Who can explain how communities can be brought together when the leaders representing them continue to drum racism? Have we heard any national sentiment from the present day Tamil leaders? When will they cease to recirculate a handful of past examples that plug hate & revenge in the minds of their people? Why do they not want to urge their people to think in the interests of the Nation first? No peaceful coexistence can take place in word or paper if the leaders that claim to represent minorities carry forward a different and racist agenda and drag their people to follow that line of thinking too? These Tamil politicians will drum hate but they do so for their own political relevance – in the end the Tamil people or the country is getting nothing out of it. By their hateful speeches and actions, they are only weakening Sri Lanka, destabilizing Sri Lanka and making Sri Lanka vulnerable.  

Racism is foundation stone of Tamil ‘Nationalism” & ‘liberation’

Tamil leaders lavishly uses cudgel of racism for political mileage & Tamil people as pawns. So long as this happens there can be no peaceful coexistence or meaningful reconciliation.

Money-Media-Propaganda has stilled the voice of truth and drummed lies & distortions. Racist actions have begotten racist reactions. However, international attention is always given to the reactions and not the racist actions.

Examples of Tamil Racism

1920s Tamil legislator Ramanathan led 2 delegations to Colonial Office in London

Tamil leaders were demanding encoding of Caste into legislative enactments in Ceylon.

Vellala caste is imported from South India and have no origins in Sri Lanka though they continue to try to dominate Tamil politics. Should Tamils change this?

Tamil racism created ITAK – Illankai Tamil Arasu Katchchi that sought a separate Tamil Nation the year after independence when Sri Lanka was under foreign control since 1505. Why would ITAK seek a separate Tamil Nation when they had been ruled by Westerners since 1505?

The 1976 Vaddukoddai Resolution wording depicts the hatred and racism of Tamil leaders who wish to brainwash younger generations to carrying forward their racism.

https://www.sangam.org/FB_HIST_DOCS/vaddukod.htm

The hatred of Tamil politicians could be seen in the 1977 General Election Manifesto

Trying to understand how Tamils vote: Read TULF’s 1977 Election Manifesto?

High-handed act by Tamils when in Opposition

Sambanthan as Opposition Leader with 50 TNA MPs stormed an army camp demanding files be opened for them.

Amirthalingam as Opposition Leader did same writing letters on official leader head against Sinhalese.

2016 October – ‘Tamil public’ attacking Sri Lanka Navy, Police and State Intelligence officers resulting in their hospitalization.

http://english.srilankamirror.com/news/item/13172-policeman-attacked-in-kilinochchi-pictures

http://www.adaderana.lk/news/37482/navy-officers-assaulted-during-ganja-raid

http://www.asiantribune.com/node/89633

2016 September – Sri Lanka High Commissioner to Malaysia attacked inside airport.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/sri-lankan-high-commissioner-was-attacked-by-indian-tamils-ranil/article9081814.ece

2016 – Sinhala student studying in Jaffna university attacked by Tamil students & hospitalized with head injuries simply because they were preparing for a Kandyan dance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2rQmvalFi0

TNA threats to Buddhist priests to vacate Buddhist temples in existence since 5^th century b.c in North & East

(Minister Cyril Mathew’s report to UNESCO gives evidence) Racist attempt to chase away Sinhalese and Buddhist priests, destroy ancient Buddhist temples and claim only Tamils live in North/East. UN declares destruction of cultural property a war crime.

Racism was such that Sinhalese were chased out of North giving less than 48 hours to leave.

No one spoke against this in 1990 and no one is speaking now to help return these chased away people to their original homes.

Even since 2015 Tamil leaders are demanding Sinhalese should not be settled in the North. Up & until 2013- 70 plus C J V Wigneswaran was living in Colombo amongst Sinhalese.

Racism of Wigneswaran was such he prohibited Tamils marrying Sinhalese

Yet his own sons are married to Sinhalese!

2015 stoning of Court complex

Militant Tamil Students and Tamil Criminal Gangs Active in Jaffna

2014 TNA leader Sambandan declared ‘Sinhala colonization a great worry to Tamils’

this sentiment has been floated since ITAK was formed in 1949.

2013 – Bank of Ceylon branch in Chennai attacked.

2013 – Mihin Lanka Sales Office in Madurai attacked

2012 – 184 Sinhala Buddhist pilgrims attacked in Chennai

A special flight had to be arranged to bring them back to Sri Lanka

2011 Maha Bodhi Society office in Chennai vandalized.

It was where Sinhala Buddhist pilgrims visited.

2 Buddhist priests attacked & manhandled by Tamil mobs in India.

Brutally attacking unarmed Buddhist priests is the worst type of racism

2008 film maker assaulted in Chennai because he was Sinhalese

Tamil leaders constantly referring to national army/police as ‘Sinhalese’ 

this very army saved close to 300,000 from LTTE.

Tamil racism – evident by the list of Tamil political parties & their objectives only for Tamils.

Racism of R. Sambanthan former Opposition Leader / Leader of ITAK/TNA – a man who sat with Prabakaran & regularly engaged in discussions with them

What did Sambanthan do when LTTE was killing fleeing children?

What did Sambanthan do when LTTE snipers were shooting and killing fleeing Tamils?

What did Sambanthan do when Tamils were kept as human shields by LTTE

If Sambanthan claims food, medicines etc were not sent by the Govt – did TNA and LTTE fronts using their $300m annual profits send even a biscuit?

Sambanthan & TNA supported regime change in 2015 – how did the supporter end up the main opposition with just 16 seats in a 225-member Parliament? Isn’t that why the Opposition for the first time supported the yahapalana budget?

Why didn’t Sambanthan & TNA speak for the thousands of Tamils killed by LTTE and generations of Tamil youth who were forced to become child soldiers?

On what basis can Sambanthan/TNA claim Tamils are ‘second-class’ citizens?

What is it that the Sinhalese enjoy because they are Sinhalese that the minorities do not enjoy because they are not Sinhalese”?

What is it that the minorities do not enjoy because they are the minority which the majority enjoys because they are the majority”?

What is legally, constitutionally & legislatively given to the majority that is not given to the minorities”?

Name a single country that has changed its original national anthem, national flag just to please & appease the minorities & have these afforded any reciprocity by the minorities?

Lets’ take C J V Wigneswaran

Where did Chief Minister Wigneswaran study – Royal College

Where was Chief Minister Wigneswaran living all his life – Colombo. He went to live in North only after 2013 – after Prabakaran was defeated – after he was parachuted from Colombo & made Chief Minister. He was no representative of the Northern people.

Where was Chief Minister Wigneswaran working – as a Supreme Court Judge

How many times has he been to North Sri Lanka when LTTE was on a killing spree?

Did he object to LTTE kidnapping Tamil children to turn into child soldiers?

Did he appeal to LTTE to release Tamil civilians kept hostage or to be used as human shields?

Did he send any food or medicines to these civilians kept trapped by LTTE?

He complained to Swiss envoy that Sinhalese fishermen are fishing in Northern waters.

He falsely claims Tamils lived in North before Sinhalese

He says Sri Lanka army does not need to be praised for post-war good deeds

He criticizes Sri Lanka army presence in North

He asks yahapalana govt to withdraw army from North and East

He goes all round the world complaining against the Sri Lanka Armed Forces

He calls for international investigation claiming genocide (but can’t explain how Tamil population is increasing)

He requests US envoy to get US medical teams to examine LTTE combatants in Jaffna

He calls for ‘shared sovereignty’ within a united Sri Lanka (all confederal nomenclature)

He claims Sinhalese are ‘outsiders’ looting ‘their’ resources

He claims Tamils should align to party pushing for ‘self-determination’

Presents Constitutional Reforms Committee a resolution by Northern Provincial Council proposing 2 states

Leads protests by Tamils – most of these Tamils later say they are given money & food to hold placards and they know nothing about demands made by Tamil leaders

Seeks India’s help on new constitution which is federal

He seeks merger of North East claiming it prevents minority communities from losing their identity

He compared terrorist Prabakaran to Keppetipola

http://www.ft.lk/article/192438/Wigneswaran-compares-Keppeitpola-to-Prabhakaran-#sthash.EgR0IGWx.dpuf

Tamil racism has compromised the sovereignty, territorial integrity and national security of this country. The entire populace will suffer in time to come because of a handful of racists. When racist examples are brought out people must learn to accept the racism in these examples and not scoff at those that expose the racism.

Why don’t Tamils tell Tamil politicians to fight the Sinhalese or vandalize Buddhist temples instead of outsourcing to Tamil civilians?

We need to move forward not go backward. If there is no record of any disunity among Sinhalese & Tamils pre-1505 how, why & who is the cause of the disunity?

Should we continue to drum past incidents instead of finding solutions to them?

Lots of questions for people to ponder and answer and it is no better a time than now to find the answers and to disallow the mischief makers to continue to drag people towards hatred & racism.

Shenali D Waduge

Examples of discrimination by Sinhalese against Tamils

By : A.A.M.NIZAM – MATARA.

Reports from the North state that the separatist elements in the North led by the racist terrorist rump TNA are making arrangements in all districts of the North to commemorate November 27^th as the Mahavir Day.  They are reported to be clearing many sites to hold these functions.  This is particularly held to provoke the security forces who with sacrifices of their lives and limbs liberated this country from 30 years of terrorist atrocities which included inhuman barbaric killing of innocent villagers in the so-called border areas that prevailed at that time including hacking the elders with machetes and other sharp weapons, smashing children and babies on nearby trees, cut opening of the abdomen of pregnant mothers, mass murder of religious prelates, abduction and killing of school children etc. 

Fortunately, our security forces became triumphant in eliminating these atrocities due to the command given by Prime Minister Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa and the guidance and direction given by President H.E. Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. 

The racist Tamils of the North forcibly hold this day called Mahavir day (The Great Heroes Day) on November 27^th which was the day in which a terrorist leader named Shanker was killed by our security forces. The question asked in general by all Sri Lankans is how can we allow a group racists to forcibly commemorate the death of a sworn enemy of this country at a time when the twin great leaders responsible for ending the war reign the country as the H.E.President and the Prime Minister?

We were powerless to do anything against this kind of activity in the past as the country was ruled by terrorist and foreign servile elements and for them even speaking by anyone against this kind of activity was a great offense. 

Now the people should have the complete liberty to oppose these anti-national activities and therefore the security forces and the Police should be empowered to take strict and firm action against all those responsible, instigate, encourage, and promote these activities to be taken into custody and prosecute them on charges of treason. 

Commemorations in this country should be allowed to hold only on 9^th May, which was the day of Liberation.

Similarly steps should also be taken to prohibit the so-called Maha Viru commemoration days of April 5^th and 11^th November being held annually by the JVP hooligans who hold highly bloated functions on these two days in which the country lost nearly 100,000 youth, several thousand on 5^th April, 1971 and over 60,000 youth  and Several million rupees worth state properties and restricted people to engage in travels, engage in their day to day business activities and forced the people to spend the nights in pitch darkness in 1988-1990 period whereas they do not have even 3% of the people’s support in this country and even lost the deposit in the recent President Election.

Steps should also be taken to prosecute the JVP hooligans responsible for these activities as well and discourage anyone even to think of engaging in treacherous and harmful activities against the country.

Ramanie de Zoysa

There is an apt Sinhala saying balallun lava kos ata bawanawa”; the phrase literally means someone is using a cat’s paw to pull out (roated) Jak seeds (kos ata) from the fire. Jak seeds roasted in a woodfire is a tasty treat eaten by Sinhala villagers; once roasted, one needs a fireproof utensil to pull out the roasted nut. 

BBC has been one of the most prominent mouthpieces for the terrorist group LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelaam) that ravaged Sri Lanka for over three decades; killing over a hundred thousand people and maiming countless civilians both physically and psychologically and destroying millions of dollars’ worth of public property. BBC has, right throughout the 30 years, been an unashamed and unapologetic spokesperson for the Tamil insurgents and their organisers living in the affluent West- distorting real facts, running falsehoods spewed by LTTE frontmen as news items or documentaries, producing via Channel 4 complete fake documentaries which have astounded Sri Lankans due to their venomous misrepresentation of facts or outright deception and audacity. Is this done out of ignorance of the real situation on the ground or is BBC pulling jak seeds out of the fire for the voracious consumption of someone powerful? Once we know the answer to this question we can evaluate our methods of responding.  

If no one has ever corrected BBC and put before them the real facts, one can understand the ignorance argument to mitigate BBC’s callous disregard for the truth and its co-habitation with key LTTE figures. However, for decades hundreds of people have made submissions, written letters and used a multitude of other ways and means to put BBC right- to no avail. One can wake someone who is asleep but when the sleeper is faking sleep, how do you wake the fake? BBC is not ignorant- therefore it is not asleep. Instead, BBC is faking sleep and we are wasting our time and effort trying to put forward facts before it to wake BBC up. Instead, we need to understand the under-currents that motivate BBC to play such a terrorist friendly role. For a start, who is BBC and how does it acquire funds for its existence?

BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) is a British ‘public corporation’- which means BBC is a public company incorporated by the British Government. It is one of 23 or so public companies incorporated by the British Government similar to National Health Service (NHS), Royal Mint, Post Office and the Land Registry. The BBC is established under a Royal Charter by the British Government and operates under its Agreement with the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of Britain. This just means that BBC is the information arm of the British Government- doesn’t it?!  Curiously, another of the British Government’s 23 public corporations is Channel Four Television Corporation. Remember the Channel 4 documentaries – Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields? Well, Channel 4 is another one of British Government’s public corporations!

The money flow- where does the funding come from?

Ostensibly BBC’s main responsibility is to provide impartial public service broadcasting in the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. No, it’s not a typo! BBC is supposed to be impartial”! Its work is funded principally by an annual television licence fee which is charged to all British households, companies, and organisations using any type of equipment to receive or record live television broadcasts. According to publicly available data, the total income from broadcasting licence fees was £3.83 billion in 2017–18 of which £655.3 million or 17.1% was provided by the government through concessions for those over the age of 75. Thus, the licence fee made up the bulk (75.7%) of the BBC’s total income of £5.0627 billion in 2017–2018 and 17% of that came from the British Government by way of elderly concessions mentioned above. Please look at the 2019 financial accounts for BBC at http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/reports/annualreport/2018-19.pdf. They are similar in pattern to the 2018 numbers.

Therefore, basically, BBC is a British Government Corporation with the right to collect a fee from the general public. Why does a British Public Corporation established and funded to provide an ‘impartial broadcasting service’ peddle Tamil terrorism against a very small island in the Indian Ocean?

The answer lies in the British Foreign Policy produced in Whitehall.

Mark Curtis in his book Unpeople” published by Vintage 2004, made startling revelations about what the British foreign policy is like and how Britain (and the US) goes about achieving their goals through their foreign policies. Another writer of this calibre is John Pilger. Both Curtis and Pilger used declassified top secret” documents as the primary sources of information for their writing.

Please see an article by Rudra de Zoysa posted on Lankaweb on September 23rd, 2011 titled Some aspects of British Foreign Policy as it relates to Sri Lanka” for more details on this. https://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2011/09/23/some-aspects-of-british-foreign-policy-as-it-relates-to-sri-lanka/.

In his article de Zoysa commented; Britain’s foreign policy is (and has been for the last century or so) crafted by a small group of government ministers, civil servants, diplomats and other bureaucrat with wide-ranging powers. Most of these people have attended Ivy League schools or universities, come from conservative  and ‘noble’ families such as Winston Churchill, Baroness Symonds, Lord Chalfont and bear such double barrel names as Douglas-Home and Drummond-Willoughby. They all have stiff upper lips, carry neatly rolled up umbrellas and are members of exclusive clubs. They also have the conviction that their white culture is superior and theirs is a superior form of life.”

Now, here’s the crux of the matter- what is this British foreign policy that requires the covert and overt promotion of terrorism in other countries? What are the goals of British foreign policy?

The goal of British foreign policy has always been to preserve its commercial interests and its international standing as a global super power- (US is no different). This was achieved through brutal colonisation of Africa and Asia and through slavery in the not too distant past. However, in the post war times Britain and its ally the US have had to change their previously used strategies to achieve their goals. In Whitehall, the Ivy League brains had to come up with ways to replace colonialism and slavery with strategies that will achieve Britain’s self-interest without using the now not-so-fashionable colonisation and slavery.

According to de Zoysa in the article mentioned above, there are 5 cornerstones of British foreign policy:

1). deepening support for state terrorism in other countries,

2). enhancing Britain’s ability to interfere militarily in global affairs (even if they have to play a ‘puppy dog’ role to enable United Sates foreign policy goals),

3). increasing state propaganda operations towards the British public,

4). the principle that Britain is no longer bound by international law, and, finally

5). the denial of the need to apologise for crimes done in colonial days.” (emphasis added)

De Zoysa further commented that Declassified documents (and postings of WikiLeaks) reveal that the decision makers in Whitehall were very honest in the policy documents about their real feelings and goals and disregard for human rights and humanitarian concerns…”

If you look at foreign policy numbers 1 and 3, isn’t this where Sri Lanka comes in? Unbelievable at some level may be, Britain has done nothing but support LTTE terrorism over the last 30 years! Together with the rest of the West, Britain forced Sri Lanka to sit down and negotiate with terrorists- on and on with no positives results for the civilian victims! I do not recollect one single incident where Britain asked the LTTE diaspora that was funding the carnage in Sri Lanka from England, to refrain from doing so. However, the ceasefires and negotiations providing the much needed breathing space to LTTE to re-group, re-arm and refresh for a more violent attack next time were directly supported and facilitated by Britain. Then again, we have always wondered about this- haven’t we?! Why wouldn’t a responsible, world leader say or do something to stop a group of terrorists against killing and maiming civilians- especially when they were in direct contact with the organisers and funders of the carnage- the LTTE diaspora?!  Was the reason that this is exactly what Britain wanted?!

Some with more humble opinions of themselves may laugh at the idea that Britain would pick tiny Sri Lanka to destabilise. These would also be the same people who think that the US in their generosity were trying to give” Sri Lanka $480m to build roads” via the recent MCC debacle! Answering readers of that mind set is not within the scope of this letter.

The number of countries where Britain has engineered regime change are well known. Curtis pointed out Iran (1953); British Guiana (1953 and 1963); Egypt (1956); Indonesia (1957 & 1965); Yemen (1962 to 1970); Oman (1970); Libya (1996 and 2011); Yugoslavia (1999); Afghanistan (2001 to date); Sri Lanka (tried in 2009 and still trying): also Saudi Arabia, Israel, early days of Idi Amin, support for the Chilean dictator Pinochet, Indonesia and early days of Sadaam Hussein are but a few more examples.

Where does BBC come in? BBC helps with policies one and three- that is supporting terrorism overseas to destabilise and to feed fake news to the British public. That is why it is the mandate of BBC to support those who cause terror in selected overseas posts. BBC is not interested in the victims of terror- that is possibly ‘collateral damage’. BBC is interested in what the armed terrorists want, what their aspirations are and where any disappeared to. BBC is there to keep the British public in the dark to keep the home front trouble free for the Government which the Government goes about foraging for more wealth. Remember the WMD (weapons of mass destruction) story that facilitated the Iraqi invasion because the West’s plant, Hussein was not behaving himself? Right though out the LTTE onslaught the news were delivered to the world by BBC news anchors/ producers almost exclusively consisting of Coomaraswamys, Manchettys, Gurumurthys and the like? Coincidence?! Probably not!   

This is probably why that complain” button at the BBC website doesn’t work so well for you! BBC is the information” arm of the British Government. It is there to support British global agendas which do not include the wellbeing of you and me.

BBC is only the cat’s paw; it is pulling kos ata from the coal for the consumption of the British Government. Target your responses to British thuggery and neo-colonialism accordingly. BBC is not there to get you the truth; it is there to manufacture the ‘Truth” that will suit and support the British foreign policy agenda. 

Press Release Consulate General of Sri Lanka Sydney

The Sri Lanka Food and Cultural Festival – 2019, a Sri Lankan Tourism Consumer Promotional Event which was jointly organised by the Sri Lanka Tourism Promotion Bureau (SLTPB), and Consulate General of Sri Lanka in Sydney, was held at Tumbalong Park, Darling Harbour from 23^rd to 24^th November 2019.

The dignitaries at the official opening include, Hon Scott Farlow, Leader of the House of the Legislative Council of New South Wales (representing Acting Minister for Multiculturalism in NSW), Hon Kevin Connolly, MP/Riverstone, Hon Karen Pensabene, Strathfield Council, H. E.  J.C Weliamuna, High Commissioner of Sri Lanka in Australia, Mr. Nimal Bandara, Consul General/Sydney, Mr. Abdul Raheem, Consul Commercial, Ms. Charmarie Maelge, MD/SLTPB and Mr. Peter Mckeon, General Manager, Sri Lankan Airlines/Australia were also participated for the event.

The main objective of this consumer promotion was to create awareness among Australian travel community that Sri Lanka is most preferred destination for leisure and holidays. Subsequent to successful similar event of this nature held in 2017, SLTPB decided to organise a consumer event to attract more Australian travellers to Sri Lanka.

The event was a great success with the presence of Sri Lankan travel and trade companies as well as many Australian visitors who enjoyed Sri Lankan festival environment at this event.

Major activities took place at this two days festival included exhibition and sale of Sri Lankan products, tasting of Sri Lankan food and the Ceylon Tea, cultural performances, question and answer sessions with give away, video presentation on Sri Lanka, distribution of promotional materials, selling of tour packages by the Sri Lankan travel companies etc.

Consulate General of Sri Lanka

Sydney

25^th November 2019

චන්ද්‍රසිරි විජයවික්‍රම, LL.B.,Ph.D.

2019 චන්දය ගැන කතාකරමින් පැෆරල් විධායක නිලධාරී රෝහණ හෙට්ටිාරච්චි වාර්තාකලේ සමහර පන්සල් (හාමුදුරුවරු) චන්ද නීතිය කඩකල බවය. මැකෝ දේශප්‍රිය විසින් ගෝඨාභය ජනාධිපතිවීමේ නිල නිවේදන කතාවේදී ආගමික නායකයින් දේශපාලනයේ යෙදීම විවේචනය කලේය. මෙය එල්ලවන්නේ ගමේ පන්සලට මිස හොරෙන් එය කරණ ලෙබ්බේවරුන්ට හෝ ඇතැම් එකී නොකී ක්‍රිස්තියානි පූජකවරයින්ට හෝ නොවේ. මේ දෙන්නා මෙසේ කතාකරන්නේ මාක්ස්වාදය බදාගෙනද, නැත්නම්බොරු ඇමෙරිකන්-ප්‍රංශ ලිබරල්වාදයෙන් අන්‌ධවීද යන්න පැහැදිලි නැත. මීට හේතුව නම් ගොඨාභයට විරුද්ධව දඹර අමිල හිමි- හිරුණිකා-රාජිතගේ සිට රන්ජන් රාමනායක-චම්පික රණවක-සරත් ෆොන්සේකා දක්‌වා අය කල අසාධාරණ හා අසත්‍ය ප්‍රකාශ ඉදිරියේ මේ දෙන්නා බකන්නිලාගෙන නැත්නම් අසරණව සිටි නිසාය. චන්ද නීතිය ගොබ්බ නීතියක් විය. එවැනි කැත ක්‍රමයක්, සවුත්තු (එස්බී දිසානායකගේ වචනවලින් බලු) නීතියක් ඉදිරියේ ලංකාවේ චන්දදායකයාට තිබුණු එකම ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදය වූයේ හාමුදුරුවරුන්ගේ කතා නොවේද? එයට විරුද්ධව කතාකිරීම මැකෝගේ හා රෝහණගේ ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍රවාදයද? තමා ජනාධිපතිවූයේ හාමුදුරුවරු දුන් සහයෝගය නිසා බව ගෝඨාභය කියන්නේ ඔහු දිණුවේ මහජන චන්දයෙන් නිසා නොවේද? අවුරුදු හතලිහක් පුරා චන්දය පාවිච්චි නොකල ආරණ්‍යවාසී භික්‍ෂූන් පවා මෙවර චන්දය දීමට ඉදිරිපත්‌වූයේ කුමක්නිසාදැයි මේ චන්ද විශේෂඥයින් දෙන්නාට නොසිතෙන්නේ ඇයි?

අවුරුදු හතලිහක් තුල ඇමෙරිකාවේදී මා නොදුටු (චන්ද) නීතියේ ආධිපත්‍යයක් ගැන මැකෝ හා පැෆරල් කට්ටිය ලංකාවේදී හලන්නේ කිඹුල් කඳුළු නොවේදැයි මට සිතේ. මීට හේතුව මෙවුන් ලංකාවේ ඉතිහාසය හා භූගෝල විද්‍යාව නොදැන සිටීමය (ඉතිහාසය කියන්නේ රටක අතීත භූගෝල විද්‍යාවටය). උදාහරණයක් වශයෙන් ජාතියේ මුරදේවතාවා සංඝයා ය යන සංකල්පය මේ කළුසුද්දන්ට නොතේරේ. මේ ගැන නොදන්නා සෙසු දේශපාලකයින්ට වඩා නෛතික, සදාචාරාත්මක වගකීමක් මේ ආයතන දෙකටම ඇත. මේ අයගේ ආකල්පමය වෙනසක් සිදුවිය යුතු නිසාය. දැණුම නැතිව දැකුම වර්‌‌ධනය නොවන නිසාය. 1930 ස් ගණන් වල තරුණ බණ්ඩාරනායක මහතා පෙඩරල් කතා කලේත්, 1947 දී ඩිිෙස් සේනානායක අයිවෝර් ජෙනින්ස්ගේ 29 වගන්තිය බදාගත්තේත්, ප්‍රථමයා එංගලන්ත ඉතිහාසය පමණකුත්, දෙවැන්නා කිසිම ඉතිහාසයකුත් නොදැන සිටි නිසාය. දැන් පැෆරල් සංවිධානය පන්සලේ ඉතිහාස කතාව නොදන්නේ එහි ඉන්නා එක හාමුදුරු අධ්‍යක්‍ෂක හැර වැඩිදෙනා බෞද්ධ නොවන නිසා විය හැකිය. ඒ හමුදුරුවෝත් දඹර අමිල හිමිගේ ගෝලයෙක් නම් සිංහල බෞද්ධයාට අබසරණ නොවේද?

හාමුදුරුවරුන් චන්දයට මැදිහත්‌ව රට යහපාලන සාපයෙන් මුදවා ගැනීම ගැන නොසතුටින් කතා කිරීමට අමතරව, මෙම ඔහුගේ මැතිවරණ ප්‍රතිඵල නිල ප්‍රකාශණයේදී මැකෝ විසින් රටට ඉතාමත් අහිතකර කරුණක්ද පිටකලේය. මෙය ඇත්තවශයෙන් බලනවිට හාමුදුරුවරුන් දේශපාලනයට මැදිහත්‌වීමට විරුද්ද්ධව ඔහු දැක්‌වූ මතය නමැති කාසියේ අනිත් පැත්තමය. ප්‍රජාතනත්‍රවාදයේ බාප්පා මෙන් ඔහු ඉල්ලා සිටින්නේ අතුරුදහන් කල පලාත් සභා චන්දය නැවත ඉක්මණටම ගෙන එන ලෙසය. මෙය දිරච්ච ලණුවක්, ජාති ද්‍රෝහී ප්‍රකාශයක්සේ සැළකිය යුතු වන්නේ පණ ඇදමින් සිට මියගිය 13 සංශොධනය නමැති ජාතියේ මර උගුලට යළි හුස්ම පිඹීමට ගත් ශුක්‍ෂම ක්‍රියාවක් නිසාය. යහපාලනකාරයින් විසින් රටටම ඔප්පුකර දුන්නේ රටේ ජනයා පලාත් සභා සුදු අලි ගැන තැකීමක් නොකරණ බවය. නොයෙකුත් වෙට්ටු, මගඩි හරහා චන්ද කල්දැමීමෙන් මේවා රටට අනවශ්‍ය බරක් බව රටටම හෙලිවිය. පලාත් සභා චන්ද ඉල්ලා එක මිනිහෙක්වත් පෙලපාලි ගියේ නැත. උතුරේවත් එය නොසිදුවූයේ විග්නේශ්වරන්ලා කල මගඩි නිසාය. මේවාට කැමති, ඒවා නිසා බලය, දූෂණය, හොරාකෑම කරගෙනයන මොන්ටිසෝරි දේශපාලකයින් හා ඒ නිසා හොරකම් කරමින් වැජඹෙන පලාත් නිලධාරි ප්‍රජාව පමණය. පාර්ලිමේන්තුවට ගොස් හොරකම් කරන ආකාරය ගැන පුහුණුව දෙන ආයතන ලෙස පලාත් සභා ක්‍රියාකරයි. මේවායින් රටට සත පහක වැඩක් නැත.

පලාත් සභා චන්දය අතුරුදහන් කරවීම නව ජනාධිපති විසින් සැළකිය යුත්තේ වෙස්‌වලාගත් භාග්‍යයක් ලෙසය. ලබන පාර්ලිමේන්තු මැතිවරණයේදී 13 සංශොධනයට විරුද්ධව මහජන වරමක් ලබාගැනීමට ඔහු සැලසුම් කල යුතුය. මීට අදාලව කලින් ජනාධිපති මහින්ද කල වරද නිවැරදි කිරීමට තවත් අවස්‌ථාවක් මේ රට බලාගන්නා යම් අදෘෂ්‍යමාන බලවේග විසින් උදාකරදී ඇත. 2009 මැයි 19 දාට පසුව යුද ආඥාවක් මඟින් 13 සංශොධනය අහෝසි කිරීමට තිබූ අව‌ස්ථාව වැරදි උපදෙස් නිසා ගිලිහී ගියේය. මෙම අදූරදර්ශී ක්‍රියාව නිසා විශ්නේශ්වරන් නම් කොටිවල්ගය අල්ලාගෙන ඔහු පසු පස්සේ දුවන්නට හැමදෙනාටම සිදුවිය. ඔහු විසින් අල්ලේ නැටවූ අය බොහෝය.

13 සංශොධනය යනු මේ රටේ කොටසක දෙමළ නිජ භූමියක් තිබෙනවා යන මිථ්‍යාව ව්‍යවස්ථාවට, කූට ලෙස, ප්‍රජාතන්ත්‍ර විරෝධී ලෙස, මන්ත්‍රීන් හෝටලය සිරකර තබාගෙන, ජනමත විචාරණයකින් තොරව ගෙන ඒමකි. මේ නිසා දැන් ලංකාව පෙඩරල් ක්‍රමයක් ඇති රටක් යයි සුප්‍රීම් උසාවිය තීරණය කර ඇත. එපමණක් නොව පෙඩරල් ක්‍රමය ගැන කතා කිරීම නීති විරෝධි නැතැයිද උසාවිය තීන්දු කලේය. මේ නිසා රට කඩන්නට හවුල් නොවෙනවායයි ඇමතිවරු දිවුරුම්දෙන ප්‍රකාශය රටේ ජනයා රවටන ඇස්බැන්දුමක් පමණය. ඊළමක් ඉල්ලන පක්‍ෂයකට පෙඩරල් ගැන කතා කිරීමට භාධාවක් නැතැයි නඩුකාරයින් කීප දෙනෙක් තීරණය කරන්නේ නීතිපොතේ තර්‌කය මිස මේ රටේ පෙඩරල් ඉතිහාසය ගැන ඔවුන් නොදන්නා නිසාය. 1921/23 දී ඇරඹුණ ඒ ව්‍යාපාරය 2019 සජිත්ගේ චන්ද ප්‍රකාශණය දක්වාම දුවමින් සිටී. මෙහිදී කොලේ වහලා, අන් හැමදේදීම වගේ යහපාලනකාරයින් කල වංක, දූෂිත, ජාති ද්‍රෝහී හැසිරීම දැන් රටම දනී.

මිලින්ද මොරගොඩ වැනි පුද්ගලයින් පවා දැන් කියන්නේ පලාත් සභා අහෝසිකර, ප්‍රාදේශීය සභා, නගර සභා මට්ටමෙන් ජනයාට බලතල ලබා දියයුතුය කියාය. ඇමෙරිකාව, එංගලන්තය, ඉන්දියාව, ජපානය, කැනඩාව වැනි රටවල් ලංකාවට බණ කියන්නේ දෙමළ ජනයාට මීනින්ෆුල් (නියමාකාරයට, ඇත්තවශයෙන්ම) ඩෙවොලූෂන් දෙන ලෙසය. උතුරු-නැඟෙනහිර දමිළ ජනයාට පමණක් නොව මුළු රටේම ජනයා බලවත් කිරීම (එම්පවර්‌මන්ට්) ජාතික අවශ්‍යතාවයකි.

13 අහෝසි කිරීම වෙනුවට එයත් සමඟ බිම් මට්ටමින් තුන්වන පංචයාත් වැනි ග්‍රාම රාජ්‍ය සංකල්පයක් හඳුන්වාදීමේ යෝජනා යහපාලන සුමන්තිරන්-ජයම්පති-ලාල් විජේනායක හොර ව්‍යවස්‌ථා මගඩියේ පවා සඳහන්වේ. එහෙත් මෙය කලයුත්තේ ආගම, ජාතිය, භාෂාව යන නිර්‌ණායක වලින් තොර කුඩා ඒකක සදා ගැනීමෙනි. මෙය ආරම්භකල යුත්තේ දැනට ඇති ග්‍රාම සේවා වසම් 14,000 (කලින් තිබූ 4000 මෙසේ වැඩිකලේ ජනාධිපති ප්‍රේමදාසය), ස්වාභාවික මායිම් සහිත ඒකක ලෙස යලි සකස් කිරීමය. මෙහිදී නිව්සීලන්තය වැනි රටවල් කර ඇත්තේ ගංඟා ද්‍රෝණි ඒ සඳහා යොදාගැනීමය. මේ අන්දමට 14,000, රටට, පරිසරයට, තිරසර සංවර්‌ධනයට, ජනයාට ගැලපෙන අන්දමේ ඒකක ලෙස බිහිවනු ඇත. මෙම මූලික ඒකකය ප්‍රාදේශීය සභා මට්ටමින් හෝ ප්‍රාදේශීය ලේකම් ප්‍රදේශ හෝ වෙනත් ඕනෑම මට්ටමකින් ක්‍රියාත්මක කල හැකිවේ. ලංකාවේ අනාදිමත් පරිපාලන ඒකක මොඩලය වූයේද, ගම-වැව-දාගැබ යන ත්‍රිත්‌වයය. ජලය අනුව මායිම් සදන්නේ නම්, ඇල, දොල, ඔය, ජල උල්පත, යෝධ ජල ලිං, වැව, ජලාශ යනාදී වශයෙන් උපයෝගීකර ගතහැකි සාධක බොහෝය.

මෙවැනි පදනමක් මත ක්‍රියාකිරීමෙන් භාෂා-ජාතිය-ආගම අනුව ඇති බෙදීම් දියවී ගොස්, පාසැල්වල සිංහල දෙමළ භාෂා ඉගෙන ගැණීම අනිවා‌ර්ය කරණවා වැනිම සහජීවන අවකාශයක් මතුවේ. මේ මඟින් දෙමළ ආක්‍රමණයක් පිළිඹඳ සිංහල මනසේ ඇති යථාවාදී බිය තුරන් වන අතරම, සාමාන්‍ය දෙමළ ජනයාට ගම් මට්ටමින් ස්වයංබලගැන්‌වීමක්ද සිදුවේ. මෙවැනි ක්‍රියාමාර්‍ගයකට ටී‌එන්‌ඒ‌කාරයින් හා සිංහල දේශපාලකයින් කැමතිවන්නේ නැත්තේ ඔවුන්ගේ ග්‍රහණයෙන් ජනයා නිදහස්‌වන නිසාය. දේශපාලකයෙක් නොවන ගෝඨාභය වැන්නෙක් අවශ්‍ය මේ නිසාය. රටට සුදුසු දේ සිදු නොවූ නිසා, මුන් අවුරුදු 71 ක්ම රට කෑවා, මුන් 225 ම පන්නා දැමිය යුතුය යන ද්වේශයක් ජනයා තුල ඇති විය.

මෙම සැලස්ම ක්‍රියාත්මක කිරීමේ ක්‍රියාවලියක් සංහිඳියා කොමිෂමටත්, රටේ ජනාධිපතිලාටත් මීට අවුරුදු දහයකට පෙර සිටම ඉදිරිපත්කලත් වැඩක්‌වුනේ නැත. උදාහරණයක් වශයෙන් මේ සමඟ අමුණා ඇති ලිපිය (හ්ට්ට්ප්://www.ඉස්ලන්ඩ්.ල්ක්/2006/10/25/මිඩ්wඒක්1.හ්ට්ම්ල් ) අගදී ලියන ලද්දකි. කරු ජයසූරිය මහින්ද රජයේ ස්වදේශ ඇමතිව සිටියදී ඔහුට එය ඉදිරිපත්කල විට මට නිලධාරියෙක් (පරිපාලන පුහුණු සේවා ආයතනයේ අධ්‍යක්‍ෂක) උත්තරයක් එව්වේය. ඔබ වැනි රට ගැන හිතන අය සිටීම ගැන අපි ආඩම්බර වෙමු. ඔබ යෝජනා කරන දේ දැනටමත් අප විසින් ක්‍රියාවට නඟමින් සිටිමු! මෙම යෝජනාව ගැන ජනාධිපති මහින්ද උනන්දුවක් දැක්‌වූවත්, පැවතුන ගතානුගතික දේශපාලන ක්‍රමයෙන් ඔබ්බට යෑමට ඔහුගේ කිට්ටුම උපදේශකයින් දෙතුන් දෙනෙක් හරහට සිටියේය.

මෙම යෝජනාව පිළිඹදව වැඩි දුර විස්තර දැනගැනීමට කැමති නම් මට ඊමේල් කරන්න. (cwije77@outlook,com).

Courtesy NDTV

Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who is considered pro-China, said he wanted Sri Lanka to be a “neutral country” and work with all the countries.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa said he wanted to work very closely with both India and China.

COLOMBO: Sri Lanka will work with India and it won’t do anything that will harm its interests, newly elected President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has said ahead of his visit to New Delhi later this week.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who is considered pro-China, said he wanted Sri Lanka to be a “neutral country” and work with all the countries.

“We will work with India as a friendly country and won’t do anything that will harm India’s interests,” said Mr Rajapaksa, who will travel to New Delhi on November 29 on his first official trip abroad as Sri Lankan President.

“We want to be a neutral country,” Mr Rajapaksa, who was sworn in as Sri Lanka”s president last week, told Nitin Gokhale of BharatShakti.in and Strategic News International in an interview.

“We don’t want to get in between the power struggles of superpowers… We are so small and we can’t survive to get into this balancing acts,” he said.

Mr Rajapaksa said he wanted to work very closely with both India and China.

“We want to work with all the countries and we don’t want to do anything which will harm any other country for that matter, we understand the importance of Indian concerns, so we cant engage in any activity which will threaten the security of India,” he added.

Noting that the Indian Ocean is an important place and plays an important role in the present day geopolitics, he said Sri Lankan was placed in a very strategic location and all the sea lane are passing close to the country from east to west.

“So, these lanes should be free and no country should control these sea lanes,” he said.

Asserting that Sri Lanka’s involvement with China during the presidency of his elder brother Mahinda (from 2005-2015) was “purely commercial”, he said, “I invite India, Singapore, Japan and Australia to come and invest here. Don’t allow only China to invest.”

He vowed to create an investment friendly environment in Sri Lanka.

Mr Rajapaksa also said that giving away the Hambantota port to China on a 99-year lease was a mistake by the previous government headed by President Maithripala Sirisena.

“The deal has to be renegotiated,” he said. “Giving a small loan for investment is a different thing but giving a strategic important economic harbour is not acceptable. That we should have controlled.”

China, which acquired Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port in 2017 as a debt swap, has been ramping up its ties with the island nation and expanded its naval presence in the Indian Ocean with an established logistics base in Djibouti.

“We want investments to help us but we will not do anything to get involved in military and geo-political rivalry,” Rajapaksa said.

On allegations of him being “authoritarian” and “racist”, the president said, “It’s a wrong perception created during the civil war with the LTTE.”

“I am a disciplined person but that doesn”t mean I am racist,” he added.

The two brothers — Mahinda and Gotabhaya — led a decisive campaign that helped end the island nation’s three decade-long civil war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).COMMENT

However, the brother-duo were accused of condoning sexual violence and extrajudicial killings allegedly by Lankan security forces during the civil war, which ended in May 2009 with the death of LTTE supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran.

Courtesy  Strategic News International

Ours is a small country and needs foreign investment to shore up its economy, says Sri Lankan Present Gotabaya Rajapaksa. In his first interview after taking charge, he told Nitin A. Gokhale, Editor-in-Chief of BharatShakti.in and SNI, that the island nation’s involvement with China is commercial. He has a message and an invite for regional powers like India, Japan, Singapore and Australia: You too should help Sri Lanka by investing and encouraging private countries in your countries to invest in the island nation. Why leave it to China alone and then grumble”?

Here’s the transcript of the full interview:

Q: Hello and welcome, I’m Nitin Gokhale and I’m privileged to have with me today Sri Lanka’s new President Mr Gotabaya Rajapaksa. A former soldier turned administrator and now the nation’s chief executive. Welcome Mr Gotabaya to this interview and I’m really honoured and privileged that you’ve given this time to me. I think this is perhaps your first interview after taking over as Sri Lanka’s seventh executive President.  What is your priority as Sri Lanka’s new president? What are your priorities?

A: We have given the policy to the people. In that, we have identified certain areas that we have to act on. Now, one is to ensure the security of this country and the people so I had to readjust certain things in these institutions especially in the military and also in the intelligence agencies, and next one is the economy. That’s very important at this time. So, I have identified certain areas where we have to focus and improve. So, security and economy are the two first priorities.

Q: But in security I mean you are well known for what you did during the Eelam war IV when you revamped the entire security structure. You got the intelligence set-up completely reorganised and of course, led the entire war effort. What in your view has happened in these last five years where there has been some slippage and we, of course, had the Easter bombings on 21^st April. So what do you want to do?

A: It depends on the policy of the government. Unless you give priority and, in your government’s policy, if national security is not on the priority list then it is down to the lowest level and that’s what happened. The last government did not give enough priority to national security. And also probably they misunderstood the importance of national security to bring economic stability. First, you want to have stability in the country for the locals and the investors to invest. (For) Local businessmen to invest, entrepreneurs to invest, national security is important. So that is what happened during the last five years. Because that government did not give enough attention to the security of this country and other things happened especially on certain investigations on officers who were involved in humanitarian operations that we had. That affected the morale of the security forces. And also there were things happening on national intelligence. Because see we have different agencies in charge of intelligence. Intelligence is important. That’s starting with SIS—State Intelligence Services. That’s the number 1 civilian establishment. Then you have the military intelligence—the army intelligence directorate, the navy intelligence and the air force intelligence. But out of that, actually the Directorate of Military Intelligence, that is the intelligence arm of the army was the most experienced intelligence agency. Then you have the CID, that is (Q: of the police) and the TID, Terrorist Investigation Division. These institutions are more or less investigation units. They are good at investigation.

Q: Right. So, post-events they are good, not in anticipating intelligence.

A: Intelligence is a different ball game but the previous government did not give this authority to the military intelligence so they were more or less not involved in even gathering information and liaising and in intelligence they were not involved. Mostly it was the CID and TID and probably SIS. But I should say that they were good at different areas. Not in this. This, not because of anything else but for the last so many years where we had terrorism in this country and anti-terrorism (ops). In that, major role of intelligence was played by the directorate of military intelligence and also, we train these officers and they have the experience. So, it is difficult immediately to stop that and give it to another (agency). I think that was another reason.

So the first thing is, of course, government policy. Then, the second thing is the institutions which are responsible for intelligence if they were not given (authority), if they change the role, then, of course, there is an issue. These are the things that ultimately led to this incident (Easter bombings).

Q: Yes, in April 2019. But, that we will move ahead because if I remember correctly and we have discussed this a number of times, Sir, that you had actually got them on a one grid kind of a thing, all these agencies when you were defence secretary.

A: So now I have appointed a very good defence secretary who is very experienced in this aspect and a dedicated officer and I have given instructions to reconstitute this organisation and get all the intelligence agencies together and coordinate them and to work accordingly rather than restricting them into departments and working individually, they must share. It is quite important. So, he will do that.

Q: That’s right. Do you think he also needs to do a lot of cooperation with countries around, like India for instance and other countries, western countries maybe? Because today intelligence sharing is important.

A: Yes. Intelligence sharing is very important. Not like LTTE terrorism. Of course, the LTTE also had support from outside. But that is the LTTE outside organisation itself, it was not a trans-national organisation. But here, it is not so. Lot of, I mean we are only a part of this. The bigger organisation is outside—international and global. So, it is very important that we get a lot of help from outside agencies because those countries are also facing these problems. India or any other country, most of the countries in this world are facing this issue. So, they have advanced resources, technology and more resources and also the knowledge of Islamic terrorism. So, therefore, we must use that knowledge and that experience. We must use.

Q: So in that context let me also ask you before I move on to the economy. There is always this criticism for the past 10 years now since 2010 when the war ended in 2009 that Sri Lanka does not need such a big army, such a big military. Your views on this.

A: It’s up to the military and the leaders to decide what should be the strength according to the threat perception that we have to analyse so that even after we increased the strength of the military when it was required during the conflict period. Then actually we did not recruit for the last maybe 10 years, we didn’t recruit people at that pace. So, normal attrition took place and today the numbers have gone down. But the focus also, see, during the conflict period we needed infantry people, armoured and also these other combat arms we needed but we can change this focus into different terms now. Even in foreign armies now, they are lot involved in national development. There are a lot of armies; even the American army is involved in national development projects. So we can change the focus and use them accordingly. But at the same time, now in this type of situation, intelligence is more important. So change the focus on them. Maybe we increase the cadres of intelligence. We may put more investment on training of intelligence gathering, mechanism. We have to change according to the threat.

Q: That’s right, the priorities will undergo a change that’s what you are saying. But, let me move onto a little bit to the economy because that’s something that has also suffered during the last couple of years, especially tourism had gone down. But now that you have come as the President, there is obviously confidence building which has happened amongst investors and tourist operators. What are your broad plans for the economy?

A: We have identified certain areas where we have to focus, the new govt has to. We have to understand that agriculture and plantation are very important. Still, one-third of our population is involved in agriculture. So we can’t forget agriculture. Sometimes the foreign advisors say that we have to focus on different things. But, this is connected with our culture, our history so we can’t do that. And, this is an area; I mean any country presently in the world cannot forget the food security, it is very important. We can’t depend on outside and it’s in our culture and it’s an area where we can develop. So that is one I give priority. Not topmost, but priority. Because today there’s lot of technology. Now how much we assist in agriculture you know whatever the successive governments had many plans on improving agriculture but still the farmer is poor.

Q: He has not benefitted.

A: This is bad because then their children will not go for farming. They see their parents are in a poor state. So this where we have to help especially but today there is enough tech in the world with less investment get more income, more prod, use in fertiliser management, use in organic fertilisers, then even in greenhouses, drip irrigation, vertical irrigation and also this in getting more proper advanced seeds. That’s very important. And also research and development. We have to develop these things by the government so that we can assist the farmer to get more income and also to develop the agriculture-based industries. So, make the farmer an entrepreneur.

Q: Instead of just a farmer…

A: Make him a businessman. See, about 40 per cent of the produce of the farmer is wasted because of poor storage, packing and lack of proper transport. If you prevent these things then automatically the income of the farmers will go up and also now sometimes, people grow tomatoes and when you get the harvest now you can’t sell and the prices go down. So why not use this for making sauce, you know.

Q: Forward linkages have to be there.

A: So that you know you get the proper value for your produce.

Q: I’m glad you’re focusing on that but also your strength has been building big infrastructure projects and getting them delivered on time.

A: Yes, infrastructure is important otherwise you can’t take the development to outside. That was the problem. There are a lot of areas where we can improve in agriculture and plantation. For a long period, our main foreign exchange earner was tea, rubber and coconut, for centuries. But today because of poor management and other areas, the income of these things has gone down. So we have to focus on these things and not only these things, other products like paper, we produce the best paper in the world. Then cinnamon, we produce the best cinnamon in the world. So there are things that we can do now; unfortunately, we import certain items that we have in Sri Lanka. We have to improve these things so we can save foreign exchange and we have to export, not only just export but important is value addition. So we have to do value addition and even in each and everything move out from only traditional systems but improve the research and develop the product.

Q: And make it a little more modern.

A: Yes, and also you find more markets and get the proper value for the quality. It is very important for us. Ceylon tea (N: is very well known). But today other markets have come up, other countries have come into the market so we have to get the correct value for the quality. I firmly believe that we should not go for quantity but for quality and get that market for Ceylon tea.

Q: Yes, today the world is ready to pay for quality.

A: Yes, so that’s where we have to. And also, we need to talk about agriculture. It is very important to educate the farmer on how to use the correct amount of water. Otherwise, the farmers waste water. Then the use of fertilisers. We have to (very moderate use of fertilisers) and also the quality. And also gradually move to organic (farming), because today there is huge demand for organic food everywhere. So, this is where we have to educate; we have to assist and help the farmers gradually move into these areas so that they and get good income. So, this is one area. And the other thing I’m very interested in developing our economy on technology.

Q: I’m glad you said that.

A: Because the 21^st century is known as the knowledge-based century. This is a good thing because it’s not a secret that our industrial base is not that huge. We have small industries on high tech but it’s not at a higher level and also we don’t have much of natural resources—oil, gas or silver. But, what is important is we have a very skilful, easily trainable human resource. So that is where we have to focus. Today, we know the centre of gravity of development and also the economy is moving towards Asia. (A) lot of countries, if we take only this side, you know, starting from India, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Japan, China. So all these countries have come up and also if you see most of these countries have come up, they have developed their economy based on tech and human resources. So, this where we have a good opportunity, we should not miss this window. So, this is where I’m focusing. But information technology and digital-based technology, these are lot of opportunities for young people. And they can earn lot of money; the other important factor linked with that is education. So you have to prepare this generation of young people to suit that economy. So this is my next focus. Lot of focus on education, this is one area that actually I have to get assistance from all these countries. Also, there are other fields that I have concentrated on, actually on fisheries because we are an island, so we have to develop fisheries and then also tourism. Very important. Also we have to understand that the global development, today, in all these countries I mentioned there is a huge middle class, from India to China, I think it’s about 400 million, I think it is growing in India, these are the people who go from country to country, these are the people who go as tourists, so we have to attract, we have to improve our advertising in these countries and we attract people, create different segments.

Q: It’s a naturally beautiful country.

A: Even if you take the Indian tourists, in religious areas, even for Buddhism, this is the ideal country; these are the areas where we have to improve. So agriculture, technology, tourism, fisheries, these are the areas where we can easily improve and also foreign direct investment is important. We have to encourage business people. My request to these high-tech companies is to come and invest in Sri Lanka, as we have very easily trainable high-skilled people, therefore I think it is good for them, even for them it is beneficial to invest in Sri Lanka. So, these are areas I’m really focusing on.

Q: Let me move on to foreign policy. When you spoke first after becoming President, you mentioned that we are equidistant from almost every power in the region and you want to be neutral. If I am reading correctly, national security and national priorities are your first priorities, rather than looking at who you align with. But this question always crops up, that’s why I’m asking you—is it China versus India in Sri Lanka? What is your view on this?

A: I have mentioned this even in my acceptance speech that we want to be a neutral country, it’s possible, there are examples in the world. But, we know the Indian Ocean plays a very important role in present-day geopolitics. So we are geographically situated in a very strategic location. All the sea lanes are passing close to Sri Lanka, from East to West. You know the importance of these sea lanes. Especially, when Asia is developing and their produce has to go to the world. And at the same time when you develop, you need energy. The energy resource is still in the Middle East, it has to come. The minerals are in Africa, those things have to come. This is very important but the thing is these lanes must be free for the whole world, no country should control the sea lanes because that’s very important.

And when I say neutral, we don’t want to bandwagon one country or get into a balancing act; we don’t want that. That is why I said neutral. We are so small that we cannot survive if we get into this balancing act. We don’t want to get in between the power struggles of superpowers or world powers so, basically, we want to work with all the countries and we don’t want to do anything which will harm any other country.

We understand the importance of the Indian concerns; we can’t specially act or engage in any activity which will threaten the security of India, that we know. We are in the region and India is a big power, is a big country. Though we want to be an independent, sovereign nation but we don’t want to get involved. We have to understand the points of view of other countries and act accordingly. But (what) everybody wants today, the most important thing, is economic development.

And to do that you cannot be a restricted soul. You have to open up while protecting your country, while protecting your industries, while protecting your business, still you have to open up. To get involved in world’s economy, for that we are ready. That is why we want to get assistance from India, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, China, Japan, this is very important, but then you have to face the reality.

So, in our case, our involvement with China, the last few years especially during Mahinda Rajapaksa government period, it was purely commercial, but because from the very beginning, world analysts, the geopolitical analysts put us also into the orbit. Even Hambantota harbour, they tried to show as part of the String of Pearls, which circles India. But in our (scheme of) things it was not so, the requirement was ours, we understood, we should never give control of the port to China. So that was a mistake.

Q: Yeah, unfortunately, the previous government…

A: Gave a lease for 99 years. And even though China is a good friend of ours and we need their assistance to develop, I’m not afraid to say that was a mistake. I will request them to renegotiate and come with a better (deal) to assist us. Today the people are not happy on that deal, we can think of one year, two years, five years, we have to think of the future, what will happen? So giving a small land for investment is a different thing. To develop a hotel or a commercial property is not a problem, that’s not an issue. The strategically important, economically important harbour, giving that is not acceptable. That we should have control. We have to renegotiate. Giving a terminal for an operation is a different thing, giving some location to build a hotel is different, not the control over a very important place, it is not acceptable. So that is my position. We want to work with India very closely.

And we want to work with China as well. Diplomatic relations and economic relations are everywhere. India is working closely with China. I know Indian investment goes to China, Chinese investment comes to India. Like that, we want investments and help but we will not do anything, we don’t want to get involved in the military and geopolitical rivalry. The other thing that I want to tell the world powers like India, Singapore, Japan, Australia, you know, the reality is they are scared of Chinese involvement, that’s a reality. But in our point of view it is commercial. We are a small country and we want foreign investment to improve our economy. So I invite India, Singapore, Japan and Australia to come and invest here. Don’t allow only China to invest. These governments must encourage their private companies to come and invest, come and help us. Without leaving it to one country and then grumbling.

So I openly say this, because I want them to come and invest in this country. We are a small country, genuinely we don’t want to get involved in these things. Please understand that. Rather than putting pressure on us, understand us and get involved in the economic development of this country. There are many ways: I am not saying only money; take our products—we have tea, cinnamon, pepper, coconut—you can assist in agriculture, there is education, invest in high-tech companies, there are lots of ways. Definitely, I want to cut red tape; I want to cut difficulties in old rules and regulations for the betterment of the country. I will create an investment-friendly environment.

Q: That’s something that people should take note of. But you are going to India on your next overseas visit next week. What are three-four main points that you’ll talk about?

A: I will reassure the Indian govt that we will work with India as a friendly country. We will not do anything that will harm the security interests and I will request them to help us in investments in many fields and also help us in education, that’s very important, and also the development of technology. I think the present Indian government, even Prime Minister Modi has changed how he approaches the neighbourhood.

Q: There’ll be a lot of things to talk about but I am sure you’ll have a better conversation with him as you come there. Let me just finally do two questions, one is of course the pattern of voting that happened in the elections and you mentioned it very clearly that you would have liked the Tamils and the Muslims to have voted for you but now you have been elected, you are also the President of the entire country. How do you take forward the reconciliation process with the minorities?

A: I believe development is the answer. For the last so many years, Tamil political leaders and also the Sinhalese leaders were talking about things that were not practical, impossible, only to fool the people. We should focus on what we can do first, you know, give everyone a good opportunity to live as a Sri Lankan in this country, to get education, live a better life, get a good job and live in dignity, so I will create that environment. Let other political things go on; you can discuss but you can’t only focus on that, neglect the well-being of the population. What is important is to develop the countries, develop those areas, infrastructure development. We did what we can, we have continued with that. And push more private industries to these areas, to create more jobs and improve education, doesn’t only mean general education but develop vocational education. For a long period, kids who didn’t have the opportunity to go to school were fighting in jungles. Now give them some training so that they can improve their skills (and) they can get into certain jobs. Create these job opportunities. This is my focus: develop these areas so that they will get equal opportunities.

Q: So, the final question here is this: there is this western narrative about you, especially that you are authoritarian or a racist Sinhalese leader and then the Muslims have a lot to fear from your coming to power; how will you reassure the Muslims?

A: I think it’s the wrong perception that was created during the conflict period. True that I was in the army for 20 years; I was fighting as an army officer against terrorism, then I retired from the army and went abroad to live nearly for 12 years in the U.S. Then I came back as the secretary defence but then people recognised me only as the secretary defence, they know me as the secretary defence so maybe because of that they think that this man is authoritarian. I am a disciplined person that doesn’t mean (you have nothing against a community). I have proved in my action that I’m not racist; I don’t work only for one section of the society. That is why I invited the Tamils and Muslims and everybody to join me in developing the country, in bringing the country up. You know, the opposition can show me as a dictator or authoritarian or whatever but I am not. People will see in my actions but I want to tell them to join me. At the same time, I want especially the media to not go by the hearsay or rumours and don’t propagate these things; understand me, speak to me, meet me and see how I am doing, how I work and give the correct picture. It’s a small country, developing country; people should help us, not put obstacles in my way. That will not help anybody.

Q: Those charges that were there against some of your officers, sometimes against you also, about human rights violations that have come up in the last phase.

A: See war is not a rosy thing, whether you internally fight or whether the Americans come and fight in Iraq or Afghanistan or UK govt fights in Iraq or Afghanistan. Whether it is internal or outside, war is not a rosy thing and everything doesn’t go very smoothly but we are a poor country, we are a lesser power so our things are highlighted more. It’s very unfair to do that because as a nation we are Buddhist, we are a very peaceful nation, our history goes back thousands and thousands years and we have our values, our culture is rich.

Q: Existence is very peaceful in that sense.

A: Yes, so rather than just criticising and I would like to even request the Tamil diaspora to forget these things, nobody is benefitted; rather we must work together to develop our country, help the people in our country irrespective of their (community). I’m sure if the minority community understand this, if they do certain things which create suspicion in the minds of majority community only then the majority community will react. They have to understand that. Everybody is a Sri Lankan citizen if they are born in Sri Lanka. They have equal rights, everybody, but they should not do certain things. They have to understand the reality. However much the society (may) move forward (but) even in the so-called advanced societies, these problems are there.

Q: There will always be differences between communities.

A: We have to understand.

Q: On that note President Rajapaksa, thank you very much for the time and your very candid views on everything ranging from economy to security to development; it is always a pleasure to meet you. Thank you very much.

Jamila Husain Courtesy The Daily Mirror

Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa had told some of his confidantes on Monday that he believed recent complaints of street name boards in Tamil language being vandalised had been done by a group of people who attempted to disrupt President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s upcoming visit to India.

The Prime Minister, over a telephone conversation with Senior DIG Ajith Rohana last Sunday night, had instructed that the matter be probed immediately and those responsible arrested.

He had then ordered officials at the Prime Minister’s office to put up the name boards claiming the heinous move aimed at creating a rift between the Tamil community and interim government and to strain Sri Lanka-India ties.

Meanwhile, officials from the Police Media Division (PMD) said following Prime Minister Rajapaksa’s orders, all DIGs, OICs and senior police officers stationed countrywide had been informed to remain vigilant in areas where street name boards had been vandalised. Officers had been instructed to scrutinise CCTV footage and identify all those responsible. Although investigations are ongoing, arrests have not been made so far.

On the invitation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa will visit India on November 29. This will be his first official visit after being elected to office.

The two leaders are expected to hold talks on wide-ranging issues during the visit deemed as a ‘fresh start’ between the interim government and Indian Government after ties were strained during the previous Rajapaksa regime with allegations that it was tilted towards China. 

Courtesy Hiru News

President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa says that the previous government has made a mistake by giving the Hambantota port which is strategically and economically very close to many major shipping lanes on a 99-year lease. 

President Gotabhaya Rajapaksa made this statement during an interview with the Indian news service SNI, which was the first interview given by the President to foreign media after his election to office.

He further stated that the Hambantota Port Leasing Agreement should be re-evaluated.

The President added that he is ready to discuss the matter with China in order for Sri Lanka to gain control of the Port.

Courtesy Hiru News

Five factions have filed complaints with the Police Headquarters against former CID director Shani Abeysekera for allegedly investigating cases in a controversial manner to please political needs.

The complainants have requested to arrest SSP Shani Abeysekera and appoint a committee to review the cases which were investigated by SSP Abeysekera during the previous regime.

Further, they stated that SSP Shani Abeysekera is preparing to flee the country and attention should be drawn to his attempt.

The Police Commission recently transferred SSP Abeysekera to the Galle DIG office as the latter’s personal assistant.

However, the complainants requested the police commission to arrest him rather than transfer him

The Police headquarters have instructed the CID director to initiate an investigation to the fleeing of IP Nishantha de Silva to Switzerland who investigated cases on political interest and in a controversial manner.

This step has been taken as he left the country without obtaining permission while the special unit is conducting investigations.

In addition, police media spokesman SP Ruwan Gunesekera said that disciplinary action will also be taken against IP Nishantha de Silva leaving the country without obtaining proper permission.

IP Nishantha de Silva, who conducted cases with Shani Abeysekera in a controversial manner, left the country with his family yesterday.

Former DIG Director Shani Abeysekera and IP Nishantha de Silva investigated several cases in a controversial manner during the previous regime to please political needs.

Allegations were made against both Abeysekera and Silva for conducting investigations in a biased manner to please politicians.

At the same time, when a police officer wants to travel abroad on a personal or official matter, it is compulsory for him or her to obtain prior permission from the secretary of the Law and Order Ministry.

However, IP Nishantha de Silva has left the country yesterday without obtaining such prior approval.

In addition, his leaving the country is disputable at a time several factions are asking for an investigation be conducted on IP Silva.

The Police Headquarters has also called a report on an ongoing investigation on IP Nishantha de Silva.

Meanwhile, the Immigration and Emigration office at the Katunayake International Airport has received a list of 704 officers of the CID who are banned from leaving the country without obtaining proper approval beforehand.

Airport authorities have confirmed this to our correspondent at the Airport.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

ප්‍රධාන නෞකා මාර්ග රැසක් ආසන්නයේ පිහිටි ක්‍රමෝපාය අතින් මෙන්ම ආර්ථික වශයෙන් අතිශය වැදගත් හම්බන්තොට වරාය 99 වසර බද්දට චීනයට ලබාදීම පසුගිය රජය සිදුකර ඇති වැරැද්දක් බව ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ පවසනවා.

ජනාධිපති ධුරයට පත්වීමෙන් අනතුරුව විදෙස් මාධ්‍යයකට ලබාදුන් ප්‍රථම සාකච්ඡාව ලෙස ඉන්දීය එස්.එන්.අයි. ප්‍රවෘත්ති සේවය සමඟ සම්මුඛ සාකච්ඡාවකට සහභාගි වෙමින් ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මේ බව සඳහන් කළා.

එහිදී ඔහු වැඩිදුරටත් කියා සිටියේ හම්බන්තොට වරාය බදු දීමේ ගිවිසුම නැවත ඇගයීමකට ලක්කළ යුතු බවයි.

ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මෙම සාකච්ඡාව ලබාදුන්නේ ලබන 29 වන දා ඉන්දියාවේ සංචාරයක නිරතවීමට නියමිතව සිටියදියි.

ඉන්දියාවේ ප්‍රකට මාධ්‍යවේදියෙකු වන නිතින් ඒ. ගෝක්ලේ ජනාධිපතිවරයා සමඟ එම සාකච්ඡාව පවත්වා තිබෙනවා.

එහිදී ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ යළි අවධාරණය කළේ ශ්‍රී ලංකාව සුපිරි බලවතුන්ගේ බල අරගලයට මැදිවීමේ අවශ්‍යතාවක් නොමැති බවයි.

තුන්වන රටකට බලපෑමක් ඇති වන අන්දමින් ශ්‍රී ලංකාව විදේශ සබඳතා නොපවත්වන අතර, ඉන්දියාවේ ආරක්ෂාව අභියෝගයකට ලක්වීමට ඉඩ නොදෙන බව ද ජනාධිතිවරයා කියා සිටියා. මේ, එහිදී ජනාධිපතිවරයා දැක්වූ අදහස්.

‘‘ චීනය අපේ හොඳ මිතුරෙකු මෙන්ම, අපට සංවර්ධනය සඳහා ඔවුන්ගේ සහය අවශ්‍ය වුවත් හම්බන්තොට වරාය ඔවුන් වෙත වසර 99කට බදු දීම අත්වැරැද්දක් ලෙසයි මා දකින්නේ. මම ඔවුන්ගෙන් ඉල්ලා සිටිනවා වඩා හොඳ එකඟතාවක් ඇති කර ගැනීම සඳහා ගිවිසුම යළි ඇගයීමකට ලක් කරන්න. ජනතාව එම ගිවිසුම සම්බන්ධයෙන් සතුටක් දක්වන්නේ නැහැ. අපට වසරක්, දෙකක් හෝ 5ක් ගැන නොව අනාගතය ගැන සිතන්න අවශ්‍යයි, ඉන්පසුව කුමක් වන්නේ ද කියා. ආයෝජනය සඳහා ඉඩම් කැබැල්ලක් ලබාදීම හාත්පසින් වෙනස් කරුණක්. වාණිජ දේපළක් හෝ හෝටලයක් සංවර්ධනය කිරීමත් ගැටළුවක් නොවේ. එහෙත් ක්‍රමෝපාය අතින් මෙන්ම ආර්ථිකමය වශයෙන් වැදගත් වරායක් එලෙස ලබාදීම පිළිගත නොහැකියි. එහි පාලනය අප අත තිබිය යුතුයි. ඒ නිසා එය නැවත සාකච්ඡා කළ යුතු වනවා.’’

මේ අතර, ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය මහකොමසාරිස්වරිය වන සාරා හල්ටන් අද උදෑසන ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ හමුවී තිබෙනවා.

එහිදී ඇය නව ජනාධිපතිවරයාට බ්‍රිතාන්‍ය රජයේ සුබ පැතුම් එක් කළ බවයි ජනාධිපති මාධ්‍ය අංශය සඳහන් කළේ.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

දේශපාලන වුවමනා මත මතභේදාත්මක ලෙස පරීක්ෂණ මෙහෙයවීම සම්බන්ධයෙන් චෝදනා එල්ල වී සිටින අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකරට එරෙහිව පාර්ශව 5ක් විසින් පොලිස් කොමිසමට පැමිණිලි ඉදිරිපත් කර තිබෙනවා.

එමගින් ඔවුන් ඉල්ලා ඇත්තේ ශානි අබේසේකර අත්අඩංගුවට ගත යුතු අතර, පසුගිය රජය සමයේ ඔහු මෙහෙය වූ නඩු යළි සලකා බැලීම සඳහා කමිටුවක් පත් කළ යුතු බවයි.

මීට අමතරව, ඔහු රටින් පැනයාමේ සූදානමක් ද පවතින බැවින් ඒ පිළිබදව ද අවධානය යොමුකළ යුතු බවට ඔවුන් යොමුකළ පැමිණිලිවල සදහන්.

මේ වනවිට අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකර පොලිස් කොමිසම විසින් ගාල්ල නියෝජය පොලිස්පතිවරයාගේ පෞද්ගලික සහකාර ලෙස මාරු කර යවා තිබෙනවා.

එහෙත්, ඔහුට ස්ථාන මාරු ලබාදීම වෙනුවට ඔහුගේ සේවය අත්හිටුවිය යුතු බවටයි එම පාර්ශව කරුණු දක්වමින් පොලිස් කොමිසම හමුවේ පැමිණිලි ඉදිරිපත් කර ඇත්තේ.

සිංහලේ අපි ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරයේ ලේකම් පූජ්‍ය මැඬිල්ලේ පඤ්ඤාලෝක හිමියන්, එම සංවිධානයේ සභාපති පූජ්‍ය ජඹුරේවෙල චන්ද්‍රරතන හිමියන්, බෞද්ධ තොරතුරු කේන්ද්‍රයේ විධායක අධ්‍යක්ෂ පූජ්‍ය අඟුලූ‍ගල්ලේ සිරි ජිනානන්ද හිමියන්, රාවණාබලය සංවිධානයේ කැඳවුම්කරු පූජ්‍ය ඉත්තෑකන්දේ සද්ධාතිස්ස හිමියන් සහ නව සිංහලේ ජාතික ව්‍යාපාරයේ සභාපති ඩෑන් ප්‍රියසාද් මෙම පැමිණිලි ගොනු කරනු ලැබුවා.

කෙසේ වෙතත්, පැමිණිලි භාර ගැනීමෙන් අනතුරුව පොලිස් කොමිසමේ මහජන පැමිණිලි අංශයේ ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ නිලධාරියෙකු පැමිණ ඔවුන් සමඟ අදහස් හුවමාරු කර ගනු ලැබුවා. එහිදී එම ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ නිලධාරියා සඳහන් කළේ අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂක ශානි අබේසේකර සම්බන්ධයෙන් කතා කිරීම නිසා තමාට ද පසුගිය රජයෙන් ස්ථාන මාරු ලබාදුන් බවයි.

මේ අතර, අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ සමූහ මංකොල්ල අංශයේ ස්ථානාපති ලෙස කටයුතු කළ පොලිස් පරීක්ෂක නිශාන්ත ද සිල්වා රටින් පළා යාම සම්බන්ධයෙන් වහාම පරීක්ෂණයක් සිදුකරන ලෙස පොලිස් මූලස්ථානය අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ අධ්‍යක්ෂවරයාට නියෝග කර තිබෙනවා.

පොලිස් මාධ්‍ය ප්‍රකාශක, ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ පොලිස් අධිකාරී රුවන් ගුණසේකර සඳහන් කළේ පොලිස් පරීක්ෂක නිශාන්ත ද සිල්වා විදෙස් රටකට පළා ගොස් ඇත්තේ කිසිදු අනුමැතියකින් තොරව බවයි.

ඔහු විසින් පසුගිය වසර 4ක කාලය තුළ සිදුකළ විමර්ශන පක්ෂග්‍රාහීව සහ අයුක්තිසහගතව සිදුකළ බවට ද විවිධ පාර්ශවයන්ගෙන් චෝදනා එල්ල වී ඇති බවයි පොලිස් මූලස්ථානය නිවේදනයක් නිකුත් කරමින් සඳහන් කළේ.

ඒ පිළිබදව අපක්ෂපාතී පරීක්ෂණයක් සිදුකරන ලෙස නොයෙකුත් පාර්ශව ඉල්ලා සිටින වාතාවරණයක් තුළයි අදාළ නිලධාරියා විදෙස් රටකට පළා ගොස් ඇත්තේ.

පොලිස් මූලස්ථානය නිකුත් කළ නිවේදනයේ වැඩිදුරටත් සඳහන් වන්නේ අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ විශේෂ ඒකකයක විමර්ශන කිහිපයක් භාරව සිටි ස්ථානාධිපතිවරයෙකු මෙලෙස කිසිදු අවසරයකින් තොරව පළා යාම බරපතල ගැටළුවක් ද වන බවයි

එමෙන්ම, දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ නිසි අවසරයකින් තොරව විදෙස්ගතවීම තහනම් කළ අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ නිලධාරීන් 704 දෙනෙකුගේ ලේඛනයක් කටුනායක ජාත්‍යන්තර ගුවන් තොටුපළේ ආගමන විගමන කාර්යාලය වෙත ලැබී තිබෙනවා.

අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුවේ හිටපු අධ්‍යක්ෂ ශානි අබේසේකරගේ නම ද එම ලේඛනයට ඇතුළත්.

උපුටා ගැන්ම හිරු නිව්ස්

හිටපු සෞඛ්‍ය අමාත්‍ය රාජිත සේනාරත්න මහතා සහ සෞඛ්‍ය අමාත්‍යාංශයේ දූෂිත නිලධාරීන්ට විරුද්ධව ඉදිරියේදී නීතිය ක්‍රියාත්මක කළ යුතු බව රජයේ වෛද්‍ය නිලධාරීන්ගේ සංගමය පවසනවා.

කොළඹදී අද පැවති ප්‍රවෘත්ති සාකච්ඡාවකදි එහි නියෝජිතයන් සදහන් කළේ සෞඛ්‍ය අමාත්‍යාංශයේ පරිපාලනමය වෙනසක් සිදුවිය යුතු බවයි.

මේ අතර පසුගිය රජයේ සෞඛ්‍ය අමාත්‍යවරයාව සිටි රාජිත සේනාරත්න මහතා විසින් ප්‍රමිතියෙන් තොර ඖෂධ බෙදා දුන්නේ යැයි චෝදනා කරමින් බෞද්ධ තොරතුරු කේන්ද්‍රයේ විධායක අධ්‍යක්ෂ පූජ්‍ය අඟුළුගල්ලේ ජිනානන්ද හිමියන් අපරාධ පරීක්ෂණ දෙපාර්තමේන්තුව පැමිණිල්ලක් ගොනු කළා.

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

Dr Gotabaya Rajapakse became our 7^th President on 18 November 2019, just a week ago. 

The busy Colombo Streets are already clean.  The make-shift vendors have moved out from pavements, so the pedestrians can move freely. 

There is no visible garbage dumping in the City, the public responded to the newly elected President call for the maintenance of cleanliness and protection of the environment.

At the Airport, prior to his election, inbound and outgoing women were seen in hundreds wearing Burqa and Niqaab.  But today, civilization has returned to the Airport where everyone can be easily identified.

On a trip down south, from Wadduwa to Mirissa, the hotel operators have confirmed an instant increase of inbound tourists to Sri Lanka.  You will find today, in addition to major hotels and motels, small operators providing accommodation are refurbishing their previously closed businesses.

In Hikkaduwa particularly, handicraft operators selling Batik products, paintings, and other ancillary items are back in business with newly found confidence.

The freedom of movements has been ensured for the public.  The VIP fast drivers are fast disappearing. Unnecessary public receptions to politicians have disappeared.  Sri Lanka is no longer a Paradise of Jokers.

With the invocation of Public Security Ordinance throughout the island, the law and order are being maintained whilst taking prompt action against drug dealers and other illegal activities.  The Land, Sea and Air personnel are safeguarding the territory, with a fore-warning to Boats carrying drugs and illegal immigrants.

The upward trend of Sri Lankan Share Indices started one week prior to the Presidential Election,  It is continuing signs of a healthy maintainable upward trend.   Sri Lankan currency unit Rupee is gradually appreciating from its previous disastrous low levels against major currencies.   

The festive season will bring additional foreign exchange through tourism, which will indirectly filter into self-employed personnel. In the coming months, positive improvements are expected as a result of the Consumer Price Index, reduction of unemployment.

Increase in Money Circulation will take place due to the increase in Spending, the influx of direct and indirect local and foreign investments, thus reducing the inflation and interest rates in the medium term.

Dr. Gotabaya Rajapakse has been in  Office for just 7 days. In fact, President Gotabaya has not done anything yet, but the Patriotic Sri Lankans have embraced the new values voluntarily.

Sri Lanka is back in Business. 

Jayawewa!

By M D P DISSANAYAKE

The President has appointed Prof Lalith U Gamage as the new Governor of Central Province. The Governors of Sri Lanka were not busy people in the  past.   In the recent past we had some colourful and not so colourful names in our list of past Governors, including Gamini Fonseka, Karunaratne Divulgane, Niluka Ekanayake, Reginald Cooray, Maithree Gunaratne, Hizbulla, Shan De Silva, Sarath Ekanayake,  Suren Ragaven,  Alawi Moulana,  Hemal Gunasekera, Azad Sally etc.

In the list of new Governors, we have witnessed several operators  with sound credentials, including very popular Specialist ENT Surgeon Dr Mrs Seetha Arambepola, Lalith U Gamage, Dr Willie Gamage.

These professionals need to be engaged in more productive roles, functioning in addition to their ceremonial roles of Governors.

The President Gotabaya has repeated emphasised the importance of ICT usage in Sri Lanka.  In this context, Lalith U Gamage could be a key player in the development of software products with necessary customization to link the Projects included in the Vision and Mission Statement to facilitate  Performance Evaluation.

ALI SUKHANVER

The National Capital Territory of Delhi commonly known as the NCR has been facing the worst situation regarding pollution particularly air pollution since long.  And same is the situation in several districts surrounding Delhi from the states of Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. In short, a strange blurriness in the shape of smog has shrouded the historical city of Delhi. Smog is a type of intense air pollution. The word ‘smog’ is a contraction of the words smoke and fog. It is considered the most visible kind of air pollution usually composed of sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, ozone and other particulates. Smog could be a result of coal combustion emissions, vehicular and industrial emissions and emissions from forest and agricultural fires.

Astonishingly Vineet Agarwal Sharda, a very active BJP leader has an altogether different point of view with reference to the air pollution caused by the smog. A few days back, talking to some media-persons in Mureet, he said that Pakistan and China are responsible for the high levels of pollution in the national capital region (NCR) and adjacent areas. He alleged either of the two neighbouring countries could have released poisonous gases into India. He further said, We must seriously consider whether Pakistan has released any poisonous gas because Pakistan was frustrated ever since Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah took charge.”

In the first week of this November, BBC published a report on the worst situation of pollution in Delhi which narrated the facts altogether differently. The report said A major factor behind the high pollution levels at this time of year is farmers in neighbouring states burning crop stubble to clear their fields. Police are wearing face masks to protect themselves from the toxic smog. This creates a lethal cocktail of particulate matter, carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide – all worsened by fireworks set off during the Hindu festival Diwali a week ago. Vehicle fumes, construction and industrial emissions have also contributed to the smog.” Fortunately, there was no reference to Pakistan or China in this report of BBC. In response to Vineet Agarwal’s statement Deputy Director-General Information Department, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mr Lijan Zhao in a tweet equated BJP leader with a JOKER. Lijan Zhao had been serving at the Chinese Embassy in Islamabad sometime back. This statement of the honourable BJP member would have become more funny and ridiculous if the people of India had believed what he had said; fortunately, they never take such things serious.

In the list of 30 most polluted cities of the world, 22 are in India. The situation was as horrible in 2016 as it is now in 2019. A survey conducted in 2016 said that at least 140 million people in India breathe air that is 10 times or more over the WHO safe limit. This horrible ratio of pollution in the air is the basic reason for the premature deaths of 2 million Indians every year. In urban areas, the basic source of this pollution is the use of sub-standard vehicles and industrial units without sufficient anti-pollution arrangements. On the other hand, in rural areas, the basic source of this pollution is the burning of biomass for cooking and for keeping houses warm. In autumn and winter season air pollution reaches a horrible level because of smoke and smog produced by burning of the remains of crops in agriculture fields. In short, air pollution in India is purely an administrative and managerial problem. If not properly taken care of, the situation would certainly become more painful and agonizing.

In such an already horrible scenario why does the honourable BJP member Vineet Agarwal Sharda expect from Pakistan and China that they would waste their resources on pumping of poisonous gases into Indian air? It is simply an Indian obsession with Pakistan and China that everything bad there is linked with the two neighbouring countries Pakistan and China. This obsession is getting more and more serious day by day. It has become a trend among Indian politicians to point fingers towards Pakistan and China whenever something goes wrong due to ineligibility and inability of the Indian government.  Blaming Pakistan and China of ‘pumping’ a poisonous gas to add more pollution to the already most polluted cities of the world seems a ‘mumbo-jumbo’ idea of the BJP politicians who have nothing else to do but raise a storm of blames and allegations against Pakistan and China. In English language, such a situation is called, ‘a storm in the tea-cup’.

BY ASANGA ABEYAGOONASEKERA

There are none so blind as those who do not see.” Matthew 9:26-27

The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know.

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and most wanted terrorist leader after Osama Bin Laden, was killed on October 26th in a US military raid by its Delta Force in the village of Barisha located to the northwest of Syria. The killing occurred in the de-escalation zone of Idlib. Baghdadi’s rule extended over 88,000 sq km, stretching across the Iraq-Syria border. He was cornered by US special forces in the dead-end of a tunnel, where he detonated an explosive suicide vest, killing himself and three of his children.

Six months ago, the final known footage of Baghdadi was aired on the militant group’s al-Furqan media network after the Easter Sunday killing in Sri Lanka, which claimed the lives of 250 civilians. The local extremist cluster that carried out the attack was influenced by Baghdadi and his terror network across South Asia.

Despite the threat of violent extremism spreading in the Island nation, which was being discussed and documented before the attack, it was not a priority due to shortcomings within the security establishment. This was highlighted a week ago by the recently released Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) report, a post-audit of the 4/21 attack.[1] Identifying deficiencies within the establishment and lapses in its decision-making process on national security, the committee’s report reveals the importance and urgency of security sector reforms to ensure the public safety of Sri Lankan citizens. 

The report holds eight recommendations. The first is for Sri Lanka’s defense establishment to implement ‘Essential reforms in the security and intelligence sector’ by undertaking a comprehensive review of national security priorities to identify gaps and weaknesses and areas that require reform and strengthening. The recommendations suggest coupling an immediate review of the present structures in place for security and intelligence and mapping out tasks, responsibilities and possible areas of overlap. The Parliamentary Select Committee is of the view that the nation has not identified its national security priorities. It leaves the task of strengthening coordination among the security establishment and key stakeholders. The nation requires a National Defence Policy (NDP). 

The Geneva Center for Security Sector Governance sees defence policy as part of a broader concept of a country’s National Security Policy or National Security Strategy. Defence policy encompasses defence planning and management, which are consecutive steps towards practical implementation of that policy, down to actual command and control. The lines that divide all these concepts or phases are often blurred in practice. In general, defence policy covers everything from ends to ways and means of achieving national defence objectives and is guided by codes and principles that are embedded in National Security Policy.”[2] Several South Asian nations do not possess defence policies shared with their public. Sri Lanka’s closest neighbour India, for example, has been criticized for not having a defence policy, a requirement that has been discussed since the time of Prime Minister Narasimha Rao in the 1990s. According to Prime Minister Rao:

The first criticism has been a rather extraordinary kind of criticism to say that we have no National Defence Policy. I would like to submit respectfully that is not true. We do not have a document called India’s National Defence Policy. But we have got several guidelines which are strictly followed and observed and those can be summed up as follows: First the Defence of national territory over land, sea and air encompassing among others the inviolability of our land borders, island territories, offshore assets and our maritime trade routes. Secondly, to secure an internal environment whereby our nation-state is insured against any threats to its unity or progress based on religion, language, ethnicity or socio-economic dissonance. Third, to be able to exercise a degree of influence over the nations in our immediate neighbourhood to promote harmonious relationships in tune with our national interests. Fourth, to be able to effectively contribute towards regional and international stability and to possess an effective out-of-the-country contingency capability to prevent destabilization of the small nations in our immediate neighbourhood that could have adverse security implications for us.[3]

S. Kalyanaraman, Research Fellow at Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis in India, explains: one of the staples of the popular and even academic discourse on India’s national security during the last few decades has been the assertion that India does not have a defence policy. Such a view is widely shared not only by Indian and foreign scholars and analysts but also by retired high-ranking civilian and military officials.”[4] A National Defence Policy is a step towards moving away from reacting in an ad hoc manner, while promoting strategic thinking and action in the realm of national security.

Has Sri Lanka ever attempted to develop a National Defence Policy?

The first draft of the National Defence Policy was prepared in 2016 by a team of distinguished military officers along with the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka (INSSSL), a national security think tank. It was prepared with the leadership of Air Chief Marshal Kolitha Gunathilake, Gen. Udaya Perera, Gen. Shavendra Silva and many others. After completion, the policy was submitted to the then Secretary of Defence Karunasena Hettiarachi, who was instrumental in initiating the process, but failed to take it forward due to his sudden transfer. The same policy was handed over to the subsequent Defence Secretaries, Kapila Waidyarathne and Hemasiri Fernando. A second attempt was engaged after the Easter Sunday bombing with the leadership of General Shantha Kottegoda and 18 distinguished military officers along with the INSSSL. After much deliberation, a revised policy was handed over to President Sirisena who would table this at the Cabinet of Sri Lanka. Had this policy guideline been taken up seriously before the Easter Sunday attacks, Sri Lanka would have had progressive reforms in the security sector and perhaps saved many innocent lives. The PSC report contains several key recommendations and findings highlighted by the committee, mirrored in the NDP as policy guidelines.

Sri Lanka’s first-ever NDP is an extensive document outlining 6 national defence interests and 13 objectives, while identifying Sri Lanka’s defence capabilities and discussing the country’s force structure modernization efforts. The document identifies the need and the extent to which force modernization ought to be facilitated for the future well-being of the defence forces. The purpose of defence policy is to ensure things are done in an organized manner and objectives are attained while respecting rules. The reforms discussed at the PSC, for example, of creating a National Security Advisor (NSA) and National Security Council (NSC), are clearly identified and discussed in the National Defence Policy. The NSC will be established under a new secretary-general as a secretariat headed by the President, and it will have 15 permanent members, including the Prime Minister, NSA, State Minister of Defence, Minister of Law and Order, Secretary to President, Secretary Defence, Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Secretary of Finance, Attorney General, Chief of Defence Staff, Tri Force Commanders, IGP and Chief of National Intelligence.

The NDP should be available to the public and, like any other policy, will go through a periodic review every three years. Such a policy gives strength to the entire system and improves decision making while prioritizing defence requirements. The strategies will be formulated by the respective forces and office of the chief of defence staff (OCDS) to achieve the security requirements from regime to regime.

In a rapidly changing, complex global threat environment in the international geopolitical arena, Sri Lanka faces numerous security threats such as extremism, cyberattacks, financial and economic crimes, maritime intrusions, environmental degradation and natural disasters. Sri Lanka has lost lives and property each year as a direct result of these threats. Examples of natural disasters include the mudslides in Aranayake[5] which killed more than 200 and displaced 350,000, as well as garbage disasters.[6]

National security issues are at the forefront of the November 2019 presidential election. It is pivotal we stimulate and strengthen the process using a National Defence Policy. New threats require new strategies and new capabilities. They also create new responsibilities. One of the fundamental questions is how to optimally balance the resources the nation possesses and how to acquire new resources to address rapidly changing security threats facing Sri Lanka. 

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera is the director general of the National Security Think Tank of Sri Lanka (INSSSL) under the Sri Lankan Ministry of Defense. The views expressed here are his own. This article was initially published by Hudson Institute Washington DC. http://www.southasiaathudson.org/blog/2019/11/20/implementation-of-a-national-defence-policy-for-sri-lanka

---

References

[1] PSC Full Report https://www.parliament.lk/uploads/comreports/sc-april-attacks-report-en.pdf

[2] DCAF Security Sector Integrity https://securitysectorintegrity.com/defence-management/defence-policy/

[3] Towards a Clear Defence Policy,” P.V. Narasimha Rao Selected Speeches. Volume IV: July 1994 – June 1995 (New Delhi: Government of India, 1995), p. 125.

[4] Kalyanaraman, https://idsa.in/policybrief/indias-defence-and-security-priorities-skalyanaraman-240518#footnote6_4dtemjx

[5] SL landslide and rain  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/18/sri-lanka-hundreds-of-families-missing-after-landslide-buries-three-villages

[6] SL Garbage dump collapse https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/15/world/asia/sri-lanka-garbage-dump-collapse.html

Image Source: https://www.army.lk/image-gallery

Courtesy The Island

Milinda Moragoda, Founder of the Pathfinder Foundation and former Cabinet Minister, in a statement called on the new Government to refrain from holding Provincial Council elections prior to the parliamentary elections.

He suggested that the Government should, as part of the expected Constitutional overhaul, seek to mobilize the necessary two-thirds majority to repeal the 13th Amendment and thereby abolish the Provincial Council system at the conclusion of parliamentary elections.

Moragoda reiterated his earlier proposal that the Provincial Councils should be abolished and power directly devolved to empowered and reconfigured local, urban and municipal councils.

“Since these bodies operate closest to the citizenry, they are in a better position to address and solve community-level problems,” he said.

The original intent of the 13th amendment enacted in 1987 was to create more provincial autonomy in order to help resolve Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem. Instead this structure has proven to be superfluous, expensive, divisive and fraught with inefficiency.

Finally, he also proposed that an empowered senate/upper house be set up to address issues concerning religious, ethnic, and regional diversity.

Editorial Courtesy The Island

The blame game is on, in the UNP, with the Ranil Wickremesinghe and Sajith Premadasa factions holding each other responsible for the party’s crushing defeat at the recently concluded presidential election. The Sajith loyalists are raking their rivals over the coals for not having gone the whole hog to ensure the party’s win. The other side insists that the then Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, entrusted with campaigning in the North and the East, succeeded in having the people there vote for Sajith overwhelmingly, but those in charge of the UNP campaign in other areas miserably failed to deliver. Both these groups are not telling the whole truth, we reckon.

The TNA, realising that odds were stacked against Sajith in the electorates outside the North and the East and the central hills, upped the ante; it put forth 13 demands aimed at securing more devolution, bordering on federalism in the hope that the UNP would be compelled to accept them publicly as it was desperate for votes. When Sajith, realising that it was plain political suicide for him to undertake to grant those demands, chose to remain silent thereon, the TNA found itself in a dilemma. It was left with a choice between a polls boycott and backing Sajith. It knew SLPP candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa would score a walkover if it boycotted the election and, therefore, decided to back Sajith. It may also have thought its support for him would lead to a quid pro quo. Even if anyone other than Ranil had campaigned in the North and the East, the TNA would still have delivered its block vote to Sajith, for its own sake more than anything else.

The Ranil faction is right in insisting that Sajith’s organisers failed elsewhere. However, the fact remains that the UNP did not throw its full weight behind Sajith. What befell him reminds us of the then PM Mahinda Rajapaksa’s predicament at the 2005 presidential election; the SLFP led by then President Chandrika Kumratunga was not supportive of him. Former President Maithripala Sirisena in Aththai Saththai, a hagiographical sketch, reveals that in the run-up to the 2005 presidential election, Chandirka asked him who he thought would win. When he told her it was Mahinda, she said Mahinda’s win would be good for the SLFP but bad for her. (Mahinda won in spite of her.)

The TNA gave Sajith the kiss of death in that its support for him triggered a backlash in other areas. The UNP made a huge miscalculation; some of its seniors even boasted that Sajith would get a head start with the help of the block votes of the minorities. They said he had bagged 30% of the votes even before the start of the race! They may have expected the votes for Sajith in the North and the East to increase while those for Gotabaya decreased so that there would be a repeat of the outcome of the 2015 presidential election.

‘The most unkindest cut’ for Sajith came from the then Minister Ravi Karunanayake in the Ranil faction. While Sajith was struggling to be the UNP’s presidential candidate, Karunanayake looked down upon him, at every turn, as a total misfit, claiming that the latter had not even passed the GCE O/L examination in Sri Lanka. Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka also castigated Sajith initially as a square peg in a round hole though he started singing hosannas for the latter, after being promised the defence portfolio.

Sajith never recovered from Ranil’s claim, at a media briefing, prior to the election, that he would be the PM in case of Sajith’s election as President, for it was Ranil the people wanted to see the back of. Sajith sought to counter that claim by offering to appoint a ‘first-time PM’, but his effort was in vain.

The UNP leader has admitted that his party has alienated the Sinhala Buddhist voters. The erosion of their faith in the UNP did not occur overnight, after Sajith was nominated to contest the presidential election. It is the UNP leadership that should take the blame for this situation.

The UNP has lost a sizeable chunk of its vote base and come to be dependent on the block votes of other parties, which can hold it to ransom. It should have made use of the opportunities that presented themselves after its win at the 2015 general election to woo the majority community. But it did not care to do so. Unaware of the ground reality, Sajith took a leap of faith on 16 November, nay, he dived into the shallow end of the pool.

By Lasanda Kurukulasuriya Courtesy The Island

With ceremonies redolent with symbolism, followed by administrative moves that sent clear messages to the public, Gotabaya Rajapaksa took office as President of Sri Lanka signaling a clarity of purpose and a no-nonsense approach to his duties that lay ahead. The indications are that his will be a leadership very different from that of presidents before him, including that of his brother Mahinda. Unlike previous presidents, Gotabaya is not a politician. The war time defence secretary has a reputation for being a tough administrator and bureaucrat who got things done. As the SLPP’s candidate in this landmark election he ensured that he and his team carried out an exemplary, slander-free and environment-friendly election campaign. This in itself is a sign of a changing political culture.

The messages contained in President Gotabaya’s initial statements – at the Elections Commissioner’s office soon after being declared winner, and at his inauguration ceremony near the historic Ruwanweliseya in Anuradhapura – complemented and reinforced each other. On both occasions he said he was well aware that his victory was delivered by the Sinhalese majority community, and both times he emphasized that it was his duty as president to protect the rights of all including ‘those who did not vote for him.’ He pledged to carry out that responsibility. He also said he would fulfill all his pledges. Months after the Easter Sunday terror attacks that killed 268 innocents, his assertion that he considered national security to be of paramount importance, reassured many.

The intensity of emotion in the welcome the new president received from crowds, wherever he went after the results were known, was unprecedented. But while Sri Lankans celebrated by lighting firecrackers, dancing in the streets and sharing sweetmeats with passers-by, reactions abroad showed an almost surreal kind of disconnect from the euphoria at home. Western media and sections of the Indian press spoke in sinister terms of the ‘return of the Rajapaksas.’ The BBC ran a documentary highlighting alleged wartime atrocities blamed on the defence secretary. Foreign Policy’s article titled “Sri Lanka has a new strongman president’ said “Both minority groups have reason to fear their new government.” A PTI report spoke of Gotabaya reaching out to ‘jittery Tamil and Muslim minorities.’

If sections of the population are cringing in fear as these reports suggest, would it not seem strange that the police, the chairman of the Elections Commission and election monitors – both foreign and local – didn’t notice, and have with one voice declared this to have been one of the most peaceful and free elections?

What is the real source of Western fears of ‘strongman’ leaders in this part of the world?

“A big question for the second round of Rajapaksa rule is whether Colombo will pivot again toward Beijing and what that would mean for the region’s power dynamics,” said Foreign Policy. Strategic affairs analyst Brahma Chellaney told the Times of India, “India faces daunting regional challenges” with “a pro-China communist government in Nepal, an implacably hostile Pakistan and the Rajapaksa family back in power in Sri Lanka.” Noting that Sri Lanka straddles vital sea lanes and is ‘central to India’s maritime security,’ Chellaney sees what he calls a ‘pro-China’ Gotabaya’s rise to power as ‘more than counterbalancing’ the ouster earlier of Beijing-backed Maldivian president Yameen.

In the contest for ascendancy in an emerging multi-polar world, India has become a strategic partner of the US. The US has identified China as its main adversary or ‘threat,’ and expects its partners to do their bit in countering Chinese influence. Sri Lanka, a founding member of the Non-aligned Movement, has historically had cordial relations with China, as well as with the US and India. China under its ambitious Belt and Road initiative now has significant infrastructure investments in Sri Lanka including the Hambantota port, arousing suspicions in both US and India of its possible military use. This is despite assurances to the contrary from both Colombo and Beijing. Under the previous yahapalana regime the country was drawn increasingly into the US orbit. The controversial and secret defence-related pacts being negotiated and/or signed with the superpower could have unnecessarily plunged the country into a conflict that has nothing to do with Sri Lanka.

President Gotabaya made his inaugural speech in Sinhala, but a few sentences in it were repeated by him in English. This was no doubt for the benefit of diplomats present. On the question of foreign relations he said, in English, “We want to remain neutral in our foreign relations and stay out of any conflicts amongst the world powers.” He urged all countries, in their diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka, to respect its unitary status and sovereignty. The president has thus sent a clear signal to the big powers that he will put national interest first, when it comes to matters of foreign policy. Another sentence in English was to say “Corruption will never be tolerated under my administration.” This was possibly a signal to encourage potential foreign investors and trading partners aware of difficulties in doing business in Sri Lanka.

The President has shown diplomatic savvy too, in the manner in which he responded to ‘loaded’ congratulatory messages from the Western bloc. The US and EU in their twitter messages said they looked forward to working with Sri Lanka on matters such as security sector reform, human rights, accountability, good governance, reconciliation and implementing international conventions on fundamental rights. The EU spokesperson’s twitter message went so far as to suggest ‘cooperation in foreign policy and security.’

The President graciously thanking the diplomats for their good wishes, in his replies focused on Sri Lanka’s own priorities such as economic and trade ties, increased inward investment, Sri Lanka’s readiness to create an environment for enhanced investment and trade, etc.

From the president’s speeches and messages so far it may be seen that he is positioning himself for a very different kind of interaction with foreign powers than that witnessed under the Wickremesinghe-led yahapalana government.

India’s PM Narendra Modi was the first to congratulate the president-elect on twitter, saying he looked forward to working with him closely “for peace, prosperity as well as security in the region.” India lost no time sending External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar to call on Gotabaya who will visit India 29-30 Nov. By making this his first overseas destination as president he signals the importance of the Sri Lanka-India relationship.

China’s ambassador in Colombo Cheng Xueyuan visited with a delegation. In Beijing the Foreign Ministry spokesperson responding to reporters’ questions on the Sri Lanka election, was reported as saying “China and Sri Lanka are strategic cooperative partners with sincere mutual assistance and ever-lasting friendship,” adding that China was ready to work with the new leadership and government for ‘high-quality BRI cooperation.’ Russia’s president Vladmir Putin in a congratulatory letter said the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa “definitely meets the fundamental interests of our peoples, and is in line with strengthening the regional stability and security.”

Messages coming in from foreign leaders show how Sri Lanka has become inseparable from its strategic Indian Ocean location in the eyes of the world – with all that this implies for big powers maneuvering for advantage in the region. Moving towards a new moment in history, Sri Lanka’s political leaders would need to evolve to meet rising external challenges resulting from these power games.

Analyst Nitin Ghokale for one sees Gotabaya as a leader who has matured with experience. In a detailed TV interview with Strategic News International (SNI), of which he is founder and editor in chief, Ghokale said everybody tends to look at Sri Lanka ‘from the old lens,’ and this leads to a misreading of the situation, because things have changed. Referring to Gotabaya’s reassurances that he was the ‘president of all communities including those who did not vote for him,’ the longtime Sri Lanka watcher said “I think we should take him at face value, because people evolve, they mature.” Ghokale pointed out “There has been a lot of turnaround” in the relationship between the Rajapaksas and the Indian establishment. He candidly admitted to a realization in the Indian establishment that the Sirisena-Wickremsinghe duo “did not deliver as expected” after India “sort of supported them in the 2015 elections.” India was reconciled, though maybe not overtly, to the fact that Gotabaya Rajapaksa was coming to power, he said, and they will work with him. “And he is also willing to work with India. … So let’s look at the current situation rather than going back and looking at what happened in the past.”

N.A. de S. Amaratunga Courtesy The Island

The countries which have benefited from Chinese assistance in Asia, Africa and Europe have not suffered a breach of their independence and sovereignty or lost any significant extents of resources.

The world economy, international relations, and geopolitics are at present influenced by two strong ideologies; neo-liberalism and nationalism. First let us see what these terms mean in the context of economic development and independence.

The basis of neoliberalism is the idea that the market is the prime determinant of not only prices of goods, matters related to trade and commerce but also social characters and human values. This would mean there is no need for the government to intervene on behalf of the people and market forces would most efficiently guide the economy with benefits to all stake holders. This theory was first mooted by Fredrich von Hayek and it was more or less a refutation of welfare capitalism advocated by John Maynard Keynes that had been in practice since the end of world war in 1948. These policies had virtually detached the government from the process of management of the economy and given the market a free hand to run the economy. The IMF, WTO and the World Bank were rearranged to serve this purpose with catastrophic effect on third world economies. The poor in the rich countries as well as in poor countries were more or less left in the lurch.

Nationalism is an ideology that promotes the interests of a particular nation and it holds that each country should govern itself without foreign interference. Nationalism could manifest in different forms according to the needs of the times. There had been anti-colonial nationalist movements the world over including Sri Lanka from ancient times. The military battles against South Indian and European invasions, the uprisings against the British occupation were good examples of anti-colonial nationalism. It may be said that several countries have evolved from anti-colonial nationalism to economic nationalism as new problems and the issuing situation demands. Several South American, African and Asian countries after successful anti-colonial nationalist struggles have started their policies based on economic nationalism. They have expropriated foreign owned land and redistributed it among the landless and they have nationalised multinational companies. China developed fast due to policies based on socialist nationalism and now it lends unobtrusive leadership to economic nationalism in the world.

It is no exaggeration to say that as a consequence of the depredations of neo-liberalism, a nationalist wave is blowing across the world. We have seen its effect, though bumbling at this stage, in the USA and UK in the form of Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, Trumpism and Brexit and nascent beginnings in other parts of Europe as shown by electoral results. People in these parts of the world are not happy being left behind by the surge of the super rich. They don’t want their leaders to be engaged in the exploitation of weak countries often spending enormously for military means while they are getting poorer. They would like their leaders to put their house in order first and then develop mutually beneficial relations with other countries instead of trying to dominate the world which has worsened the global problems.

This nationalism if it is to succeed locally has to be in the first place not chauvinistic, racist, aggressive or exploitative. Internationally it has to be mutually beneficial, non-interfering, and non-hegemonic. However, the big powers in this camp such as China may want in return for economic assistance, some loyalty vis-a-vis the opposing camp, a preferential treatment regarding economic programmes, extension of facilities for their transportation etc which by their nature may not be intrusive into independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the host country.

One could get an idea of what is enunciated above by comparing two programmes, one vigorously pursued by the US and the other more gently by China. The former was pressuring our government of the day to enter into ACSA, MCC, and SOFA agreements which obviously were designed to take our country into their economic and military grip. On the other hand the Belt and Road Initiative put forward by China has already found acceptance even in European countries in the G7 group such as Italy. Greece in the brink of bankruptcy may recover due to B & R I. Malaysia has already been benefited to the tune of USD 27 billion. In Africa Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria etc are recovering to some degree from their economic woes due to B & R I. In contrast some of these countries which had entered into MCC agreements with the US have lost large extents of their land to US companies, eg. Congo. And other countries have terminated the agreements when they realized the implications and the real US intentions (see; K.Wickramasinghe – The Island 13.11.2019).

A comparison of Chinese and Indian economies would further elucidate the difference between the two ideologies and the desirability of economic nationalism. China in the nineteen forties was struggling with its poverty, so was India. Now China has totally come out of the grip of poverty while India is still struggling though doing quite well and is expected to wipe out poverty in due course. China developed fast due to its nationalist programmes. They invested in their people first, developed their village economy as a priority, and agriculture based industry and after their people had come out of poverty they looked at more ambitious big industry. India on the other hand allowed to be controlled by the IMF, WTO and the World Bank and their rich became richer while the poor became poorer. Now India seems to have realized their mistake and is turning away from neo-liberalism and moving towards nationalism.

The countries which have benefited from Chinese assistance in Asia, Africa and Europe have not suffered a breach of their independence and sovereignty or lost any significant extents of resources. China has not dictated to any of these countries on how to run their country, how to change their constitutions, how to look after their security, or preached on democracy, human rights, minority rights and other internal affairs. China has not forced or pressurized any of the recipients of its aid to fall in line and join the B & R I. They have instead requested them to evaluate the pros and cons of the project and join if they agree with its broad principles.

China helped Sri Lanka during the war against the LTTE with no strings attached. After the war it gave substantial assistance to build our roads, ports etc and our economy recovered in every respect as shown by all parameters. They did not interfere in our internal affairs, constitution reforms, ethnic issues, during the war or thereafter. With the change of government in 2015 attitude towards China changed, their projects were stopped, and they were grossly humiliated. And they made us pay for it, we had to pay heavy compensation for stopping the Colombo Port City project and we were forced to agree to an arrangement on the Hambanthota Port that is very disadvantageous to us. Even after all that some of the comments made by our ministers on China were not at all friendly, for example the then minister of finance said their interest rates for loans were very much higher than that of other friendly countries. All this was done to please the west but the assistance we got from the west was negligible.

Countries that demonstrate a tilt towards nationalism as an ideology for developing an economic model seem to subscribe to a political philosophy that approaches all issues from the national point of view aimed at meeting national interests. For instance if the majority of people live in the villages and their vocation is mainly farming the village economy should be given priority and it should be based on agriculture. This view may not be to the liking of the imperialists and their institutions like the IMF. They would not approve for instance subsidizing fertilizer for the village farmers. On the contrary they may have design on the farmers’ land such as what is envisaged in the MCC agreement which proposes to build an economic corridor from Colombo to Trincomalee which may by devious means effect the acquisition of a large extent of land for US industry thereby totally destroying the village economy and reducing the land owning dignified farmer to perhaps a labourer in that industry. This clearly illustrates the difference between neo-liberalist imperialism and the more desirable policies based on nationalism. It is this kind of dubious hidden agenda that had made some African countries stop MCC projects in their countries.

Sri Lanka’s economy has been dragged into the doldrums. Its poor are struggling to survive. It needs USD 3 billion per annum to service the loans. Recovery would be impossible without shaking off the neo-liberal shackles and IMF fetters. Sri Lanka has to turn towards economic nationalism. However, Sri Lanka would need what Mao Tse Tung meant when he said “Communist China would look for genuine friendly aid only.”

N.A. de S. Amaratunga

W.K. Prasad Manju Courtesy Ceylon Today

Former Leader of the House, Parliamentarian Lakshman Kiriella said the name of former Prime Minister and UNP Leader, Ranil Wickremesinghe which was proposed for the post of Opposition Leader, had been officially accepted by Speaker Karu Jayasuriya during the Party leaders meeting which was convened yesterday (21).

He said a letter submitted to this effect by UNP General Secretary, MP Akila Viraj Kariyawasam was officially endorsed by Speaker Jayasuriya during the meeting yesterday.

Kiriella added that another letter that had been submitted to the Speaker, urging him to officially accept UNP MP Sajith Premadasa for the post of Opposition Leader had been dismissed by Speaker Jayasuriya. He asserted that the Speaker has the authority to accept a nomination to the post proposed by a General Secretary of a recognized political Party and not those proposed by other MPs.   

The Speaker’s office issuing a Media release yesterday noted that he received a letter submitted to Speaker Jayasuriya by Kariyawasam officially requesting him to appoint Wickremesinghe as the next Opposition Leader. The Speaker’s office also stated that a letter signed by 40 UNF MPs urging Speaker Jayasuriya, to appoint Premadasa as the next Opposition Leader had also been received.

On 20 November, Wickremesinghe made a special statement to the Media, announcing that he would resign from his post as Premier, and yesterday, he tendered his resignation to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the UNP Media unit stated

By Shivanthi Ranasinghe Courtesy Ceylon Today

Since the conclusion of the election, a number of interesting messages have been floating around in social media. Some of these are obviously in support of the Yahapalana Government that just ended.

 The resigned Yahapalana loyalists write in hope that the new administration would continue the good work started by the Yahapalana Government. However, it will be difficult for the new Administration to do so for two reasons.

The main reason would be that the new Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Administration strongly disagrees that the work done by the Yahapalana Government was good. 

The mandate the GR Administration received was in fact to reverse the steps taken by the Yahapalana Government.

 The other reason being, those who ask the new Administration to continue the Yahapalana work contradict themselves. For instance, there had been requests not to place National Security above the Constitution.

This betrays the ignorance of the requester. The basic definition of a Constitution is the primary law and the Constitution of a country is said to be the spinal cord of the law of the land. The law is created to protect the citizen and his right. 

Out of all the rights recognised as part of a disciplined, civilised society, the right to live is the most paramount of all. Life is valued greater than any asset or treasure. 

That right to life is enshrined in the Constitution and executed via National Security.

 Therefore, if in the execution of National Security, steps are taken beyond the written law or the written law is manipulated, then it is not in exclusion of the Constitution but very much in line with its core objective.

Those who voted for the Yahapalana candidate Sajith Premadasa write also of strengthening democracy, an independent judiciary, media freedom, independent commissions, and the RTI legislation. 

Those who thus speak are simply repeating blindly someone else’s carefully drafted script, rather than basing their assertion on facts.

It can be said, perhaps somewhat cynically that the Mahinda Rajapaksa Administration had a severe case of election diarrhea. Well ahead of time, elections were held.

 It was not just the General or Presidential, but all elections at every level were held.

 Areas such as the North that had not experienced any form of democracy or free will for almost thirty years were able to elect their Provincial Council members for the first time under the MR Administration.

  While it is noteworthy that elections were finally held in the North, it must also be noted that this was done so despite the resistance from within MR Administration itself.

After the war, all paramilitary groups that were supportive to the then Administration were also disarmed. This allowed the TNA that was the LTTE political proxy to once again regain their stronghold.

 Naturally, this meant that the North would not be an electorate that the MR Administration can win.

 Therefore, then Ministers such as Patalie Champika Ranawaka were strongly opposed to the idea of conducting any form of elections in the North.

It was because MR, as the then President, overcame such resistance that the TNA today stands exposed as a political entity with a self-serving agenda. 

Though the support from the North to GR was abysmal, the TNA also performed poorly during the 2018 Local Government Elections. 

In fact, the disappointment of the people had been over the TNA’s overall performance had been manifesting as way back as early 2017.

In April 2017 a group of ex-LTTE cadres took to the streets in protest against the agri-farms and preschools, maintained by the Civil Defence Force, being turned over to the TNA-run Provincial Council management.

 Protesters in their hundreds marched down the streets for they feared that if there was such a change in management it would result in the projects running to ruin and they themselves losing their livelihoods.

In an enclave where TNA had been carefully maintaining only one voice of opinion and that too exclusively theirs, this was certainly an unexpected outburst. 

None of those who expound on the need for devolution in the name of democracy had ever questioned the silence from the North. 

Even the smallest group that has the freedom of expression will have more opinions than members.

 Then, the fact that the North has one opinion, and that is maximum power devolution to the point of self-governance and not hum on economic development or any other social need, is strange to say in the least.

Even the protest march against the TNA in 2017 had been dismissed as a one-off incident.

 The voice of hundreds of protesters cannot be a “one-off incident”. There had been similar incidents that had exposed the disillusionment people have of the TNA.

 The emotional farewell Colonel Rathnapriya Bandu received in January 2018 from the people in Vishvamadu – a hotbed of the LTTE in a different era, passed not so long ago, was astounding.

 They grieved over losing the presence of an officer attached to the very Army that destroyed their Tamil Eelam dream.

In the same manner, time and again villagers have been protesting when Army camps within their vicinity had been removed. 

They claim the presence of the military was a clear impediment to anti-social criminal activities in the area. 

With the absence of the military presence with the removal of the Army, camp has increased these criminal activities and has made the area unsafe for the people. They also claim, for emergency and other needs, 

it has always been the Army camp that had come to their assistance and aid and never the elected officials in the Provincial Council.

Thus, when the Yahapalana Government quietly allowed all the Provincial Councils to become defunct by not holding elections after their terms expired, it is hardly surprising that the TNA hardly made a peep as a way of a protest. 

The greatest irony is that the Provincial Councils were formed to ensure that the Tamils in the North and the East have power devolved to them.

The then Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi did not fly down to Sri Lanka and the then JR Jayawardena Government did not sign the 13th Amendment under duress from India for the betterment of all Sri Lankan citizens.

 This was purely done to address a need articulated – violently and otherwise – by certain Tamil groups in the North and the East. 

In this context, the greatest protector and defender of the provincial council system ought to be the TNA, who are still on the same page of self-governance.

This exposes the greatest farce of the Yahapalana Government. Their core agenda was the maximum devolution of power and strengthening of democracy. Yet, they could not hold a single Provincial Council election.

 The very advocators of the Provincial Council system to the point that they want it to be self-governing did not make a single protest for they knew they would get booted out by the people. 

They were, in essence, clinging on to power against the will of the majority. Yet, the Yahapalana Government was able to establish that it had strengthened democracy.

The Yahapalana narrative highlights the establishment of independent commissions. The Election Commission is supposed to be one such independent commission. 

Yet, they were unable to hold the Local Government Elections on time and out of the nine, not a single election to appoint a new council for the provincial councils that fell defunct during the Yahapalana era. 

The first request the Election Commission Chairman Mahinda Deshapriya made of the newly elected President Gotabaya Rajapaksa was to allow the Provincial Council elections to take place. That one statement negates the entire Yahapalana narrative that they strengthened democracy.

It was also very obvious that the members of these so-called independent commissions were working towards their own private agenda. 

Professor Hoole, despite being a member of the Election Commission, clearly did not believe in elections. He went to Courts against holding general elections. 

While it is true that elections were not due, after Maithripala Sirisena declared his unwillingness to work with Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, people ought to have been given an opportunity to elect a stable government.

The only successfully executed project of the Yahapalana Government was to rewrite their failures in a flowery narrative. 

To the one who takes a cursory glance, the Yahapalana Government had done an excellent job. Yet, they failed to retain their power seats because they antagonized different people on different levels.

The election is over and a new Government is shaping up. Yet, the voter’s duty is far from done. As citizens, we need to stay involved than blindly following a well-crafted script. Staying informed is the only way to strengthen democracy

ranasingheshivanthi@gmail.com

By: Padraig Colman Courtesy Ceylon Today

The Western Media has predictably greeted the election of our new President with rehashed allegations of war crimes. 

Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election was reported on 17 November (over ten years since the LTTE’s defeat)

On that same date, one newspaper, The London Sunday Times, owned by Rupert Murdoch, led with a story about horrendous crimes committed by British soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 Not all of the information is new. What is shocking is the extent of the crimes and of the tireless efforts of the British Government to suppress the facts.

 The Insight team of the Sunday Times and the BBC Panorama programme has been carrying out a year-long investigation. 

The Panorama programme was broadcast on Monday (18). They claim that two thick files have been kept under lock and key behind the barbed wire security fences of the Trenchard Lines military base near Salisbury Plain.

The Baha Mousa case

The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT) investigated alleged war crimes committed by British troops during the occupation of Iraq starting in 2003; Operation Northmoor investigated alleged war crimes in Afghanistan. 

The Government’s excuse for calling off the investigations in 2017 was that Phil Shiner, a lawyer who had taken more than 1,000 cases to IHAT, was struck off as a solicitor following allegations that he had paid fixers in Iraq to find clients. That does not explain why the files were kept locked up.

Publicity had already been given to some of the cases featured in the Panorama programme. I have myself written about the case of Baha Mousa.

https://pcolman.wordpress.com/2011/09/09/more-fog-of-war-another-british-war-crime/
According to Sir William Gage’s report, Baha Mousa was pronounced dead at 22:05 hours.

 A subsequent post mortem found that in the course of his detention Baha Mousa had sustained 93 separate external injuries. He was also found to have internal injuries including fractured ribs.

Baha Mousa was a receptionist at the Ibn al-Haitham Hotel in Basra who was captured in a raid by Britain’s finest on 14 September 2003 after a cache of arms and uniforms was found in his workplace. 

The Army had found weapons including grenades, rifles, bayonets and suspected bomb-making equipment. Along with nine others, he was taken in for “questioning”.

Corporal Donald Payne killed a man. That’s what soldiers do. Here is how Payne killed Baha Mousa. Payne violently assaulted Baha Mousa, punching and kicking. 

This ended with Baha Mousa lying inert on the floor. According to the Gage Report:

 “I find that from the outset of their incarceration in the TDF (Temporary Detention Facility) the Detainees were subjected to assaults by those who were guarding them and, in particular, by Payne. 

I find that they were also assaulted from time to time by others who happened to be passing by the TDF.

 The assaults by the guards were instigated and orchestrated by Payne. He devised a particularly unpleasant method of assaulting the detainees, known as the “choir”. 

It consisted of Payne punching or kicking each detainee in sequence, causing each to emit a groan or other sign of distress.

 Baha’s father was a senior Police officer, permitted by the British to carry a pistol and wear his blue uniform. 

Colonel Mousa believed the real reason his son was killed was he had seen several British troops opening the hotel safe and stuffing currency into their pockets.

At a court martial Payne was charged with manslaughter, inhumane treatment and perverting the course of justice. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year in prison.

British war crimes in Iraq

Panorama has re-examined the evidence in a number of alleged war crimes cases. One such case was the shooting of an Iraqi Policeman by a British soldier on patrol in Basra in 2003.

 Raid al-Mosaw was shot by a British soldier in an alleyway as he left his family home. Major Christopher Suss-Francksen confidently concluded that the soldier was legitimately acting in self-defence.

 IHAT detectives spent two years investigating the case and interviewed 80 British soldiers, including the soldier Suss-Francksen claimed had witnessed the shooting. 

The soldier told IHAT: “This report is inaccurate and gives the impression that I was an eyewitness. 

This is not true.” This soldier and many others confirmed that they only heard one shot which means that Raid al-Mosaw could not have fired first. The Sunday Times states bluntly that Suss-Francksen faked evidence.

IHAT detectives say they found evidence of widespread abuse at Camp Stephen, a British Army base in Basra run by the Black Watch and used as an unofficial detention centre.

 One of the detectives told Panorama that the physical and sexual abuse of prisoners, most of whom were innocent, was “endemic” at the base. There was nothing spontaneous about the many horrendous crimes committed at Camp Stephen. 

The culture of abuse was sanctioned at senior levels. The open layout of the camp would have made it obvious to officers what was happening. There is a stinking fetor of complicity and cover-up.

Detectives working on Operation Northmoor investigated a night raid in Helmand Province, Afghanistan on 18 October 2012 during which a Special Forces soldier killed four males aged 20, 17, 14 and 12 in the guest room of a family home in Loy Bagh village.

 They were merely drinking tea. Relatives had to mop up teeth, bone and brain flesh from the heavily-stained carpet. 

Investigators expected the soldier to be charged with four counts of murder and referred the case to the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA).

 They also wanted to prosecute the commanding officer, along with his superior, for falsifying a report and for perverting the course of justice. Military prosecutors decided not to bring charges.

Predictably, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab refused to be drawn on whether these claims were new to him, and said that prosecuting authorities for the British Armed Forces are “some of the most rigorous in the world”. 

It is instructive to contrast Raab’s attitude with the response of Enoch Powell to the atrocities at the Hola Camp in Kenya in 1959.

https://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/02/powell-speech-kenya-hola
Former Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald (now Warden of Wadham College, Oxford) has examined the evidence gathered by the Sunday Times and concludes: “In 2002, the International Criminal Court was set up, with Britain’s enthusiastic support, to prosecute crimes against humanity where individual nations were too cowardly, incompetent or unwilling to bring their own citizens to justice in the face of compelling evidence of the gravest international crimes. Now, as that Court turns its eyes towards us, we are forced to confront the unnerving possibility that one of those derelict nations might be our own.”

Courtesy Adaderana

Former Minister Rajitha Senaratne says that Sajith Premadasa is not yet suitable for the position of the Leader of the Opposition.

Joining the ‘Mokada Wune?’ (What happened?) program on Ada Derana, the former Health Minister stated that the crisis within the party was the main reason for the defeat at the Presidential Election.

He also said that the institutes appointed to investigate corruption had become even more corrupt.

Stating that the former Prime Minister was committed to the elections campaign ‘with his soul’, Senaratne said that there is no truth in the allegations against Wickremesinghe.

The qualification to be the Opposition Leader is being able to work together with the international and not the person’s popularity, he further said.

He added that former Minister Sajith Premadasa is a person with little political experience.

Senaratne says he does not see anyone within the party who is eligible for the leadership of the United National Party (UNP) is Ranil Wickremesinghe resigns as the Leader.

Others were too soon to nominate Sajith Premadasa for the presidential candidacy, says Senaratne.

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.