Courtesy Adaderana

Chief Inspector Nishantha Silva attached to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has reportedly left the country this afternoon (24), stated Ada Derana reporter.

Silva has been involved in several controversial investigation cases within the CID.

Reportedly, the Chief Inspector has left the country to Switzerland with his family at around 12.50 pm this afternoon.

When Ada Derana inquired on the matter, Police Media Spokesperson SSP Ruwan Gunasekara stated that Silva had not been granted leave.

By Vinod Moonesinghe Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

Colombo, November 24 (The Sunday Observer): After a quiet Monday and Tuesday, things began to get back to normal on Wednesday, but with a difference. People set off for work with a new enthusiasm. Jaded by four years of ‘Yahapalanaya,’ the public anticipates great things from President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

In the short term, it is unlikely that he would face much opposition on the political front. While Sajith Premadasa did creditably, winning 42% of the vote, his United National Party cannot be content with the result. A quarter of Premadasa’s votes came from six districts, in the North, East and Central provinces, in which most voters come from minority communities – votes given to him by supporters of minority parties.

On the other hand, he won only about a third of the Sinhalese Buddhist vote. By this measure, the UNP could end the upcoming general election with fewer seats than it received in 2010.

The biggest challenge ahead for the new President will be to forge a nation out of the country peopled by disparate ethnic groups. This election highlighted the ethnic divide, with the bulk of the majority Sinhalese Buddhists voting for him, but the minority vote going overwhelmingly to his opponent.

During his swearing-in ceremony, at the significant Buddhist Ruwanweliseya site, President Rajapaksa acknowledged his debt to the Sinhalese Buddhist voters who ensured his election. Speaking frankly, he admitted the failure of his expectations of sizeable vote shares from the minority communities. He did, however, make a commitment to representing all Sri Lanka’s people, not just his voters.

Ethnic Issue

The ethnic issue in Sri Lanka dates back to the early period of the British occupation of the island, when the colonial government carried out ‘divide and rule’ policies, perfected in Ireland over centuries.

The loyalty of the Northern people to the Crown of Kandy, reported by Governor North in 1799, was undermined by the British by providing education preferentially to the Northern elite. They empowered Muslim and South Indian moneylenders and traders at the expense of mainly Sinhalese farmers. At the same time, they encouraged the immigration of traders and potential landowners from India and from Penang and Singapore.

By the end of the British period, only the Indian Tamil estate workers lay below the mass of Buddhist Sinhalese in the colonial pecking order – although a small stratum of Sinhalese Buddhists rubbed shoulders with the comprador elite.

This fact underlies the history of ethnic strife in this island, causes the fears of the Sinhalese Buddhist majority.

Even today, Sinhalese Buddhist representation in the ruling elite is relatively small. Rajapaksa’s bedrock of support came from the Sinhalese Buddhist lower classes, the farmers, workers and the self-employed.

Way To End Ethnic Tensions

These ethnic tensions come about as a result of an uneven distribution of opportunities and wealth, and of frictions caused by attempts to even out the inequalities. Given the limitations on resources available to Sri Lanka, efforts at redistribution could only result in equalization of scarcity.

In the long term, these inequalities may only be ironed out through equitable economic growth, which does not leave any class or community behind. This, in turn, requires social and economic modernization, to overturn the legacy of colonialism, our economic backwardness.

The origin of this backwardness may be traced to the grand expropriation of peasant land in the last three- quarters of the 19th century. The Crown Lands (Encroachment) Ordinance of 1841 took over commonly-held lands, including the forests and many commonly-operated paddy fields. The job was completed by the Waste Lands Ordinance a half-century later.

Traditionally, the peasantry operated at three, ecologically-friendly levels. They left the forests as watersheds for rainwater collection and storage, for collection of forest products (honey, kitul sap, herbs and roots), for occasional hunting and for chena (swidden) cultivation.

They reserved home gardens for fruits and vegetables. They left the lowest land for paddy cultivation, which they did for three seasons per year.

The importance of the commonly-held lands lay in the fact that they provided the bulk of the market produce of the peasantry. They used the remainder, after separating the portion going to feudal mesne lords, mainly for their own consumption. The loss of common land and forests meant the loss of the bulk of their market produce, and they became mere subsistence farmers.

Subsistence farmers cannot provide a market for industrial goods, and they cannot invest in innovations and equipment for increasing productivity. Settlement schemes, the Paddy Lands Act and the limited land reform of the 1970s all contributed towards a solution to this problem, but did not prove sufficient to drag the peasantry out of the mire.

On the lands they seized from the peasantry, the British grew first coffee, then tea and rubber.

The plantation system, which they imported from the West Indies, was just a level above slavery. The planters did not invest heavily in agricultural machinery, but depended on large inputs of cheap human labor. Dr SBD de Silva has pointed out that this, too, constituted an under-developed form of mercantilism, rather than modern capitalism.

The young people on the plantations do not, by and large, wish to work as their parents have done. They are better educated and more outward-looking, and most intend to migrate to urban centers.for employment. This would leave the plantation sector with a massive labor shortage, unless mechanization takes place.

Thus, the agriculture sector provides 27% of employment, but only 7% of the gross national product (GDP). This means the agricultural sector cannot function as a market for a burgeoning manufacturing sector, inhibiting the growth of the latter.

To some extent, the overseas labor market has provided an alternative to a developed agricultural sector. Much of the economic development taking place in the island since 1977 has been fuelled by funds remitted by workers overseas. This has resulted in developmental anomalies, such as the proliferation of beauty salons in villages, and in the rapid development of the banking sector.

Workers’ remittances could provide a means for investment in both agriculture and industry.

However, workers’ remittances cannot provide a long-term alternative to developing production, both for the local market and for exports. Sri Lanka is in a position of not being able to pay for imports. It needs both to substitute for imports and to develop its export capacity.

Narrow Export Market

Furthermore, the country’s exports are almost wholly dependent on a few markets, in North America and Europe. There has to be diversification in export destination, as well as in export products.

It is likely that there will be a global recession within the next two years. Sri Lanka, by reason of its dependence on a few markets, both for its products and for tourism, will be highly vulnerable.

The vulnerability of the economy has been exacerbated by the lack of effective governmental direction over the past four years, during which its policies zigzagged all over the field. This led to a drop in economic growth, made all the worse by the Easter Sunday bomb attacks, which devastated the tourism sector.

The Easter incidents made more obvious the renewed breakdown in societal values from which the country had been recovering following the end of the three-decades-long civil conflict.

Selective persecution of the Opposition, in the midst of inaction on law and order issues such as the Bond Scam, led to widespread disdain for the rule of law. This became apparent simply by the rise of reckless driving on the crowded roads.

Thus, the new President (Gotabaya Rajapaksa) comes into office in the face of a daunting task. The manifesto on which he contested indicates how he would set about addressing this mission, of resuscitating the economy and rebuilding society.

Face East, Not West

An essential part of that strategy is to face East, rather than West. Asia, not Europe or North America, is the growth area. It is to India, Japan and China and, to a lesser extent the existing and emergent new regional powerhouses such as South Korea and Vietnam, to which we must turn in building both a regional security framework and bilateral and multilateral economic relationships.

The new markets we must pursue, for which we must develop new products, lie on the axes of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and on the new Mumbai-Moscow trade route.

President Rajapaksa has already opened up official dialogue with India, where he will make his first official visit in the near future on the invitation of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Meanwhile, Chinese President Xi Jinping congratulated him on his election, expressing hope for greater bilateral co-operation and mutual development on the basis of the BRI.

US Hectoring

Unfortunately, while President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has emphasized a foreign policy of friendship with all, but no subordination to any power and the US Embassy sent a conciliatory congratulatory note, the message from US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had a hint of hectoring.

This does not bode well for the future, and is unlikely to go down well, considering that the ACSA, SOFA and MCC agreements were hot election issues, very unpopular with the public at large.

The good news is that, by the very fact of getting himself elected, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has set in motion the means of economic and social recovery. On the next day after his swearing in, the first day of trading since his election, the Colombo Stock Exchange All Share Price Index (ASPI) soared by nearly 2%, and has continued to rise. This signifies the rise in confidence felt by the business community, who anticipate a change in the way the economy will be run.

The enthusiasm with which people reported to work may also be a harbinger of change. Commuters noticed that private buses have started operating more in keeping with their schedules. Reports of increased sales of motorcycle helmets indicate a greater respect for the possibility of legal repercussions for wayward behavior.

The legal strictures of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution mean, unfortunately, that there is a limit to the decisive action that can be taken until fresh general elections, unless the new parliamentary opposition (the former government) extend the same co-operation to the President as President Maithripala Sirisena received on his election.

What the past four years have made clear is the extent to which change must take place. The public has reacted very positively to the new President’s rulings on closing roads and enormous security escorts, reinforcing their high regard, and faith in his capacity to carry out the changes that are required.

That regard and that faith may be sorely tested in the coming period, as the country grapples with the problems of history and the challenges of the present, for this is a struggle as difficult in its own way as the battle against violent separatism, which ended in victory ten years ago.

The country will require all the resources it used in that conflict, including patience, fortitude and courage, and a willing and able leadership.

(The featured image at the top shows President Gotabaya Rajapaksa with Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa)

By Nikhil Sonnad/The Quartz Courtesy NewsIn.Asia

With a few minor exceptions, there are really only two ways to say tea” in the world. One is like the English term—té in Spanish and tee in Afrikaans are two examples. The other is some variation of cha, like chay in Hindi.

Both versions come from China. How they spread around the world offers a clear picture of how globalization worked before globalization” was a term anybody used. The words that sound like cha” spread across the land, along the Silk Road. The tea”-like phrasings spread over water, by Dutch traders bringing the novel leaves back to Europe.

The term cha (茶) is Sinitic,” meaning it is common to many varieties of Chinese. It began in China and made its way through central Asia, eventually becoming chay” (چای) in Persian. That is no doubt due to the trade routes of the Silk Road, along which, according to a recent discovery, tea was traded over 2,000 years ago. This form spread beyond Persia, becoming chay in Urdu, shay in Arabic, and chay in Russian, among others. It even made its way to sub-Saharan Africa, where it became chai in Swahili. The Japanese and Korean terms for tea are also based on the Chinese cha, though those languages likely adopted the word even before its westward spread into Persian.

But that doesn’t account for tea.” The Chinese character for tea, 茶, is pronounced differently by different varieties of Chinese, though it is written the same in them all. In today’s Mandarin, it is chá. But in the Min Nan variety of Chinese, spoken in the coastal province of Fujian, the character is pronounced te. The keyword here is coastal.”

The form used in coastal-Chinese languages spread to Europe via the Dutch, who became the primary traders of tea between Europe and Asia in the 17th century, as explained in the World Atlas of Language Structures. The main Dutch ports in east Asia were in Fujian and Taiwan, both places where people used the te pronunciation. The Dutch East India Company’s expansive tea importation into Europe gave us the French thé, the German Tee, and the English tea.

Yet the Dutch were not the first to Asia. That honor belongs to the Portuguese, who are responsible for the island of Taiwan’s colonial European name, Formosa. And the Portuguese traded not through Fujian but Macao, where chá is used. That’s why, on the map above, Portugal is a pink dot in a sea of blue.

A few languages have their own way of talking about tea. These languages are generally in places where tea grows naturally, which led locals to develop their own way to refer to it. In Burmese, for example, tea leaves are lakphak.

The map demonstrates two different eras of globalization in action: the millennia-old overland spread of goods and ideas westward from ancient China and the 400-year-old influence of Asian culture on the seafaring Europeans of the age of exploration. Also, you just learned a new word in nearly every language on the planet.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

රටේ කිසි විටකත් හමුදා පාලනයක් ඇති නොවන බවත්, ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය ආරක්ෂා කිරීමට පියවර ගන්නා බවටත් ආරක්ෂක ලේකම් විශ්‍රාමික මේජර් ජෙනරාල් කමල් ගුණරත්න  මහතා පවසනවා.

ආරක්ෂක ලේකම්වරයා මේ බව සඳහන් කළේ මිහින්තලේ පුදබිමට පැමිණ ආශිර්වාද ලබාගැනීමෙන් අනතුරුව මාධ්‍යට අදහස් දක්වමින්.

නව ආරක්ෂක ලේකම් විශ්‍රාමික මේජර් ජෙනරාල් කමල් ගුණරත්න මහතා ඊයේ මිහින්තලේ රජමහා විහාරයට ගොස් විහාරාධිපති පූජ්‍ය වළවාහැංගුණු වැවේ ධම්මරතන හිමියන් බැහැදැක ආශිර්වාද ලබාගත්තා.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

සත්‍ය වශයෙන්ම ශ්‍රී ලංකාවට දැන් යහපාලනය උදාවී ඇති බව ශ්‍රී ලංකා රාමඤ්ඤ මහා නිකායේ අනුනායක පූජ්‍ය අංකුඹුරේ පේමවංශ හිමියන් පවසනවා.

අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ මැණික්හින්න – හුරීකඩුව ශ්‍රී විද්‍යා සාගර පිරිවෙනට පැමිණි අවස්ථාවේදියි උන්වහන්සේ මේ බව සඳහන් කළේ.

අද උදෑසන අග්‍රාමාත්‍ය මහින්ද රාජපක්ෂ දළදා සමිදුන් වැද පුදා ගැනීමෙන් අනතුරුව දළදා සමිදුන් වෙනුවෙන් සිදුකරන කිරි පිඩු පූජාවට ද එක් වුණා.

අනතුරුවයි අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා, මැණික්හින්න – හුරීකඩුව ශ්‍රී විද්‍යාසාගර පිරිවෙනට පැමිණ ශ්‍රී ලංකා රාමඤ්ඤ මහා නිකායේ මහානායක අතිපූජ්‍ය නාපානේ පේමසිරි  හිමියන් බැහැදැක ආශිර්වාද ලබා ගත්තා.

අනතුරුව අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා ගැටඹේ රාජෝපවනාරාමයට පැමිණ ආගමික වතාවත්වල නිරත වීමෙන් අනතුරුව විහාරාධිපති පූජ්‍ය කැප්පෙටියාගොඩ සිරි විමල නාහිමියන් සහ පූජ්‍ය ගල්කැටිවල රතනවංශ හිමියන් බැහැ දුටුවා

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකරට එරෙහිව වහාම නීතිය ක්‍රියාත්මක කළ යුතු බව සිංහලේ සංවිධානය පවසනවා.

එහි මහලේකම් පූජ්‍ය මැඩිල්ලේ පඤ්ඤාලෝක හිමියන් මේ බව කියා සිටියේ කොළඹ අද පැවති මාධ්‍ය හමුවකට එක්වෙමින්.

මේ අතර අපරාධ පරික්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකර මහතා විදෙස්ගතවීමේ සූදානමක් ඇති බැවින් එය වළැක්වීමට කටයුතු කරන ලෙස නව සිංහල රාවය ජාතික සංවිධානයේ මහලේකම් පූජ්‍ය මාගල්කන්දේ සුදත්ත හිමියන් පවසනවා.

කළුතර අද පැවති ප්‍රවෘත්ති සාකච්ඡාවකට එක්වෙමින් උන්වහන්සේ මේ බව සඳහන් කළ අතර, තවත් පාර්ශ්ව කිහිපයක් මේ පිළිබඳ අදහස් පළකළා.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකර සමඟ ආන්දෝලනාත්මක පරීක්ෂණ මෙහෙය වූ ප්‍රධාන පොලිස් පරීක්ෂක නිශාන්ත ද සිල්වා අද සිය දරු පවුල ද සමඟ හොර රහසේම ස්විට්සර්ලන්තය බලා පළා ගොස් තිබෙනවා.

කටුනායක ගුවන් තොටුපළ හිරු වාර්තාකරු සඳහන් කළේ ඔහු සිය බිරිඳ සහ දරුවන් තුන් දෙනා සමඟ දහවල් 12.50ට පමණ ස්විස් ගුවන් සේවයට අයත් ඩබ්ලිව්.කේ. 0065 දරණ යානයෙන් දිවයිනෙන් පිටත්ව ගොස් ඇති බවයි.

අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකර සහ ප්‍රධාන පොලිස් පරීක්ෂක නිශාන්ත ද සිල්වා පසුගිය රජය සමයේ දේශපාලනික වුවමනා මත ආන්දෝලනාත්මක සිද්ධීන් කිහිපයක් පිළිබදව පරීක්ෂණ සිදුකළා.

එහිදී ඔවුන්ට පාර්ශව රැසකින් චෝදනා එල්ල වූයේ ඒකපාර්ශවික ලෙස දේශපාලන වුවමනා මත එම පරීක්ෂණ සිදුකළ බවටයි.  

කෙසේ වෙතත්, ඔවුන්ට එරෙහිව විවිධ චෝදනා ද එල්ල වී ඇති අවධියකයි අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ ප්‍රධාන පොලිස් පරීක්ෂක නිශාන්ත ද සිල්වා මෙලෙස අද හොර රහසේම විදෙස් ගත වී ඇත්තේ.

මේ සම්බන්ධයෙන් හිරු ප්‍රවෘත්ති අංශය පොලිස් මාධ්‍ය ප්‍රකාශක, ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ පොලිස් අධිකාරී රුවන් ගුණසේකරගෙන් විමසීමකදී ඔහු සඳහන් කළේ පොලිස් මූලස්ථානයේ අවසරයකින් තොරව ඔහු දිවයිනෙන් පිටත්ව ගොස් ඇති බවයි.

මීට පෙර අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ අධ්‍යක්ෂ ලෙස කටයුතු කළ ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ පොලිස් අධිකාරී ශානි අබේසේකර ගාල්ල නියෝජ්‍ය පොලිස්පතිවරයාගේ පෞද්ගලික සහකාරවරයා ලෙස මාරු කර යැවීමටයි පොලිස් කොමිසම කටයුතු කරනු ලැබුවේ.

Courtesy Hiru News

Defence Secretary Retired Major General Kamal Gunarathna says that a joint programme will be carried out with the involvement of the Tri Forces, Police and the general public, to combat the drug menace.

He expressed these views after having visited the Mihinthale Raja Maha Viharaya.

The Defence Secretary also said that attention has been drawn towards doing justice to war heroes who were unfairly imprisoned.

Courtesy Hiru News

The government has informed newly appointed Ministers to pay attention towards curbing unwanted expenditure at state institutions.

Accordingly, the Presidential Secretariat has informed to manage expenses carefully and that each Minister has to report regarding costs under their respective Ministries.

However, instructions have been given not to make any changes in expenses for public welfare.

Meanwhile, all foreign travel of state officials has been temporarily suspended

Courtesy Hiru News

The Chief Inspector Nishantha Silva who conducted several controversial investigations with Former CID Director Shani Abeysekara has fled the country to Switzerland with his family.

Former CID Director Shani Abeysekara and Chief Inspector Nishantha Silva had carried out investigations into several controversial incidents based on the political requirements of the previous government.

Many factions accused them of carrying out investigations in a biased manner based on political requirements

Our correspondent at the BIA noted that he had left the country with his family at 12:50 this afternoon. He had conducted many investigations into various cases under the directives issued by the Former CID Director Shani Abeysekara.

Accordingly in the midst of various allegations being levelled against him the Chief Inspector of the Criminal Investigations Department Nishantha De Silva has left the country.

Previously the Police Commission had taken steps to appoint Former CID Director Shani Abeysekara as the personal secretary to the Deputy Inspector General of the Galle Police Division.

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

The 15 Cabinet Ministers’ workload is quite challenging. Each Minister needs to have at least 2 State Ministers. Each State Minister needs to have qualified Professionals and Academics, consisting of at least one identified in each of the allocated Subjects. 

In other words, the structure should provide a direct link to each Page in the Saubhagaya Dekma ( the Presidential Manifesto or Vision and Mission Statement of the President) assigning the commitments made to the public.

Neither Ministers nor State Ministers are qualified to implement the Manifesto.  They are politicians.  The Establishment Hierarchy at the Ministries such as Secretaries (previously Permanent Secretaries) and the rest will be responsible for implementing the decisions, within FR and AR.  But looking at the Manifesto and Implementing the tasks is not their responsibility.  They are different kinds of Animals of their own, within the Box. That responsibility should remain within the Cabinet Ministers, State Ministers, and the Professionals and Academics.

The primary objective of the structure will be to ensure developing short term targets for each Subject.  The IT Professionals could quite easily develop a package of Targets vs Performances matrix with drill-down analysis for each State Minister and Cabinet Minister.  It will also highlight critical areas where Performances are falling behind the Target and the reasons, with an appropriate plan for remedial actions.

When the Prime Minister and the President review achievements, probably fortnightly,  the implementation progress can be measured.

In the long run- some State Ministers and even Cabinet Ministers, need to be provided extensive training on the Performance Evaluation essentials.

In the first three months, the Prime Minister and the President can obtain first-hand information on capabilities of Professionals, Academics, State and Cabinet Ministers, which will be valuable going forward.

The Vision and Mission Statement of the President should become the Bible for the Cabinet,  State Ministers, and the Advisors.

By Janaka Perera

Throughout every Christmas season, customers at supermarkets in Sri Lanka can hear Christmas hymns being sung and the staff wearing red Santa Claus caps, though not all the staff may be Christians. 

This no doubt is commercializing religion but why force-feed it on non-Christians too – both employees and customers? 

 During Buddhist and Hindu festivals however, we hear neither chanting of Buddhist sutras nor Hindu devotional songs at these same supermarkets. 

Are we still a European colony?

We can understand if this is confined only to December 24-25.  But why continue it for over a month until the festive season ends?  This does not happen in Western countries to my knowledge.

Is not forcing non-Christian employees to wear Santa Claus costumes a violation of human rights?  

 Getting the female staff to wear cloth and jacket during the Sinhala-Tamil New Year is quite different since it a national festival according to ancient traditions – not a religious festival as such.

We do not mind Sri Lankan supermarkets having Christmas trees during the season provided they have Vesak Lanterns during Vesak and maybe some Hindu symbols during Hindu festivals at least in areas where Hindus are in the majority.  

by C.A. Chandraprema Courtesy The Island

November 23, 2019, 7:46 pm

* UNP’s Vibheeshana role
* Communalism in minority politics
Opportunity for reset in majority-minority relations

What we just experienced was undoubtedly the most eventful week since January 2015. The people of Sri Lanka have voted to end a five year long nightmare. Gota’s victory was not unexpected, but the sheer magnitude of the victory certainly was. What we saw was the reaction of a down trodden, persecuted, humiliated majority community to all the suffering and indignities they had undergone for the past five years. The events that took place in Sri Lanka between January 2015 and November 2019 will be a valuable case study for all multi-ethnic, multi-religious nations as to what could happen when the majority community of a nation is used as a doormat by the minority communities.

Over the past five years, UNP politicians went out of their way to insult and humiliate the Sinhalese and especially the Sinhala Buddhists. The Tamils and Muslims reacted positively to such Sinhala politicians. The way to curry favour with the minorities and to obtain their votes was to heap insults on the Sinhalese. During the past five years, the well known Sinhala ditty “Sinhalaya modaya, kevum kanna yodaya” was the clarion call of the yahapalana government. At election time, the Sinhalese were divided between the two main political parties, a situation which allowed the minority political parties organized on the basis of either ethnicity or religion to tip the balance in favour of one political party or another.

It is no secret that members of the minority comunities generally held the Sinhalese in contempt because they thought they could always prevail against the divided Sinhalese by manipulating the democratic system to their advantage. This attitude cannot be blamed only on the ethnicity and religion based political parties. Such political parties have contributed to the problem no doubt, but this isolationist, exclusivist anti-Sinhalese, anti-Sinhala Buddhist attitude has seeped into the very fiber of the being of most Tamil and Muslim Sri Lankans. There are exceptions to this no doubt, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the Tamils and Muslims in this country are communal minded. One has to call a spade a spade and this has to be discussed openly.

Communal minded minorities

The communal mindedness of the Tamils and the Muslims has to be taken out of the realm of taboo topics by the Tamils and Muslims themselves. If one reads Armand de Souza’s book ‘Hundred Days in Ceylon under Martial Law 1915’ and other sources on the 1915 riots, the cause of the communal disturbances was not due to anything that the Sinhalese did, but because a certain community of Muslims did not want a Buddhist procession to go past one of their mosques. At the same time, another community of Muslims in the same area had no issue with the Buddhist procession going past their mosque.

That was in an era when there was no Wahabism, no Al Qaeda and no ISIS and the Muslims were a minority in British Ceylon. It is mind boggling to think that a communal riot can be sparked off simply because a Buddhist religious procession went past a mosque. One would think that a communal riot would need a more cogent cause such as at least a brawl between two groups resulting in several deaths or something of that nature. The very fact that a Buddhist procession could not go past a mosque without sparking off a riot shows that the Sinhalese were treated with contempt by at least a section of the Muslims even at that time.

What has happened today is that with the Wahabi contagion, that attitude seems to have affected the Muslim community in general. Not that this attitude on the part of minority communities has no justification. The average Sinhalese can be bought for a mess of pottage. A few roofing sheets, and some handouts can change Sinhalese voting patterns but that will not happen to the same extent among Tamils and Muslims. As the old saying goes, you get only what you deserve and as far as the Sinhalese go, any negative attitudes the minorities may have towards them was not without justification.

It’s just that during the past five years, this was taken too far for even the cringing, servile Sinhalese to stomach. Many people thought the anti-Sinhalese, pro-minority bent in the UNP was due to Ranil Wickremesinghe’s leadership. It was so to some extent no doubt. We never saw such an attitude in the UNP during the J.R.Jayewardene, Premadasa and D.B.Wijetunga eras. Nor have we read of such an attitude during the Dudley Senanayake and D.S. Senanayake eras. The only approximation to what was experienced under Ranil Wickremasinghe’s watch would be the Sir John Kotelawala era.

However, the anti-Sinhala Buddhist attitude reached a new level of insidiousness with the emergence of Sajith Premadasa in the UNP. What was open and infantile earlier became hidden and crafty. Maximum emphasis was placed on duping the gullible Sinhalese with welfare measures while pledging what was essentially the division of the country to the Tamils. Just days before the election, the then Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa in a statement described the UNP’s policy as follows:

“The chapter on constitutional reform in the manifesto of the UNP presidential candidate contains provisions to replace the unitary state with a formulation that describes Sri Lanka as an ‘undivided and indivisible’ state. This is accompanied by the pledge that governmental power will be devolved to the provinces to the ‘maximum extent possible’. Identical provisions can be seen in the draft constitution tabled in Parliament by the Prime Minister in January this year.

“The UNP manifesto also contains provisions to expand the powers and functions of the provincial councils, to set up a second chamber in Parliament made up of provincial council representatives in order to curb the powers of Parliament, to allow the provincial units to raise funds independently, to place district and divisional secretaries under the provincial councils and to create a Constitutional Court, which will adjudicate in disputes between the center and the provincial units. Like the draft constitution, the UNP presidential election manifesto also aims to turn Sri Lanka into a loose federation of virtually independent provincial units.

“The draft constitution sought to describe Sri Lanka as an ‘ekeeya rajya’ in Sinhala and as an ‘orumiththa nadu’ in Tamil while carefully refraining from using the English phrase ‘unitary state’ which has specific constitutional connotations. Thus the label of a unitary state would have remained in Sinhala while in Tamil and English Sri Lanka would no longer be recognized as a unitary state. A similar deviousness is to be seen in the UNP presidential election manifesto. Though great care has been taken to avoid using phrases like ekeeya rajaya or unitary state, it has a reference in Sinhala to ‘maubime ekeeyathwaya’, which translates into English as ‘the unity of the motherland’.

“The phrase ‘maubime ekeeyathwaya’ has no constitutional value but it can be used to misleadingly suggest to Sinhala readers that the manifesto seeks to uphold the unitary state. Significantly, the UNP manifesto has refused to use even the Sinhala phrase ‘ekeeya rajya’ that had been conceded earlier in the PM’s draft constitution to assuage Sinhala sentiments. There is a clearly apparent hardening of the federalist position in the UNP manifesto. This is the first time that a mainline political party has included in an election manifesto provisions to dismantle the unitary state and to create a federal state in its place. Therefore this is a matter that needs to be taken very seriously.”

A new level of insidiousness

The SLPP was not able to take political advantage of the UNP’s open sellout to the separatist lobby due to two reasons – on the one hand, the constitutional subterfuge involved was too complicated for the average voter to understand – indeed it was hardly understood clearly even by most politicians. Secondly, even if the issue had been understood by the opposition politicians there was not enough time to get the message across to the public. The question is whether Sajith was aware of the contents of the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto until it was in print and drew flak from the opposing side? Even though he went around the country brandishing a copy of his manifesto and saying that it was his own thinking, everyone knows that manifestoes are normally not prepared by election candidates themselves.

It’s always a team of experts who prepares the manifesto for the candidate. So was this chapter on constitutional reform introduced into his manifesto without his knowledge? It is well known that the UNP manifesto was prepared in a hurry and was in fact the last manifesto to be launched by the main political parties. The evidence that we have to the effect that Sajith was fully aware not only of the contents of the chapter on constitutional reform but also its implications was that at a press conference held quite some time before the UNP manifesto was released, Sajith stated that his position was ‘the maximum devolution of power within an undivided and indivisible Sri Lanka’.

At that press conference he avoided the use of the term unitary state. This indicates that he was well briefed as to the concepts and terminology involved and the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto was not something introduced without his knowledge.

Sajith Premadasa is not Maithripala Sirisena. In 2015, when the newly elected yahapalana government went to Geneva and betrayed the country, they deliberately posted a doctored Sinhala translation of UNHRC Resolution 30/1 on the official foreign ministry website in order to mislead the Sinhala reader as to the actual contents of that document. It was obviously this doctored translation that was given to President Sirisena by his foreign minister. So for a while we saw a war of words between the President and the opposition with the former insisting that Resolution 30/1 was a great achievement and the latter shouting from the rooftops that Sri Lanka had been betrayed. It would have taken months for President Sirisena to realize that the opposition was right.  

In Sajith’s case however the situation was obviously very different. He is English educated and quite capable of understanding the connotations of the words used. The indications are, that he knew from the very beginning what the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto would contain. In speaking to the Mahanayakes we heard Sajith mention the word ekeeya rajya but that phrase does not appear anywhere in his manifesto. In the manifesto itself we find the phrase ‘maubime ekeeyabawa’ but that is not a reference to a unitary state. However it could be used to mislead those unfamiliar with constitutional phraseology into thinking that it is a reference to the unitary state.

In the last few days in the run up to the poll, Champika Ranawaka went to see the Ven Mahanayake Theras with a letter saying that the UNP was for an ekeeya rajya. This was nothing but the same kind of chicanery that we saw in 2015. Maithripala Sirisena stated publicly that he was going to abolish the executive presidency, and he signed agreements with various political parties and oganisations saying that he would abolish the executive presidency, but his manifesto stated deviously that the constitution will be amended only to the extent that a referendum is not made necessary. That precluded the abolition of the executive presidency. What we saw with regard to constitutional reform in Sajith Premadasa’s manifesto was very similar. The TNA knows that what Sajith promised them through his manifesto was a federal state and they made the decision to vote for the UNP on that account.

All this is a cause for worry because it shows that the younger generation in the UNP has become much more devious and sophisticated in their treachery than the older generation. On the one hand they play the role of a populist politician, patting people on the back, giving people houses and jobs, promising to give Janasaviya on top of Samurdhi, free meals to school children, free school uniforms, free shoes, free sanitary pads for women so as to buy Sinhala votes and then pledging to give the Tamils a federal state so as to get their votes as well. What the 2019 presidential election campaign showed beyond any doubt is that the UNP’s problem is not just Ranil Wickremasinghe, but runs far deeper and getting rid of RW will not cure the problem but will probably make things worse.

Promoting a Vibheeshana

The people realised this instinctively which is why they did not fall for the wolf in sheepskin trick when the UNP and the Tamil and Muslim political parties associated with them dumped Ranil Wickremasinghe and adopted Sajith Premadasa as their champion. They supported Sajith because they thought he could deliver to them what RW could not. Even after this resounding defeat, the Tamil and Muslim political parties have not got out of the “Sinhalaya modaya kevum kanna yodaya” frame of mind. Mano Ganesan and Rishard Baithiudeen now claim that the Tamils and Muslims were not being ‘jaathiwadee’ because they had all voted for a Sinhala Buddhist. Such claims insult the intelligence of the voting public.

The Tamils and Muslims voted for Sajith Premadasa because he was willing to do their bidding – to be a Vibheeshana to the Sinhalese. RW was also willing to do the bidding of the minorities and he too wanted to contest. But the reason why the minority parties backed Sajith was because they thought that the latter would be better able to deceive the Sinhalese. This election result has put paid to that kind of politics. It is certainly true that at a future election the minorities could always pull off another 2015 style coup by ganging up behind a Sinhala leader who was willing to do their bidding, but the reaction to that could well be a 2019 style turn of events the next time around. In 2015, the coup was unexpected. But after the bitter lessons learnt, voters will always be vigilant at every election.

The odds that were stacked against the majority community all these years are now somewhat even. For that we have to thank the yahapalana government formed in 2015. Do we want a ding dong electoral battle between the minority communities and the majority community? That is entirely for the minority communities to decide. There is of course a question over whether the Tamil and Muslim reaction to Gota’s Presidential candidacy was due to his being the main architect of the war that crushed LTTE terrorism and the erroneous belief that he was behind the anti-Muslim Bodu Bala Sena. The BBS was actually used by certain local and international forces including the Jathika Hela Urumaya and Norway, to oust the Rajapaksa government. The US Embassy in Colombo also played a major role in this and we commented on it in this column at that time.

Such factors would have contributed to the extreme reaction on the part of the minorities and it may be surmised that if the candidate had been Mahinda Rajapaksa, the reaction may have been somewhat different. However it is also the reality that the reaction to MR would only have been marginally different. The communal minded majority of Tamil and Muslim voters don’t want to see a proper Sinhala leader in office. Communal politics was first started by S.J.V.Chelvanayagam in the 1950s by mooting a Tamil state A ‘Thamil arasu’. The Tamils of Indian origin were first organised in trade unions which later became political parties. Then the Muslims started communal politics in the 1980s. Because the Sinhaese were divided, it was possible for the Tamils and Muslim political parties to align themselves with various political parties and call the shots in the governments that were formed since the 1990s.

This reached its apogee in 2015, when a President was elected to power without getting the majority of the majority community vote. Outside the north and east, President Maithripala Sirisena had lost the election and he managed to win only due to the overwhelming majorities received from the north and east. Having reached its highest point between 2015 and 2019, the worm has turned, and the Sinhalese have hoist the Tamils and the Muslims with their own petard. Now each Tamil and Muslim individual will have to take a personal decision and decide whether this narrow minded communalism was going to continue or whether they were going to reject communal politics and become members of the SLPP and the UNP instead of being members of Muslim or Tamil based political parties. The choice is theirs.

What the presidential election 2019 showed for the first time was that the Sinhalese can play the same game that the Tamils and Muslims have been playing for decades. Until S.J.V.Chelvanayagam came along in the mid-1950s, the Tamil leadership of the north personified in G.G.Ponnambalam got on fine with the Senanayakes who led the UNP. He was so close to the Senanayakes that he even got involved and fell victim to the internal conflicts in the UNP. Until M.H.M.Ashraff came into the scene in the 1980s with his divisive message, the Musims were well integrated in the two main political parties.

There were more Muslims in the UNP than in the SLFP but both political parties had respected Muslim leaders whose names are closely associated with the histories of those political parties. So it’s not as if national politics has never existed among Tamils and Muslims in this country. In 1952, even Chelvanayagam lost his seat to a UNP candidate. That was before communalism became the main determining force in northern politics. We once had a past that was exemplary. Each Tamil and Muslim living in this country will have to make an individual decision as to whether we are going to go back to the rational past or to continue with the irrational present.

Dr. Sudath Gunasekara Former Permanent Secretary to Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranayaka and Ex- President of the Sri Lanka State Administrative Services Association (1991-19194)

22.11.2019.

H.E. The President,

Sir ,

Your decision to appoint 15 Cabinet Ministers only, is excellent and highly commendable. The whole country admires it as the beginning of a New Political Culture and Statecraft in this country, as you have promised in your manifesto.  This is said to be the smallest Cabinet after 1956. As you know 1956 was the turning point in Sri Lankan politics in national resurgence. The second re-emergence reappeared in 2005 with Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory and culminated in 2009 with the elimination of the LTTE under his leadership and you’re commanding the Armed Forces. But that emergence was short-lived and again robbed by the reactionary forces in 2015.   

I suggest you strict to this policy of a leaner Cabinet even after the next General Election so that it will turn to be the third turning point, in the political history of this country after the so-called 1948 Independence, that will be irreversible, and you will go down in history as a hero who rescued this country from all colonial legacies and who made this Island nation once again a fully independent and a free and a proud nation.

 This I think is the wish of all those who voted you in. Since this country has failed to emerge as an Independent, free and prosperous country for 71 years due to poor and bad political leadership that was the misfortune and the curse of the nation.

Appointment of Deputy Ministers

I suggest you appoint only 15 Deputy Minister as well, to these 15 Cabinet Ministries, of cause with clear responsibilities assigned, and refuse the madness of appointing another set of Ministers called State Ministers and Non-Cabinet Minister as it has become a big fast and a Joke as well, just to keep some crazy politicians happy, of course without doing any service to the country. However, for practical purposes you may appoint 2 Deputies to the Prime Minister considering the heavy volume ha has to handle.

Also your attention is drawn to the joke of having another set of Ministers called Ministers of State as if others are not. Similarly, the appointment of non-Cabinet or any other such as Ministers with many other names, like Special Projects and without Portfolio, etc should also be stopped. I would also suggest that even after the next General Elections you strict to this number of Ministers and Deputy Ministers for the next five years ignoring the number set by the Constitution as 30 Cabinet Ministers and 40 Non-cabinet. Those MPPs who are disgruntled may be asked to find other jobs outside the Parliament and the Parliament should cease to be a place providing princely jobs for politicians under your Government at least now. They must be told that they have come here to serve the people and not to bleed them at their expense. If you are strict with these principles, I can assure you that you will definitely get the necessary 2/3 in the next Parliament for you to get a new Constitution based on the civilization of this country passed, making the way for the necessary legal framework.

I also suggest that you reduce the number of MPP to around 130 but not exceeding 150 that could be formed into 15 Executive Committees as it was done during the State Council days where the Chairmen of the Committees can be appointed as Ministers. This arrangement will help you to run a Government even without Political Parties, which has become a bane and a veritable curse to this country.

Moreover, the appointment of National list MP for any existing vacancy may also be withheld until you make a decision on the National List after the next General Election to abolish it.

The National list

The so-called National list is a major anachronism in our body politics as it serves only political parties to appoint personal friends of party leaders who can never come to Parliament through elections. This system has created a new version of Democracy that could be called backdoor Democracy” This list was invented by political parties just to increase their vote in Parliament only and never to serve the people.  None of these National list MPP has done any service up to date. Look at the performance of National list Ministers in the past, particularly men like Malik Samarwickrama, Anoma Gamage, Sarath Fonseka, C H.Marasinha, Jayampathi Wikramaratna, A.H.M Fousi. SB Dissanayaka, M.L.H Hisbulla, and Vijitamuni Zoysa, some of whom are defeated Candidates, a disgrace to politicians.

 What is more, is these fellows are not answerable to the people and they are answerable only to their Party leaders as they are appointed by them. So where is Democracy? It is a very big danger to democracy to have such people in Parliament who bark and act only on behalf of their Party leaders who have their own private agendas.

To my knowledge, there has been only one National list MP in the history of this innovation, who has done some useful service to the country. That is Luxman Kadiragamar, the best Foreign Minister we ever had. But one swallow does not make a summer.

Therefore why have another 29 jokers and parasites like this at public expense, as if 195 are not enough, whereas actually we can do a better job with a Parliament of 130 or 150 the most. What the people want today is a lean Parliament and a lean Cabinet of quality men and women who are committed to serve the people who can make this country a miracle in the world or at least in Asia and definitely not a set of highway robbers and looters like what we had in the recent past where the leaders ended up with looting the Central Bank of the nation and thereby who put it even behind Afganisthan within 4 years.

I assure you, Sir, you can add few more glittering jewels to your crown in addition to what you have already won if you listen to these requests so that you can go down in history as the man who created irreversible history in Good Governance in this country.

Best wishes,

Dr.Sudath Gunasekara.

Dr. Dietmar Doering -The writer is a German investor, tourism promoter and social scientist based in Sri Lanka Courtesy The Island

Sri Lanka ushered a new era with the election of a typical ‘People’s President’ with a convincing mandate at a critical juncture to lead the country’s 21 million people towards economic prosperity.

With 6.9 million plus votes, the clear verdict of the masses reflected the demand for a strong leader, and the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the President effectively drove home the point that the nation clamored for direction and guidance from a resolute presidency to charter a new and meaningful course for a country at crossroads.

With a significantly high voter turnout, the November 16 presidential polls was free, fair and peaceful. This was also confirmed by EU EOM’s (European Union Election Observation Mission) Chief Observer, Ms Marisa Matisa, who commented that “Sri Lanka’s presidential election was largely free of violence and technically well managed”.

The phenomenal peaceful outcome of the presidential stakes, with a near 80% voter participation, was remarkable. The enthusiasm amongst voters to exercise their franchise to elect a headstrong leader with a vision to open new vistas in terms of economic growth and development was clearly visible. The young, old and infirm queued up with confidence to bring about a change the country at large envisaged for a better tomorrow.

Sri Lanka’s wholly impartial and peaceful presidential election was a splendid example to the world, especially to the western hemisphere, which more often than not tend to heap criticism on the country when it comes to honoring democratic processes. It is no secret that the negative and biased western mainstream media tries to paint a negative picture, whenever elections are conducted in Sri Lanka.

This is absolutely unfair and unjustified. Not only this presidential polls, but even many others held previously were also largely violence-free and described as free and fair. After then President Mahinda Rajapaksa lost to Maithripala Sirisena in 2015, the transition of power was smooth. Even before the final results were announced, Mahinda Rajapaksa vacated his official residence in an exemplary move that saw the newly-elected President taking over the mantle of leadership with ease.

In the just concluded presidential election also, the other main contender, Sajith Premadasa conceded defeat and congratulated the President-elect on his victory in the true spirit of lofty democratic traditions.

However, the western media sought to highlight a few marginal and somewhat irrelevant incidents during the election period in a bid to taint the positive scenario. This has been the general pattern when it comes to countries like Sri Lanka, where they highlight some sporadic minor incidents in a bid to give the story a twist and thereby tarnish the country’s image. Unfortunately, it has become the trend to add a frightening dimension to events to portray to the outside world that all’s not well in Sri Lanka.

Even in Europe, election time is not completely devoid of violence. So was it in Germany, where in the last parliamentary polls, some candidates in the fray faced physically harassment with many political party offices and vehicles also set ablaze. The whole electoral process came under threat by rival parties as a result.

In my view, the last two elections in Sri Lanka were significantly more peaceful than many polls conducted in other democracies across the world. With such political maturity and excellence in conducting elections, I would recommend that observers be drawn from Sri Lanka to monitor polls in western countries.

The 2019 Sri Lankan presidential election campaign was fierce, with the candidates putting up a stiff fight with debates, arguments and counter arguments. However, after the results were announced, they shook hands with the President-elect.

Sri Lanka has proven that it’s a matured democracy with a salutary electoral process. The country’s adherence to democratic principles and traditions are laudable. In this positive backdrop, interferences by western envoys should stop.

Unfortunately, questions on alleged human rights violations that crop up largely on information provided by some foreign envoys based in Sri Lanka to their respective governments, are tainting the positive image of the country in the world.

The question of human rights violations is more evident when it comes to weapons being exported to countries like Yemen. Great Britain and Germany are still exporting heavy weapons to Saudi Arabia knowing only too well the destruction they can cause to the lives of civilians as well.

The hypocrisy of western nations is rarely highlighted in their mainstream media. Only social media streams report on alleged human rights violations they commit.

Sri Lanka should seek to quit its dependence on leading global lending agencies such as the World Bank and IMF as the loans they grant influence policies, especially in developing countries.

With Sri Lanka’s enormous potential, a four-fold increase in tourist arrivals will significantly minimize the dependence on foreign funding. According to leading rating agencies, achieving an annual target of 8 million tourists will translate into a 50% plus contribution to the national GDP.

– Dr. Dietmar Doering

(The writer is a German investor, tourism promoter and social scientist based in Sri Lanka)

J. M. Jinasena Courtesy The Island

Dear Mr. Premadasa,

I did not vote for you, nor am I aligned with a political party. My family are a colour pallet of green, blue, red and now the new pink. Nor am I a political pundit or have a degree in political science.

I am writing to you as I find your supporters, the social media and your colleagues, appear to be under the illusion that your failure to win the Presidential elections was due to a single reason and that reason being the RW factor.

I am no friend of RW. In fact I have little respect for the supposed gentleman, considering the manner in which he has hogged the UNP party leadership despite successive defeats, without giving the young blood of the party a chance. His obvious favouritism towards his chronies is akin to MR’s nepotism. It is also undeniable, RW’s “I will continue to be the PM” line on the campaign trail may have adversely impacted your elections campaign. However, none of those are the reasons why I didn’t vote for you.

Mr. Premadasa, I didn’t vote for you because:

a) As far as my memory recalls you had never won your Electoral District in your 26 years of service to the public. Granted you have a seat in the deep South, which is the Rajapaksa territory, but in that case, you should have the foresight and political acumen to switch the seat. Correct me if I am wrong, but RW originally contested from Biyagama and then switched to a sure seat in Colombo and so did Ravi K –from Kotte to Colombo. You cannot be heard to say you were not given a seat of your choice. You were the Deputy Leader of the Party and if you could not convince your leader to give you a sure seat, then what confidence do we have of your negotiation skills and success?

b) You were backed by Maithri Gunaratne and Shrilal Lakthileke, who rebelled and supported you to bring in party reforms. You however didn’t stand by them and sold them down the river for a deal with RW. Mr. Karu J suffered the same fate. Therefore, I didn’t consider you trustworthy or loyal and deserving the Presidency. In all of your speeches on the election trail, the word used was “I” not “us”. Brought back the memories of a dictator, not a man willing to work in co-operation. There were enough squabbles between MS and government. I didn’t want the same to continue.

c) During your 26-year political career, you didn’t take a clear stand on any burning issue in the country. The ceasefire agreement, P TOMS, The war on Terror, persecution of our soldiers, Bond Scam, Easter Bombing, MCC Agreement, Sale of Hambantota Port to the Chinese and many more issues were faced by the country, but you remained silent, whilst most of your colleagues had something to say on each of the issues, though some views most certainly, attracted the wrath of the public or escalated your colleagues’ reputation to joker status. Against this background, I most certainly didn’t believe in your promises – to go to the electric chair on behalf of our soldiers or die for the sake of the country. The pledges came far too late. I didn’t trust you to walk the walk.

d) You did not say a word when your colleagues spared no mercy on the Buddhist monks or the Archbishop. Our country is deeply conservative and all religions are highly respected, and you didn’t see that these remarks were affecting your campaign, which convinced me you had poor political acumen and lacked common sense.

e) I was extremely amused at the fairy tale promises you made about working 24 hours for the good of the people, walking on streets with your voters everyday and worshipping them and taking care of all their needs. I was told by my UNP friends, that you were just playing to the masses with those words. Well the masses showed what they thought of such not-so-intelligent remarks, by overwhelmingly rejecting you. It looks like the fairy tales went down well with Colombo 1-15 though. So, who is the real gullible voter I wonder?

f) You promised to deliver a lot, but never explained the method of delivery. Complicated English words thrown together, does not set out a method or formula and you were caught out many a time. I then excused you as there were doubts about your O/L, but that factor too played a part in my decision not to vote for you. MS at least had O/Ls and even then, see the damage he did!

g) You were in charge of the Ministry of Housing for four and a half years. I didn’t see anything novel or innovative in the housing schemes you declared open. I visited some of the areas in which you have established these housing schemes, and I find the occupants absolutely disgruntled; not only had they taken personal loans to complete the houses, they also had to provide the labour forsaking their own daily work, in order for you to declare open the housing schemes on time. The houses had been built in a style of your late father’s era, whereas the designs and technology even for budget houses, had improved and modernized over the years. GR’s idea of a solar panel which generated an income for the household, was far more appealing to me.

h) I am a fan of Yala just like you. I go to Yala on weekdays to avoid the weekend crowd. I have seen you at Yala National Park on almost all of those trips, even on days where there were important parliament sittings and cabinet meetings. We used to always wonder, how you could excuse yourself from these important sittings, to spot an elephant and a leopard, which can be spotted easily on another day. Therefore, I didn’t believe you when you said you will work 24/7 for us voters.

i) Your camp says you didn’t have funds to do the campaign properly. You said you lived in a flat and your slippers were worn. But the complex from which you emerge every morning sure doesn’t look ordinary nor your wife’s dress. I frankly didn’t detect any difference in the GR and SP campaigns where finances were concerned. In fact, you spent more I believe, reserving the front page of popular Sunday Newspapers for your advertisement campaigns.

I saw on the television, RW very prominently campaigning in the North and East. You were prominent in the rest of the provinces. It’s the provinces in which you campaigned that didn’t vote for you.

Therefore, I genuinely believe that blaming RW alone for this debacle, is wrong and unfair. I didn’t vote for you not “because of” RW. In the past, I have voted for others in your party “in spite of” RW. I didn’t vote for you as the country couldn’t risk another experiment on the throne. We had enough of Friday Night surprises and Mr. Bean shows, in the past four and a half years.

You conducted yourself in a decent manner after a huge defeat, and resigned from your post in the party with immediate effect. Although you were not known for any sporting prowess, and I had only seen a propaganda clip of you playing street cricket in Jaffna, I must say you were a good sport in defeat and even attended the final conference at the Election Commissioner’s Office. Thus, I took the time to pen this letter, as you seem to be confused why people didn’t vote for you, despite the promise of a heaven on earth for us voters.

All the best for you future! Hope you will do the needful to win our confidence!

J. M. Jinasena

.spa.gov.sa

Riyadh, Nov 23, 2019, SPA — His Royal Highness Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Crown Prince, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, sent a cable of congratulations to Gotabaya Rajapaksa, on taking the oath of office as President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.
The Crown Prince said: it is my delight, on the occasion of taking the oath of office, as the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, to send to you sincere congratulations and wishing of good health and happiness and the friendly people of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, steady progress and advancement.

spa.gov.sa

Riyadh, Nov 23, 2019, SPA — The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud sent a cable of congratulations to the His Excellency President Gotabaya Rajapaksa of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, on taking the oath of office.
In his cable, the King said: It is our pleasure, on the occasion of taking the oath as the president of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, to send to you, on behalf of the people and the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in my own name, the best of congratulations and wishing to succeed and to the friendly people of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, further advancement and prosperity.

By Dr Tilak S. Fernando Courtesy Ceylon Today

Daya Gamage worked at the American Embassy in Colombo, as the Sole Foreign Service National and a Political Specialist. He retired in 1994 and has been living in Las Vegas since retirement. After two years of concentration, he has been able to share his knowledge, understanding and his intimate professional association with the US Department of State in the form of a book – Tamil Tigers’ Debt to America. Being aware of how America’s foreign policy worked- sometimes in a strange manner, he has come out with an unbiased text full of data in his book nowhere else is contained. Daya Gamage has authorised the writer to ” to quote anything from his book” so that the readers will get a clear picture of  America’s Foreign Policy,  Sri Lanka’s National Issues and the LTTE struggle in depth. Gamage handles the United States Bureau of the Online daily newspaper Asian Tribune constantly making the readers knowledgeable of the manner in which US foreign policy towards Third World nations works. His book is available on Amazon

At a dinner gathering on May 2012 in Las Vegas, Nevada, several erudite medical surgeons practising in the USA, two of whom were Sri Lankan Tamils hailing from the Jaffna Peninsula were quite knowledgeable about the situation in their former homeland. Daya Gamage had the opportunity of participating in a discourse with an academic, who was directly engaged with the Sri Lanka’s reconciliation process. He had been ‘commissioned’  to enlighten the Govt. of Sri Lanka (GOSL)  on what lessons Sri Lanka as a nation  had learnt from the ethnic strife and also, was part of a group that had been asked to recommend policy planks to aid the  government in a programme of conflict resolutions.

Insight

What was expected from this academic,  where talented Jaffna Tamil, medical personnel participated keenly  to get some insight into the degree to which Sri Lanka was conscious  of what the US State Department had been promoting and advocating all those years and  whether Sri Lanka took note of those ideas during its research for a  national policy towards conflict resolution. At least  since the 1985 Thimpu (Bhutan)  talks between the GOSL and LTTE representatives. The signals as indicated by Daya Gamage in relation to Sri Lanka’s governance, rule of law, ethnic strife, race relations, minority rights, devolution of power to the periphery, etc.

When the issue was placed before him that the intensive security of a broad spectrum of national issues  and the policy planks developed by the US State Department Foreign Service Officers(FSOs) stationed in Colombo in the 1980s and 1990s would be  relevant in the context that existed, he  had direct links to President Rajapaksa, dismissed the notion.

From what sounded  like a very authoritative position, his understanding was that the American Embassy in Colombo had been until ‘recently’, exclusively in conversation, dialogue and contact with Sri Lanka’s  elite and the American diplomatic mission was out of touch with Sri Lanka’s ground situation and out of pace with the  country’s trends.

The US-based Pedagogue’s contention was the mindset that was developed during the 1980s and 1990s at the American diplomatic mission in Colombo and Washington  on Sri Lankan issues, viz race relations, ethnic strives,devolution, Tamil rights, rule of law, structure of government, et al, which had no bearing  in the existed context.

A dinner party

Daya Gamage has had no evidence at the time whether the guest at the dinner was reflecting the sentiments of the  highest echelons of the GOSL or if both ( the highest echelons of the Government of Sri Lanka and this interlocutor) was  one of many persons commissioned, to provide guidelines  to Sri Lankan conflict on resolution since the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009.

It is significant, therefore, that he seemed to be ignorant of the remarkable ‘link’ between the development mindset of the 1980s/90s and the post- 2009 positions on Sri Lanka  pursued by the US. Or maybe Sri Lanka had no capacity to understand that ‘link,’ even though it is an important lesson it may learn when working towards reconciliation and rearranging the polity.

American perspective

The American perspective that had emerged, since the domestic demise of the Tamil Tigers in May 2009, has in fact emerged out of the initial polity planks developed in those two earlier decades within the portals of the American diplomatic mission, with active collaboration of what was then called  the ‘Near East and South Asia (NEA) Bureau of the State Department’ (now known as the South and Central Asian Affairs Bureau).

It was the initial belief of this interlocutor that Colombo’s American diplomatic mission had changed the techniques it used to monitor the domestic scenario and situation, and as a result was more favourable to Sri Lanka. But subsequent developments, with the US moving resolutions at Geneva’s UNHRC and mounting the pressure associated with the US, did not match with this interlocutor’s understanding. It should be reminded here once again that this conversationalist was one of those who was ‘commissioned’ by the President of Sri Lanka to ascertain what ‘lessons can be  learned’ from  Sri Lanka’s long war and  recommend the reconciliation process to bring  healing to the nation.

What was noted at the outset was three-fold:

1. Ethnic tensions, race relations, Tamil demands and grievances, and their  place in a larger Sri Lankan society where the Sinhalese enjoy a numerical strength; the influence of the Tamil political lobby as well as the domestic human rights activists; and the dismal failure of some noted civil society leaders and State officials to intervene in the ongoing dialogue contributed largely  towards the development of the mind-set of the American FSO, which in turn saw Washington pursuing a rigid policy towards Sri Lanka.

2. Because of the failure of Sri Lankan officials (its professionals) to effectively interact with the FSOs and participate in the debate that was taking place within the portals of Colombo’s The American diplomatic mission and the failure of the two principal  national political parties i.e.: the UNP and the SLFP, in nurturing their own foreign-policy experts was a serious setback. This resulted in the Sri Lankan authorities and the State Department to be on different pages.  In consequence, the Government of Sri Lanka had reacted in an ambiguous manner to pressures that were being mounted and faced discomfort globally.

3. The outcome had been the emergence of a particular policy that Washington has set its mind upon, a policy that is most uncomfortable for Sri Lankan in the post-LTTE era and saps its capacity to forge a strategic path.

When searching for the path towards national reconciliation today, it is imperative for Sri Lanka’s  ‘self-proclaimed foreign-policy experts’ to  link the scenario  that developed within the US Embassy in Colombo during the 1980s and 1990s, one that created the foundation of American policy towards Sri Lanka in the decade that followed, to the serious attempts of the US State Department ‘even to  contemplate’ to salvage the LTTE supreme  leadership in May 2009. Furthermore,  it should be borne in mind that this ‘failure’ to get the  Tiger  hierarchy out of  the battle zone and to simultaneously minimise civilian casualties that led the US State Department to intensify pressure of a different kind  since then involving the strategic use of the Tamil diaspora to effect  changes in Sri Lanka.

Washington’s desire to keep the LTTE alive

To identify that ‘intense pressure of a different kind’, it is vital to ascertain why Washington wanted the LTTE alive, what steps it took to  keep it alive, and what path it is taking to bring pressure on Sri Lanka and to then consider whether Sri Lanka  can withhold that pressure.

At the outset, it was noted that the interlocutor with whom Daya Gamage had a dialogue at Las Vegas in May 2012 in the company of two Sri Lankan  Tamil medical personnel  either failed to grasp this larger scenario or was manifesting the sentiments of the  hierarchy with the Rajapaksa administration, which was once a broadly popular  administration among the majority Sinhalese but was defeated on 8th January 2015 at the Presidential Election, failed to scrutinise that larger scenario to re-establish the cordial  and friendly relations that once existed between Colombo and Washington. Eliminating the misunderstanding between the two nations, as US senator John Kerry said in his foreign relations committee report of late 2009, is for mutual benefit and interest.

And to move away from what  the former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once said, “There are things we do not know what we do not know; there are known unknowns – that is to say there are knowns and unknowns, that is to say there are  things  that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don’t know!

tilakfernando@gmail.com

courtesy: Daya Gamage- “Tamil Tigers Debt to America.”

To be continued…

Courtesy Adaderana

The election manifesto of United Kingdom’s Labour Party has featured Sri Lanka and promised the protection of human rights of Tamil and Muslim populations in the island nation.

The Labour Party’s manifesto, aimed at securing the victory of UK’s general election in December, was launched two days ago. Many foreign media had tagged the manifesto as ‘radical’ and ‘ambitious’.

The Labour Party has made a pledge that, if elected, it will work through the UN and the Commonwealth to insist on the protection of human rights for Sri Lanka’s minority Tamil and Muslim populations.”

Highlighting the prevailing human rights issues around the world, the Labour Party also vowed to suspend the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen and to Israel for arms used in violation of the human rights of Palestinian civilians.”

The manifesto also took an undertaking to reform the international rules-based order to secure justice and accountability for breaches of human rights and international law, such as the bombing of hospitals in Syria, the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip, the use of rape as a weapon of war against the Rohingya community in Myanmar and the indiscriminate bombardment of civilians in Yemen.

A future Labour Government intends to appoint human-rights advisers to work across the Foreign Office and government to prioritise a co-ordinated approach to human rights and to advocate for human rights at every bilateral diplomatic meeting.

Courtesy Hiru News

Former general secretary of UNP Tissa Attanayake issued a statement today in response to the statement issued by UNP general secretary Akila Viraj Kariyawasam regarding the election campaign of Sajith Premadasa.

The statement says that the party’s general secretary is deliberately hiding the truth and accusing the election operation office in Vauxhaull street.

Meanwhile convening a media briefing subsequent to the presidential election UNP MP Nalin Bandara said that the party as well as the Sirikotha headquarters did not render the necessary support to Sajith Premadasa during the presidential election campaign.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාසගේ මැතිවරණ ව්‍යාපාරය සම්බන්ධයෙන් එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ මහලේකම් අකිල විරාජ් කාරියවසම් පසුගියදා නිකුත් කළ මාධ්‍ය නිවේදනයට ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වමින් එම පක්ෂයේ හිටපු මහලේකම්වරයෙකු වන තිස්ස අත්තනායක ද අද නිවේදනයක් නිකුත් කළා.

එහි දැක්වෙන්නේ පක්ෂ මහලේකම්වරයා සිතාමතාම සත්‍යය වසන් කරමින් වොක්ෂෝල් වීථියේ පිහිටි මැතිවරණ මෙහෙයුම් කාර්යාලයට චෝදනා කර ඇති බවයි.

මේ අතර, ජනාධිපතිවරණයෙන් පසුව මාධ්‍ය හමුවක් කැඳවමින් එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී නලින් බණ්ඩාර චෝදනා කළේ මැතිවරණ ව්‍යාපාරයේදී සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාසට අවශ්‍ය සහය එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ අභ්‍යන්තරයෙන් සහ සිරිකොත මූලස්ථානයෙන් නොලැබුණු බවයි.

මෙම ප්‍රකාශයට ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වමින් එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ මහලේකම් පාර්ලිමේන්තු මන්ත්‍රී අකිල විරාජ් කාරියවසම් නිවේදනයක් නිකුත් කරමින් පසුව ප්‍රකාශ කර සිටියේ සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාසගේ මැතිවරණ ව්‍යාපාරයේ ප්‍රධාන කාර්යයන් සිදුවූයේ වොක්ෂොල් වීදියේ පිහිටි මෙහෙයුම් කාර්යාලයේ බවයි.

එහි ප්‍රධානියා ලෙස තිස්ස අත්තනායක කටයුතු කළ බවත්, එම කාර්යාලයට පක්ෂ මූලස්ථානයෙන් ඉල්ලා තිබූ සියලූ සහයන් උපරිමයෙන් ලබා දුන් බවත්, එම නිවේදනයේ සඳහන් කර තිබුණා.

ඊට ප්‍රතිචාර දක්වමිනුයි එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයේ හිටපු මහලේකම් තිස්ස අත්තනායක අද මෙම නිවේදනය නිකුත් කළේ.

නව ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදී පෙරමුණේ ජනාධිපතිවරණ මෙහෙයුම් කටයුතු ප්‍රධාන අංශ දෙකකින් සමන්විත වූ බව එහි දැක්වෙනවා.

පළමු අංශය වූ එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂයට එම පක්ෂ යාන්ත්‍රණය ක්‍රියාත්මක කරවීමට භාර වූ නමුත්, ජනතාවගේ මතය වන්නේ එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ නායකත්වයෙන් එම කාර්යය ඉටු නොවූ බව යැයි එම නිවේදනයේ සඳහන්.

වොක්ෂෝල් වීථියේ පිහිටි මෙහෙයුම් කාර්යාලයේ සිදුකරනු ලැබූයේ සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාසගේ ප්‍රචාරක රැස්වීම් සංවිධානය කිරීම විශේෂ අවස්ථාවන් සූදානම් කිරීම ආදී කාර්යයන් පමණක් බවත්, එම කාර්යයන් කාර්යක්ෂමව සිදුවූ බවත් තිස්ස අත්තනායක නිකුත් කළ නිවේදනයේ දැක්වෙනවා.

හිටපු මහලේකම් තිස්ස අත්තනායක සිය නිවේදනය මගින් පෙන්වා දෙන්නේ සජිත් ප්‍රේමදාසගේ ඉල්ලීම පරිදි තමන් මැතිවරණ මෙහෙයුම් කටයුතු වලට එක්වුව ද, අග්‍රාමාත්‍යවරයා ද සහභාගි වූ සාකච්ඡාවලදී ජනාධිපතිවරණයේ සියලූ මෙහෙයුම් කටයුතු මෙහෙයවීමට භාර දුන්නේ මෙහෙයුම් කළමනාකාර මලික් සමරවික්‍රම, පක්ෂ සභාපති කබීර් හෂීම් සහ මහලේකම් අකිල විරාජ් කාරියවසම් යන අයට බවයි.

මැතිවරණය සඳහා මුදල් එකතු කිරීම හා වියදම් කිරීම් සිදුකරනු ලැබූවේ එම මූල්‍ය කමිටුව විසින් බවත්, ඊට වොක්ෂෝල් වීථියේ පිහිටි කාර්යාලය හෝ තමන්ගේ කිසිදු සම්බන්ධයක් නොමැති බවත්, වගකීම් පැහැර හැර කණ්ඩායම් හැගීම ප්‍රතික්ෂේප කිරීම නිර්ලජ්ජිත ක්‍රියාවක් බවත්, එක්සත් ජාතික පක්ෂ හිටපු මහලේකම්වරයා සිය නිවේදනයෙන් පෙන්වා දෙනවා.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

අපරාධ පරික්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකර මහතා පැවති යහපාලන ආණ්ඩුවට පක්ෂග්‍රාහීව කටයුතු කිරීම හේතුවෙන් නිර්දෝශී පිරිස් සිර ගතව ඇති බවට ජාතික සංවිධාන චෝදනා කරනවා.

එම සංවිධාන නියෝජනය කරන භික්ෂූන් වහන්සේ සදහන් කරන්නේ 2015 සිට අපරාධ පරික්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව සිදුකළ විමර්ශන පිළිබදව නැවත පරික්ෂණ ආරම්භ කළ යුතු බවයි

vooke

KAMALIKA PIERIS

President Gotabaya hails from a political family with a proud political record. His father, D. A. Rajapaksa was one of the founder-members of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP).  D.A. was a Member of Parliament.  He served as the Deputy Speaker and Cabinet Minister of Agriculture and Lands when W. Dahanayake was Prime Minister. The late D. A. Rajapaksa today holds the proud distinction of having produced two highly popular Presidents of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa came from a political family, but he had no political ambitions initially. He left that to his three brothers.  But In 2009, with the end of the war, Gotabaya was identified as a possible successor to Mahinda Rajapaksa. Gotabaya at that time stated firmly that he had no political ambitions. Gotabaya was catapulted into politics when Mahinda Rajapaksa was prevented from contesting the presidency for the third time. Since Mahinda Rajapaksa was disqualified from a third try, the popular choice was his brother, Gotabaya.

Gotabaya may have come in as a substitute for Mahinda Rajapaksa but he has the potential to be an effective President in his own right. Gotabaya has better qualifications, better achievements, better work experience, and a wider world view, than all the former Presidents of Sri Lanka, put together said, one observer. [1] 

Gotabaya has the discipline and necessary managerial experience to function effectively as President said another. He has a very successful track record.  In the army, he was seen as a fearless, unflappable leader. He has gained a reputation as a forthright administrator who does not take no” for an answer, said, analysts. He is a decisive and clear-sighted person, said Subramanian Swamy.   

 Gotabaya comes into the Presidency, with work experience in two very demanding, highly different fields. He is a decorated military man with experience in commanding troops. That is well known. But he is also a qualified computer professional with work experience in that field too. Gotabaya worked as a computer engineer in the IT department of Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, California.  

As Secretary to the Defense Ministry, Gotabaya showed that he can deliver the goods at two very different levels, a military victory then urban improvement. There was a third level as well, which is not so well known. Using his position as a brother to the President, Gotabaya came to the rescue of projects in distress. Here is one instance.

Archeologists had found an ancient boat at Godawaya and had signed an agreement with a foreign country (forget the name) to do joint research on it. The foreign country, however, said the boat now belonged to them, and chased away the local researchers.   The boat was about to go abroad. When all other avenues failed, the local researchers ran to Gotabaya who put a stop to the plan.

The Yahapalana experience brought a new factor into Sri Lanka politics.  There arose a call for a strong leader. Until now no one wanted a strong leader. They wanted a weak leader who could be pushed around. This time, it appears, the public wanted a strong leader.    Well, they have definitely got one. Hope they will like it.  Gotabaya Rajapaksa will be a strong   President, unlike any we have had before. There are good reasons for this.

President Gotabaya is not a career politician. That is why he was able to order that photographs of political leaders be removed from the walls of state organizations. No career politician would have attempted this. This was carried out immediately and the public applauded.

President Gotabaya has never had his own political party, does not want one and is not shackled to any other political party either.  That means he neither knows nor cares about pandering to supporters to simply hold on to them. He cannot please all those who elected him this time, either because there are far too many of them. He also does not seem to care, at least at this moment, whether he is re-elected or not. All of which means he cannot be easily influenced.

Secondly, this is a leader who means business. I address you today as the Executive President of our dear Motherland, [as] the Commander-in-Chief and [as] the Defence Minister who will ensure security,” he said in his inaugural speech,  making it clear that he had considerable power.

 I am your Executive President. I will not hesitate to use such executive powers for the benefit of the country at any time. I will thus form a new Government that can work in accordance with my policies and implements the historic mandate given by the people to build a prosperous nation,  he continued, making it clear that he intended to use those powers.

He favours loyalty and patriotism. Loyalty and patriotism are looked down on in the west, as backward, old fashioned values. It is good to see President Gotabaya embrace them. ‘I love my country. I am proud of my country. I have a vision for my country. I appeal to all patriotic Sri Lankans to join me in my journey to build a prosperous nation for the future generations’, he said.

The public has already seen something of the Gotabaya style, though they may not realize it.  Towards the end of Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s second term of office as President, there were a series of demonstrations by university students, directed from outside and intended to destabilize the Mahinda Rajapaksa government. The main strategy was to block important trunk roads.

In one of these demonstrations, which I happened to see, the students were seated on the road in front of College House, on Thurstan Road, in a large group covering the whole road.  Facing them ,  very far away were two police vans strategically placed, blocking the road, and a handful of police, standing by the  vans,  silently watching, The students were not going to be allowed to  proceed up Thurstan Road, as they had intended, but could  continue sitting in front of College House as long as they wished. How long the students sat there, I do not know. Unlike in Yahapalana time, there was no tear gas, no water cannon, and no rows of helmeted, baton carrying police. Traffic had been re-routed.

President Gotabaya will work in consultation with his brother, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The two have worked together before, as we know, and will have no difficulty in working together again. This will be a formidable combination. The public has already noted that if this pair had been running the government, the Easter Sunday bomb explosion would not have been allowed to occur.

The two brothers are equally popular in the eyes of their supporters. The work they have done for the country is well known.  Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s role in winning the war and building superhighways is well known, but he has also contributed in other areas. I have listed them elsewhere and will mention just one here. The nanotechnology sector in Sri Lanka was developed during the time of Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Throughout Yahapalana rule, Mahinda Rajapaksa remained popular. Within days of losing the 2015 Presidential election, Mahinda Rajapaksa’s supporters (who had voted against him!) wanted him back. They went in droves to his residence in Hambantota.  With every blunder by Yahapalana, Mahinda Rajapaksa became more desirable.  The Pohottu party which came up later is centered on him.

 Mahinda Rajapaksa was given special recognition at all Gotabaya Rajapaksa‘s election meetings. His arrival at these meetings, looking very plump, was greeted with howls of joy and toddlers were held out for him to hold. He was always the main speaker at these meetings.  A final observation. When President Gotabaya mentioned Mahinda Rajapaksa’s name in his first speech as President of Sri Lanka,   the audience immediately applauded.

It is not possible to say anything yet about how President Gotabaya will deal with economic issues, but there are pointers. The economic growth and progress achieved by President Mahinda Rajapaksa were not continued by Yahapalana complained to the public. ‘Hondata thibuna ratak,’ said one election slogan, ‘apata giya kalak”.

This was Sri Lanka‘s first wake up call. Sensing this, Gotabaya started ‘Viyath Maga’ and ‘Eliya’. Two collectives of intellectuals, artists and academics whose primary objective was to rebuild a stronger economy in Sri Lanka. These organizations held well-attended seminars throughout the country. ‘Viyath Maga’ and ‘Eliya’ were very popular. Gotabaya Rajapaksa said that he had no intention of entering politics when he began Viyath Maga.

The public expects much from President Gotabaya, I think it’s a turning point in the history of Sri Lanka,” said one supporter. “With the economy and national security, I think the country will improve in every way in the next five years. We’re very hopeful with him.” [In Gotabaya‘s time] the Colombo City was developed with several new attractions and most importantly the city had been kept clean, we expect that this would be continued, said another.”

President Gotabaya has generated hope in the economic sector. The Stock market which had fallen steadily from 2015, shot up within 24 hours of President Gotabaya taking office.  The new President must prioritize a National Industrial Policy serving the local industrial community while maintaining a global outlook, said former President FCCISL, Nawaz Rajabdeen. Sri Lanka has abundant talent in enterprise, innovation, and technology,” he concluded.

Business Chamber of Commerce sent a congratulatory message to President Rajapaksa. We wish to express our faith in [your] ability to take the country towards a more fortuitous era of economic growth, the message said.

The Chamber wishes to recall that at the outset of his Presidential campaign  Gotabaya Rajapaksa convened a gathering of the country’s leading business personalities, called “Viyath Maga”., to exchange ideas about the economy. It did not merely generate goodwill but created new hope in the business community.   President Gotabaya has expressed refreshing ideas about the Small and Medium Sector and has referred to the need to find fresh export markets for Sri Lanka’s products.

 This chamber is deeply impressed by the President’s words of wisdom as well as his knowledge of the economy and where it should be driven towards to achieve better results for this country. Given these factors, whilst we foresee a more promising future for the country. We assure the new Head of State of Sri Lanka all our support in his great endeavor, concluded Business Chamber of Commerce.

When Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected President of Sri Lanka, the neighboring countries, India, Pakistan and Maldives responded immediately, with greetings and assurances of support. Prime Minister Modi has invited President Gotabaya to come over. India immediately sent External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar to Colombo, to meet President Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa. President Gotabaya will be good for India, said Subramanian Swamy, a Rajya Sabha MP of India.

However, Hindustan Times, a privately owned newspaper, thinks it is time for India to start bullying Sri Lanka all over again. “Delhi must respect the political dispensation in Colombo, but be firm when necessary,” it said. India must deepen economic interdependence with Sri Lanka.  India must make Sri Lanka pursue an India-first policy.

 India must also draw clear red lines and enforce them. Colombo is free to engage with Beijing as a sovereign entity, but if the engagement affects Indian security interests, Delhi should make it clear that it will exercise its leverage. Gotabaya will only seek in Beijing what he is unable to get from New Delhi, just as during the final phase of the civil war,” it said. India will also have to deepen security cooperation with Sri Lanka without further escalating geostrategic competition in the Indian Ocean.

It is not possible to accept any of this. In addition to having to hold on to its 29 states, its Muslims and Hindus,   India now has to tread very carefully in its foreign relations. It is still a part of the US-dominated military set up for the Bay of Bengal together with Australia and Japan. But it is getting alarmed about the USA getting into Trincomalee. India is waking up to other realities as well. Instead of fighting with China, India has now decided to talk to China. India has re-established links with Russia on military matters. India is in no position to dictate terms to Sri Lanka.

China knows that it already has good relations with President Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa. Therefore China did not rush to greet President Gotabaya. Chinese President Xi Jinping said in his congratulatory message, It is a great pleasure to learn that you are assuming the office of the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. On behalf of the Chinese Government, people and in my own name, I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to you. I attach great importance to the development of our bilateral relations and wish to work together with you to enhance our mutual political trust, to start a new chapter of the China–Sri Lanka Strategic Cooperative Partnership and to bring more tangible benefits to our two peoples.”

The USA was also slow to respond. It did not congratulate President Gotabaya directly. The USA embassy said. “The United States congratulates the people of Sri Lanka on their democratic presidential election and looks forward to working with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Sri Lanka has continued to show the strength and resilience of its republic with a free, fair, and transparent presidential election befitting Asia’s oldest democracy. We commend the Elections Commission, civil society and government authorities for promoting a peaceful election. We are ready to continue our work with the new President and with all the people of Sri Lanka in supporting the country’s sovereignty through heightened good governance, expanded economic growth, the advancement of human rights and reconciliation, and in fostering an Indo-Pacific region where all countries can prosper.”

This message makes it clear that the USA plans to dig in and continue their work in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is sadly mistaken if Sri Lanka thinks that it can get rid of the USA as easily as they allowed the USA to come in. Once the USA gets a grip on a country, it will not let go.  The USA has military plans for Sri Lanka.

The US-controlled Yahapalana Phase one (2015-2019) is now over. In Phase one three instructions were given to now-defunct Yahapalana government,   (a) weaken the state, (b) ruin the economy and (c) crush the people. Then a dissatisfied, angry, restless community will be created, who will be encouraged to protest. A state of chaos will result. The west will then be able to move in, probably using the Right to Protect” (R2P). 

Sri Lanka must understand that the apparatus set up by the USA to further its interests in Sri Lanka is still intact.  It is very much alive and kicking.  This apparatus consists, inter alia, of political parties, politicians,   CIA funded NGOs parading as ‘civil society’, USA funded evangelist churches and the Killer Breed,” whose votes would have gone without hesitation to ‘Hansaya’.

There have been a few hiccups. The Presidential elections revealed the actual strength of the JVP.  JVP has only 418,553 supporters among 13,252,499 voters. The civil society grouping played a significant role in the high profile 2015 project to defeat the Rajapaksas. The Americans funded the operation, noted Shamindra Ferdinando. This time they failed. They couldn’t have challenged Gotabaya Rajapaksa under any circumstances, he said.

When I saw the huge enthusiastic crowds at the election meetings of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, shown on television, I felt a sense of fear, not elation. Because, if the USA , which had meddled in the 2010 and 2015 elections,   decided to meddle in this as well, and distort the result, this angry crowd would have erupted. There would have been an explosion that America could not have controlled.

USA will not find it easy to manipulate President Gotabaya, either. President Gotabaya has lived in the USA, so he will know something about the American culture, surely. He will also understand the agreements the USA is offering. President Gotabaya has already negotiated one ACSA with the USA. He will know to re-negotiate the present one. As a military man, the implications of the SOFA will be clear to him and he may kick it out of the window. That is why the USA wanted the SOFA signed before Gotabaya took over.

Sri Lanka has to now decide on a new foreign policy. .President Gotabaya in his first speech as President of Sri Lanka said, We want to remain neutral in our foreign relations and stay out of any conflicts among the world powers. I urge all countries to respect our country’s sovereignty and unitary status.” It is unlikely that they will do so. Sri Lanka’s strategic position in the Bay of Bengal makes it a useful possession.

Nonalignment is also no longer possible. India, which should lead non-alignment, is aligned to the USA.  It is no longer possible to speak of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace either.  Too many big powers have arrived in the Bay of Bengal.

Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace was initiated by Sri Lanka at the 26th United Nations General Assembly in 1971. It led to the adoption of a resolution by which the Indian Ocean was designated as a Zone of Peace, with airspace and ocean floor limits to be determined. The proposal was not so much about peace. It was about containing the presence of Western powers in the region. But those powers, except China, had wanted to have bases in the Indian Ocean.

So it is going to be like old times. In the 19th   century, the Sinhala king considered bringing in France, Denmark or Britain in order to get rid of the Dutch. This time, there are just two alternatives.  It is either the USA or China.   Obviously, Sri Lanka must link with the rising power, China, not the fading power, USA.  (Continued)

[1] Presidents R. Premadasa, D.B. Wijetunge and M.Sirisena went straight from secondary school into jobs in the police, cooperatives, and community work. Chandrika Kumaratunga had a diploma in political science. Only J.R. Jayewardene and Mahinda Rajapaksa had professional qualifications as lawyers.

වැසිවනාන්තර සුරකින්නෝ සංවිධානය

යුනෙස්කෝ ලෝක උරුම තෙත් කලාපීය වැසි වනාන්තරයක් වන සිංහරාජ රක්ෂිතය සංවර්ධන ක්‍රියාවලි නිසාවෙන් පසු ගිය කාලය තුලදී දැඩි තර්ජන වලට ලක් විය. තවත් එවැනිම සිදු වීමක්  සිංහාරජ රක්ෂිතයේ නැගෙනහිර බෑවුමට වන්නට පිහිටි සූරියකන්ද ප්‍රදේශයේ හිමිදිරි පෙදෙස(Morning Side) සංචාරක බංගලාවට පිවිසෙන මාර්ගයේ කිලෝමීටර 5කට ආසන්න දුරක් මාර්ගය දෙපස කොලොන්න ප්‍රාදේශීය සභව මගින් බැකෝ යන්ත්‍ර යොදා ගනිමින් වන රක්ෂිතය හායනයට ලක් කර ඇත.

සිංහරාජ වන රක්ෂිතයේ සුවිශේෂි ස්ථානයක් සහ විශාල සංචාරක ආකර්ෂණයක් දිනාගෙන ඇති හිමිදිරි පෙදෙස පිවිසුමෙහි රක්ෂිතය තුල සිදුව ඇති වන විනාශය පිළිබඳව සැලවීමත් සමග වැසිවනාන්තර සුරකින්නෝ සංවිධානය ඒ පිළිබඳව සොයා බලා වන සංරක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවෙන් විමසන විට ඔවුන් පැවසුයේ මෙම මාර්ගය සංවර්ධනය කිරීමට කොලොන්න ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාව මගින් අවසර ඉල්ලා ඇති බවත් ඒ අනුව රක්ෂිතය තුල මාර්ගය සංවර්ධනය කිරීමේ ක්‍රියාවලිය වනසංරක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ පූර්ණ අධීක්ෂණය යටතේ සිදු කිරීමට අත්‍යවශ බවත්, විශාල  යන්ත්‍ර යොදා නොගනමින් මිනිස් ශ්‍රමය පමණක් යොදා ගනිමින් වනාන්තරයට හානි නොවන අන්දමින් මෙම ක්‍රියාවලිය සිදු කිරීමට අවශ්‍ය පියවර ගන්නා ලෙස ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාව දැනුවත් කර ඇති බවය.

හිමදිරි පෙදෙස සංචාරක බංගලාවට වාහනයක් මගින් පහසුවෙන් ලඟා වීම සඳහා එක් පසකින් කෙටි මාර්ගයක් ඇති නමුත් අඩි20ක පමණ පළලකින් යුක්තව මෙලෙස මාර්ගය සංවර්ධනය කිරීම සඳහා ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාව ක්‍රියාකිරීම ගැටළු සහගත කරුණක් වේ. රක්ෂිතයක් තුළ සංවර්ධන ක්‍රියාවලියක් සිදු කිරීමේදී අනුගමනය කල යුතු නිසි ක්‍රියා පටිපාටියක් ඇති අතර එම ක්‍රියාවලීන් උල්ලංගනය කරමින් මධ්‍යම පරිසර අධිකාරිය, ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් කාර්යාලය ආදී අවසර ගත යුතු අනෙකුත් කිසිදු ආයතනයකින් අවසර නොගෙන මෙම විනාශකාරී සංවර්ධන ක්‍රියාවලිය කොලොන්න ප්‍රාදේශීය සභාව මගින්  හිතුමනාපෙට සිදු කර ඇත. මිනිස් ශ්‍රමය වෙනුවට බැකෝ යන්ත්‍ර යොදා ගැනීම නිසාවෙන් රක්ෂිතයට දැඩි හානියක් සිදු වී ඇති අතර ඒ සමගාමීව රක්ෂිත සීමාව තුල මිනිස් ක්‍රියාකාරකම් වැඩවී අනවසර දැව හෙලීම්, තේ වගාව සඳහා වනාන්තර ආක්‍රමණය කිරීම, පතල් කැනීම සඳහා යොමුවීම වැනි ක්‍රියාවන් ඉහල ගොස් ඇති බව ගම්වාසීන් පවසයි.

මෙලෙස පුළුල් කර ඇති මාර්ගය දෙපස විශාල වශයෙන් නෙළු, මීවන, පාසි ඇතුළු කුඩා ශාක විශේෂ ගණනාවක් තිබූ අතර එම ශාක පද්ධතිය තුළ සර්ප, කෘමි, කටුසු, ගොළුබෙලි ආදී සත්ව විශේෂ බහුලව දැක ගැනීමට හැකියාව තිබූනි. විශාල සුන්දරත්වයක් සමගින් සංචාරකයන්ගේ ආකර්ෂණය දිනාගෙන තිබූ මාර්ගයක් වන අතර මෙම වන හායනය නිසාවෙන්  ශාක හා සත්ව ඇතුළු විශාල ජීවීන් පිරිසකට හානි සිදු වී සුන්දරත්වයටද හානි සිදුව ඇත. මෙම ක්‍රියාවලිය අදූරදර්සී ක්‍රියාවක් වන බැවින් මෙය වැරදි පූරවාදර්ෂයක්ද වන අතර විශාල නාය යැම් වලට අත වැනීමක් ලෙසද දැක්විය හැකිය.

සංචාරකයන්ගේ පහසුව තකා එක් මාර්ගයක් පවතින විටකදී එය නිසි අයුරින් නඩත්තු කරනු  වෙනුවට රක්ෂිත භූමිය මෙලෙස වීනාශ කිරීම ලෝක උරුම වනාන්තරයකට කිසිසේත් උචිත ක්‍රියාවක් නොවන අතර අදාල නිලධාරීන් මේ පිලීබඳව සොයා බලා මෙම විනාශය සිදූවූ ප්‍රදේශය සංරක්ෂණය කිරීම සඳහා කඩිනම් ක්‍රියා මාර්ගයක්  ගන්නා ලෙස වැසිවනාන්තර සුරකින්නෝ සංවිධානය බලධාරීන්ගෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටී.

මේ පිළිබඳ වැඩිදුර තොරතුරු  0777771348 (ජයන්ත විජේසිංහ, කැඳවුම්කරු, වැසිවනාන්තර සුරකින්නෝ සංවිධානය) ඇමතීමෙන් ලබාගත හැක.

orpheus perera

Millennium  Challenge Corporation was set up as an alternate to providing American AID to the 3rd world. Around 2004, Americans must have thought, why they help any country, unless they have some control over them politically as well as economically. 

If you inspect existing MCC corporation zones in most countries, it is different how the zone(Proposed) done in Sri Lanka. It divides the country into two. The danger here reminds me of a statement made by former US ambassador Robert O Blake, when Sri Lankan forces were advancing, beating LTTE. “LTTE will never be defeated, even if they do, they will do a comeback later because they are resilient”. According to what I have read  MCC has full land rights in the proposed zone. If this is done this way and if a terrorist uprising takes place again in the top part of the country, even Sri Lankan army will not be able to go to the North to combat it. Your Excellency, the President,Goatabaya Rajapaksha ,  if you have not given any thoughts about it, please think about it. It is a different issue if you set up more than one MCC zone(Eg. One in Trincomali, one in Batticaloa one in Jaffna peninsula and one in Matara.  

Asian Tribune Report:-
http://asiantribune.com/node/93190

By Noor Nizam – Convener “The Muslim Voice”, November 22, 2019.

Governor A.J.M. Muzammil,
I am flabbergasted to read your above statement and wish to inform you that I cannot agree to some of the things what you have stated.

How dare you tell that the Muslims voted then General Fonseka in large numbers at the 2010 elections? Do you know that 20% of the then Muslim Vote Bank of nearly 750,000 to 800,000 Muslims voted HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa. Ask HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa or his (then) campaign Team and they will tell you this.

I was the Co-Chairman of the Muslim Propaganda Unit along with another Muslim University lecturer who is the present Ambassador for Sri Lanka in a Muslim country, appointed under the MY3 regime after the 2015 presidential elections. During the 2010 Presidential Elections, The Muslim Propaganda Unit functioned directly under Hon. Basil Rajapaksa and operated from Temple Trees with a staff/volunteers of nearly 20 persons between October 2009 and January 2010. No Muslim politicians or Ministers in the Mahinda camp were allowed to get involved in the day to day campaign activities of the MUF. They were only allowed visits. We had an elaborate campaign plan which functioned very successfully and contributed to HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory in 2010. Even HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa is aware of this fact. The out come of the Muslim Propagand Unit was that, we were able to harness 20% of the then Muslim Vote Bank. You were a frontline Muslim campaigner for General Sarath Fonseka at that election.

Now you tell  that, this time Tamils and Muslims did not vote HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
I will not talk about the Tamil votes, Governor Muzammil, but let me tell you that a very substantial amount of Muslims voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Alhamdulillah. Even Hon. Gammanpila mentioned this on TV. Another SLFP/SLPP Mahinda Pela MP from the Negombo area did the same view. Of the he Muslims who are living scattered outside the North and Eastern Provinces, which comprise of 60% of the Muslim population, a substantial amount voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

Please do not make statements without exactly knowing the facts/truth which is turning detrimental to the Muslim community in the political arena in the present political situation.  

Since January 8th., 2015, The Muslim Voice” has been involved tirelessly defending and lobbying the support of the Muslim Vote Bank through writing rebuttals”, comments” and article to the Tamil and English print and electronic/digital media to educate, inform the deception” of the Muslim ministers and politicians, why the Muslims should think of supporting the Mahinda Pela”, The Joint Opposition”, the SLPP” and finally HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the presidential candidate. Many other small Muslim groups were also directly or indirectly involved in the campaign supporting HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The SLPP Muslim Section also did a wonderfull job. The Muslim Pradesya Sabha, Palaath Sabha and Local Government SLPP representatives who were members till recently also contributed a lot and brought in a large amount of votes in favour of HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The former Chairman of the Beruwela Urdan Council and the young SLPP “Muslim Turks”  in  Southern coastal belt from Moratuwa Galle have done their due, but in SILENCE, and enabled the “polling” of thousands of votes in favour of HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. They have been in the struggle to bring HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the 7th., President of Sri Lanka since the formation of the SLPP from the begining of 2016. It is our bounded resposbility to  credit them for the tireless work all these “RAJAPAKSA LOYALISTS” have done to enable HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa the 7th., elected President of Sri Lanka, our “MAATHROOBUMIYA”.

You got involved in the campaign during the later stages and addressed meetings . You spoke about the past” and compared the present” and concluded publicly that the Muslims did not vote HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. You may have personal reasons to do so, but we have to be fair to the Muslim voters who voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa and let me tell you that a very substantial number of Muslims voted for HE. Gotabaya Rajapaks on November 16th., 2019. It is our duty to acknowledge their votes and support. I am attaching below a newspaper article link which tells of your stand in 2010 – how the Muslim elite of Colombo, as you call them, campaigned against HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa at the 2010 presidential elections. (Read last para).
http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=116653
http://www.ft.lk/front-page/GR-Sabry-make-strong-case-for-Muslim-support/44-689144 (FYI – read the comments at the bottom of the article).

Please do not make statements without exactly knowing the facts/truth which is turning detrimental to the Muslim community, especially Muslims of the Eastern Province, in the political arena and leading to disharmony. IT IS HURTING WHEN YOU TELL SUCH THINGS. Muslims need HARMONY” with the majority community for the future.  “The Muslim Voice” is looking forward to it, Insha Allah. We all have to work hard to get much more Muslim votes for the SLPP and HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s/Hon. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government at the next general elections in 2020 so that a MAJORITY government with all communities represented could be formed, Insha Allah. The need now is, we as Muslims have to work together in the interest of the Muslim community and become partners with the majority community, Insha Allah.

Courtesy The Economic Times

Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has allowed a Russian Navy ship to visit the Hambantota Port. India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign military assets and submarines in its territorial waters that are detrimental to India’s interests.

New Delhi: Ahead of his trip to India on November 29, the new Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has allowed a Russian Navy ship to visit the Hambantota Port. India is likely to welcome this decision since it has been concerned over the use of the strategically located port by the Chinese Navy and has been desirous of Russia expanding its presence in the Indo-Pacific region to make it more inclusive. India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign military assets and submarines in its territorial waters that are detrimental to India’s interests. Rajapaksa’s elder brother and former president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, had irked India by allowing Chinese submarines to berth in Sri Lanka twice without informing it. India had raised the matter at the highest level twice in 2014.

Hambantota Port, built with Chinese loans, is of special interest to India. In December 2017, the Sri Lankan government leased the port to China for a period of 99 years after failing to show commitment to pay loans of billions of dollars. During his meeting with President Rajapaksa on Tuesday, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar had conveyed India’s expectation that the Sri Lankan government would take forward the process of national reconciliation to arrive at a solution that meets the aspirations of the Tamil community for equality, justice, peace, and dignity.

Russian Navy ship Perekop of the Baltic Fleet is docked in Hambantota Port this week. The 138-meter long and 17-meter wide ship has a displacement of 6,900 tonnes and is commanded by Commander Roman Pakhomov. Perekop, whose crew includes 399 naval personnel, is equipped with modern radio-technical and navigational equipment as well as combat armament. During the three-day visit, the crew members of the ship will take part in sporting events as well as cultural programmes organised by the Sri Lankan navy. o make it more inclusive.

India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign militar ..

Read more at:
//economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/72179118.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

Courtesy Scroll.in

The populist mandate in the recent elections calls into question post-civil war efforts at reconciliation.

In the aftermath of the 2019 Presidential elections which concluded another era of the Sri Lankan political journey, it is necessary to delve into the fragility of the Sri Lankan state. The results of this election depict that the Sri Lankan state continues to be aversive to the One Nation – One State” concept, signifying further polarisation within the voter base and questioning the efforts of nation-building and reconciliation in the recent past.

Having won the election with a significant majority, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa represents more than the stronger sentiments of the ethnic majority, the Sinhala-Buddhist camp: he now represents the entire Sri Lankan population. Significantly, the President-elect failed to secure the vote of the minorities in not only the Northern and Eastern provinces of Sri Lanka but also in the upcountry region. Despite the lapse of a decade since the conclusion of the 30-year civil war, the Rajapaksa regime has repeatedly failed to secure the trust of the minorities since 2010. This, however, is not a surprise given the nature of their campaign, which carries deeply problematic political implications for the country in the long run.

The tyranny of the majority

President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s campaign was founded upon two populist notions: the Sinhala-Buddhist ethnic identity, and the idea of strengthening national security in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday attacks.

Populism is a form of politics that creates an us against them” distinction and seeks to mobilise the general will of the common people” against the corrupt elite”. Ideally, the general will of the people represents the majority. This is a democratic feature because democracies function on the will of the majority. However, the idea of populism and its compatibility with democracy is debatable (this is a wider debate that the author will not delve into in this article).

Since populism can take various forms at the outset, it can look and feel democratic but can result in democratic backsliding or even outright authoritarianism, both innately inconsistent with the principles of liberal democracy. In fact, populism is aversive to liberal democratic principles where it erodes respect for reason, liberal institutions, and minority populations. Further, it can be hostile to liberal democracies when accompanied by ethnonationalism and authoritarianism, bequeathing the ultimate danger of a tyranny of the majority”.

A supporter of Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna waves a flag and walks past a cut-out of the Rajapaksa brothers, Mahinda (left) and Gotabaya (centre), in Colombo. Credit: AFP

A tyranny of the majority arises when the majority of a country (in the case of the Sri Lankan Presidential election 2019) exclusively pursues its own interests at the expense of those representing the minority (in numbers as well as ideology). This is a problematic implication for Sri Lanka, which has already suffered long-standing consequences of the majority-minority divide inherited through the colonial legacy of divisive ethnic politics between the majority and minority populations.

In a global context where identity politics and its populist frenzy have emerged attractive and successful in various parts of the world such the United States, India and the United Kingdom, it is not a surprise that Sri Lanka is no different. Particularly in countries like Sri Lanka, where ethnicity is at the very heart of nationhood and statehood debate, the legitimacy and acceptance of the state, as well as its political leaders, is woven around these ethnic identities.

Populist implications

This results in the fragmentation of the idea of a nation”, an essential factor in demarking statehood. What is generally understood as a legitimate state is a territorial entity which is comprised of a distinct population identifying itself as a nation and a government that holds the monopoly over the territory and its people. In such a context, friction on what constitutes the Sri Lankan nation” fragments the foundation of the Sri Lankan state”.

When the election results were released, several distinctions concerning the voters in the North and the South as well as voters belonging to different ethnicities were made by the general public. Theoretically, whilst a division of this nature should not exist in a stereotypical western model of a nation-state, in practice it was apparent that the Sinhala Buddhist majority in the South were questioning the political will expressed by the people who did not belong to their camp.

It was interesting to observe how the Tamil ethnic group in the North and the East despite having cast their vote for a non-Tamil leader, Sajith Premadasa (as opposed to MK Sivajilingam, a prominent member of Parliament representing the Tamil National Alliance or TNA), were still labelled separatists”, and in certain extreme cases as terrorists” by the majority camp residing in the South.

The ideas about the Muslim ethnic group was no different, especially given the xenophobia following the national security argument of the aforementioned populist campaign. In light of this observation, even though the minority populations seem to be trying to get involved in national politics in spite of the leaders’ ethnicity, the Sinhala-Buddhist camp in the South continues to voice against such inclusivity within the national political discourse.

Perhaps, the reason underlying the trust placed in Sajith Premadasa by the minority ethnic groups was his sentiment towards eliminating poverty, a problem that relates to everyone. On the other hand, it can also be a result of the lack of trust placed in the new president by the minority groups, given the blatant exclusion of their interests in his political campaign. In the case of the latter, the continuation of this exclusion furthers the deeply fractured notion of the Sri Lankan national identity and is a canary in a coal mine, signalling at the continuing dissatisfaction on the part of the minority ethnic groups with regard to the Sri Lankan political leadership, eventually leading to another ethnic conflict lingering at dusk.

Alas, given that national security is at the heart of President Rajapaksa’s victory, in theory, it is vital to strengthen the identity of a nation”, one of the key foundational factors of the Sri Lankan state”. National security in Sri Lanka then becomes more of a political question as opposed to a wholly strategic and military one. However, given that President Rajapaksa’s campaign sought to solidify the identity politics of the ethnic majority, a factor that bore dire implications on the island in the past, the real question now boils down to the political will of the new Sri Lankan president as well as his regime to create an all-inclusive national identity. Without such a sense of national identity, realising national security will be quite far-fetched.

This article first appeared on Groundviews.Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.