel Sri Lanka’s economy, and also, I kindly request all friends present here today to encourage more Government and Private sector investment, trade, cooperation, and ventures into Sri Lanka.
Chinese tourist arrivals have been one of the key strengths of the Sri Lankan tourism industry. Mainly thanks to an announcement made in February this year by the Chinese Ministry of Culture and Tourism, placing Sri Lanka among the Top 20 countries for tourism. I take this opportunity to call for a joint effort between our countries to enhance tourism among us, as collectively we have much more to offer. let us not forget that This Century Belongs to Asia. This is Asia’s Century. I wish to refer to the words of President Xi Jinping’s steadfast commitment to share achievements of China towards the future betterment of mankind.”
Continuous leadership of the CPC has guided China to emerge in the path of Socialism with Chinese characteristics as a true decisive global giant with a grand new era of development, especially in Asia, Africa, & Latin America, and towards prosperity of all Nations.
Dear Friends, in conclusion I wish to emphasize that in Buddhism the importance of cultivating Kalyana Mitras is taught. Kalyana Mitra is the best of friendships that sees through times of good and through times of difficulty. Sri Lanka sees the friendship cultivated with China to be one of the true best Kalayana Mitras, amidst times of good and difficulty, China stood by Sri Lanka. Vice Presidents of Indonesia,Mianmar,Nepal,Vice Prime Minister of Vietnam,minister of commerce Maldives,Sri Lanka State Ministers Tharaka Baalasooriya,Janaka Wakkumbura,Kanaka Herath,member of parliament Yadamini Gunawardena,Secretary to the Prime Minister Anura Dissanayaka,Government officials of many countries,representatives participated for this occasion.
On February 27, 2022, in Minsk, the parties announced their readiness for the second round, but the negotiations were blocked by the United States through the mouth of a State Department spokesman who said that “negotiations at gunpoint are not diplomacy.”
The second attempt to stop the war was made by Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett. But “the West has decided to continue to strike at Putin.” And the most aggressive position was taken by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Finally, there was a chance to end the conflict for the third time in Istanbul in the spring of 2022. The Turkish negotiations were the most fruitful, but after the Russian Federation withdrew its troops from near Kyiv, all obligations were violated.
The columnist summed up that the White House refused to negotiate with Kyiv, and forced it to continue fighting in the name of US goals. Читайте больше на https://www.pravda.ru/news/world/1874065-ssha_i_britanija_sorvali_tri_popytki/
Ukraine had earlier pushed for the president’s participation in summit that will be held in Delhi.
Volodymyr Zelensky will not attend the main G20 conference as invites for the summit this year were sent out only to the members of the Group of 20, host country India has confirmed.
The confirmation by Delhi has put an end to speculation and expectations that Mr Zelensky would participate in the event that will bring together world leaders of major economies in Delhi.
Speaking during a special press conference marking nine years of the foreign policy of the Narendra Modi government, foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said invitations were being sent out to G20 members only.
Mr Jaishankar said the topic of extending an invitation to Mr Zelensky was not even discussed after a final list was announced at the start of India’s G20 presidency this year.
G20 participation is for members of G20,” Mr Jaishankar told reporters on Thursday. And for countries and organisations who we have invited and that list we had declared as soon as we assumed presidency of the G20.”
President Ranil Wickremesinghe is currently endeavouring to implement the 13th Amendment of the Constitution, which could lead to the establishment of a federal structure, much to the delight of Washington policymakers.
US policy towards Sri Lanka’s ethnic conflict has long been guided by the comforting notion that Tamil self-government within a decentralised Sri Lankan state would satisfy the legitimate needs of that minority community and shield it from ‘Sinhalese oppression’.
Washington policymakers projected onto Sri Lanka their panacea for ethnic discord—federalism—without prescribing mechanisms to protect democracy in devolved jurisdictions and prevent them from being used as bases for renewed militancy.
Washington – advocating federalism since the early 1980s – concealed the fact that federalism can perpetuate inequality and inconsistent legal protections across the country. Most notoriously, U.S. federalism sanctioned systems of law and law enforcement that protected slavery, racial segregation, and minority disenfranchisement for nearly two centuries. Federalism also contributed to a separatist civil war that killed 750,000 combatants plus an estimated 50,000 civilians. The U.S. Civil War became inevitable when the federal government insisted that preserving the Union took priority over Southern states’ right to continue practicing slavery and that separatism was not a right under the political contract that created the nation.
Sri Lanka never engaged in a debate within itself to find out that in the US the sharing of governmental authority between the centre and the states still poses serious problems. In recent years, for example, more than a dozen Republican-led states refused to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, denying health-care coverage to many low- income families. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the national public health response was hobbled by disjointed and sometimes counterproductive policies followed by state governments, costing tens of thousands of avoidable deaths. Much to the detriment of American democracy, in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, some state governments devised policies to constrain voting and even to override the popular vote. Such abuses have led some scholars to conclude that American federalism is dysfunctional. And, those in Sri Lanka who advocate federal structure need to comprehend these factors.
Activating the 13th Amendment fully and devolution of power seems to have returned to the national agenda with President Wickremesinghe taking a lead role. He undertook a similar endeavour as the prime minister in 2001-2004 during the Bush Administration with its Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell and his deputy Richard Armitage playing a significant role during the Norwegian-initiated peace talks.
Washington believed that the Tamil community (accounting for 12% of the Sri Lankan population) had fewer economic and employment opportunities when compared to the ‘advantaged’ 74% Sinhalese majority and it would benefit from a federal system.
Washington policymakers arrived at this determination way back in the 1980s, long before the signing of the infamous Indo-Sri Lanka Accord. That determination governed the mindset of the policymakers and lawmakers in the U.S. through 2009 and to date.
Classified 1984/1986 US Documents Advocating Federalism
In June 1984, the Directorate of Intelligence (CIA) and the State Department’s Near East and South Asia Bureau (NEA) jointly prepared a document called ‘Failure to Share Political Power with Minority Groups’. Declaring President Jayewardene’s commitment to his Sinhalese-Buddhist constituency at the height of the July 1983 communal riots, it said by the general election of 1956 Sinhalese-dominated parties had gained control of the government and driven the small Tamil parties out of the mainstream political life.”
Another document dated September 02, 1986 and authored jointly by the CIA and the NEA noted that ‘northern insurgency’ had politicised Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese and Tamil communities. The ethnic rivalry is at the heart of the conflict, the document says, adding that the Tamils believe – with some adjustments – they need some devolution of power to their districts and that they are victims of political and economic discrimination, suggesting that Washington refrain from providing military assistance to the Sri Lanka administration, as it noted even in another document that Washington shouldn’t get involved in a battle between two ethnic communities.
These three documents laid the foundation for the subsequent structure of Washington’s foreign policy toward Sri Lanka all the way until the end of the separatist Eelam War IV in May 2009 and well beyond.
Washington sentiments
Washington sentiments were amply reflected in this 1984 (once) classified document. This June 1984 document had the most revealing sentiments that played a major role in subsequent years during Washington’s intervention in Sri Lanka’s national issues, one of which was the proposal for a federal system in Sri Lanka solely and exclusively focusing on minority Tamil issues.
Washington’s initial (1984) understanding was that a federal structure would extensively satisfy the Tamil demands. The document states, Tamil demands probably would be satisfied by a federal structure that would guarantee Tamils control over security and economic development where they comprise the majority of the population”. This belief was notably expressed by State Department Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) at frequent intervals in subsequent years when Washington intervened in Sri Lankan national affairs; in keeping with this agenda the USAID in 2005, with active participation of top officials of the US Embassy in Colombo, continuously for three months, convened nationwide public seminars with the assistance of civil society groups underscoring the merits of federalism.
The June 1984 classified ‘intelligence assessment’ expressed fear that if Washington was seen associating with a regime that battles a minority group it could damage the U.S. prestige in the region and in parts of the Third World and that highly politicised Tamil minority in Sri Lanka might even turn to the Soviet Union for support.” (It is with this rationale that Washington deeply engaged during the 2002-2004 peace talks that it believed could bring favourable acceptance in the international community). In 2023, President Wickremasinghe seems to be bringing back the scenario to which he was engaged in as prime minister in advocating the implementation of the 13th Amendment.
The June 1984 ‘Intelligence Assessment’ further declares Tamil demands probably would be satisfied by a federal structure that would guarantee Tamils control over security and economic development where they comprise the majority of the population” – meaning the North-East region of Sri Lanka.
The document opined that Washington believed the Tamils have become convinced that they should have an autonomous homeland with economic and security control.”
What the June 1984 document says about the United States refusal to extend military assistance to the (American-friendly) Jayewardene regime’s request to combat the LTTE terrorism and its total blocking of the supply of military gear to the subsequent Rajapaksa regime during (2006-2009) its military offensive against the separatist movement led to Washington’s strict belief that such military equipment could be used for repressive measures against the Tamils.”, and that other avenues need to be found such as devolution of power and setting up a federal structure.
The following are from ‘Sri Lanka: The Challenge of Communal Violence’, a joint intelligence assessment by the Directorate of Intelligence (CIA) Office of Near Eastern and South Asia Bureau of the State Department. June 1984 Secret document subsequently declassified:
1. President Jayewardene’s failure to deal with the demands of Sri Lanka’s Tamil minority – 18 percent of the population – has brought the Tamils to the brink of open insurrection. In our judgment, Jayewardene, through his political maneuvering since his election in 1977, has contributed to the deterioration of communal relations by failing to share political power with minority groups
2. Tamil demands probably would be satisfied by a federal structure that would guarantee Tamils control over security and economic development where they comprise the majority of the population.
3. The Tamils, according to Embassy and scholarly reports, have become convinced that they should have both an autonomous homeland and control over security forces and access to more economic development projects.
4. We believe the frustrations of the last year have convinced even moderate Tamils they must press for a separate homeland with the hope of achieving at least a federal relationship with Colombo.
Subsequent US Manipulation for a Federal System
In early 2012, under the auspices of the Office of the Under Secretary-General of the United Nations (Political Affairs) B. Lynn Pascoe, attended by many professionals that included President Barack Obama’s close confidante and information czar Prof. Cass Sustein and his wife Dr. Samantha Power, the U.S. President’s human rights-war crimes-genocide crusader in the National Security Council, to start a process of restructuring several developing Third World nations’ constitutional arrangements to promulgate federalism as an answer to ethnic minority grievances.
The Under-Secretary-General (Political) B. Lynn Pascoe was a retired career diplomat from the US State Department.
Since the early 2012-process commenced a number of closed-door meetings and seminars at which the partition of UN member states has been discussed. Most of the meetings have been held under the direction of the UN Interagency Framework for Coordination on Preventive Action (the Framework Team or FT). The control of the FT fell into the domain of the under-secretary-general of Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman, who took over from Pascoe in June 2012.The UN slot in the Department of Political Affairs, for decades, has always been assigned to a retired American Foreign Service officer (FSO), and it is the second most influential position next to the Secretary-General.
When a former American FSO occupies the Number Two slot of the UN, the State Department has extensive leverage over the operation of the United Nations, and it has been seen that both branches – the Department of Political Affairs and the US State Department – work together to achieve common objectives. As much as the state department and its representative – US ambassador to UN- maintain jurisdiction over the Human Rights Commission in Geneva under internal UN arrangement, during this period, the Under-Secretary (Political) Jeffrey Feltman oversaw the functioning of UNHRC.
When the process commenced in 2012, Sri Lanka, apart from Nepal, was also a target for the identity federalism engineers. To promote a ‘serious devolution to the peripheral regions’ – whether one calls it federal structure or otherwise – Dr. Samantha Power, who initially attended the Framework Team in early 2012 with the UN Department of Political Affairs, travelled to Sri Lanka in November 2015. UN Under-Secretary-General (Political) Jeffrey Feltman travelled to Sri Lanka for talks in July 2017, during the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration.
Illegality of the Indo-Lanka Accord and 13th Amendment
First, there is a reasonable argument to be made that the bilateral accord – the Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987 – that mandated the devolutionary restructuring of the Sri Lankan government was illegal from the very inception.
But the 13th Amendment was imposed on the country under duress rather than being legislated through democratic debate.
What is less debatable is that the Indian airdrop and intimidatory diplomatic communications from New Delhi to Colombo prior to the IPKF were violative of at least the spirit of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. That UN Article enjoins all member states to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State.” Both the Security Council and the General Assembly have adopted numerous resolutions that contain implicit or explicit references to Article 2(4), condemning, deploring or expressing concern about acts of aggression or the launching of armed intervention. A number of resolutions have included calls for withdrawing troops from foreign territories.
In addition, Article 51 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states that an expression of a state’s consent to be bound by [a] treaty which has been procured by coercion of its representative through acts or threats directed against him shall be without legal effect.” Similarly, Article 52 of the same Convention provides that a treaty is void if its conclusion has been procured by the threat or use of force in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations.”
Some Indian commentators have argued that Sri Lanka cannot withdraw from the 1987 Accord—and by extension the Amendment—by reason of the Vienna Convention because neither Sri Lanka nor India are signatories to the Convention. The United States has never ratified the Vienna Convention, but its Department of State as early as 1971 acknowledged that the Convention constituted the authoritative guide to current treaty law and practice,” even for non-parties. Despite being a non-signatory, the U.S. Government has frequently brought cases before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) based on alleged violations of the Vienna Convention. In short, neither India nor the USG has standing under international law to press Sri Lanka to honour commitments imposed on it illegally.
The Thirteenth Amendment was enacted in the Sri Lanka Constitution as a result of this illegal Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987.
What has been outlined above is that Washington policymakers and lawmakers endeavoured from early 1980s to impose a federal structure on Sri Lanka, and current Ranil Wickremesinghe presidency is succumbing to US pressure. Further, Sri Lankan lawmakers need to be apprised of the illegal entry of the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord and its by-product the 13th Amendment.
(The writer is a retired Foreign Service National Political Specialist of the U.S. Department
of State once accredited to the Political Section of the American Embassy in Colombo)
Foreign Minister Ali Sabry told Parliament yesterday that his ministry had received no information about CIA Chief William J. Burns’ alleged visit to Sri Lanka on Feb 14.
Making a ministerial statement in response to a series of questions raised by SLPP dissident MP Ven. Aturaliye Ratana Thera on June 22, the minister said that his ministry only provided necessary diplomatic clearances for the aircraft to fly to Sri Lanka.
Minister Sabry said that he had been aware that two aircraft of the United States Air Force had arrived at the Bandaranaike International Airport on Feb. 14 and according to the information provided by the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Aviation and Airport and Aviation Services Lanka Ltd, a number of US officials had officially entered the country.
The Minister’s response to Ven Ratana’s queries: This is my answer after consulting all the relevant agencies. While the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the link between the foreign countries, entities, institutions and ministries departments and institutions in Sri Lanka, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is not the focal point for the subject area that comes under the purview of the MCC. It is noted as an expert committee was appointed by the Cabinet in December, 2019 to review the MCC agreement and the final report was handed over to the former President in June, 2020. The proposed SOFA is an agreement between the US and Sri Lanka, according to the line ministry in this regard also the Ministry of Defence and information required in this regard could be obtained from the Ministry of Defence. ACSA is also an agreement that comes under the Defence Ministry. Relevant line ministry in this regard is the Defence Ministry and further information may be obtained from the Ministry of Defence.
Therefore, it is appropriate to ask the relevant line ministry – the ministry of Defence regarding the reimplementation of these agreements and its current status and the purposes. I am aware that two aircraft belonging to the American Air Force arrived at the Katunayake BIA in the afternoon of Feb 14, 2023. According to the information provided by the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Aviation and Airport and Aviation Services Lanka Limited, they have officially entered into the country.
The two planes that had arrived at the Katunayake International Airport under No RCH 23/992142A and RCH 231/00215A. I further mention that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had done only the necessary diplomatic clearances for the aircraft to fly to Sri Lanka. The chairman of the Airport and Aviation Services Lanka Limited has informed that the names, passport numbers and Visa number of the persons who came in the two aircrafts could be obtained from the Department of Immigration and Emigration.
Further the Airport and Aviation Services Pvt Ltd has informed this ministry that they are not aware of the fact to which organisation in the United States the said group belongs to and responsible for and have met with the parties or organizations in Sri Lanka bearing what responsibilities and what matters to the agreement were discussed in this meeting. And therefore, some of these questions seem to be referred to the wrong ministry. So, based on the evidence that we gathered, and the information which we acquired from different agencies, this is the information which I can provide to the question raised by Ven Aturaliye Ratana Thera on June 22, 2023.”
The ruling SLPP parliamentary group should intervene to make President Ranil Wickremesinghe examine the draft Constitution formulated by the nine-member committee appointed by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Cabinet-of-Ministers, rebel SLPP List MP Gevindu Cumaratunga said yesterday (15).
President’s Counsel Romesh de Silva headed the committee.
Having elected UNP leader Wickremesinghe in July last year as the President to complete the remainder of the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term, the SLPP couldn’t remain silent on their own initiative, Cumaratunga said.
Responding to a query raised by The Island, the leader of civil society group Yuthukama stressed that the SLPP received two mandates at the Nov. 2019 presidential and Aug. 2020 parliamentary polls to introduce a new Constitution.
President Wickremesinghe should under no circumstances implement the 13th Amendment to the Constitution or contemplate going beyond that particular amendment, the first time entrant to Parliament said.
Questioning the President’s Office’s request for political parties to submit their recommendations, regarding the 13th Amendment, by 15th August, MP Cumaratunga said that the SLPP owed an explanation regarding its failure to take up the issue at hand with the President.
The committee announced by the then Justice Minister Ali Sabry, PC, comprised Gamini Marapana P.C., Manohara de Silva P.C., Sanjeewa Jayawardena P.C., Samantha Ratwatte P.C., Prof. Naazima Kamardeen, Prof. A. Sarveswaran, Prof. Wasantha Seneviratne and Prof. G.H. Peiris.
According to the committee, the draft that had been finalized in March 2022 was handed over to the then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in April though it was never subject to public discussion. Both Sinhala and English copies were handed over to the President while the Legal Draftsman was requested to translate it to Tamil.
Of the political parties represented in Parliament, the main Opposition SJB and President Wickremesinghe’s party the UNP haven’t made representations to Romesh de Silva’s Committee. In spite of the Joint Legal Secretaries of the SJB meeting the Chairman of the Committee to work out modalities, the anticipated meeting didn’t take place, sources said.
The Committee received representations from delegations led by Basil Rajapaksa (SLPP), R. Sampathan (TNA), Dinesh Gunawardena (MEP), Udaya Gammanpila (PHU), Wimal Weerawansa (JNP), Tiran Alles (UPP), Vasudeva Nanayakkara (DLF), Anura Kumara Dissanayake (JJB), Raja Collure (Socialist Alliance), Dew Gunasekera (CP), Nimal Siripala de Silva (SLFP), Rushdi Habeeb (ACMC), Douglas Devananda (EPDP), Bandula Chandrasekera (JHU), Mano Ganesan (TPA), V. Radhakrishnan (UPF), Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan (TMVP), Senthil Thondaman (CWC), Prof. Tissa Vitharana (LSSP), C.V. Wigneswaran (TMTK) and Asanka Navaratne (SLMP).
About a week before President Rajapaksa fled the country, amidst violent protests, the Committee planned to address the media regarding the new Constitution at the Presidential Secretariat. However, the media briefing was cancelled at the eleventh hour.
The committee has been divided over the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, enacted in 1988, in the wake of the Indo-Lanka Accord, signed in the year before.
The majority of Romesh de Silva’s Committee has not endorsed the Provincial Council, introduced in terms of the 13th Amendment, whereas Prof. A. Sarveswaran disagreed with the relevant Chapter (XXII) that he asserted deprived Provincial Council the powers enjoyed under the present Constitution, thereby affected reconciliation efforts.
Those who opposed asserted that the 13th Amendment undermined the unitary character thereby threatened the security of the State.
One member declared his opposition to the Provincial Council system and was not in favour of the provisions incorporated in Chapter XXII. That particular member has explained the grave danger in continuing with the existing system and the intensification of that threat in case of further devolution of power.
But two members supported the proposed Chapter XXII on the basis that
(i) No separate elections are held to constitute Provincial Councils,
(ii) Provincial Councils to consist of representatives of Local Authorities elected at the Local Authority Elections,
(iii) Provincial Councils to exercise executive power subject to the executive powers of the President and the Cabinet of Ministers
(iv) Power of the National State Assembly is not restricted in any manner with regard to any subject on which a Provincial Council has the power to make statutes.
The draft contained a full chapter on Provincial Councils. The Committee has suggested election of members to Provincial Councils and Local Authorities will be held on the same day in one election with each elector having two votes to elect a member for his electoral unit [ward] and a member for the Provincial Council from any one of the candidates in his local government area.
Wang Yi, director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, vowed that China will help Sri Lanka effectively address the challenges of financial debt on Wednesday.
Wang, also a member of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, made the remarks during a meeting with Sri Lankan Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena at the sidelines of the seventh China-South Asian Expo in Kunming, southwest China’s Yunnan Province.
China is always Sri Lanka’s reliable strategic partner and appreciates that Sri Lanka has always been friendly to China and has stood by China on issues related to its core interests, he said.
China also firmly supports Sri Lanka in safeguarding its sovereign independence and national dignity, and is willing to strengthen exchanges of experience in governance as well as cooperation in various fields with Sri Lanka, he said.
Wang vowed that China will help Sri Lanka improve its capacity for independent development, get rid of the “poverty trap” and the “trap of non-development,” accelerate its industrialization process and agricultural modernization.
He expressed belief that Sri Lanka will overcome its temporary difficulties, find a development path in line with its national conditions, and realize revitalization and prosperity.
Noting that Sri Lanka is an important participant and beneficiary of the China-South Asia Expo, he welcomed the Sri Lankan side to continue to make good use of this important platform to further explore the Chinese market.
For his part, Gunawardena thanked China for its firm support for Sri Lanka in safeguarding its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, and for its timely and effective assistance to Sri Lanka in times of difficulty.
The forward-looking flagship cooperation projects between the two sides such as the Colombo Port City and the Hambantota Port will bring benefits to the Sri Lankan people and play a key role in regional connectivity and sustainable development, he said.
Sri Lanka will work with China to expand cooperation in economy, trade and investment, agriculture, tourism, energy and innovation to help Sri Lanka achieve food self-sufficiency and accelerate the development of key industries, he added. (CGTN)
Sri Lanka’s programme is planned to deliver 71 outcomes by the end of September. Presently, as of the end of July, 35 are met” and 14 are unknown”. There are 8 more that are not met”
That means the ratio of unknowns to knowns is about 33% — rather high for a critical economic recovery programme
These unknowns” primarily encompass quantitative commitments, such as tax revenue and primary balance targets. These are not mere numbers but essential indicators of the improvement in Sri Lanka’s fiscal position
It has been five months since Sri Lanka entered the board-level agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on its 17th programme. Month-to-month progress has been tracked in the public domain by the IMF Tracker (https://manthri.lk/en/imf_tracker ), a platform maintained by Verité Research. The IMF Tracker identifies programme commitments that have been met” and unmet” on verifiable criteria. Those achievements for which no data has been made available to make a reasonable assessment are marked as unknown”.
Persistence of known unknown
Sri Lanka’s programme is planned to deliver 71 outcomes by the end of September. Presently, as of the end of July, 35 are met” and 14 are unknown”. There are 8 more that are not met”. That means the ratio of unknowns to knowns is about 33% — rather high for a critical economic recovery programme. These unknowns” primarily encompass quantitative commitments, such as tax revenue and primary balance targets. These are not mere numbers but essential indicators of the improvement in Sri Lanka’s fiscal position. Two explanations for known unknowns There are two ways to try and make sense of why there are such a significant number of known commitments, on which the achievement is unknown. One is that the government has failed to meet these commitments and is not making the information public to delay the recognition of failure. The second is that the government does not see the Sri Lankan public – or even its parliament – as an important stakeholder in the implementation of the programme agreed with the IMF. Therefore, it lacks interest in providing these stakeholders with critical information. The second explanation may sound strange, but it is not implausible. Achieving the committed actions on Sri Lanka’s IMF programme plans has always lacked internal interest and accountability. Strange as it may seem, this is just business as usual. Can business as usual” yield different results? Sri Lanka has been in 16 IMF programmes since 1966 and failed to complete almost half of them (7 of 16). Even past programmes that were completed saw huge departures from the original plans, which were excused by the IMF to move the programme forward. The parliament or the public have rarely (if ever) questioned the adequacy of the government’s progress on those plans. This might explain why Sri Lanka’s IMF plans have not achieved more than temporary patchwork repairs in the past. A person is admitted to the hospital when there is a serious health condition, which requires constant care and observation to ensure recovery. You would expect that proper diagnosis and treatment in the hospital and the patient following through with good behaviour would prevent further hospitalisation for the most part. But imagine a person who spends 15 days each month in the hospital throughout the year, every single year of that person’s life. There is, you would think, something incurably wrong with the person or something quite inadequate about the hospital. A country going to the IMF signals a serious emergency condition, much like a person going into a hospital. Sri Lankans who were born in 1965 had an average life expectancy of 63 years. Those who are still alive today have seen their country functioning like that patient, spending exactly half of their lives in the IMF hospital (28+ years up to now). 58 years on in this cycle, it will need a strong optimistic temperament to think This time we will be cured”, without any evidence of the country being transformed from business as usual”. Sri Lanka is now, sadly, not on course to achieve even 90% of the 71 actions targeted for completion by September 2023. Some of the actions that are not met” are easy actions to accomplish. For example, the establishment of a fiscal transparency platform that makes public all the tax holidays given by the government is overdue since March 2023. Additionally, concealing the lack of achievement on 14 commitments or not caring to make the appropriate information public to the most important stakeholders, is very much business as usual”. The ”unknowns” in the IMF Tracker are a barometer to be watched. It is not uncommon for the government to see the economic recovery plan (agreed with the IMF) as an external facing agreement by Sri Lanka to appease the IMF. This might explain why it can sometimes be claimed that the IMF will be provided the required information about implementation, while the Sri Lankan public is not. This is a seriously flawed perspective. The plan should be one to recover Sri Lanka’s economy, and it is for the sake of the people in Sri Lanka. It is therefore a plan that has to be genuinely owned by the government and the people in the country. The fundamental accountability of the government, to have a good plan and to implement it properly, is to all the people who live in Sri Lanka – not to an international bureaucracy located in Washington DC. Sri Lanka has, in the past, geared the delivery of IMF programmes in a shortsighted way to appease and mislead the IMF — easily done, given its justifiably limited ability to understand local dynamics. This might be the reason Sri Lanka has been one of the worst cases in the world in regularly turning up at the IMF hospital, with its public finance health in crisis. If there is anything to learn from the past, it is that repeating those past patterns is not a recipe for sustained economic recovery. If the government and the IMF believe it is enough for only the IMF to know about the progress of the economic recovery plan, and that the public and parliament can be kept in the dark, it would suggest that neither is learning from past mistakes. The number of known unknowns in the IMF Tracker, therefore, is an important barometer. It is a constant signal of how much the government understands the true stakeholders of Sri Lanka’s economic recovery plan, and for whose sake the government thinks the plan is being implemented. Dr Nishan de Mel is the executive director at Verité Research
The economic development of Sri Lanka is negatively afflicted by attitudes of policymakers and planners and the behaviour of them concerned with many practical aspects in the policy planning process. Negative attitudes of policy planners have a direct relationship with countrywide economic problems, and neither the government policy development process nor the political direction for changing attitude problems have not been successfully addressed by the political direction in the country since independence in 1948.
Attitudes mean the way people are thinking, which is disciplined and sophisticated by education. People gain education on various subject areas from schools and high education from universities and TVET institutions. Education in a variety of subject areas trains people to look at many subjective matters with different perspectives. Education could change a person’s thinking pattern by providing more accurate knowledge on various matters and learning process on diversified matters needs to be properly coordinated and provide to citizens. This means the knowledge gained from education, irrespective of the place it gained, would be useful to shape the attitudes, and support to advance the understanding of many issues in subject areas. Basic knowledge gaining process could not be fluctuated according to the place where the knowledge has been gained and from a person or institution from where did anyone gained education as the quality of education in Sri Lanka differs from rural to urban not because the government policy but because of the personnel associated with offering education. Despite this situation the ethical behaviour is that if the knowledge gained considers accurate, it should be recognised as standard disregarding the place of knowledge was gained.
However, in Sri Lanka, those who gained education from Colombo Schools and other major private schools in regional areas attempt to show that the knowledge gained from urban schools and private schools was superior to the knowledge gained from village schools. This is the mythical attitude of Sri Lankan. This should be decided by educational experts, but not by personnel who have no expertise on the matter. The view may have been a considerably debatable opinion. A teacher who recently retired from a school in Sri Lanka told me that schools are informally divided by people as excellent and not good. And this classification may not be based on the available supportive statistics, it is an allegorical classification by certain people in the country. I told her this type of classification has no justice for education, which is the basic right of all citizens.
When considering education, it relates to various subject areas, the basic education of kids is equal to whichever schools they attended to and the knowledge given by the school is equal compared to any other schools. Many people who gained education from urban schools attempt to insult poor people who gained education from rural schools, insulting the knowledge is not an acceptable judgement. Poor people also like to gain education from comprehensive schools in towns if they are admitted by the administration. There is no justice in this type of classification. If anyone investigates the background of tertiary students, it could be revealed that the bulk of students are from rural schools, but many policymakers are not ready to accept this point and they want promoting urban schools.
It is a divisive attitude that had been purposely fabricated and spread by Christian churches with dishonest motives. The quality of education is divided by the name of the school that has been expanded by vicious people. This was the reason to keep school name using the names of saints and attempt at education is better than other schools. It was to keep people supportive of imperialists and to spread Christianity in Sri Lanka using education as a strategic way. Neither St. Augustine nor Thomas Aquinas advised such a dismemberment and an abusive education policy, the Christian decrepitude attitudes should be removed from the minds of kids to make an equal society by directing them to progressive and productive education. Therefore, attitude problems of people have become the major constraint for economic development is essential. The gaining the participation of rural communities in development projects reflects the justice of education quality and for recognition. A positive contribution from rural people to development tasks will be a vital area and the way the country needs approaching throughout of current economic and social problems.
Policymakers and planners require developing economic programs to attract the support and participation of rural people who represent an enormous volume and a higher rate of the population. Rural people are the spirit of the country as they had been contributed a higher share to the economy since the beginning of humans in the country, however, the contribution of rural people has not been valued by the government authority since the independence because of the attitude problems of the government administrators. The contribution of rural people has undermined many instances and highlighted the small contribution of urban people as valuable to the country.
Rural people, to make a higher contribution to the economy, need the positive motivation of them and value the knowledge and skills they have acknowledging the contribution to the economy. The government authority in Sri Lanka seems to be silent on the contributions of rural people and sometimes rejects the contribution of rural people when they associate with development programs. This type of negative attitude does not appear in many other countries, where the obvious nature is appreciating the contribution without separating participants as rural educated and urban educated in development projects. When kings and Queens managed the country in history, the labour for development was not divided as rural and urban.
When I was working in Sri Lanka, I observed this situation as a significant constraint to development, policymakers did not consider removing this negative aspect in the past, and they are willing continuing to negative attitudes to the future. It seems the problem is continuing, irrespective of the political party in power, the problem is continuing negative attitudes in society, and the modern nature of the problem is using rural poor women sending the Middle East to make dollars and use such earned exchange for urban wealthy people and politicians to spend for selfish purposes.
Rural people have a strong association with the agricultural sector that is needed a higher participative contribution, which means about 40% of the contribution of the Gross National Product should be from agriculture that generates higher productivity. The historical information further confirms that since the era of early humans, the best nature of the rural population was hardworking in various tasks given to them with achieving goals and to see the outcomes of the plans. This aspect of the contribution of the rural community has revealed from the writing of foreign visitors, and the policymakers who gained education and training from so-called high schools in urban areas have been jealous towards rural educated people and attempt to dis-motivate rural community by various ways such as coverup and other type of negative responses.
When implementing policy plans aimed at balanced growth, the focus and objectives of policy plans should be stressed on gaining the support of rural people. They can contribute a lofty share of the production and give justice to the entire community without discrimination. The capitalist class was a major constraint for rapid development since the Kandyan Kingdom of history and aristocrats used rural labour, exploiting them for the construction of large houses called noble houses (Walaus) that display the patriciate picture now in Sri Lanka.
The major negative picture of the aristocrats themselves was disunity and jealousy for each other and some historians expressed that the major reason to under the country the western imperial power was the disunity of aristocrats and the king. Houses of aristocratic nobles clearly showed how they lived as well as their attitude towards society. Another significant point ignored was all these large houses were built using the labour of rural poor people without making a reasonable payment for them and nobody gave appreciation to the rural poor.
Policymakers of Sri Lanka, after the political independence in 1948, were lack of understanding the social fabric which has been developed in the past and were not interested in contributory value when they were setting objectives of the plans. They wanted to let down rural people. Before the European invasion, society could not see such a negative behaviour in the society because ancient kings and queens were against the division of society and understood the value of the contribution of rural people. The lack of support from the rural community could be considered as a cardinal reason for the economic backwardness and betraying the rural community. Caste dictions were brought into society to discredit rural people in villages for exploitation of rural people.
However, in many Asian countries, policy planners are concerned with the rural community that contributes a positive support to the economy. In the Japanese environment since the Tokugawa period, rural participation was vital and Meiji restoration gained the contribution of the rural community. If it investigates the economic history of other Asian countries such as China, Korea and India, this point could be proven. Attitudes of Sri Lankan have not comparatively deviated from the practical experience of other Asian countries, but aristocrats in Si Lanka purposely created divisive practices.
The consequences of Christian education in Sri Lanka, which was supposed to be based on the philosophy of Jesus Christ, had a negative conduct and dis-motivated attitudes, letting down rural people insulting Christianity. Christian churches supported rural people who contributed to churches through assets and building. Rural people were poor and had difficulty contributing to the church. This was a reason to disregard rural people for development activities, but the outcome of Christian leaders in development work was attempting to deviate persons educated in Christian schools from cooperative work. Education administrators in Christian schools are preferred to train kids to deviate from rural communities. Why this type of negative choice when the country needs unity and cooperative development? I feel it is a secret strategy of Christian education in Sri Lanka. The Christian education policies were against the teaching of Jesus Christ, and when the then government nationalise the schools which were gaining government support for developing a national education policy, the policymakers of Christian education encouraged to agitate violently against the government policy. It is seen that Christian schools in Sri Lanka do not admit poor Christians to their schools and charges, adding to the government support, such as payments for teachers and other capital tasks.
Many development plans from the four-year development program introduced by then prime minister, Sir John Kotelawala in 1954, and other programs such as the ten-year plan, six-year plan, five-year plan and four-year plan, have been implemented in Sri Lanka without attracting the support of rural people and such programs were not monitored and activated remedial management process by the planners who educated in so-called big schools in urban areas. When critically evaluating such plans, they seemed like desk plans, like writing the thesis for higher degree programs, and they were designed by bureaucrats, developing a mental picture to mislead ruling governments. There was a famous story that certain bureaucrats misled Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake, showing water-filled a small land area expressing the success of the rural cultivation program begun by the 1965 government.
The four-year development program in 1954 aimed at the successful engagement of rural people in regional areas, giving new meaning to the privatization concept appropriate to Sri Lanka. The investment direction given by the plan was the right way to go forward, but political misbeliefs were directed to go imprudent way and rural people were misguided to follow an unknown philosophy and collective march using rural people for political advantages.
Political independence in 1948 was gained without letting the blood of radical political supporters. The traditional literature books explain the strategic policy of kings and queens to gain the support of rural people. For example, The Sthupavamsa detailed how the king, Dutugamunu, used the countenance of modern management theories to defeat invaders and increase the productivity of the agriculture sector.
However, the policy attitude of Sri Lanka has been radically changed to give priority to the metro-centred population despite the views of SWRD Bandaranaike, the political independence because the education in independent Sri Lanka attempted to neglect rural people promoting misguided attitudes among the urban population who gained educated from Christian schools. It aligned to give a message that English medium education for metro people and Sinhala and Tamil medium education for rural kids. When Buddhist base education attempted to provide facilities for the participation of rural people without a religious difference, urban-based Christian education providers attempted to push English-based education to rich people while insulting the teaching of Jesus Christ. Christianity is based on the concern of the poor. Jesus Christ explained how it is difficult for a rich person to enter heaven.
Although Sri Lanka needed a participative democratic style in development projects without contrast between rural areas and metro people, development activities purposely were distanced the attracting the participation of rural people. The major reason was key figures in rural planning were from educated figures in based on non-Christian schools in many districts in Lanka. They attempted to reject poor rural people and forced rural people out of development activities since the 1960s. Anti-Christian attitude was considered as a fundamental mistake of Christian education. Despite the attempt of the government officers to disregard rural people, the SLFP government in the early 1960s decided to taking over schools which were receiving government funds. The Christian education policy was a significant barrier to get participation of rural Non-Christians in the balance growth.
The outcomes of government investments should distribute among all citizens of the country and such a balance growth policy is needed to be implemented by all governments that were ruled the country after the political independence in 1948. After the independence, the development policies of Sri Lanka have changed, aiming at the balance growth concept, and it was in the first place in the Asian region.
However, during the colonial administration and independent control after the 1948, investment distributed in urban areas and during the colonial administration a considerable volume of investment distributed in upcountry regions. The direct results of investment distribution limiting to certain area, prevented rural people gaining education, health, highways, electricity, and water facilities which were distributed to investment zones.
13 Plus has the best chance of passing parliament this time as all parties desperately try to win minority support. However, since all parties support 13 Plus, no party can gain political mileage over others using it. Ranil won most Tamil and Muslim votes whenever he contested for president (1999 and 2005), however, he cannot win minority votes this time as Rajapaksas are aligned to him.
Tamils, Muslims and Christians have no faith in Rajapaksas, to say the very least, and would reject anyone who is perceived to be aligned with them. If Rajapaksas don’t contest against Ranil, minorities will assume they are in the same boat and will reject both, 13 Plus or even full federal. All parties other than the SJB rely on Buddhist votes to go past the 50% required to win the presidential election or come as close to it as possible. All minority votes (30%) will be a SJB block vote at the next presidential election.
Sinhala moderate voters are also divided between the three main political camps, SJB, SLPP/Ranil and JVP. However, if the JVP fields Dr Harini Amarasuriya for the presidential election, SLPP/Ranil camp will lose Sinhala moderate voters almost entirely. This forces the SLPP/Ranil camp to focus solely on Sinhala Buddhist hardline voters to see them through. Sadly, Sinhala Buddhist hardliners will also reject them if they grant 13 Plus to minorities. It is a lose-lose situation for Ranil and Rajapaksas. This is why they must not touch 13A, 13P or power devolution heading into an election.
Understanding minority voter mentality is key to control the damage. Since no minority voter will be voting for Ranil or anyone aligned to Rajapaksas, the only sensible thing for them to do is to retain Sinhala Buddhist hardline voters. Trying to woo minority voters is like running after a mirage looking for water. It only exhausts the hapless victim.
Rajapaksas need a Plan B if Ranil fails to win. Otherwise, they go out of business with Ranil. They should be able to quickly position themselves as the party of choice for Buddhist hardliners for the next parliamentary election if Ranil loses. This cannot be done if SLPP factions vote for 13 Plus. After bad experience following the Nugegoda resurrection of Mahinda, even the patriotic camp of the SLPP is now unwilling and incapable of repeating it.
On the other hand, if Ranil cannot get enough votes to pass 13 Plus, he will dissolve the parliament, or cause it to get dissolved (by allowing the budget to be defeated) which means a parliamentary election. A parliamentary election first, gives the JVP the best opportunity to get the highest possible number of seats it can win (at the expense of the SLPP). The JVP will win a smaller number of seats if the presidential election is held first, as the JVP has no chance of winning the presidential election. Ranil knows this and uses it as a bargaining tool with the SLPP.
Drop 13A, 13P and devolution, or suffer an unprecedented election defeat from which many old political clans will not recover.
Restructuring of domestic debt has become a vital focus of news in Sri Lanka and many ordinary people are lack of understanding the process, which is expressing jargon and ordinary people have an idea that they are not concerned about the process. The act of rehabilitation of public enterprises, which was certified on 12th November 1996, gave sophisticated instructions for restructuring of public enterprises. Disregarding of instruction of the act, the governments elected continuing the management of public enterprises which has become a dogma at current Sri Lanka.
All governments elected after 1990 should take the responsibility for accountability and JVP also should share the responsibility as the irresponsible actions of JVP contributed to an increase in debt in public enterprises and appointing weak personnel for management of such enterprises.
Public enterprises should manage like private enterprises to give reasonable returns to owner government and showing the accountability to public.
Members of the parliament must read the act again and work to re-invent the rehabilitation process.
Driverless cars, also known as autonomous vehicles or self-driving cars, have the potential to revolutionize transportation and reshape various industries.
Their future holds numerous possibilities and challenges.
Here are some key points about the future of driverless cars:
1. Advantages:
· Safety: One of the primary promises of autonomous vehicles is improved safety. Human errors are responsible for the majority of accidents, and autonomous vehicles could significantly reduce these accidents by eliminating driver errors.
· Efficiency: Autonomous vehicles could optimize traffic flow, reducing congestion and improving overall transportation efficiency.
· Accessibility: Self-driving cars could increase accessibility for people who are unable to drive due to age, disabilities, or other reasons.
· Productivity: Passengers can use travel time for work, leisure, or relaxation instead of focusing on driving.
2. Challenges:
· Technological Hurdles: Developing fully autonomous systems that can handle complex and unpredictable driving scenarios in various environments remains a challenge.
· Regulation and Legislation: The legal framework for autonomous vehicles is still being developed. Governments need to establish rules and regulations to ensure the safe operation of these vehicles on public roads.
· Ethical and Moral Decisions: Autonomous vehicles may encounter situations where ethical decisions need to be made, such as choosing between minimizing harm to occupants or pedestrians in case of an unavoidable accident.
· Data Security and Privacy: Driverless cars rely heavily on data collection and communication systems, raising concerns about cybersecurity and the privacy of passengers’ information.
· Infrastructure Adaptation: Roads and transportation systems may need to be adapted to accommodate autonomous vehicles effectively.
3. Levels of Autonomy: Autonomous vehicles are often classified into levels of autonomy, ranging from Level 0 (no automation) to Level 5 (full automation, no human intervention required). Most current efforts are focused on achieving Levels 3 and 4, where the car can handle most driving tasks but might still require human intervention in certain situations.
4. Implementation and Adoption:
· Gradual Adoption: The transition to a fully autonomous vehicle ecosystem is expected to be gradual, with initial deployments in controlled environments (e.g., specific geographic areas, closed campuses) before widespread adoption on public roads.
· Fleet Services: Autonomous vehicles might first find success in fleet services like ridesharing and delivery, where the controlled environment and predictable routes make implementation easier.
· Integration with Public Transportation: Driverless cars could be integrated with public transportation systems to provide seamless and efficient multi-modal transportation solutions.
5. Impact on Industries:
· Automotive Industry: Traditional automakers are shifting their focus to autonomous technology, while tech companies are also entering the automotive sector.
· Urban Planning: The need for parking spaces might reduce as autonomous vehicles can drop off passengers and park themselves efficiently.
· Insurance and Liability: The shift towards autonomous vehicles might reshape the insurance industry as liability shifts from drivers to manufacturers and software developers.
6. Public Perception: Public acceptance and trust in autonomous vehicles are crucial for their successful adoption. High-profile accidents involving autonomous vehicles can impact public perception and slow down adoption.
In conclusion, while the future of driverless cars holds immense potential for safety, efficiency, and accessibility, several challenges must be addressed before they become a common sight on the roads.
The collaboration of various stakeholders, including technology developers, governments, and the public, will shape the trajectory of autonomous vehicles in the coming years.
Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena arrived at Kunming International Airport this morning (Aug 15) to commence 4-day visit to Yunnan Province in China. He was warmly received at the airport by Vice Chairman of the CPPCC Yunnan Provincial Committee Zhao Jin, Protocol Chief and other senior officials and Charge D’ Affairs at Sri Lanka Embassy K K. Yoganadan and other officials of the mission.
The Prime Minister will be the Chief Guest at the 7th China-South Asia Expo, jointly hosted by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and the Yunnan provincial government, will be held from August 16 to 20 in Kunming, China.
According to Expo organizers, 60 countries will participate in this gigantic trade display. They include all South and Southeast Asian countries, and RECP member countries.
The 7th China-South Asia Expo is considered to be the most important economic and trade exchange events between China and South Asian countries. The 15 large pavilions will focus on promoting economic and trade cooperation and cultural exchanges with South Asia, as well as devote nine pavilions for regional cooperation, resource, industrial park, port, biopharmaceuticals and health, cultural tourism, modern agriculture, digital economy, and advanced manufacturing.
Covering an exhibition area of 150,000 square meters, the expo will also be displayed online.
As an important platform of extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits between China and South and Southeast Asian countries, the expo will also stage a series of sideline events, in addition to three special events. There will be eight professional forums, such as the 4th China-South Asia Cooperation Forum (CSACF).
In addition to holding discussions with Chinese leaders on bilateral relations, economic cooperation, trade and investments, the Prime Minister is scheduled to Visit Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Science, Yunnan Provincial Energy Investment Group Co. Ltd. or Sinohydro Bureau and Photovoltaic Power Station of Yunnan Provincial Energy Investment Group Co. Ltd in Kunming and Gusheng Village and Experimental paddy field of Yunnan State Farms Group, Erhai Ecological Corridor, Exhibition and Experience center of Xiaguan Compressed Tea in Dali.
The Prime Minister is accompanied by State Ministers Tharaka Balasuriya, Janaka Wakkumbura and Kanaka Herath, MP Yadamini Gunawardena and Secretary to the Prime Minister Anura Dissanayake.
India’s top podcast ‘The Ranveer Show’ interviewed Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner to India Milinda Moragoda in Mumbai.
Hosted by social media entrepreneur, YouTuber, motivational speaker and leadership coach Ranveer Allahbadia, ‘The Ranveer Show’ features eminent people from different walks of life talking about issues that impact the people and society at large. The show brings important voices from the field of politics, diplomacy, sports, entertainment, lifestyle and also spiritual leaders.
‘The Ranveer Show’ has previously featured a number of prominent personalities, including the External Affairs Minister of India Dr. S. Jaishankar, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Priyanka Chopra, Glenn McGrath and spiritual leader Sadhguru. In March 2020, ‘The Ranveer Show’ became India’s top ranked podcast on Spotify and continues to retain that position. High Commissioner Moragoda is the first diplomatic Head of Mission to be interviewed in the show. Ranveer Allahbadia is the founder of BeerBiceps Pvt Ltd, a company that creates self-improvement content in various formats through six YouTube channels with more than seven million online followers and subscribers
The Ranaviru Seva Authority (RVSA) awarded Rs. 2.76 million worth scholarships to 23 children belongs to war veteran families, those have excelled at the G.C.E. (Ordinary Level) Examination while obtaining 9 Distinctions, today (Aug 15).
This specially organized event was held under the patronage of RVSA Chairperson Major General Nandana Senadeera (Retd).
Lally Kobbekaduwa, Manel Wimalaratne, Apsara Gunawardena and Rekha Senadeera joined the scholarship awarding program organized with the aim of empowering these children through education.
Italy-based Sri Lankan donors led by Priyantha Munasinghe extended financial support for the program.
Accordingly, a war hero child receives financial assistance of Rs. 5,000 per month for two years (a total of Rs. 120,000.00).
Chief of Naval Staff Rear Admiral Jayantha Kularatne, Chief of Air Staff Air Vice Marshal Sampath Wickramarathne, RVSA Deputy Chairperson Mrs Sonia Kottegoda, RVSA Director Brig. Chandra Abeykoon, Secretary to the President Brig. Nalin Madhiwaka and RVSA staffers, donors and parents were present at the occasion.
The ‘Races’ of Sri Lanka (Ceylon) were invented by the British when they ruled our country. Until the British came, there were no races or ethnic divisions in Sri Lanka, as we know them today. The ‘ethnic groups’ we are saddled with today, are bogus ones created by the British rulers. The British invented three bogus races, ‘Sinhala’, ‘Ceylon Tamil’ and ‘Ceylon Moor’. The word ‘Sinhala’ which denoted the whole population was now reduced to the status of a ‘race’.
Before British rule, the island was known as Sinhaladeepa’, the citizens were known as ‘Sinhala’ and the unique language developed in the island was also named ‘Sinhala’. The word ‘Sinhala’ denotes a nationality, not a race. The Sinhala sovereign state was an assimilative one that absorbed immigrants who came to the island.
The Sinhala language has no separate word for ‘race’. Historian RALH Gunawardana said he found it difficult to find a satisfactory equivalent for the word ‘race’ n Sinhala. The Sinhala term “jati/jatiya” was adopted for ‘nation,’ ‘caste’ and ‘race’ depending on the context.
‘Race ‘is a concept invented in Europe and heavily used by the west in the 19th and 20th centuries. Colonial rulers introduced the idea to the colonies. In Sri Lanka the British introduced the notion of race into its Census of 1871. This was the first complete population census of Ceylon. Race appeared for the first time in this census. Race was included in every Census thereafter including the last one in 2012.
The Sinhala, Tamil and Moor races were officially recognized for the first time in 1871. The proportions in the Census of 1871 were Sinhalese 69.40%, Tamils 22.21% and Moor 6.79%. By 1881, the races listed were Low country Sinhalese, Kandyan Sinhalese, Ceylon Tamils, Indian Tamils, Ceylon Moor, Indian Moor, Malay, Veddah and Burgher. These became the census categories from 1881 onwards. (Denham Census of Ceylon of 1911 p 195)
The idea of race became further entrenched when In 1886 R Virchow and the brothers CF and PB Sarasin identified three physical types in Sri Lanka, Sinhala, Tamil, and Veddah.
These race categories were imposed on the population.In the 1871 Census, the Census official left the form with the head of the house to fill in, with a list of races to choose from.
These three bogus races, Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim (Moor) violate the main principle of classification, which is to classify by one single criterion. You classify according to one attribute at a time such as age, weight, or height. You do not say A weighs 6 kilos, B is 6 feet tall and C is 6 years old. That is known as cross classification.
Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim,( Moor) groups are based on cross classification., Tamils are classified according to language, Moors according to religion, Sinhalese according to origin. This is a ridiculous, absurd classification. It should be discarded.
the criteria used for these races have been questioned. In 1945, Jennings had pointed out that the Sinhalese and Tamils were language groups and not races. Muslims are not a race either, observed analysts. They are a religious group, If we recognize them as a political category, then we must recognize Buddhists, Hindus and Christian also as political categories.
I do not know how legal these categories are. I do not think they have ever been tested in a court of law. But when a birth is registered, ‘Race’ is included. The present day Birth Certificate, has a cage for ‘Race’ and it is compulsory to fill it in. There is an official list to select from. The Registrar General’s Department can make alterations in name and marital status, but they cannot make changes in race.
In 1975 or so, Registrar General’s office was given a list of approved races” as well as a list of the terms which cannot be included for ‘race’ such as ‘brahmin’. In 1990 there was a discussion in Parliament, to delete the category of Race” and replace it with the nationality , Sri Lankan” but this did not become law.
The ‘Ceylon Tamil’ and ‘Ceylon Moor’ are descendants of Tamil immigrants from India .The ‘Ceylon Tamil’ consisted of the Tamil speaking, low caste, landless, agricultural labor arriving in Dutch and British times from Tamilnadu. The ‘Ceylon Moor’ or Muslims were also from India. Low caste Indians had converted to Islam during the period of Muslim rule in India. the Ceylon Moor probably came from Tamilnadu, since they speak Tamil today.
Isolated Muslim grave stones were found in Sri Lanka in the pre-colonial period. This is greeted with enthusiasm as evidence of Muslim influence. That is not so. A Muslim settlement would be accompanied by a Muslim burial ground with lots of burials in it. Isolated burial stones indicate that that there were no permanent, sizeable Muslim settlements in the island at that time. These Muslims were probably a migrant group engaged in the carrying trade, with residential bases on the coast, such as Beruwela and Galle.
When the Portuguese expelled the Muslim traders from the south, they went to King Senerat (1604-35) in Udarata kingdom and told him that they had nowhere to go, which means they were not a settled population in the island even then. Senerat sent them to settle in the Eastern province. This is the first known permanent settlement of Muslims.
The British also gave a new set of provinces to the island. In 1833 They t created five large provinces in north, east, west, south and centre. these became the present day Northern, Eastern, Western, Southern and Central provinces. Northwestern province was created from these in 1845, North central in 1873, Uva in 1886 and Sabaragamuwa in 1889.
The British then allocated their invented ‘races’ into the invented ‘provinces’. Every province and district was enumerated in terms of ‘race’. Majority communities were declared for each an administration division. In 1911, the Sinhalese were allocated the Central province, the Tamil were given the north and east and the Moors got the Puttalam district. (Denham p 195)
In 1950, the UNESCO statement, “The Race Question“, signed by some of the internationally renowned scholars of the time (including Ashley Montagu, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Gunnar Myrdal, Julian Huxley, etc.), suggested that: it would be better when speaking of human races to drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of ‘ethnic groups’.”
An ‘ethnicgroup’ was defined as a group that shared a distinct culture, religion or language, which differed from the other groups living close by. Critics point out that the ethnic groups that appear in the national census of former colonies are the same old categories invented by their European rulers earlier. ( continued)
Says coordination among state and non-state institutions crucial for a holistic response to human trafficking
Plans to incorporate awareness on human trafficking into education sector
A wakeup call to all stakeholder institutions from the NAHTTF
The landscape of human trafficking is evolving, transforming into a ruthless business that preys on the vulnerable and exploits their desperation. This dark reality presents a complex challenge that threatens not just individual lives but our national security as well, stressed Defence Secretary General Kamal Gunaratne delivering the keynote address at the opening session of the Awareness Workshop organized for the Divisional Secretaries on Human Trafficking at the Radisson Hotel, Colombo today (Aug 14).
The three-day workshop is organized by the National Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force (NAHTTF) in collaboration with the Safe Foundation under ‘Empowering Civil Society Organizations to Combat Human Trafficking’, a project funded by the USAID.
This workshop is held under the supervision of the Defence Secretary, with the purview of the Chief of National Intelligence Major General Ruwan Kulathunga, while 36 Divisional Secretaries and Assistant Divisional Secretaries are attending the programme.
‘Recognizing the gravity of this threat, we have formulated the National Strategic Action Plan to monitor and combat human trafficking for the years 2021-2025’ the Defence Secretary stated adding our approach is based on four pillars: Prevention, Protection, Prosecution, and Partnership”.
Highlighting the gaining ground over collective effort he went on emphasising the necessity of coordination between governmental and non-governmental organizations, which is crucial for a holistic response to human trafficking.
At present, we collaborate with twenty stakeholders under the NAHTTF, demonstrating the power of unity in our fight against this crime”, he added.
On this note focusing the importance of the Divisional Secretaries role that stands as a cornerstone he remarked that this multi-disciplinary collaboration will enable them to actively contribute to the NAHTTF’s endeavours.
The upgrading to ‘Tier-2’ from ‘Tier-2 Watch List’ in the Trafficking in Persons Report submitted annually to the US Department of State showcases our progress he reasoned while explaining positive outcomes of this collective effort.
Revealingly future plans that are afoot to work with inter-governmental institutions and connect field development officers with the taskforce and further aim to incorporate awareness of Human Trafficking into the education system, he said.
In closing he remarked that human trafficking is a crime against humanity, and affirmed we, as the NAHTTF of Sri Lanka, are determined to fight against it with all our might.
Senior officials of Safe Foundation, Attorney General’s Department, Immigration and Emigration Department, Human Trafficking, Smuggling, Maritime Crimes Investigation Division, Institute of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, Bureau for the Prevention of Abuse of Children and Women, National Child Protection Authority, Department of Labour, National Authority for the Protection of Victims of Crime and Witnesses, SLBFE, IOM, ILO and legal officers representing the Defence Ministry are contributing as resource personnel at the three-day long workshop.
Colombo, August 14: Sir Robert Chalmers, an Oxonian and an eminent scholar of Buddhism and Pali, was excited when he was appointed Governor of Buddhist-majority Ceylon in 1913. The assignment was right up his street.
While being an official in the British Treasury, Chalmers had pursued his interest in Buddhism and Pali, having been a favourite student of Prof.Thomas William Rhys Davids, the founder of the Pali Text Society in the UK.
ADVERTISEMENT
Ceylonese Buddhists and political liberals were equally enthusiastic about Chalmers’ coming. They were in the midst of a politico-religious reawakening led by the Temperance Movement and Anagarika Dharmapala. And liberal Ceylonese, cutting across communities, expected Chalmers, the Orientalist, to be more accommodative than his predecessor, Sir Henry McCallum, on the issue of representation in the Legislative Council. MacCullum, a military engineer, was hard as nails in many matters including Ceylonese political aspirations. He had acerbically dismissed the Ceylonese elite’s claim for greater representation in the Legislative Council saying that they were not representative of the masses.
But Chalmers, with his sensitivity to Buddhism, was expected to bridge the political deep gulf naturally and effortlessly.
Chalmers’ Scholarship
According to Dr.R.P.Fernando, historian of the British Raj in India and Ceylon, Chalmers published a paper in the Journal of the RoyalAsiatic Society (JRAS) in 1894 entitled The Madhura Sutta – concerning caste”. The sutta, which is contained in the Majjhima Nikaya, gives the Buddhist view on caste.
The Majjhima Nikaya consists of 152 discourses by the Buddha and his chief disciples, which together constitute a comprehensive body of teaching concerning all aspects of the Buddha’s teachings.
In 1895, Chalmers published another paper in the JRAS entitled Nativity of the Buddha” with the Pali text of an unpublished Sutta from the Majjhima Nikaya dealing with the ‘marvels and mysteries’ of the Buddha’s nativity. He then took over the task of translating the Jataka tales from Prof.Rhys Davids. The first volume of translations came out in 1895. According to Dr. R.P.Fernando, this contained Jataka No.1 (Apannaka Jataka) to Jataka No.150 (Sanjiva Jataka).
Dr. Fernando further says that at the Paris Congress of 1897, Chalmers made a presentation on the Pali term Tathagata and published a paper on it in the JRAS in 1898. In this paper, Chalmers says that the first title assumed by the Buddha was not Samma-sambuddha but Tathagata. He also pointed out that the Buddha used Tathagata in his dying words Tamhehi kiccam atappam akkhataro Tathagata.
One of Chalmers’ first public engagements in Ceylon was to preside over the prize-giving ceremony at the Vidyodaya Pirivena. The monks thought that he would not be able to pronounce Pali properly but he floored them with an extempore speech in chaste Pali!
1915 Buddhist-Muhammadan Riots
However, Chalmers’ three-year tenure in Ceylon as Governor was marked or rather marred by the widespread rioting in the Central and Western Provinces in 1915 involving Buddhists and Hambayas” who were Muslim traders of South Indian origin living in the Western, Central and Sabargamuwa Provinces. A panicky Chalmers unleashed Martial Law with draconian provisions for three months to crush Buddhists who he thought were trying to overthrow the government. He was replaced in 1916 before his tenure was to end.
The contentious issue was playing music in front of mosques during Buddhist religious processions (Peraheras).
In his book Riots and Martial Law in Ceylon -1915” the Tamil scholar, lawyer and leader Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan says that the Hambayas of Kandy had objected to Buddhists playing music in front of their mosques during Peraheras. The matter was taken to the District Court.
The Basnayake Nilame of the Gampola temple argued before the District Court of judge Paul E.Pieris, that as per Art 5 of the 1815 Kandyan Convention, the British rulers were bound to respect all Buddhist customs including playing music in religious processions.
In his ruling dated June 4, 1914, District Judge Paul.E.Pieris said that music is an essential part of Perahera rites and that the Kandyan Convention is binding and unalterable.
The Hambayas then took the case to the Supreme Court. On February 2, 1915, the Supreme Court reversed the order of the District Court. It ruled that the application of the Kandyan Convention was subject to the Police Ordinance of 1865 and the Local Bodies Ordinance of 1898, which required licensing of processions. In other words, the right to take processions was not absolute and unfettered.
Though jolted by the ruling, the Kandyan Buddhists applied for a license to hold a procession on the birthday of the Buddha that fell on May 28, 1915. The Hambayas opposed the move. The Kandy District Government Agent told the Buddhists that the procession could pass through the Castle Hill Street mosque (in Kandy) after it was closed at 12 in the night. But when the procession reached the mosque at 1 am on May 29, it was both open and fully lit and stones were hurled on the procession.
What followed was unbridled looting and destruction of Hambaya shops and properties. Villagers around Kandy went about in gangs attacking Hambaya shops and properties all along the railway line up to Colombo, shouting Kolle Kolle” (Loot Loot). Before long, many parts of Colombo were engulfed in violence in which rowdies played a predominant part.
The police were nonplussed. There was no firm chain of command. Inspector General Herbert Dowbiggin was at sea. Police were issued rifles but without ammunition. However, things changed radically on June 2, when Governor Chalmers imposed Martial Law with draconian provisions. A free hand was given to the cops and the 28 th.Punjabis, a British-officered, Muslim-majority Indian army unit deployed in Ceylon at that time to fight an expected German invasion.
According to Ramanathan, Chalmers was persuaded to take extreme steps by some vested interests and ill-infomed advisors. Besides the tough commander of the army, Brig.Gen. H.H.L Malcolm, the others were a section of the traditional Sinhalese aristocracy who were jealous of the newly emerging Sinhalese bourgeoisie making a name for themselves and aspiring for leadership through the Temperance Movement.
Chalmers and Brig. Gen.Malcolm also mistakenly viewed the spreading violence as a movement by the new bourgeoisie to overthrow the government with the help Germans, who were then fighting the British in World War 1 (1914-18). Chalmers and Gen.Malcolm took no note of the fact that no White person or government property was attacked and that the clashes were only between two native communities. Charmers did not consult any knowledgeable Ceylonese, including his Maha Mudaliar (chief Ceylonese official) Solomon Dias Bandaranaike.
Many leading Ceylonese, including those who were manifestly loyal to the British, were imprisoned. The well- known businessman and philanthropist, Henry Pedris, was executed for firing in the air to scare away a mob trying to attack his shop. Hundreds of ordinary people were flogged or shot dead for the flimsiest of transgressions, on mere suspicion or on the complaint of rivals. Among the elite locked up in stinking cells for weeks was D.S.Senanayake.
Heavy fines (in some cases in pounds sterling) were imposed on the wealthy. Heavy compensation was sought for arbitrarily assessed damages to property. British barrister Eardley Norton remarked that the government was suffering from treasonitis”.
An estimated 116 people were killed, including 63 in police firing; 4075 houses and boutiques were looted, 250 houses and boutiques were burned down, 17 mosques were burnt and 86 damaged.
Though violence had ceased in four days, by June 6, Chalmers lifted Martial Law only on August 30. To save himself, he simultaneously issued an order indemnifying himself and other officials for actions taken to suppress the rioting.
However, Chalmers was replaced by Sri John Anderson in 1916. Chalmers was not only unrepentant but nonchalantly returned to his first love, Buddhist and Pali studies. As Master of Peterhouse College in Cambridge in 1924, he produced a metrical translation of the Sutta Nipata, the earliest teaching of the Buddha in Pali verse.
As China’s rise threatens the democratic rules, values, and institutions that have shaped the post-war world order, the United States (US) is increasing its outreach in the Indo-Pacific region. Distant South Asian island nations such as Sri Lanka are today receiving greater attention from the US. This brief seeks to bridge the gap in the literature on the US’s Sri Lanka policy and highlights how the current US government positions Sri Lanka in its broader Indo-Pacific strategy. The brief uses the economic crisis of Sri Lanka as a case in point to assess the US’s Sri Lanka policy and its broader implications for South Asia.
Introduction
Since the establishment of their diplomatic relations in 1948,[1] Sri Lanka and the United States (US) have had a tumultuous relationship broadly spanning the following phases: From the 1950s to 1970s, the US viewed Sri Lanka through the lens of the Cold War; in 1953, Vice-President Richard Nixon visited Sri Lanka,[2] and some years later in the 1970s, the US installed a military base in Diego Garcia.[3] Starting from the 1980s, with the onset of the civil war in Sri Lanka, the US became interested in peace-making efforts. However, it worked in tandem with India’s policies and leadership, despite the former’s scepticism of the US.[4]
The beginning of the millennium saw the US expand its bilateral relations with Sri Lanka, as the Cold War ended and the US war on terror began; the US’s relations and assistance was largely subject to Sri Lanka’s ability to find a peaceful resolution to its civil war.[5] However, the final phase of the civil war (2006-2009) resulted in a surge in human rights abuses and war crimes against Tamil minorities in the country. With the defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the Rajapaksas became heroes for the majority Sinhala population,[a] even as the US and the West urged for reconciliation and the strengthening of democratic institutions. The US and the West consequently suspended military aid for the country and continued to criticise the regime.
This alienation and the need for post-war reconstruction compelled Sri Lanka to approach China and capital markets for International Sovereign Bonds (ISB).[6] An alienated Colombo was willing to embrace close relations with China, which had historically shown little concern for Sri Lanka’s domestic affairs. China’s funding and assistance—which was swift and tied to less conditionalities—as well as relations with elites, and its exploitation of corruption and systemic vulnerabilities fostered a strong relationship with Sri Lanka and the Rajapaksas.[7]
Beijing’s commercial lending to Sri Lanka commenced in 2001 through a loan facility for an oil tank farm project, but its presence in the country rapidly increased in the final years of the civil war and thereafter.[8] Sri Lanka borrowed heavily from China, even as most of these loans were on high-interest rates and opaque in nature. China’s direct development finance increased from US$0.45 billion in 2005 to US$12 billion by 2019.[9] Similarly, China’s debt profile in Sri Lanka rose from 0.3 percent in the 1990s to 20 percent (US$7.4 billion) in 2022, making it Colombo’s largest bilateral lender.[10]
China’s assistance came at a cost for Colombo’s economy, polity, and strategy. Leveraging Sri Lanka’s debts and economic dependency on it, China entrenched its influence in the country, as seen in the 99-year lease of the Hambantota port to a Chinese state-owned enterprise in 2017. It also emboldened the regime to ignore much-needed democratic and economic reforms being demanded by the West and the US.
As Chinese coercion and intimidation continue to challenge the current values-based international order, the US is growing increasingly concerned. The contemporary interests of the US in Sri Lanka can be narrowed to two interconnected issues—the reconciliation of Tamils and strengthening democracy in Sri Lanka; and limiting China’s influence and presence in the country.
Concerns about China’s presence and activities in Sri Lanka had already surfaced in the US by 2009.[11] The US began efforts to renew, revive and strengthen” relations with Sri Lanka in 2015[12] following the electoral defeat of pro-China Mahinda Rajapaksa. John Kerry became the first US foreign secretary to visit Sri Lanka in a decade[13] and offered more carrots than sticks to incentivise Sri Lanka to promote reforms. The US further attempted to consolidate its influence through defence engagements. In 2017, the US and Sri Lanka renewed the Acquisition and Cross-Services Agreement (ACSA), and in 2019, negotiations started for the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).[b],[14] US attempts to promote robust engagement came to a halt with the Rajapaksas returning to power in the 2019 presidential and the 2020 parliamentary elections.
Today Sri Lanka sits at the heart of the evolving dynamics in the Indo-Pacific, owing to its location and crucial Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC).[15] More than 80 percent of the world’s seaborne oil trade transits through the chokepoints in the Indian Ocean,[16] of which nearly 30 percent of the world’s oil traffic and 90 percent of China’s oil passes through Sri Lanka’s coasts.[17] Crucially for the US, all of its Navy vessels passing between the Fifth and Seventh fleet transit through Sri Lankan waters.[18] In this regard, it is crucial to study how the US perceives important island nations such as Sri Lanka.
The next section highlights how the current US government positions Sri Lanka in its broader Indo-Pacific strategy. The brief uses the Sri Lankan economic crisis as a case in point to assess the US’s Sri Lanka policy, and closes with a summary of its key findings on the broader implications for the region.
Locating Sri Lanka in the Indo-Pacific
The Joe Biden administration’s broader Indo-Pacific policy is seen in a number of strategic plans: the Interim National Security Strategy of March 2021,[19] the Indo-Pacific Strategy of February 2022,[20] and the National Security Strategy of October 2022.[21] The strategic plans are largely a continuation of those of preceding administrations.
In all these documents, the US expresses its concerns for the decline in the post-Cold War world order as a result of both external and internal factors. Externally, the US blames China and other authoritarian regimes for challenging the stable and open international order; however, the US is concerned about China using its economic, diplomatic, political, military, and technological capabilities to exploit the weaknesses of democracies and the open world order. In addition to cross-border aggressions, China has exploited the free economic choices, media, and political space of open societies to influence and coerce governments. This has strained the values of sovereignty, self-determination, territorial integrity, economic choices, free information, and political independence.
Internally, China’s coercive statecraft has damaged the democratic institutions and values of countries. The COVID-19 pandemic only exacerbated pre-existing democratic challenges such as corruption, inequality, populism, polarisation, disinformation, human rights abuses, and nationalism, further straining the values-based order. The US intends to defend the values-based order from these threats by strengthening international institutions; promoting self-determination, territorial integrity, and political independence; supporting countries in making sovereign decisions; deterring external pressures; and building resilient supply chains. Further assessment of the Biden administration’s strategic plans indicates the following objectives to achieve this vision:
Allies, Partners, and Institutions: The US is determined to remain proactive in the Indo-Pacific. However, considering its constraints, there is increasing attention to sustaining and building allies, partnerships, and multilateral and minilateral institutions with countries that share common interests in defending the international order. These allies and partners include NATO members, Australia, Japan, ASEAN countries, and India. The US, with its allies and partners, aims to promote coordinated development efforts, economic approaches, and posture planning. This will promote a favourable balance of power, deter China from dominating any region, and limit further cross-border aggressions. That said, the US will be prioritising its values and interests even as it engages with these partners.
Regional Leadership: The US is keen to focus on all the regions of the Indo-Pacific, including South Asia. However, there is an acknowledgment that its role is stronger when it engages with its partners. Thus, the US is interested in its partners embracing regional leadership roles in the Indo-Pacific while it continues to support and supplement them. The US will support its allies and partners to promote humanitarian assistance, disaster needs, and maritime security, with the aim of deterring chaos or Chinese domination in certain regions. For instance, the US sees a strong and resilient India as crucial to upholding the values-based order in the Indian Ocean and South Asia and coordinates with it to promote economic connectivity and deter further Chinese coerciveness.
Democratic Values and Capacity Building: The US has shown interest in bilateral assistance and relations with the Indo-Pacific countries. Capacity building, promoting accountability and human rights, fighting corruption, strengthening democracy, providing development assistance and investments, access to markets, increasing maritime capacity and domain awareness, defence and military cooperation, and addressing infrastructure gaps in the Indo-Pacific countries has become crucial for the US. This will help the states strengthen democratic institutions and build resilient economies as well as strong and prosperous societies that will mitigate transnational threats and deter Chinese assertiveness.
Responsible Competition and Transnational Threats: The US also aims to compete with China responsibly, while cooperating with China to build resilience against transnational threats such as migration, health, climate change, food security, and energy shortage.
To be sure, these plans speak broadly of the Indo-Pacific, without any specific references to Sri Lanka. However, in February 2021—soon after the Biden administration came to power—there were signs that Sri Lanka was being deemed a crucial part of the US’s Indo-Pacific strategy. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken referred to Sri Lanka as a partner and friend that will promote regional security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific. He stressed celebrating the shared principles and values of protecting and promoting democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and justice.[22] President Biden’s letter to Sri Lanka’s President Ranil Wickremesinghe in February 2023 further expressed the US’s willingness to cooperate with Sri Lanka to maintain a secure, free, and open Indo-Pacific.[23]
The Integrated Country Strategy elaborates on Sri Lanka’s position in the Indo-Pacific strategy.[24],[25] The US views Sri Lanka as the fulcrum of the Indo-Pacific and has promoted military cooperation and modernisation, foreign assistance, and capacity-building programs in the country. Its efforts in Sri Lanka are intended to promote accountability, reconciliation, transparency, and rule of law; strengthen economic and democratic institutions/governance; respect human rights; bolster civil society; promote market-driven reforms and economic reforms; limit corruption; and compel the country to adhere to international norms, transparency, and fiscal responsibility. This will promote the values-based order by strengthening democratic and economic institutions and limiting Chinese influence. The US also intends to improve its commercial engagements, exports, investments, and market opportunities with its partners to promote an open and robust economy in Sri Lanka. However, the strategy document asserts that the US’s engagements will depend on the Sri Lankan government’s reconciliation and responsive governance, and willingness to strengthen democratic institutions and respect human rights.
A Case Study of the Economic Crisis
The US sees the crisis in Sri Lanka as a means to create a more sustainable and inclusive economy[26] and to promote a representative, democratic, and responsive government.[27] It expanded its outreach to Sri Lanka during the crisis bilaterally and through its regional partner, India. Despite this enthusiasm to tackle Sri Lanka’s economic issues, the US’s rhetoric has focused on criticising Beijing for using opaque lending mechanisms and debt trapping.[28],[29] ISBs—which contribute to nearly 35 percent of the government’s debts—have hardly been mentioned by the US.[30]
Assistance and Bail-out
The initial response of the US to the Sri Lankan crisis was slow. Early signs of the crisis surfaced in mid-2021, and in September 2021, Sri Lanka declared a food emergency. Yet, the US’s outreach to Sri Lanka began only in March 2022. On par with its Indo-Pacific policy, the US’s role was largely favoured to supplement that of India’s by offering humanitarian assistance to Sri Lanka and helping the island nation reach an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The US’s outreach to Sri Lanka in March was driven by two reasons: First, starting late-2021, as tensions between China and Sri Lanka escalated, India took the lead to assist Sri Lanka. By March 2022, India had offered new lines of credit to Sri Lanka worth US$1 billion, paving the way for other countries to provide supplementary and humanitarian assistance.[31] Second, in March, Sri Lanka finally reversed its policy and decided on approaching the IMF, where the US enjoys significant influence.[32]
Since March 2022, the US has offered Sri Lanka assistance of US$270 million. In the same month, following Under Secretary for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland’s visit to Sri Lanka and the Fourth Sri Lanka–US Partnership Dialogue, the US offered Sri Lanka assistance of US$80 million to boost renewable energy projects in the island nation.[33] In June, the US offered over US$27 million in grants for technical assistance to the dairy industry in Sri Lanka, followed by US$12 million grants for humanitarian assistance and livelihood support.[34] This was followed by President Biden’s announcement of US$20 million to assist Sri Lanka with food security and nutritional requirements for school children.[35] The US also offered a loan of US$120 million to help support Sri Lanka’s small and medium enterprises.[36] In September, USAID Administrator Samantha Power offered an additional US$40 million to help Sri Lanka with fertilisers, food, and nutritional support.[37]
The US has been the second largest aid provider to Sri Lanka during the crisis, after India. Since Sri Lanka’s independence in 1948, the US has offered the island nation US$2 billion in assistance.[38] If seen in absolute numbers, the US’s assistance to Sri Lanka during the crisis year alone has constituted 13.5 percent of its total aid. This assistance is still small compared to the US’s assistance to other countries in the region,[39] but the US’s role has been largely supplementary. It preferred India to take the lead, following which it has provided humanitarian assistance to vulnerable communities and helped build a sustainable and robust economy that is resilient to external shocks. Its assistance to Sri Lanka has largely been focused on food security, public health, economic well-being, disaster risk reduction, shelter, agriculture and livelihood, fertilisers, and nutritional support for schoolchildren and women.
Besides humanitarian aid, the US has played a crucial role in Sri Lanka’s IMF negotiations.[40] For the US, the IMF’s ‘Get Well, Stay Well’ plan is best suited to strengthen Sri Lanka’s economic and democratic institutions.[41] Its policy prescriptions, such as promoting revenue-based fiscal consolidation, debt restructuring, rebuilding reserves, restoring price stability, increasing taxes, reducing corruption, and ensuring the independence of the Central Bank,[42] were expected to strengthen institutions and promote transparency, stability, and good governance. Thus, even with deepening political instability, the US helped Sri Lanka negotiate with the IMF.[43]
Subsequently, a high-level delegation from the Department of State and the US Treasury visited Sri Lanka to explore further ways of cooperation and assistance.[44] Later, it was acknowledged that the Treasury and Department of State played a keen role in supporting Sri Lanka’s approach to debt restructuring and negotiating with the IMF.[45] The US continued follow-up negotiations and assured Sri Lanka of support from the IMF at the highest level.[46] On multiple occasions, India and the US have collaborated closely with Sri Lanka’s IMF bailout. For instance, Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s visit and assurances of debt restructuring were closely followed by Victoria Nuland’s second visit to Sri Lanka.[47] The US also assured Sri Lanka’s bailout on fair terms and criticised China’s half-hearted efforts when it offered only two years of debt moratorium to Sri Lanka.[48]
The US has used the crisis to provide symbolic messaging, exhibit its willingness to assist Sri Lanka, and anchor its presence in the Indo-Pacific. Besides the US Ambassador’s proactive engagement in Sri Lanka, Colombo had several high-profile delegations visiting from the US (Table 1). These delegations offered fresh assistance, followed up on IMF negotiations, and explored further ways of assistance and cooperation.
Table 1: Delegation Visits from the U.S.
Delegation
Designation
Date
Outcome of the Visit
Victoria Nuland
Under Secretary for Political Affairs
22-23 March 2022
Fourth Sri Lanka–US Partnership Dialogue
Kelly Keiderling; Robert Kaproth
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Department of State;Deputy Assistant Secretary, US Treasury
26-29 June 2022
Explored effective ways of US assistance to Sri Lanka
Samantha Power
Administrator, USAID
10-11 September 2022
US$40 million announced for humanitarian assistance
Donald Lu
Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs
17-19 October 2022
Discussed recent developments with the IMF and Sri Lanka’s debt restructuring
Victoria Nuland
Under Secretary for Political Affairs
1 February 2023
Announced additional US$30 million aid
Jedidiah Royal
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defence for Indo-Pacific Security Affairs
16 February 2023
Discussed defence cooperation, regional stability, and Indo-Pacific Security
Source: Author’s own
This interest in the region also exists at the top level: Biden announced additional aid to Sri Lanka and interacted with the Sri Lankan envoy,[49] and Secretary Blinken has had multiple engagements with the Sri Lankan foreign minister.[50] The US has also indicated some sensitivities to Sri Lanka’s interests and adopted flexibilities in its policy. For instance, the US envoy to Sri Lanka held a meeting with China to ensure further assistance to the country.[51] Similarly, the US expressed its understanding of Sri Lanka’s situation and its rationale for importing Russian oil.[52]
However, US policy appears solely focused on strengthening Sri Lanka’s democratic institutions, entrenching the US’s influence and pushing back against China. This explains the US’s ambiguity on ISBs; the US has realised but has not acknowledged that the ISBs have contributed to Sri Lanka’s debt burdens, too. Much of its rhetoric and policy has been focused on pushing back against China. While the US’s assistance with IMF negotiations helped Sri Lanka with credit ratings and offered bargaining opportunities with private players, this was largely a byproduct of the US’s strategy to strengthen Sri Lankan institutions and push back against China.
The US itself has had a limited role to play in negotiating with private players; the Sri Lankan government took the lead in convincing its private creditors to negotiate debt restructuring.[53] Indeed, one of Sri Lanka’s bondholders from the US, Hamilton Reserve Bank Ltd, had also filed a suit against the Sri Lankan government for defaulting on its loans.[54] Since most of the ISBs are dollar-denominated or Eurobonds, scholars have criticised the US and the West for pushing Sri Lanka into the debt crisis and not doing enough to assist it.[55]
Democracy and Reconciliation
In parallel, the Biden administration showed keen interest in Sri Lanka’s democratic institutions and reconciliation, albeit with some limited flexibility. Here, the US has followed an independent path to achieve some of its foreign policy goals, because of its historical differences with India on reconciliation in Sri Lanka (Table 2). Except for the 2012 and 2013 voting, the US and India have largely differed in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC). India’s efforts to promote reconciliation in Sri Lanka are bilateral, whereas the US prefers multilateral approaches, and follows it up with bilateral means.
Table 2: The U.S. and India on UNHRC Sri Lanka Resolutions
Year
Resolution
US Stance
India’s Vote
2009
Sri Lanka urges the international community to help with reconstruction efforts and assistance.
N.A.
In favour
2012
Criticism of human rights situation, and calls for measures.
Sponsored Resolution
In favour
2013
Criticism of human rights situation, and calls for measures.
OHCHR is authorised to collect, analyse, and preserve evidence of human rights violations.
Co-sponsored Resolution
Abstained
2022
Reinforce the capacity of OHCHR; link human rights violations to corruption and economic crisis.
Co-sponsored Resolution
Abstained
Source: Author’s own
The US sees this crisis as a making of China’s debt trap diplomacy as well as the weak democratic and economic institutions of Sri Lanka. In February 2021, the Biden administration hinted that democracy, human rights, the rule of law, and equal justice are crucial aspects of its relations with Sri Lanka.[56] The Fourth Sri Lanka–US Partnership Dialogue also witnessed discussions on reconciliation, human rights, democracy, good governance, the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act, and justice provision.[57] In 2022, the US even co-sponsored a UNHRC resolution that links the economic crisis and human rights violations with corruption.[58]
Reconciliation, promotion of human rights, and strengthening democratic values and institutions are crucial for the US-envisioned values-based order in the region. The US sees the UNHRC as a means for strengthening democratic institutions in Sri Lanka. To date, the US has sponsored multiple resolutions against Sri Lanka in the UNHRC. This includes the resolutions in 2012, 2013, and 2014.[59] In 2015, the US co-sponsored a resolution with the government of Sri Lanka that intended to establish a truth commission, an office of missing persons, an office of reparations, and a transnational justice mechanism from which the Rajapaksas government withdrew in 2019.[60]
The Biden administration’s approach to Sri Lanka has been no different: The government co-sponsored a resolution in 2021 that authorised the OHCHR to collect, analyse, and preserve evidence of human rights abuses and war crimes in Sri Lanka.[61] This was despite the US not having rejoined the UNHRC. In October 2022, even as the US assisted Sri Lanka, it co-sponsored another UNHRC resolution, which extends and reinforces the capacity of OHCHR to collect, analyse, and preserve evidence. It also called on Sri Lanka to take accountability for human rights violations caused by corruption and economic crisis.[62] However, the Sri Lankan government and the Sinhala majority have not reciprocated well to this US ‘coercion’. [63]
Even as the US has increased its outreach to Sri Lanka, it has shown a distrust of the government of Sri Lanka and its military when it comes to human rights. As Sri Lanka witnessed mass protests and political instability in April 2022, the US expressed its concerns about Sri Lanka’s use of unnecessary force against the demonstrators. It criticised Sri Lanka for imposing a second emergency within a span of two months and defended citizens’ right to peaceful protest.[64] The US also called on Sri Lanka to see the crisis as an opportunity to create a more inclusive, representative, democratic, and responsive government.[65] Even after achieving relative political stability, subsequent US delegations visiting and assisting Sri Lanka emphasised political reforms, accountability, and reconciliation.[66] The US also urged the Sri Lankan government to be more democratic and hold the much-delayed local elections at the earliest.[67] In addition, the US has engaged with the Tamil parties and delegation, where it has expressed its lack of satisfaction with reconciliation.[68]
Further, the US has continued to impose sanctions on Sri Lankan military officials. The Biden administration has imposed sanctions on four senior Sri Lankan military officials—two in December 2021, one in December 2022, and another in April 2023.[69],[70] Shavendra Silva—the Chief of Defence Staff when Biden came to power—continued to be placed under sanctions under the Biden administration.
The US acknowledges that its engagements and assistance to Sri Lanka depend on the latter’s willingness to promote reconciliation, responsive governance, democratic institutions, and human rights.[71] Although the US has consistently demanded reforms and used UNHRC resolutions, bilateral means, and sanctions to pressure Sri Lanka, it has not singled it out. This is notable, especially since the Biden administration consists of several high-level officials who have criticised Sri Lanka on several occasions in the past.[72] The US’s interests in Sri Lanka and hesitancy to push it further closer to China have likely motivated this flexibility. However, there is a perception in the US of a lack of ‘real results’. [73] It is this lack of progress, along with the trust deficit for the Sri Lankan government and the army, that has likely led to Sri Lanka not being extended an invitation to the US’s Democracy Summit to date and deterred robust cooperation between both countries.
Implications
Sri Lanka, the Indo-Pacific, and the U.S.
Sri Lanka holds a crucial position in the US’s Indo-Pacific strategy, and the US is determined to stay relevant in the region, continuing to help the island nation in its economic recovery. The US has taken the lead role in IMF negotiations and humanitarian assistance to further consolidate its influence and push back against China. As a result, it has also shown leniency with its approach to Sri Lanka’s reconciliation and human rights. Several high-level officials who had criticised Sri Lanka in the past for failing to reconcile have not condemned or singled out Sri Lanka in recent times.
However, the US’s Sri Lanka policy is limited by several challenges. The US continues to see Sri Lanka solely through the prism of its Indo-Pacific strategy. Its stance has been ambiguous when Sri Lanka faces challenges that go beyond the usual defendants, such as the ISBs. This perception of seeing Sri Lanka through its own interests only can be counter-productive for the US. Second, despite some flexibility from the US on the reconciliation issue, the lack of progress on human rights has impeded a more robust relationship. The US’s attempts to push back against China by strengthening Sri Lankan institutions are increasingly at odds with each other. Its use of bilateral pressure and multilateral institutions such as the IMF and the UNHRC could only fuel pre-existing anti-Western sentiments among the elites and the Sinhala populace, thus making it easier for elites to distance themselves from the states, even as China continues to have a deep influence on them.
Convergences and Divergences with India
Sri Lanka’s crisis also illustrates the US’s increasing cooperation with India. Both countries have displayed an understanding of each other’s interests and sensitivities which have, in turn, shaped their convergences and divergences.
On convergences, there is an understanding of regional security and order. The US acknowledges and prefers India’s leadership rather than challenging it; thus, it has limited itself to playing a supplementary role. Second, both countries have closely cooperated and coordinated when it comes to pushing back against China and its influence in Sri Lanka. As seen in the Sri Lankan crisis, India and the US have supplemented each other on humanitarian relief as well as the IMF negotiations and bailout.
In the case of divergences, both countries subscribe to different visions of the Indo-Pacific. While the US focuses on both democracy and China, India’s focus has been on the latter. That said, both countries have shown a clear understanding of each other’s preferences, sensitivities, and interests. The US has initiated and followed its independent policy when it has sensed such differences, especially when it comes to reconciliation and democracy. However, India has also co-existed with these differences, merely observing the US’s sanctioning of high-level officials and UNHRC resolutions rather than influencing the US’s policy in these areas. This is despite India’s reservations against such international pressure, indicating increasing maturity in the India–US relationship.
Opportunities and Challenges in the Region
The Sri Lanka crisis indicates increasing trust and cooperation between India and the US. While the nature of such cooperation commenced only recently, both countries could explore ways to cooperate. India’s influence in the region, combined with the US’s economic power and institutional influence, could push back against China and strengthen the capacity of South Asian institutions, democracy, and economy. However, since cooperating only to counter China might be counter-productive, both countries could explore domains such as climate change, maritime security, defence cooperation, and infrastructure investments to kickstart their partnership. India’s and the US’s outlooks on the region will also vary on the basis of their priorities and interests, especially when it comes to democracy and human rights. However, given the increasing trust, both countries have, at least for now, learned to manage these differences.
Conclusion
As Chinese belligerence continues to challenge the current values-based international order, traditional spheres of influence are witnessing increasing competition. The US has increased its outreach in the Indo-Pacific region, including in Sri Lanka, where the two countries share a tumultuous history.
The Sri Lankan crisis has illustrated that the US is keen to stay proactive in the region. In a single year, the US has had six high-level visits to Sri Lanka and spent nearly 13 percent of what it had offered as aid in Sri Lanka since the 1950s. However, its policies largely rely on the convergence and divergence of its interests with New Delhi. In cases of convergence, as seen with pushing back against China, the US has let India take the lead and has only played a supplementary role. In cases of divergences, such as human rights, corruption, and strengthening democratic institutions, the US has initiated or followed its independent policy.
The US will continue to face challenges in Sri Lanka, as its policies are increasingly growing at odds with each other. Insisting on viewing Sri Lanka through its own interests will only limit the US’s engagements with the country, leaving China at an advantage to deepen its influence.
Aditya Gowdara Shivamurthy is Junior Fellow at ORF.
Endnotes
[a] Mahinda Rajapaksa, elected as President in 2005, along with his brother and then Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa are largely credited for bringing an end to the three-decade civil war in the country. Other members of the Rajapaksa family also held key portfolios during this period.
[b] The ACSA agreement was first signed in 2007, but an updated and lengthy version of the agreement was renewed in 2017. The agreement allows both countries to transfer and exchange logistic supplies, support and refuelling services. The SOFA agreement was first signed in 1995, and a new pact was negotiated in 2018. The pact asserts that the US military, civilian, and contractors present in Sri Lanka in connection with the docked ships will enjoy diplomatic immunity, and would be allowed to carry arms when on duty. SOFA lapsed as protests erupted across the country. It was feared that both the agreements would reduce Sri Lanka to a US colony.
[c] Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights
[3] Dennis Kux, India and the United States: Estranged Democracies (Washington DC: NDU Press Publications, 1993)
[4] Jeffery Lunstead, The United States’ Role in Sri Lanka’s Peace Process 2002-2006,” San Francisco, The Asia Foundation, 2007, https://asiafoundation.org/
[5]The United States’ Role in Sri Lanka’s Peace Process 2002-2006.”
[24] The Integrated Country Strategy is a four-year strategy that articulates the US’s priorities in a country. This is led by the Chief of Mission to develop coordinated planning and policies among various US departments and agencies. See: https://www.state.gov/integrated-country-strategies/
[25] Department of State, Integrated Country Strategy: Sri Lanka.
[26] US Delegation Meets Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa: Discusses Economic Crisis,” Outlook, June 27, 2022,
[59] Deborah Ross, Recognizing 12 years since the end of the war in Sri Lanka on May 18, 2009, honoring the lives lost, and expressing support for justice, accountability, reconciliation, reconstruction, reparation, and reform in Sri Lanka to ensure a lasting peaceful political solution and a prosperous future for all people of Sri Lanka” US Congress, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-resolution/413/text
[60] Ross, Recognizing 12 years since the end of the war.”
[61] Ross, Recognizing 12 years since the end of the war.”
[62] Mitra, Explained: What Is the UNHRC Resolution About Sri Lanka and How Will India Vote?.”
It is no secret that President Ranil Wickremesinghe always rooted for a federal solution. Nevertheless, regardless of his own personal beliefs, he, as an astute politician, is also aware that majority of the country (which is not to be read as ‘majority community’) bitterly oppose such a power-sharing structure that will effectively castrate the Central Government.
13A opposed more by the minority communities than the majority
This has not stopped him from trying to dabble with it and the last time he did, it almost cost him his political career. Even at that time, he knew he was taking a dangerous gamble. Therefore, he never took ownership of the proposed constitution that TNA Spokesman M.A. Sumanthiran penned. In that document, a question mark was designed to be cast on the word ‘unitary’. Even in the English translation, the word ‘unitary’, that had established legal context, was replaced with the Sinhala word for unitary with a slash and a Tamil word that translates as a collective. As such, the Yahapalana Government tried to play a mean trick on both sides of the divide on the question of unitary status of the country.
Of course, Ranil Wickremesinghe’s then political debacle was not simply due to the promotion of federalism or the attempted chicanery. The Central Bank bond scams, treacherously co-sponsoring the UNHRC 30/1 Resolution, persecuting war heroes, retarding the robust economic growth of seven per cent to a mere two per cent and the Easter Sunday Attack were the primary factors that almost booted out of politics.
However, it is notable that the minority parties, who he had been unashamedly and unreservedly serenading and courting, did not come to his rescue at his hour of need. This is because federalism is opposed more by the minority communities than the majority.
RW’s rise to power from the ashes
In 2019, voters sent him to the ‘naughty boy’s corner’ with only one national list seat for UNP – the oldest political party. Not a single UNP member won at the 2020 General Election that was held on 5 August. Everyone in that party, including Party Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, failed to win enough votes even to warrant a count.
By that time, the UNP had been reduced to a ‘ghost town’ as the then Deputy Leader Sajith Premadasa left to form his own party, the SJB. He took with him majority of the UNP MPs, who were only too happy to escape the sinking ship.
It was with this one national list seat that Ranil Wickremesinghe, as the lone UNPer, entered the 16th Parliament of Sri Lanka. Undeterred, he used his wit, honed by over 50 years in politics, to turn every opportunity to his advantage. Two years later, on 21.07.2022, Ranil Wickremesinghe was sworn in as the eighth Executive President of Sri Lanka.
A country like Japan would have included into their textbooks the fall and rise of Ranil Wickremesinghe to teach their children the value of perseverance. Unfortunately, in Sri Lanka we do not teach these kinds of life lessons to anyone.
The man of the hour
It was a jarring moment when Ranil Wickremesinghe became the President. The man we got rid of two and half years ago was back. However, there were more pressing issues. Our country was in near anarchy and he might be the only person who could save us.
When President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was voted into Office in 2019 with one of the strongest mandates, he was expected to lead our country into prosperity and instill discipline. While not everyone blames him for the near economic collapse, almost none exonerates him for mismanaging anti-government protests.
When he resigned on 14.07.2022, every essence of democracy was under siege and was about to be overrun by anarchists. The situation needed to be rolled back quickly and the only man who could do it at that moment was Ranil Wickremesinghe.
He was a prominent member of the Ranasinghe Premadasa Government, who played a pivotal role to break the 1988-89 JVP insurgency. His methods were not popular then and still have the power to send shivers down anyone’s back. Everyone knew he would not tolerate any nonsense. Therefore, even those who worked hard to depose him in 2019 were not totally opposed to Ranil Wickremesinghe assuming the presidency.
As expected, as President, he restored order and put everyone – including foreign diplomats, who were running interference with internal affairs, in their place. This time there was no bloodshed and within days the country was back in business. This earned him a second glance from those who despised him.
The hour has passed. what now?
President Wickremasinghe was indeed the man of the hour. However, even at that crucial moment, the question remained as to what he would do when the hour passes. He always felt that rather than the Sinhala Buddhist majority community, his meal ticket came from the minority parties. As such, he was always an ardent supporter of federalism and hence the 13th Amendment to the Constitution (13A).
Last July-August, it was desperately hoped that the era of the Yahapalana Government would have served him as a valuable lesson and he would never traverse that path again. In many ways, he did seem to have reformed. During his one year in Office, anyone who mocked or ridiculed Buddhism has found themselves in deep trouble with the law. This must be compared to the productions as ‘Budunge Rasthiyaduwa’ by KK Srinath, which key characters of Yahapalana Government endorsed.
Exactly a year has passed since the last protester had been packed off home. According to Verité Research (Pvt) Ltd survey, 60 per cent believe that the ‘Aragalaya’ was a flop. Thus, any threat of anarchy has been nullified for the moment. Unfortunately, the other threat, the threat of federalism, which was feared by many when Ranil Wickremesinghe became President, has manifested.
Late 2022, President Wickremesinghe broached the possibility of implementing the 13A in full. There were some discussions with all the parties on this subject. Other than a promise for a definite solution by February 2023, nothing really came out of it. Last week, President again pledged to implement the 13A.
Strengthen the economy to bin 13A
This has again agitated the nationalists. Whether they will be able to quell it as they did last time remains to be seen.
It is noteworthy that the 13A is India’s pet project. This is the reason for the TNA to demand it even though their one time master, the LTTE rejected it and accused India of betraying the Tamil aspirations.
India has been our superhero during our economic crisis. Since then, we have entered into a number of agreements with India. As such, even if President Wickremesinghe might no longer believe in the 13A, he might not be in a position to reject it.
Therefore, there is an important task for all those who oppose the 13A. That is, we must get our act together and strengthen our economy. This must be a national and not a mere government effort. While depending on another economy, it is just not feasible for our government to act independently.
ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com
(The views and opinions expressed in this column are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of
Ceylon Today)
Civilisations evolve independently and through mutual interaction. Trade, invasions, emissaries and missionaries and the diffusion of ordinary folk across borders represent avenues of cultural interrelationship. The ideas and information aliens bring and their potentialities affirmatively further the advancement of a nation. Equally important would be the genetic advantage of ethnic mixing. Sri Lanka stands as a prime example of a country that progressed in this manner.
Few cultures have succeeded in exerting their influence far away from their indigenous territory. Here, the first and foremost have been Romans. For that reason, they also gathered a wealth of information about foreign lands.
A man who lived when the Roman Empire was marching towards its climax and wrote a compendium on all affairs of the world, from cosmology to cosmetics, was Gaius Plinius Secundus, popularly known as Pliny the Elder. His 2000th birthday falls this year. He will be remembered for thousands of more years as one of the greatest writers of all time.
Pliny researched and recorded so much about different cultures in the world, until the time he lived. His reference to a visit of ambassadors from the Anuradhapura Kingdom to the Court of the Roman Emperor Claudius fascinated historians worldwide. Pliny dispelled the myth that, apart from Italy and Greece, people living in other lands are barbarians, showing the world in the Anuradhapura era, Sri Lankans were just as civilized as Romans.
In ancient times, large distances limited human movement. The advent of navigation mixed up cultures faster, changing the world. The Phoenicians, the tribes on the Mediterranean coast between Lebanon and Greece, were the pioneer navigators. By about 1000 BCE, their ships sailed almost every corner in the oceans of the region. The Romans acquired ship-building technology and the art of navigation from the Phoenicians, expanded their fleet and conquered lands, becoming the greatest political power in the world by the 1st century. The Roman Empire, lasting for about 1000 years, from 625 BCE, influenced culture and happenings in Europe, the Middle East and Africa profoundly. Despite the motto Roma Invicta”, meaning undefeatable Rome, the empire failed to repulse an attack by Germanic forces in 476 CE.
The Anuradhapura culture in Sri Lanka evolved independently but followed a path parallel to Rome in its rise and fall. The era beginning around 370 BCE, continued longer than Roman civilisation, overlapping with it for nearly 800 years. Although we advanced to the highest standards in empirical technology, unlike the Romans, our ancestors did not strive to acquire foreign lands by installing a huge naval infrastructure. Instead, they concentrated on agriculture, building remarkable irrigation systems. Anuradhapura was always under the threat of South Indian invasions but succeeded in defending itself until 1017 CE. And later, as the art of navigation advanced worldwide, because of its unique geographical coordinates, the island became an attraction for trade and invasion.
Traditionally, the religion of early Roman civilisation was mythology, but they were also inspired by Greek philosophers. The favoured philosophy was stoicism, which tells people to live following the virtues of wisdom, justice, temperance and courage. Buddhism, a religion as well as a philosophy that originated in India, guided the Anuradhapura culture. The teachings of Buddha are not very different from stoic ideals. In both cultures, the rulers subscribed to religion and philosophies, but many of them, in their deeds, acted contrarily because of their greed for power. Nero, who studied stoicism as a young adult, killed his mother and second wife. Kashyapa I, brutally asphyxiated his father, King Dhatusena, to death by immuring him in a wall. It is said that Dahutsena had previously ordered the burning of his own sister alive. Society often ignores the grave crimes of rulers and highlights their achievements!
Many historians attribute the fall of Rome and Anuradhapura to the fault of rulers.
Ramsay MacMullen, a leading authority on Roman history, argues in his book Corruption and Decline of Rome” a key factor in Rome’s fall was the steady loss of focus and control over the government as its aims were thwarted for private gain by high-ranking bureaucrats and military leaders. Historians have also said that the oppressive taxation of citizens to support the government and army contributed much to the downfall of the Empire in 476 CE. Poor improvised by heavy taxation, preferred invaders taking over the government.
Similar circumstances opened the way for the collapse of Anuradhapura. The kingdom grew into prosperity, of course not without intermittent calamities, primarily because of the principles of righteousness advocated by Buddhism, which created a favourable environment for the collective effort essential to promoting agriculture and technology. Erudite monks in monasteries devoted their entire lives to studies, qualifying them to advise the rulers, their reputation reached foreign lands, notably India and China. In later years, internal strife and greed for power to enjoy royal pleasures escalated, driving the country into poverty. The Buddhist establishment became more demanding than scholarly. Just as in Rome, conditions suited to a foreign invasion emerged.
Although Anuradhapura and Rome advanced rapidly in the 1st century CE, well above other nations, direct contact between the two cultures has been limited. Despite the strength of the Roman navy, their ships could not sail vast distances and reach Sri Lanka because of the difficulty of determining geographical locations without instrumentation, even a compass. The Romans heard stories about Taprobane from Persian traders and Greeks and considered it a different world.
Pliny the Elder’s Natural History”, a thirty-seven volume encyclopedia, stands as one of the greatest writings of antiquity, covering all branches of knowledge. The book is frequently cited in Sri Lankan literature because it discloses a vivid description of a delegation of emissaries from Sri Lanka to the court of the Roman Emperor, Tiberius Claudius Caesar (41-54 CE). What Pliny enumerates is undoubtedly centered on a fact. Some have endorsed all he has said as accurate and looked for clues in Sri Lankan history, while others consider many of his claims to be taken with a grain of salt. An extract from an English translation of Natural History reads:
During the reign of the Emperor Claudius, an embassy came from this distant island to Rome. The circumstances under which this took place were as follow: Annius Plocamus had farmed from the treasury the revenues arising from the Red Sea. A certain freedman of his, while sailing around Arabia, was carried away by a gale from the north beyond the coast of Carmania. In the course of fifteen days he had drifted to Hippuros, a port of Taprobane, where he was most kindly and hospitably received by the king; and having, after a study of six months, become well acquainted with the language, was enabled to answer all his inquiries relative to the Romans and their emperor. But of all that he heard, the king was more particularly struck with surprise at our rigid notions of justice, on ascertaining that among the money found on the captive, the denarii were all of equal weight, although the different figures on them plainly showed that they had been struck in the reigns of several emperors. By this circumstance in especial, the king was prompted to form an alliance with the Romans, and accordingly sent to Rome an embassy, consisting of four persons, the chief of whom was Rachias.”
Above is a reasonable and acceptable story. The weight of the Roman silver coin denarii remained constant (3.9 grams) from 200 BCE to 64 CE. The King of Sri Lanka appreciated the fact that Roman currency stood undepreciated for a long period.
Pliny signifies the episode by telling, a 1st century Sri Lankan ruler, having learned from a sailor of a foreign country where prosperity and justice existed, wished to form an alliance by sending an emissary. Pliny was aware that justice did not prevail in Rome all the time. Claudius earned recognition as a reasonable emperor, whereas those before and after (Caligula and Nero) were the cruelest. Pliny finalised his book during reign of Emperor Vespasian, who always sought Pliny’s advice and firmly reestablished the rule of law in Rome.
Pliny does not indicate how he obtained information about the envoys and the year of their visit is not mentioned. He famously accused writers for not acknowledging the authorship of the sources from which information was gathered. Perhaps to avoid being criticized on the same grounds, he seems to have adopted a clever style of writing. On the basis of some good evidence, he researched and wrote a story connecting existing information (not verified), to imply all the details came from the envoys.
According to Pliny, the vessel in distress landed in the port of Hippuros, Taprobane. Although various interpretations exist, there is no evidence of a port by that name in Sri Lanka, certainly not at the time the sailor landed. In other sections of his writing, he states the most famous city on the Island is Palesimundus and there is a river, lake and promontory by the names; Cydra, Megsbe and Coliacum – words derived from Greek. The Ancient Greeks sometimes confusedly described Sri Lanka and Anuradhapura as Palesimundus. It is unlikely the ambassadors have said they are from Palesimundus. According to Pliny, the people of Taprobane, worship Hercules. In Greek Buddhism, the most powerful god Hercules is the defender of Buddha. Many other legends in Pliny’s Natural History, including the statement, the people of Taprobane do not hire slaves, are found in more ancient Greek texts.
Since the Greek invasion of Persia in 492 BCE and Alexander’s conquest of territories further east and his march to India in 327 BCE, the Greeks seem to have acquired a wealth of information about Sri Lanka and the surrounding region. Based on the data they collected, Eratosthenes (276-194 BCE) estimated the size of Sri Lanka, and later Ptolemy drew a map. Geographic locations were given names by the Greeks. It is said that more than 90% of ancient Greek literature was intractable since the pre-modern era. Presumably, during Pliny’s time, many of these documents were available.
When there are so many uncertainties and ambiguities in Pliny’s account, Sri Lankan authors have presented lengthy arguments to trace the origin of the name of the leader of the delegation, mentioned as Rachias, primarily to ascertain his ethnicity – a glaring reflection of our immaturity. Can we be certain someone would remember and spell a foreign name correctly?
Pliny also wrote the Sri Lankan ambassadors who visited Rome were astonished to see the constellations Great Bear and Pleiades, as these are not visible from Tabrobane soil. It may be because Sri Lankans are not stargazers; instead; they confidently believe their destinies are fixed by the positioning of planets, which they never dare to see by looking at the sky. And having seen the northern sky upon arriving at the shores of Italy they were amazed. Pliny also presents another inadmissible story; according to the ambassadors, in their country, the star Canopus lit the night, casting shadows. It is true that in Sri Lanka, Canopus appears higher in the horizon compared to Italy, but everyone knows, no star is sufficiently bright to cast shadows – possibly an exaggeration by Pliny.
The historical chronicles of any culture are important and need to be venerated. At the same time, we should keep in mind, their contents not be taken as absolute truth for natural reasons. As the accurate recording of data did not exist in those days, many claims stem from hearsay, folklore and speculation. The writers were biased and opinions and facts are intermingled. A danger would be the use of their contents as supporting evidence for decision-making.
Reading chapters of Pliny’s book, devoted to other subjects indicates he resorted to rational argument, compared to Eastern historians of the time, but sometimes linked factual and fictional data and assertions of others without critical examination. Pliny was a polymath, but not an original thinker like Plato or Aristotle. Although he denounced extravagances, his thinking seems to have been influenced by Roman elitism.
Pliny the Elder’s (22-79 CE) biography is strange, unique and exemplary. Born to a wealthy family, he studied in Rome, beginning his career as an officer in the army.He served in Germany. Africa and Spain as a higher- level administrator in the Roman Empire. Literarily and philosophically inclined, he devoted his entire spare time to reading and writing, did not get married and led an honourable life entirely free of vices. His nephew, named Pliny the Younger, has said that his uncle did not waste even a minute distracting from official duties or studies. He read and wrote until late at night. At the time he was eating or taking a bath, a servant was instructed to read a book aloud for him to listen to. He rarely walked, but carried in a chair by slaves, so that he could read while moving. His incomparable volume of writing and his knowledge in areas of science, engineering, geography, history and art attest to what his nephew said.
The last appointment, Pliny held was commander of the Roman fleet. In CE 79, he lived with his sister and nephew near Pompeii and close to the naval headquarters. On August 24th afternoon, Pliny was working on a manuscript, when his sister told him smoke was rising above a mountain. He wanted to rush to the scene out of scientific curiosity. Minutes later, he received a message from a friend, telling him Mount Vesuvius had started to erupt and asking help for evacuation. He commanded a fleet of boats for rescue missions and traveled to shore, ignoring warnings of the assistants who followed him. Because of his feebleness, he suffocated to death by inhaling toxic gases.
Pliny was a defender of the Roman cause and the Emperors, particularly Claudius and Vespasian sought his advice. Many times he made statements implying prosperity of the Roman Empire exceeded all the other parts of the world, but often he lamented the extravagances of citizens and corruption of rulers as a deterrent to progress.
According to Pliny, the Sri Lankan delegates who visited Rome said, in their country, an elderly man of mild and clement disposition without children is elected as the king and if he happens to father children, abdication would be the consequence; this is done so that there may be no danger of the sovereign power becoming hereditary. We know this was not practiced in Sri Lanka or in Roman Empire. Perhaps, Pliny wrote these lines as a message to Roman polity, because he witnessed the dangers of imperial succession based on hereditary claims. Though an ardent advocate of Roman expansionism, he hinted that justice and fair play stood higher in Anuradhapura those days than in Rome.
Lt. Gen. Dias warns of Eelam through constitutional means
Former Army Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Jagath Dias asks whether a plan is underway to help establish Eelam by constitutional means.The Gajaba Regiment veteran asked a gathering at Sri Sambuddhathva Jayanthi Mandiraya whether they realised that the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution would pave the way for a separate state in the Northern and Eastern province for all practical purposes.
The former frontline combat veteran said so, addressing a recent meeting to educate the people on the danger of the full implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, enacted in the late 1988 in terms of the Indo-Lanka Accord signed in the previous year virtually at the point of a gun held by New Delhi.
Having served the Army for over 35 years, Jagath Dias retired in Dec. 2015. At the time of his retirement, he held the rank of Major General. The ex-soldier said that he felt the urgent need to oppose the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government move as it would lead to the disintegration of the country.
Those who had fought the LTTE, at the risk of their lives to bring the war to a successful conclusion in May 2009, were aghast at the current moves to facilitate the separatist agenda, the wartime General Officer Commanding (GoC) of the 57 Division said. The first Division, deployed on the Vanni front in March 2007, as the LTTE abandoned its bases in the East, the formation was tasked with regaining Kilinochchi.
The former GoC queried whether withdrawal of some military bases, at the expense of national security, giving up control of archeological sites, privatization of public assets and weakening of the military, were meant to create an environment, conducive for the breaking up of the country.
Lt. Gen. Dias who had never addressed such a public gathering before said that the implementation of the 13th Amendment couldn’t be justified, under any circumstances, as India failed to execute her side of the Accord that was forced on Sri Lanka.
Recalling the direct Indian military intervention, in 1987, as troops engaged in first brigade-level offensive in the Vadamaratchchi region of the Jaffna peninsula were on the verge of capturing Vellupillai Prabhakaran, the retired officer recalled stressing that the LTTE couldn’t be disarmed in terms of the Agreement. Therefore, Sri Lanka was not obliged to honour the accord, the Gajaba veteran said, urging fresh appraisal of the country’s response to the emerging threat.
India completed the withdrawal of its troops in March 1990. Referring to the May 1991 assassination of Congress I prime ministerial candidate Rajiv Gandhi contesting the general election, Lt. Gen. Dias explained how in the absence of proper defence and foreign policies, the LTTE gradually developed into a formidable conventional fighting force, inclusive of a deadly suicide wing that claimed the lives of so many innocents. The ex-combat officer compared the growth of the LTTE with the corresponding failure on the part of successive governments to realize the impending danger and counter the threat.
Sri Lanka should keep in mind that India forced the controversial constitutional amendment after having threatened the then executive, Lt. Gen. Dias said.At the onset of his speech, the ex-solder emphasized that he didn’t represent any political party or particular ideology. I was influenced by the unexpected political changes last year and subsequent developments,” Lt. Gen. Dias said, declaring that the division of the country wouldn’t be allowed.
President’s Counsel Manohora de Silva, who had been always at the forefront of campaigns against separatist agenda, warned that President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s real intention was to implement constitutional proposals that were submitted by a parliamentary committee during the Yahapalana administration during which he served as the Prime Minister.
The constitutional expert said that President Wickremesinghe had been quite clear about his intention when he addressed the Parliament on 09 Aug., regarding the course of action he intended to take with regard to the issue at hand.
Referring to the constitutional proposals formulated by a parliamentary committee that included Presidents Counsel M.A. Sumanthiran (TNA) and Jayampathy Wickremaratne (UNP National List), Manohara de Silva PC said that the overall project was meant to strip Sri Lanka of its unitary status.
Pointing out that the Chief Government Whip Prasanna Ranatunga declared their support for 13A plus, immediately after President Wickremesinghe’s 09 Aug. speech, Manohara de Silva said that the UNP leader and the SLPP leader Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed to be on the same page.
Recently, rebel SLPP MP Prof. Channa Jayasumana asked former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to state his position on President Wickremesinghe’s plan as the latter was elected in July last year to complete the five-year term won overwhelmingly by the former President at the Nov. 2019 presidential election. Prof. Jayasumana said that the former President could not keep quiet when his mandate was used contrary to the wishes of the electorate that elected him.
The President’s Counsel said that all previous presidents, including Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, who believed in devolution, refrained from implementing certain provisions in the 13th Amendment as they realized the danger.
Referring to the relevant sections in the 13th Amendment, Manohara de Silva explained how the full implementation could quickly lead to chaos. The lawyer discussed the circumstances under which the Northern and Eastern provinces could amalgamate again to consolidate the Tamil homeland theory.
Reminding how Dinesh Gunawardena voted against the 13th Amendment in 1988 when it was presented at the behest of India, Manohara said he was utterly disappointed at the way the MEP leader remained silent when President Wickremesinghe advanced his political agenda. The lawyer stressed the responsibility on the part of Cabinet ministers to state their position on the 13th Amendment or be prepared to face the consequences.
The President’s Counsel explained how the full implementation of the 13th Amendment could reduce the national police to the task of providing protection to ‘VIPs’ whereas provincial police, under the Chief Ministers, take charge of law and order.
The outspoken lawyer urged the PM and other parliamentarians to ascertain the rapid developments taking place and take decisions with national interest in their hearts.
Dermatologist Natalia Zhovtan has identified certain products that can accelerate skin aging in Russians, Life reports.
Photo: pixabay.com
According to the expert, the consumption of products such as
frankfurters
Sausages
chip
smoked meats
and canned food,
may contribute to premature external aging. These foods are rich in monosodium glutamate, which can lead to obesity, liver cell damage, and permanent skin damage. “In addition, excessive salt intake in the diet can trigger early cell aging. Consuming more than four grams of salt per day leads to a shortening of telomeres – the tips of chromosomes. When they become critically small, the cells lose their ability to divide, accelerating the aging process,” the doctor explained.
In addition, Zhovtan highlighted the detrimental effects of energy drinks on skin health due to their high sugar content. In addition, these products contain significant amounts of caffeine and sodium, which contribute to dehydration.
Join the Pravda.Ru telegram channel with the opportunity to express your own opinion) Читайте больше на https://www.pravda.ru/news/health/1872873-dermatolog_zhovtan_produkty_kotorye_privodjat_k_rannemu/
It has been five months since Sri Lanka entered the board-level agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) on its 17th programme. Month-to-month progress has been tracked in the public domain by the IMF Tracker (https://manthri.lk/en/imf_tracker ), a platform maintained by Verité Research.
