The 15 Cabinet Ministers’ workload is quite challenging. Each Minister needs to have at least 2 State Ministers. Each State Minister needs to have qualified Professionals and Academics, consisting of at least one identified in each of the allocated Subjects.
In other words, the
structure should provide a direct link to each Page in the Saubhagaya Dekma (
the Presidential Manifesto or Vision and Mission Statement of the President)
assigning the commitments made to the public.
Neither Ministers nor State Ministers are qualified to implement the Manifesto. They are politicians. The Establishment Hierarchy at the Ministries such as Secretaries (previously Permanent Secretaries) and the rest will be responsible for implementing the decisions, within FR and AR. But looking at the Manifesto and Implementing the tasks is not their responsibility. They are different kinds of Animals of their own, within the Box. That responsibility should remain within the Cabinet Ministers, State Ministers, and the Professionals and Academics.
The primary objective of the structure will be to ensure developing short term targets for each Subject. The IT Professionals could quite easily develop a package of Targets vs Performances matrix with drill-down analysis for each State Minister and Cabinet Minister. It will also highlight critical areas where Performances are falling behind the Target and the reasons, with an appropriate plan for remedial actions.
When the Prime Minister
and the President review achievements, probably fortnightly, the
implementation progress can be measured.
In the long run- some
State Ministers and even Cabinet Ministers, need to be provided extensive
training on the Performance Evaluation essentials.
In the first three months, the Prime Minister and the President can obtain first-hand information on capabilities of Professionals, Academics, State and Cabinet Ministers, which will be valuable going forward.
The Vision and Mission Statement of the President should become the Bible for the Cabinet, State Ministers, and the Advisors.
Throughout every Christmas season, customers at supermarkets in Sri Lanka can hear Christmas hymns being sung and the staff wearing red Santa Claus caps, though not all the staff may be Christians.
This no doubt is commercializing religion but why force-feed it on non-Christians too – both employees and customers?
During Buddhist and Hindu festivals however, we hear neither chanting of Buddhist sutras nor Hindu devotional songs at these same supermarkets.
Are we still a European colony?
We can understand if this is confined only to December 24-25. But why continue it for over a month until the festive season ends? This does not happen in Western countries to my knowledge.
Is
not forcing non-Christian employees to wear Santa Claus costumes a violation of
human rights?
Getting the female staff to wear cloth and jacket
during the Sinhala-Tamil New Year is quite different since it a national
festival according to ancient traditions – not a religious festival as such.
We do not mind Sri Lankan supermarkets having Christmas trees during the season provided they have Vesak Lanterns during Vesak and maybe some Hindu symbols during Hindu festivals at least in areas where Hindus are in the majority.
* UNP’s Vibheeshana role * Communalism in minority politics Opportunity for reset in majority-minority relations
What we just experienced was undoubtedly the most eventful week since January 2015. The people of Sri Lanka have voted to end a five year long nightmare. Gota’s victory was not unexpected, but the sheer magnitude of the victory certainly was. What we saw was the reaction of a down trodden, persecuted, humiliated majority community to all the suffering and indignities they had undergone for the past five years. The events that took place in Sri Lanka between January 2015 and November 2019 will be a valuable case study for all multi-ethnic, multi-religious nations as to what could happen when the majority community of a nation is used as a doormat by the minority communities.
Over the past five years, UNP politicians went out of their way to insult and humiliate the Sinhalese and especially the Sinhala Buddhists. The Tamils and Muslims reacted positively to such Sinhala politicians. The way to curry favour with the minorities and to obtain their votes was to heap insults on the Sinhalese. During the past five years, the well known Sinhala ditty “Sinhalaya modaya, kevum kanna yodaya” was the clarion call of the yahapalana government. At election time, the Sinhalese were divided between the two main political parties, a situation which allowed the minority political parties organized on the basis of either ethnicity or religion to tip the balance in favour of one political party or another.
It is no secret that members of the minority comunities generally held the Sinhalese in contempt because they thought they could always prevail against the divided Sinhalese by manipulating the democratic system to their advantage. This attitude cannot be blamed only on the ethnicity and religion based political parties. Such political parties have contributed to the problem no doubt, but this isolationist, exclusivist anti-Sinhalese, anti-Sinhala Buddhist attitude has seeped into the very fiber of the being of most Tamil and Muslim Sri Lankans. There are exceptions to this no doubt, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the Tamils and Muslims in this country are communal minded. One has to call a spade a spade and this has to be discussed openly.
Communal minded minorities
The communal mindedness of the Tamils and the Muslims has to be taken out of the realm of taboo topics by the Tamils and Muslims themselves. If one reads Armand de Souza’s book ‘Hundred Days in Ceylon under Martial Law 1915’ and other sources on the 1915 riots, the cause of the communal disturbances was not due to anything that the Sinhalese did, but because a certain community of Muslims did not want a Buddhist procession to go past one of their mosques. At the same time, another community of Muslims in the same area had no issue with the Buddhist procession going past their mosque.
That was in an era when there was no Wahabism, no Al Qaeda and no ISIS and the Muslims were a minority in British Ceylon. It is mind boggling to think that a communal riot can be sparked off simply because a Buddhist religious procession went past a mosque. One would think that a communal riot would need a more cogent cause such as at least a brawl between two groups resulting in several deaths or something of that nature. The very fact that a Buddhist procession could not go past a mosque without sparking off a riot shows that the Sinhalese were treated with contempt by at least a section of the Muslims even at that time.
What has happened today is that with the Wahabi contagion, that attitude seems to have affected the Muslim community in general. Not that this attitude on the part of minority communities has no justification. The average Sinhalese can be bought for a mess of pottage. A few roofing sheets, and some handouts can change Sinhalese voting patterns but that will not happen to the same extent among Tamils and Muslims. As the old saying goes, you get only what you deserve and as far as the Sinhalese go, any negative attitudes the minorities may have towards them was not without justification.
It’s just that during the past five years, this was taken too far for even the cringing, servile Sinhalese to stomach. Many people thought the anti-Sinhalese, pro-minority bent in the UNP was due to Ranil Wickremesinghe’s leadership. It was so to some extent no doubt. We never saw such an attitude in the UNP during the J.R.Jayewardene, Premadasa and D.B.Wijetunga eras. Nor have we read of such an attitude during the Dudley Senanayake and D.S. Senanayake eras. The only approximation to what was experienced under Ranil Wickremasinghe’s watch would be the Sir John Kotelawala era.
However, the anti-Sinhala Buddhist attitude reached a new level of insidiousness with the emergence of Sajith Premadasa in the UNP. What was open and infantile earlier became hidden and crafty. Maximum emphasis was placed on duping the gullible Sinhalese with welfare measures while pledging what was essentially the division of the country to the Tamils. Just days before the election, the then Opposition Leader Mahinda Rajapaksa in a statement described the UNP’s policy as follows:
“The chapter on constitutional reform in the manifesto of the UNP presidential candidate contains provisions to replace the unitary state with a formulation that describes Sri Lanka as an ‘undivided and indivisible’ state. This is accompanied by the pledge that governmental power will be devolved to the provinces to the ‘maximum extent possible’. Identical provisions can be seen in the draft constitution tabled in Parliament by the Prime Minister in January this year.
“The UNP manifesto also contains provisions to expand the powers and functions of the provincial councils, to set up a second chamber in Parliament made up of provincial council representatives in order to curb the powers of Parliament, to allow the provincial units to raise funds independently, to place district and divisional secretaries under the provincial councils and to create a Constitutional Court, which will adjudicate in disputes between the center and the provincial units. Like the draft constitution, the UNP presidential election manifesto also aims to turn Sri Lanka into a loose federation of virtually independent provincial units.
“The draft constitution sought to describe Sri Lanka as an ‘ekeeya rajya’ in Sinhala and as an ‘orumiththa nadu’ in Tamil while carefully refraining from using the English phrase ‘unitary state’ which has specific constitutional connotations. Thus the label of a unitary state would have remained in Sinhala while in Tamil and English Sri Lanka would no longer be recognized as a unitary state. A similar deviousness is to be seen in the UNP presidential election manifesto. Though great care has been taken to avoid using phrases like ekeeya rajaya or unitary state, it has a reference in Sinhala to ‘maubime ekeeyathwaya’, which translates into English as ‘the unity of the motherland’.
“The phrase ‘maubime ekeeyathwaya’ has no constitutional value but it can be used to misleadingly suggest to Sinhala readers that the manifesto seeks to uphold the unitary state. Significantly, the UNP manifesto has refused to use even the Sinhala phrase ‘ekeeya rajya’ that had been conceded earlier in the PM’s draft constitution to assuage Sinhala sentiments. There is a clearly apparent hardening of the federalist position in the UNP manifesto. This is the first time that a mainline political party has included in an election manifesto provisions to dismantle the unitary state and to create a federal state in its place. Therefore this is a matter that needs to be taken very seriously.”
A new level of insidiousness
The SLPP was not able to take political advantage of the UNP’s open sellout to the separatist lobby due to two reasons – on the one hand, the constitutional subterfuge involved was too complicated for the average voter to understand – indeed it was hardly understood clearly even by most politicians. Secondly, even if the issue had been understood by the opposition politicians there was not enough time to get the message across to the public. The question is whether Sajith was aware of the contents of the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto until it was in print and drew flak from the opposing side? Even though he went around the country brandishing a copy of his manifesto and saying that it was his own thinking, everyone knows that manifestoes are normally not prepared by election candidates themselves.
It’s always a team of experts who prepares the manifesto for the candidate. So was this chapter on constitutional reform introduced into his manifesto without his knowledge? It is well known that the UNP manifesto was prepared in a hurry and was in fact the last manifesto to be launched by the main political parties. The evidence that we have to the effect that Sajith was fully aware not only of the contents of the chapter on constitutional reform but also its implications was that at a press conference held quite some time before the UNP manifesto was released, Sajith stated that his position was ‘the maximum devolution of power within an undivided and indivisible Sri Lanka’.
At that press conference he avoided the use of the term unitary state. This indicates that he was well briefed as to the concepts and terminology involved and the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto was not something introduced without his knowledge.
Sajith Premadasa is not Maithripala Sirisena. In 2015, when the newly elected yahapalana government went to Geneva and betrayed the country, they deliberately posted a doctored Sinhala translation of UNHRC Resolution 30/1 on the official foreign ministry website in order to mislead the Sinhala reader as to the actual contents of that document. It was obviously this doctored translation that was given to President Sirisena by his foreign minister. So for a while we saw a war of words between the President and the opposition with the former insisting that Resolution 30/1 was a great achievement and the latter shouting from the rooftops that Sri Lanka had been betrayed. It would have taken months for President Sirisena to realize that the opposition was right.
In Sajith’s case however the situation was obviously very different. He is English educated and quite capable of understanding the connotations of the words used. The indications are, that he knew from the very beginning what the chapter on constitutional reform in his manifesto would contain. In speaking to the Mahanayakes we heard Sajith mention the word ekeeya rajya but that phrase does not appear anywhere in his manifesto. In the manifesto itself we find the phrase ‘maubime ekeeyabawa’ but that is not a reference to a unitary state. However it could be used to mislead those unfamiliar with constitutional phraseology into thinking that it is a reference to the unitary state.
In the last few days in the run up to the poll, Champika Ranawaka went to see the Ven Mahanayake Theras with a letter saying that the UNP was for an ekeeya rajya. This was nothing but the same kind of chicanery that we saw in 2015. Maithripala Sirisena stated publicly that he was going to abolish the executive presidency, and he signed agreements with various political parties and oganisations saying that he would abolish the executive presidency, but his manifesto stated deviously that the constitution will be amended only to the extent that a referendum is not made necessary. That precluded the abolition of the executive presidency. What we saw with regard to constitutional reform in Sajith Premadasa’s manifesto was very similar. The TNA knows that what Sajith promised them through his manifesto was a federal state and they made the decision to vote for the UNP on that account.
All this is a cause for worry because it shows that the younger generation in the UNP has become much more devious and sophisticated in their treachery than the older generation. On the one hand they play the role of a populist politician, patting people on the back, giving people houses and jobs, promising to give Janasaviya on top of Samurdhi, free meals to school children, free school uniforms, free shoes, free sanitary pads for women so as to buy Sinhala votes and then pledging to give the Tamils a federal state so as to get their votes as well. What the 2019 presidential election campaign showed beyond any doubt is that the UNP’s problem is not just Ranil Wickremasinghe, but runs far deeper and getting rid of RW will not cure the problem but will probably make things worse.
Promoting a Vibheeshana
The people realised this instinctively which is why they did not fall for the wolf in sheepskin trick when the UNP and the Tamil and Muslim political parties associated with them dumped Ranil Wickremasinghe and adopted Sajith Premadasa as their champion. They supported Sajith because they thought he could deliver to them what RW could not. Even after this resounding defeat, the Tamil and Muslim political parties have not got out of the “Sinhalaya modaya kevum kanna yodaya” frame of mind. Mano Ganesan and Rishard Baithiudeen now claim that the Tamils and Muslims were not being ‘jaathiwadee’ because they had all voted for a Sinhala Buddhist. Such claims insult the intelligence of the voting public.
The Tamils and Muslims voted for Sajith Premadasa because he was willing to do their bidding – to be a Vibheeshana to the Sinhalese. RW was also willing to do the bidding of the minorities and he too wanted to contest. But the reason why the minority parties backed Sajith was because they thought that the latter would be better able to deceive the Sinhalese. This election result has put paid to that kind of politics. It is certainly true that at a future election the minorities could always pull off another 2015 style coup by ganging up behind a Sinhala leader who was willing to do their bidding, but the reaction to that could well be a 2019 style turn of events the next time around. In 2015, the coup was unexpected. But after the bitter lessons learnt, voters will always be vigilant at every election.
The odds that were stacked against the majority community all these years are now somewhat even. For that we have to thank the yahapalana government formed in 2015. Do we want a ding dong electoral battle between the minority communities and the majority community? That is entirely for the minority communities to decide. There is of course a question over whether the Tamil and Muslim reaction to Gota’s Presidential candidacy was due to his being the main architect of the war that crushed LTTE terrorism and the erroneous belief that he was behind the anti-Muslim Bodu Bala Sena. The BBS was actually used by certain local and international forces including the Jathika Hela Urumaya and Norway, to oust the Rajapaksa government. The US Embassy in Colombo also played a major role in this and we commented on it in this column at that time.
Such factors would have contributed to the extreme reaction on the part of the minorities and it may be surmised that if the candidate had been Mahinda Rajapaksa, the reaction may have been somewhat different. However it is also the reality that the reaction to MR would only have been marginally different. The communal minded majority of Tamil and Muslim voters don’t want to see a proper Sinhala leader in office. Communal politics was first started by S.J.V.Chelvanayagam in the 1950s by mooting a Tamil state A ‘Thamil arasu’. The Tamils of Indian origin were first organised in trade unions which later became political parties. Then the Muslims started communal politics in the 1980s. Because the Sinhaese were divided, it was possible for the Tamils and Muslim political parties to align themselves with various political parties and call the shots in the governments that were formed since the 1990s.
This reached its apogee in 2015, when a President was elected to power without getting the majority of the majority community vote. Outside the north and east, President Maithripala Sirisena had lost the election and he managed to win only due to the overwhelming majorities received from the north and east. Having reached its highest point between 2015 and 2019, the worm has turned, and the Sinhalese have hoist the Tamils and the Muslims with their own petard. Now each Tamil and Muslim individual will have to take a personal decision and decide whether this narrow minded communalism was going to continue or whether they were going to reject communal politics and become members of the SLPP and the UNP instead of being members of Muslim or Tamil based political parties. The choice is theirs.
What the presidential election 2019 showed for the first time was that the Sinhalese can play the same game that the Tamils and Muslims have been playing for decades. Until S.J.V.Chelvanayagam came along in the mid-1950s, the Tamil leadership of the north personified in G.G.Ponnambalam got on fine with the Senanayakes who led the UNP. He was so close to the Senanayakes that he even got involved and fell victim to the internal conflicts in the UNP. Until M.H.M.Ashraff came into the scene in the 1980s with his divisive message, the Musims were well integrated in the two main political parties.
There were more Muslims in the UNP than in the SLFP but both political parties had respected Muslim leaders whose names are closely associated with the histories of those political parties. So it’s not as if national politics has never existed among Tamils and Muslims in this country. In 1952, even Chelvanayagam lost his seat to a UNP candidate. That was before communalism became the main determining force in northern politics. We once had a past that was exemplary. Each Tamil and Muslim living in this country will have to make an individual decision as to whether we are going to go back to the rational past or to continue with the irrational present.
Dr. Sudath Gunasekara Former Permanent Secretary to Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranayaka and Ex- President of the Sri Lanka State Administrative Services Association (1991-19194)
22.11.2019.
H.E. The
President,
Sir ,
Your decision to appoint 15 Cabinet Ministers only, is excellent and highly commendable. The whole country admires it as the beginning of a New Political Culture and Statecraft in this country, as you have promised in your manifesto. This is said to be the smallest Cabinet after 1956. As you know 1956 was the turning point in Sri Lankan politics in national resurgence. The second re-emergence reappeared in 2005 with Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory and culminated in 2009 with the elimination of the LTTE under his leadership and you’re commanding the Armed Forces. But that emergence was short-lived and again robbed by the reactionary forces in 2015.
I suggest you
strict to this policy of a leaner Cabinet even after the next General Election
so that it will turn to be the third turning point, in the political history of
this country after the so-called 1948 Independence, that will be irreversible, and
you will go down in history as a hero who rescued this country from all
colonial legacies and who made this Island nation once again a fully independent
and a free and a proud nation.
This I think is the wish of all those who voted you in. Since this country has failed to emerge as an Independent, free and prosperous country for 71 years due to poor and bad political leadership that was the misfortune and the curse of the nation.
Appointment of
Deputy Ministers
I suggest you appoint only 15 Deputy Minister as well, to these 15 Cabinet Ministries, of cause with clear responsibilities assigned, and refuse the madness of appointing another set of Ministers called State Ministers and Non-Cabinet Minister as it has become a big fast and a Joke as well, just to keep some crazy politicians happy, of course without doing any service to the country. However, for practical purposes you may appoint 2 Deputies to the Prime Minister considering the heavy volume ha has to handle.
Also your attention is drawn to the joke of having another set of Ministers called Ministers of State as if others are not. Similarly, the appointment of non-Cabinet or any other such as Ministers with many other names, like Special Projects and without Portfolio, etc should also be stopped. I would also suggest that even after the next General Elections you strict to this number of Ministers and Deputy Ministers for the next five years ignoring the number set by the Constitution as 30 Cabinet Ministers and 40 Non-cabinet. Those MPPs who are disgruntled may be asked to find other jobs outside the Parliament and the Parliament should cease to be a place providing princely jobs for politicians under your Government at least now. They must be told that they have come here to serve the people and not to bleed them at their expense. If you are strict with these principles, I can assure you that you will definitely get the necessary 2/3 in the next Parliament for you to get a new Constitution based on the civilization of this country passed, making the way for the necessary legal framework.
I also suggest that you reduce the number of MPP to around 130 but not exceeding 150 that could be formed into 15 Executive Committees as it was done during the State Council days where the Chairmen of the Committees can be appointed as Ministers. This arrangement will help you to run a Government even without Political Parties, which has become a bane and a veritable curse to this country.
Moreover, the appointment of National list MP for any existing vacancy may also be withheld until you make a decision on the National List after the next General Election to abolish it.
The National
list
The so-called National list is a major anachronism in our body politics as it serves only political parties to appoint personal friends of party leaders who can never come to Parliament through elections. This system has created a new version of Democracy that could be called backdoor Democracy” This list was invented by political parties just to increase their vote in Parliament only and never to serve the people. None of these National list MPP has done any service up to date. Look at the performance of National list Ministers in the past, particularly men like Malik Samarwickrama, Anoma Gamage, Sarath Fonseka, C H.Marasinha, Jayampathi Wikramaratna, A.H.M Fousi. SB Dissanayaka, M.L.H Hisbulla, and Vijitamuni Zoysa, some of whom are defeated Candidates, a disgrace to politicians.
What is more, is these fellows are not answerable to the people and they are answerable only to their Party leaders as they are appointed by them. So where is Democracy? It is a very big danger to democracy to have such people in Parliament who bark and act only on behalf of their Party leaders who have their own private agendas.
To my knowledge, there has been only one National list MP in the history of this innovation, who has done some useful service to the country. That is Luxman Kadiragamar, the best Foreign Minister we ever had. But one swallow does not make a summer.
Therefore why
have another 29 jokers and parasites like this at public expense, as if 195 are
not enough, whereas actually we can do a better job with a Parliament of 130 or
150 the most. What the people want today is a lean Parliament and a lean
Cabinet of quality men and women who are committed to serve the people who can
make this country a miracle in the world or at least in Asia and definitely not
a set of highway robbers and looters like what we had in the recent past where
the leaders ended up with looting the Central Bank of the nation and thereby
who put it even behind Afganisthan within 4 years.
I assure you, Sir, you can add few more glittering jewels to your crown in addition to what you have already won if you listen to these requests so that you can go down in history as the man who created irreversible history in Good Governance in this country.
Dr. Dietmar Doering -The writer is a German investor, tourism promoter and social scientist based in Sri Lanka Courtesy The Island
Sri Lanka ushered a new era with the election of a typical ‘People’s President’ with a convincing mandate at a critical juncture to lead the country’s 21 million people towards economic prosperity.
With 6.9 million plus votes, the clear verdict of the masses reflected the demand for a strong leader, and the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the President effectively drove home the point that the nation clamored for direction and guidance from a resolute presidency to charter a new and meaningful course for a country at crossroads.
With a significantly high voter turnout, the November 16 presidential polls was free, fair and peaceful. This was also confirmed by EU EOM’s (European Union Election Observation Mission) Chief Observer, Ms Marisa Matisa, who commented that “Sri Lanka’s presidential election was largely free of violence and technically well managed”.
The phenomenal peaceful outcome of the presidential stakes, with a near 80% voter participation, was remarkable. The enthusiasm amongst voters to exercise their franchise to elect a headstrong leader with a vision to open new vistas in terms of economic growth and development was clearly visible. The young, old and infirm queued up with confidence to bring about a change the country at large envisaged for a better tomorrow.
Sri Lanka’s wholly impartial and peaceful presidential election was a splendid example to the world, especially to the western hemisphere, which more often than not tend to heap criticism on the country when it comes to honoring democratic processes. It is no secret that the negative and biased western mainstream media tries to paint a negative picture, whenever elections are conducted in Sri Lanka.
This is absolutely unfair and unjustified. Not only this presidential polls, but even many others held previously were also largely violence-free and described as free and fair. After then President Mahinda Rajapaksa lost to Maithripala Sirisena in 2015, the transition of power was smooth. Even before the final results were announced, Mahinda Rajapaksa vacated his official residence in an exemplary move that saw the newly-elected President taking over the mantle of leadership with ease.
In the just concluded presidential election also, the other main contender, Sajith Premadasa conceded defeat and congratulated the President-elect on his victory in the true spirit of lofty democratic traditions.
However, the western media sought to highlight a few marginal and somewhat irrelevant incidents during the election period in a bid to taint the positive scenario. This has been the general pattern when it comes to countries like Sri Lanka, where they highlight some sporadic minor incidents in a bid to give the story a twist and thereby tarnish the country’s image. Unfortunately, it has become the trend to add a frightening dimension to events to portray to the outside world that all’s not well in Sri Lanka.
Even in Europe, election time is not completely devoid of violence. So was it in Germany, where in the last parliamentary polls, some candidates in the fray faced physically harassment with many political party offices and vehicles also set ablaze. The whole electoral process came under threat by rival parties as a result.
In my view, the last two elections in Sri Lanka were significantly more peaceful than many polls conducted in other democracies across the world. With such political maturity and excellence in conducting elections, I would recommend that observers be drawn from Sri Lanka to monitor polls in western countries.
The 2019 Sri Lankan presidential election campaign was fierce, with the candidates putting up a stiff fight with debates, arguments and counter arguments. However, after the results were announced, they shook hands with the President-elect.
Sri Lanka has proven that it’s a matured democracy with a salutary electoral process. The country’s adherence to democratic principles and traditions are laudable. In this positive backdrop, interferences by western envoys should stop.
Unfortunately, questions on alleged human rights violations that crop up largely on information provided by some foreign envoys based in Sri Lanka to their respective governments, are tainting the positive image of the country in the world.
The question of human rights violations is more evident when it comes to weapons being exported to countries like Yemen. Great Britain and Germany are still exporting heavy weapons to Saudi Arabia knowing only too well the destruction they can cause to the lives of civilians as well.
The hypocrisy of western nations is rarely highlighted in their mainstream media. Only social media streams report on alleged human rights violations they commit.
Sri Lanka should seek to quit its dependence on leading global lending agencies such as the World Bank and IMF as the loans they grant influence policies, especially in developing countries.
With Sri Lanka’s enormous potential, a four-fold increase in tourist arrivals will significantly minimize the dependence on foreign funding. According to leading rating agencies, achieving an annual target of 8 million tourists will translate into a 50% plus contribution to the national GDP.
– Dr. Dietmar Doering
(The writer is a German investor, tourism promoter and social scientist based in Sri Lanka)
I did not vote for you, nor am I aligned with a political party. My family are a colour pallet of green, blue, red and now the new pink. Nor am I a political pundit or have a degree in political science.
I am writing to you as I find your supporters, the social media and your colleagues, appear to be under the illusion that your failure to win the Presidential elections was due to a single reason and that reason being the RW factor.
I am no friend of RW. In fact I have little respect for the supposed gentleman, considering the manner in which he has hogged the UNP party leadership despite successive defeats, without giving the young blood of the party a chance. His obvious favouritism towards his chronies is akin to MR’s nepotism. It is also undeniable, RW’s “I will continue to be the PM” line on the campaign trail may have adversely impacted your elections campaign. However, none of those are the reasons why I didn’t vote for you.
Mr. Premadasa, I didn’t vote for you because:
a) As far as my memory recalls you had never won your Electoral District in your 26 years of service to the public. Granted you have a seat in the deep South, which is the Rajapaksa territory, but in that case, you should have the foresight and political acumen to switch the seat. Correct me if I am wrong, but RW originally contested from Biyagama and then switched to a sure seat in Colombo and so did Ravi K –from Kotte to Colombo. You cannot be heard to say you were not given a seat of your choice. You were the Deputy Leader of the Party and if you could not convince your leader to give you a sure seat, then what confidence do we have of your negotiation skills and success?
b) You were backed by Maithri Gunaratne and Shrilal Lakthileke, who rebelled and supported you to bring in party reforms. You however didn’t stand by them and sold them down the river for a deal with RW. Mr. Karu J suffered the same fate. Therefore, I didn’t consider you trustworthy or loyal and deserving the Presidency. In all of your speeches on the election trail, the word used was “I” not “us”. Brought back the memories of a dictator, not a man willing to work in co-operation. There were enough squabbles between MS and government. I didn’t want the same to continue.
c) During your 26-year political career, you didn’t take a clear stand on any burning issue in the country. The ceasefire agreement, P TOMS, The war on Terror, persecution of our soldiers, Bond Scam, Easter Bombing, MCC Agreement, Sale of Hambantota Port to the Chinese and many more issues were faced by the country, but you remained silent, whilst most of your colleagues had something to say on each of the issues, though some views most certainly, attracted the wrath of the public or escalated your colleagues’ reputation to joker status. Against this background, I most certainly didn’t believe in your promises – to go to the electric chair on behalf of our soldiers or die for the sake of the country. The pledges came far too late. I didn’t trust you to walk the walk.
d) You did not say a word when your colleagues spared no mercy on the Buddhist monks or the Archbishop. Our country is deeply conservative and all religions are highly respected, and you didn’t see that these remarks were affecting your campaign, which convinced me you had poor political acumen and lacked common sense.
e) I was extremely amused at the fairy tale promises you made about working 24 hours for the good of the people, walking on streets with your voters everyday and worshipping them and taking care of all their needs. I was told by my UNP friends, that you were just playing to the masses with those words. Well the masses showed what they thought of such not-so-intelligent remarks, by overwhelmingly rejecting you. It looks like the fairy tales went down well with Colombo 1-15 though. So, who is the real gullible voter I wonder?
f) You promised to deliver a lot, but never explained the method of delivery. Complicated English words thrown together, does not set out a method or formula and you were caught out many a time. I then excused you as there were doubts about your O/L, but that factor too played a part in my decision not to vote for you. MS at least had O/Ls and even then, see the damage he did!
g) You were in charge of the Ministry of Housing for four and a half years. I didn’t see anything novel or innovative in the housing schemes you declared open. I visited some of the areas in which you have established these housing schemes, and I find the occupants absolutely disgruntled; not only had they taken personal loans to complete the houses, they also had to provide the labour forsaking their own daily work, in order for you to declare open the housing schemes on time. The houses had been built in a style of your late father’s era, whereas the designs and technology even for budget houses, had improved and modernized over the years. GR’s idea of a solar panel which generated an income for the household, was far more appealing to me.
h) I am a fan of Yala just like you. I go to Yala on weekdays to avoid the weekend crowd. I have seen you at Yala National Park on almost all of those trips, even on days where there were important parliament sittings and cabinet meetings. We used to always wonder, how you could excuse yourself from these important sittings, to spot an elephant and a leopard, which can be spotted easily on another day. Therefore, I didn’t believe you when you said you will work 24/7 for us voters.
i) Your camp says you didn’t have funds to do the campaign properly. You said you lived in a flat and your slippers were worn. But the complex from which you emerge every morning sure doesn’t look ordinary nor your wife’s dress. I frankly didn’t detect any difference in the GR and SP campaigns where finances were concerned. In fact, you spent more I believe, reserving the front page of popular Sunday Newspapers for your advertisement campaigns.
I saw on the television, RW very prominently campaigning in the North and East. You were prominent in the rest of the provinces. It’s the provinces in which you campaigned that didn’t vote for you.
Therefore, I genuinely believe that blaming RW alone for this debacle, is wrong and unfair. I didn’t vote for you not “because of” RW. In the past, I have voted for others in your party “in spite of” RW. I didn’t vote for you as the country couldn’t risk another experiment on the throne. We had enough of Friday Night surprises and Mr. Bean shows, in the past four and a half years.
You conducted yourself in a decent manner after a huge defeat, and resigned from your post in the party with immediate effect. Although you were not known for any sporting prowess, and I had only seen a propaganda clip of you playing street cricket in Jaffna, I must say you were a good sport in defeat and even attended the final conference at the Election Commissioner’s Office. Thus, I took the time to pen this letter, as you seem to be confused why people didn’t vote for you, despite the promise of a heaven on earth for us voters.
All the best for you future! Hope you will do the needful to win our confidence!
Riyadh, Nov 23, 2019, SPA — His Royal Highness Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Crown Prince, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense, sent a cable of congratulations to Gotabaya Rajapaksa, on taking the oath of office as President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. The Crown Prince said: it is my delight, on the occasion of taking the oath of office, as the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, to send to you sincere congratulations and wishing of good health and happiness and the friendly people of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, steady progress and advancement.
Riyadh, Nov 23, 2019, SPA — The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud sent a cable of congratulations to the His Excellency President Gotabaya Rajapaksa of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, on taking the oath of office. In his cable, the King said: It is our pleasure, on the occasion of taking the oath as the president of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, to send to you, on behalf of the people and the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in my own name, the best of congratulations and wishing to succeed and to the friendly people of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, further advancement and prosperity.
Daya Gamage worked at the American Embassy in Colombo, as the Sole Foreign Service National and a Political Specialist. He retired in 1994 and has been living in Las Vegas since retirement. After two years of concentration, he has been able to share his knowledge, understanding and his intimate professional association with the US Department of State in the form of a book – Tamil Tigers’ Debt to America. Being aware of how America’s foreign policy worked- sometimes in a strange manner, he has come out with an unbiased text full of data in his book nowhere else is contained. Daya Gamage has authorised the writer to ” to quote anything from his book” so that the readers will get a clear picture of America’s Foreign Policy, Sri Lanka’s National Issues and the LTTE struggle in depth. Gamage handles the United States Bureau of the Online daily newspaper Asian Tribune constantly making the readers knowledgeable of the manner in which US foreign policy towards Third World nations works. His book is available on Amazon
At a dinner gathering on May 2012 in Las Vegas, Nevada, several erudite medical surgeons practising in the USA, two of whom were Sri Lankan Tamils hailing from the Jaffna Peninsula were quite knowledgeable about the situation in their former homeland. Daya Gamage had the opportunity of participating in a discourse with an academic, who was directly engaged with the Sri Lanka’s reconciliation process. He had been ‘commissioned’ to enlighten the Govt. of Sri Lanka (GOSL) on what lessons Sri Lanka as a nation had learnt from the ethnic strife and also, was part of a group that had been asked to recommend policy planks to aid the government in a programme of conflict resolutions.
Insight
What was expected from this academic, where talented Jaffna Tamil, medical personnel participated keenly to get some insight into the degree to which Sri Lanka was conscious of what the US State Department had been promoting and advocating all those years and whether Sri Lanka took note of those ideas during its research for a national policy towards conflict resolution. At least since the 1985 Thimpu (Bhutan) talks between the GOSL and LTTE representatives. The signals as indicated by Daya Gamage in relation to Sri Lanka’s governance, rule of law, ethnic strife, race relations, minority rights, devolution of power to the periphery, etc.
When the issue was placed before him that the intensive security of a broad spectrum of national issues and the policy planks developed by the US State Department Foreign Service Officers(FSOs) stationed in Colombo in the 1980s and 1990s would be relevant in the context that existed, he had direct links to President Rajapaksa, dismissed the notion.
From what sounded like a very authoritative position, his understanding was that the American Embassy in Colombo had been until ‘recently’, exclusively in conversation, dialogue and contact with Sri Lanka’s elite and the American diplomatic mission was out of touch with Sri Lanka’s ground situation and out of pace with the country’s trends.
The US-based Pedagogue’s contention was the mindset that was developed during the 1980s and 1990s at the American diplomatic mission in Colombo and Washington on Sri Lankan issues, viz race relations, ethnic strives,devolution, Tamil rights, rule of law, structure of government, et al, which had no bearing in the existed context.
A dinner party
Daya Gamage has had no evidence at the time whether the guest at the dinner was reflecting the sentiments of the highest echelons of the GOSL or if both ( the highest echelons of the Government of Sri Lanka and this interlocutor) was one of many persons commissioned, to provide guidelines to Sri Lankan conflict on resolution since the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009.
It is significant, therefore, that he seemed to be ignorant of the remarkable ‘link’ between the development mindset of the 1980s/90s and the post- 2009 positions on Sri Lanka pursued by the US. Or maybe Sri Lanka had no capacity to understand that ‘link,’ even though it is an important lesson it may learn when working towards reconciliation and rearranging the polity.
American perspective
The American perspective that had emerged, since the domestic demise of the Tamil Tigers in May 2009, has in fact emerged out of the initial polity planks developed in those two earlier decades within the portals of the American diplomatic mission, with active collaboration of what was then called the ‘Near East and South Asia (NEA) Bureau of the State Department’ (now known as the South and Central Asian Affairs Bureau).
It was the initial belief of this interlocutor that Colombo’s American diplomatic mission had changed the techniques it used to monitor the domestic scenario and situation, and as a result was more favourable to Sri Lanka. But subsequent developments, with the US moving resolutions at Geneva’s UNHRC and mounting the pressure associated with the US, did not match with this interlocutor’s understanding. It should be reminded here once again that this conversationalist was one of those who was ‘commissioned’ by the President of Sri Lanka to ascertain what ‘lessons can be learned’ from Sri Lanka’s long war and recommend the reconciliation process to bring healing to the nation.
What was noted at the outset was three-fold:
1. Ethnic tensions, race relations, Tamil demands and grievances, and their place in a larger Sri Lankan society where the Sinhalese enjoy a numerical strength; the influence of the Tamil political lobby as well as the domestic human rights activists; and the dismal failure of some noted civil society leaders and State officials to intervene in the ongoing dialogue contributed largely towards the development of the mind-set of the American FSO, which in turn saw Washington pursuing a rigid policy towards Sri Lanka.
2. Because of the failure of Sri Lankan officials (its professionals) to effectively interact with the FSOs and participate in the debate that was taking place within the portals of Colombo’s The American diplomatic mission and the failure of the two principal national political parties i.e.: the UNP and the SLFP, in nurturing their own foreign-policy experts was a serious setback. This resulted in the Sri Lankan authorities and the State Department to be on different pages. In consequence, the Government of Sri Lanka had reacted in an ambiguous manner to pressures that were being mounted and faced discomfort globally.
3. The outcome had been the emergence of a particular policy that Washington has set its mind upon, a policy that is most uncomfortable for Sri Lankan in the post-LTTE era and saps its capacity to forge a strategic path.
When searching for the path towards national reconciliation today, it is imperative for Sri Lanka’s ‘self-proclaimed foreign-policy experts’ to link the scenario that developed within the US Embassy in Colombo during the 1980s and 1990s, one that created the foundation of American policy towards Sri Lanka in the decade that followed, to the serious attempts of the US State Department ‘even to contemplate’ to salvage the LTTE supreme leadership in May 2009. Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that this ‘failure’ to get the Tiger hierarchy out of the battle zone and to simultaneously minimise civilian casualties that led the US State Department to intensify pressure of a different kind since then involving the strategic use of the Tamil diaspora to effect changes in Sri Lanka.
Washington’s desire to keep the LTTE alive
To identify that ‘intense pressure of a different kind’, it is vital to ascertain why Washington wanted the LTTE alive, what steps it took to keep it alive, and what path it is taking to bring pressure on Sri Lanka and to then consider whether Sri Lanka can withhold that pressure.
At the outset, it was noted that the interlocutor with whom Daya Gamage had a dialogue at Las Vegas in May 2012 in the company of two Sri Lankan Tamil medical personnel either failed to grasp this larger scenario or was manifesting the sentiments of the hierarchy with the Rajapaksa administration, which was once a broadly popular administration among the majority Sinhalese but was defeated on 8th January 2015 at the Presidential Election, failed to scrutinise that larger scenario to re-establish the cordial and friendly relations that once existed between Colombo and Washington. Eliminating the misunderstanding between the two nations, as US senator John Kerry said in his foreign relations committee report of late 2009, is for mutual benefit and interest.
And to move away from what the former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld once said, “There are things we do not know what we do not know; there are known unknowns – that is to say there are knowns and unknowns, that is to say there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don’t know!
tilakfernando@gmail.com
courtesy: Daya Gamage- “Tamil Tigers Debt to America.”
The election manifesto of United Kingdom’s Labour Party has featured Sri Lanka and promised the protection of human rights of Tamil and Muslim populations in the island nation.
The Labour Party’s manifesto, aimed at securing the victory of UK’s general election in December, was launched two days ago. Many foreign media had tagged the manifesto as ‘radical’ and ‘ambitious’.
The Labour Party has made a pledge that, if elected, it will work through the UN and the Commonwealth to insist on the protection of human rights for Sri Lanka’s minority Tamil and Muslim populations.”
Highlighting the prevailing human rights issues around the world, the Labour Party also vowed to suspend the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia for use in Yemen and to Israel for arms used in violation of the human rights of Palestinian civilians.”
The manifesto also took an undertaking to reform the international rules-based order to secure justice and accountability for breaches of human rights and international law, such as the bombing of hospitals in Syria, the illegal blockade of the Gaza Strip, the use of rape as a weapon of war against the Rohingya community in Myanmar and the indiscriminate bombardment of civilians in Yemen.
A future Labour Government intends to appoint human-rights advisers to work across the Foreign Office and government to prioritise a co-ordinated approach to human rights and to advocate for human rights at every bilateral diplomatic meeting.
Former general secretary of UNP Tissa Attanayake issued a statement today in response to the statement issued by UNP general secretary Akila Viraj Kariyawasam regarding the election campaign of Sajith Premadasa.
The statement says that the party’s general secretary is deliberately hiding the truth and accusing the election operation office in Vauxhaull street.
Meanwhile convening a media briefing subsequent to the presidential election UNP MP Nalin Bandara said that the party as well as the Sirikotha headquarters did not render the necessary support to Sajith Premadasa during the presidential election campaign.
President Gotabaya hails from a political family with a proud political record. His father, D. A. Rajapaksa was one of the founder-members of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). D.A. was a Member of Parliament. He served as the Deputy Speaker and Cabinet Minister of Agriculture and Lands when W. Dahanayake was Prime Minister. The late D. A. Rajapaksa today holds the proud distinction of having produced two highly popular Presidents of Sri Lanka, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Gotabaya Rajapaksa came from a political family, but he had no political ambitions initially. He left that to his three brothers. But In 2009, with the end of the war, Gotabaya was identified as a possible successor to Mahinda Rajapaksa. Gotabaya at that time stated firmly that he had no political ambitions. Gotabaya was catapulted into politics when Mahinda Rajapaksa was prevented from contesting the presidency for the third time. Since Mahinda Rajapaksa was disqualified from a third try, the popular choice was his brother, Gotabaya.
Gotabaya may have come in as a substitute for Mahinda Rajapaksa but he has the potential to be an effective President in his own right. Gotabaya has better qualifications, better achievements, better work experience, and a wider world view, than all the former Presidents of Sri Lanka, put together said, one observer. [1]
Gotabaya has the discipline and necessary managerial experience to function effectively as President said another. He has a very successful track record. In the army, he was seen as a fearless, unflappable leader. He has gained a reputation as a forthright administrator who does not take no” for an answer, said, analysts. He is a decisive and clear-sighted person, said Subramanian Swamy.
Gotabaya comes into the Presidency, with work
experience in two very demanding, highly different fields. He is a decorated
military man with experience in commanding troops. That is well known. But he
is also a qualified computer professional with work experience in that field
too. Gotabaya worked as a computer engineer in the IT department of Loyola
Marymount University, Los Angeles, California.
As Secretary to the Defense Ministry, Gotabaya showed that he can deliver the goods at two very different levels, a military victory then urban improvement. There was a third level as well, which is not so well known. Using his position as a brother to the President, Gotabaya came to the rescue of projects in distress. Here is one instance.
Archeologists had found an ancient boat at Godawaya and had signed an agreement with a foreign country (forget the name) to do joint research on it. The foreign country, however, said the boat now belonged to them, and chased away the local researchers. The boat was about to go abroad. When all other avenues failed, the local researchers ran to Gotabaya who put a stop to the plan.
The
Yahapalana experience brought a new factor into Sri Lanka politics. There arose a call for a strong leader. Until now no one
wanted a strong leader. They wanted a weak leader who could be pushed around. This
time, it appears, the public wanted a strong leader. Well, they have definitely got one. Hope they
will like it. Gotabaya Rajapaksa will be
a strong President, unlike any we have
had before. There are good reasons for this.
President Gotabaya
is not a career politician. That is why he was able to order that photographs
of political leaders be removed from the walls of state organizations. No
career politician would have attempted this. This was carried out immediately
and the public applauded.
President
Gotabaya has never had his own political party, does not want one and is not
shackled to any other political party either.
That means he neither knows nor cares about pandering to supporters to
simply hold on to them. He cannot please all those who elected him this time, either
because there are far too many of them. He also does not seem to care, at least
at this moment, whether he is re-elected or not. All of which means he cannot
be easily influenced.
Secondly, this is a leader who means business. I address you today as the Executive President of our dear Motherland, [as] the Commander-in-Chief and [as] the Defence Minister who will ensure security,” he said in his inaugural speech, making it clear that he had considerable power.
I am your Executive President. I will not hesitate to use such executive powers for the benefit of the country at any time. I will thus form a new Government that can work in accordance with my policies and implements the historic mandate given by the people to build a prosperous nation, he continued, making it clear that he intended to use those powers.
He favours
loyalty and patriotism. Loyalty and patriotism are looked down on in the west, as
backward, old fashioned values. It is good to see President Gotabaya embrace
them. ‘I love my country. I am proud of my country. I have a vision for my country. I appeal to
all patriotic Sri Lankans to join me in my journey to build a prosperous nation
for the future generations’, he said.
The public has already seen something of the Gotabaya style, though they may not realize it. Towards the end of Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s second term of office as President, there were a series of demonstrations by university students, directed from outside and intended to destabilize the Mahinda Rajapaksa government. The main strategy was to block important trunk roads.
In one of these demonstrations, which I happened to see, the students were seated on the road in front of College House, on Thurstan Road, in a large group covering the whole road. Facing them , very far away were two police vans strategically placed, blocking the road, and a handful of police, standing by the vans, silently watching, The students were not going to be allowed to proceed up Thurstan Road, as they had intended, but could continue sitting in front of College House as long as they wished. How long the students sat there, I do not know. Unlike in Yahapalana time, there was no tear gas, no water cannon, and no rows of helmeted, baton carrying police. Traffic had been re-routed.
President Gotabaya will work in consultation with his brother, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The two have worked together before, as we know, and will have no difficulty in working together again. This will be a formidable combination. The public has already noted that if this pair had been running the government, the Easter Sunday bomb explosion would not have been allowed to occur.
The two brothers are equally popular in the eyes of their supporters. The work they have done for the country is well known. Mahinda Rajapaksa‘s role in winning the war and building superhighways is well known, but he has also contributed in other areas. I have listed them elsewhere and will mention just one here. The nanotechnology sector in Sri Lanka was developed during the time of Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Throughout
Yahapalana rule, Mahinda Rajapaksa remained popular. Within days of losing the
2015 Presidential election, Mahinda Rajapaksa’s supporters (who had voted
against him!) wanted him back. They went in droves to his residence in
Hambantota. With every blunder by
Yahapalana, Mahinda Rajapaksa became more desirable. The Pohottu party which came up later is
centered on him.
Mahinda Rajapaksa was given special recognition at all Gotabaya Rajapaksa‘s election meetings. His arrival at these meetings, looking very plump, was greeted with howls of joy and toddlers were held out for him to hold. He was always the main speaker at these meetings. A final observation. When President Gotabaya mentioned Mahinda Rajapaksa’s name in his first speech as President of Sri Lanka, the audience immediately applauded.
It is not possible to say anything yet about how President Gotabaya will deal with economic issues, but there are pointers. The economic growth and progress achieved by President Mahinda Rajapaksa were not continued by Yahapalana complained to the public. ‘Hondata thibuna ratak,’ said one election slogan, ‘apata giya kalak”.
This was Sri Lanka‘s first wake up call. Sensing this, Gotabaya started ‘Viyath Maga’ and ‘Eliya’. Two collectives of intellectuals, artists and academics whose primary objective was to rebuild a stronger economy in Sri Lanka. These organizations held well-attended seminars throughout the country. ‘Viyath Maga’ and ‘Eliya’ were very popular. Gotabaya Rajapaksa said that he had no intention of entering politics when he began Viyath Maga.
The public expects much from President Gotabaya, I think it’s a turning point in the history of Sri Lanka,” said one supporter. “With the economy and national security, I think the country will improve in every way in the next five years. We’re very hopeful with him.” [In Gotabaya‘s time] the Colombo City was developed with several new attractions and most importantly the city had been kept clean, we expect that this would be continued, said another.”
President Gotabaya has generated hope in the economic sector. The Stock market which had fallen steadily from 2015, shot up within 24 hours of President Gotabaya taking office. The new President must prioritize a National Industrial Policy serving the local industrial community while maintaining a global outlook, said former President FCCISL, Nawaz Rajabdeen. Sri Lanka has abundant talent in enterprise, innovation, and technology,” he concluded.
Business Chamber
of Commerce sent a congratulatory message to President Rajapaksa. We wish to
express our faith in [your] ability to take the country towards a more
fortuitous era of economic growth, the message said.
The Chamber wishes to recall that at the outset of his Presidential campaign Gotabaya Rajapaksa convened a gathering of the country’s leading business personalities, called “Viyath Maga”., to exchange ideas about the economy. It did not merely generate goodwill but created new hope in the business community. President Gotabaya has expressed refreshing ideas about the Small and Medium Sector and has referred to the need to find fresh export markets for Sri Lanka’s products.
This chamber is deeply impressed by the
President’s words of wisdom as well as his knowledge of the economy and where
it should be driven towards to achieve better results for this country. Given
these factors, whilst we foresee a more promising future for the country. We
assure the new Head of State of Sri Lanka all our support in his great
endeavor, concluded Business Chamber of Commerce.
When Gotabaya Rajapaksa was elected President
of Sri Lanka, the neighboring countries, India, Pakistan and Maldives responded
immediately, with greetings and assurances of support. Prime Minister Modi
has invited President Gotabaya to come over. India immediately sent External
Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar to Colombo, to meet President Gotabaya and
Mahinda Rajapaksa. President Gotabaya will
be good for India, said Subramanian Swamy, a Rajya Sabha MP of India.
However,
Hindustan Times, a privately owned newspaper, thinks it is time for India
to start bullying Sri Lanka all over again. “Delhi must respect the
political dispensation in Colombo, but be firm when necessary,” it said. India
must deepen economic interdependence with Sri Lanka. India must make Sri Lanka pursue an
India-first policy.
India
must also draw clear red lines and enforce them. Colombo is free to engage with Beijing as a
sovereign entity, but if the engagement affects Indian security interests,
Delhi should make it clear that it will exercise its leverage. Gotabaya will only seek in Beijing what he
is unable to get from New Delhi, just as during the final phase of the civil
war,” it said. India will also have to deepen security cooperation with Sri
Lanka without further escalating geostrategic competition in the Indian Ocean.
It is not possible to accept any of this. In addition to having to hold on to its 29 states, its Muslims and Hindus, India now has to tread very carefully in its foreign relations. It is still a part of the US-dominated military set up for the Bay of Bengal together with Australia and Japan. But it is getting alarmed about the USA getting into Trincomalee. India is waking up to other realities as well. Instead of fighting with China, India has now decided to talk to China. India has re-established links with Russia on military matters. India is in no position to dictate terms to Sri Lanka.
China knows that it already has good relations with President Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa. Therefore China did not rush to greet President Gotabaya. Chinese President Xi Jinping said in his congratulatory message, It is a great pleasure to learn that you are assuming the office of the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. On behalf of the Chinese Government, people and in my own name, I would like to extend my heartfelt congratulations and best wishes to you. I attach great importance to the development of our bilateral relations and wish to work together with you to enhance our mutual political trust, to start a new chapter of the China–Sri Lanka Strategic Cooperative Partnership and to bring more tangible benefits to our two peoples.”
The USA was also slow to respond. It did not congratulate President Gotabaya directly. The USA embassy said. “The United States congratulates the people of Sri Lanka on their democratic presidential election and looks forward to working with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Sri Lanka has continued to show the strength and resilience of its republic with a free, fair, and transparent presidential election befitting Asia’s oldest democracy. We commend the Elections Commission, civil society and government authorities for promoting a peaceful election. We are ready to continue our work with the new President and with all the people of Sri Lanka in supporting the country’s sovereignty through heightened good governance, expanded economic growth, the advancement of human rights and reconciliation, and in fostering an Indo-Pacific region where all countries can prosper.”
This message makes it clear that the USA plans to dig in and continue their work in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is sadly mistaken if Sri Lanka thinks that it can get rid of the USA as easily as they allowed the USA to come in. Once the USA gets a grip on a country, it will not let go. The USA has military plans for Sri Lanka.
The US-controlled Yahapalana Phase one (2015-2019) is now over. In Phase one three instructions were given to now-defunct Yahapalana government, (a) weaken the state, (b) ruin the economy and (c) crush the people. Then a dissatisfied, angry, restless community will be created, who will be encouraged to protest. A state of chaos will result. The west will then be able to move in, probably using the Right to Protect” (R2P).
Sri Lanka must understand that the apparatus set up by the USA to further its interests in Sri Lanka is still intact. It is very much alive and kicking. This apparatus consists, inter alia, of political parties, politicians, CIA funded NGOs parading as ‘civil society’, USA funded evangelist churches and the Killer Breed,” whose votes would have gone without hesitation to ‘Hansaya’.
There have been a few hiccups. The
Presidential elections revealed the actual strength of the JVP. JVP has only 418,553 supporters among 13,252,499 voters.
The civil society grouping played a significant role in the high profile 2015
project to defeat the Rajapaksas. The Americans funded the operation, noted
Shamindra Ferdinando. This time they failed. They couldn’t have challenged
Gotabaya Rajapaksa under any circumstances, he said.
When I saw the huge enthusiastic crowds at the election meetings of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, shown on television, I felt a sense of fear, not elation. Because, if the USA , which had meddled in the 2010 and 2015 elections, decided to meddle in this as well, and distort the result, this angry crowd would have erupted. There would have been an explosion that America could not have controlled.
USA will not find it easy to manipulate President Gotabaya, either. President Gotabaya has lived in the USA, so he will know something about the American culture, surely. He will also understand the agreements the USA is offering. President Gotabaya has already negotiated one ACSA with the USA. He will know to re-negotiate the present one. As a military man, the implications of the SOFA will be clear to him and he may kick it out of the window. That is why the USA wanted the SOFA signed before Gotabaya took over.
Sri Lanka has to now decide on a new foreign policy. .President Gotabaya in his first speech as President of Sri Lanka said, We want to remain neutral in our foreign relations and stay out of any conflicts among the world powers. I urge all countries to respect our country’s sovereignty and unitary status.” It is unlikely that they will do so. Sri Lanka’s strategic position in the Bay of Bengal makes it a useful possession.
Nonalignment is also no longer possible. India, which should lead non-alignment, is aligned to the USA. It is no longer possible to speak of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace either. Too many big powers have arrived in the Bay of Bengal.
Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace was initiated by Sri Lanka at the 26th United Nations General Assembly in 1971. It led to the adoption of a resolution by which the Indian Ocean was designated as a Zone of Peace, with airspace and ocean floor limits to be determined. The proposal was not so much about peace. It was about containing the presence of Western powers in the region. But those powers, except China, had wanted to have bases in the Indian Ocean.
So it is going to be like old times. In the 19th century, the Sinhala king considered bringing in France, Denmark or Britain in order to get rid of the Dutch. This time, there are just two alternatives. It is either the USA or China. Obviously, Sri Lanka must link with the rising power, China, not the fading power, USA. (Continued)
[1] Presidents R. Premadasa, D.B. Wijetunge and M.Sirisena went straight from secondary school into jobs in the police, cooperatives, and community work. Chandrika Kumaratunga had a diploma in political science. Only J.R. Jayewardene and Mahinda Rajapaksa had professional qualifications as lawyers.
Millennium Challenge Corporation was set up as an alternate to providing American AID to the 3rd world. Around 2004, Americans must have thought, why they help any country, unless they have some control over them politically as well as economically.
If you inspect existing MCC corporation zones in most countries, it is different how the zone(Proposed) done in Sri Lanka. It divides the country into two. The danger here reminds me of a statement made by former US ambassador Robert O Blake, when Sri Lankan forces were advancing, beating LTTE. “LTTE will never be defeated, even if they do, they will do a comeback later because they are resilient”. According to what I have read MCC has full land rights in the proposed zone. If this is done this way and if a terrorist uprising takes place again in the top part of the country, even Sri Lankan army will not be able to go to the North to combat it. Your Excellency, the President,Goatabaya Rajapaksha , if you have not given any thoughts about it, please think about it. It is a different issue if you set up more than one MCC zone(Eg. One in Trincomali, one in Batticaloa one in Jaffna peninsula and one in Matara.
By Noor Nizam – Convener “The Muslim Voice”, November 22, 2019.
Governor A.J.M. Muzammil, I am flabbergasted to read your above statement and wish to inform you that I cannot agree to some of the things what you have stated.
How dare you tell that the Muslims voted then General Fonseka in large numbers at the 2010 elections? Do you know that 20% of the then Muslim Vote Bank of nearly 750,000 to 800,000 Muslims voted HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa. Ask HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa or his (then) campaign Team and they will tell you this.
I was the Co-Chairman of the Muslim Propaganda Unit along with another Muslim University lecturer who is the present Ambassador for Sri Lanka in a Muslim country, appointed under the MY3 regime after the 2015 presidential elections. During the 2010 Presidential Elections, The Muslim Propaganda Unit functioned directly under Hon. Basil Rajapaksa and operated from Temple Trees with a staff/volunteers of nearly 20 persons between October 2009 and January 2010. No Muslim politicians or Ministers in the Mahinda camp were allowed to get involved in the day to day campaign activities of the MUF. They were only allowed visits. We had an elaborate campaign plan which functioned very successfully and contributed to HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory in 2010. Even HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa is aware of this fact. The out come of the Muslim Propagand Unit was that, we were able to harness 20% of the then Muslim Vote Bank. You were a frontline Muslim campaigner for General Sarath Fonseka at that election.
Now you tell that, this time Tamils and Muslims did not vote HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. I will not talk about the Tamil votes, Governor Muzammil, but let me tell you that a very substantial amount of Muslims voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Alhamdulillah. Even Hon. Gammanpila mentioned this on TV. Another SLFP/SLPP Mahinda Pela MP from the Negombo area did the same view. Of the he Muslims who are living scattered outside the North and Eastern Provinces, which comprise of 60% of the Muslim population, a substantial amount voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
Please do not make statements without exactly knowing the facts/truth which is turning detrimental to the Muslim community in the political arena in the present political situation.
Since January 8th., 2015, The Muslim Voice” has been involved tirelessly defending and lobbying the support of the Muslim Vote Bank through writing rebuttals”, comments” and article to the Tamil and English print and electronic/digital media to educate, inform the deception” of the Muslim ministers and politicians, why the Muslims should think of supporting the Mahinda Pela”, The Joint Opposition”, the SLPP” and finally HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the presidential candidate. Many other small Muslim groups were also directly or indirectly involved in the campaign supporting HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The SLPP Muslim Section also did a wonderfull job. The Muslim Pradesya Sabha, Palaath Sabha and Local Government SLPP representatives who were members till recently also contributed a lot and brought in a large amount of votes in favour of HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The former Chairman of the Beruwela Urdan Council and the young SLPP “Muslim Turks” in Southern coastal belt from Moratuwa Galle have done their due, but in SILENCE, and enabled the “polling” of thousands of votes in favour of HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. They have been in the struggle to bring HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa as the 7th., President of Sri Lanka since the formation of the SLPP from the begining of 2016. It is our bounded resposbility to credit them for the tireless work all these “RAJAPAKSA LOYALISTS” have done to enable HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa the 7th., elected President of Sri Lanka, our “MAATHROOBUMIYA”.
You got involved in the campaign during the later stages and addressed meetings . You spoke about the past” and compared the present” and concluded publicly that the Muslims did not vote HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa. You may have personal reasons to do so, but we have to be fair to the Muslim voters who voted HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa and let me tell you that a very substantial number of Muslims voted for HE. Gotabaya Rajapaks on November 16th., 2019. It is our duty to acknowledge their votes and support. I am attaching below a newspaper article link which tells of your stand in 2010 – how the Muslim elite of Colombo, as you call them, campaigned against HE. Mahinda Rajapaksa at the 2010 presidential elections. (Read last para). http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=116653 http://www.ft.lk/front-page/GR-Sabry-make-strong-case-for-Muslim-support/44-689144 (FYI – read the comments at the bottom of the article).
Please do not make statements without exactly knowing the facts/truth which is turning detrimental to the Muslim community, especially Muslims of the Eastern Province, in the political arena and leading to disharmony. IT IS HURTING WHEN YOU TELL SUCH THINGS. Muslims need HARMONY” with the majority community for the future. “The Muslim Voice” is looking forward to it, Insha Allah. We all have to work hard to get much more Muslim votes for the SLPP and HE. Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s/Hon. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government at the next general elections in 2020 so that a MAJORITY government with all communities represented could be formed, Insha Allah. The need now is, we as Muslims have to work together in the interest of the Muslim community and become partners with the majority community, Insha Allah.
Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has allowed a Russian Navy ship to visit the Hambantota Port. India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign military assets and submarines in its territorial waters that are detrimental to India’s interests.
New Delhi: Ahead of his trip to India on November 29, the new Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has allowed a Russian Navy ship to visit the Hambantota Port. India is likely to welcome this decision since it has been concerned over the use of the strategically located port by the Chinese Navy and has been desirous of Russia expanding its presence in the Indo-Pacific region to make it more inclusive. India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign military assets and submarines in its territorial waters that are detrimental to India’s interests. Rajapaksa’s elder brother and former president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, had irked India by allowing Chinese submarines to berth in Sri Lanka twice without informing it. India had raised the matter at the highest level twice in 2014.
Hambantota Port, built with Chinese loans, is of special interest to India. In December 2017, the Sri Lankan government leased the port to China for a period of 99 years after failing to show commitment to pay loans of billions of dollars. During his meeting with President Rajapaksa on Tuesday, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar had conveyed India’s expectation that the Sri Lankan government would take forward the process of national reconciliation to arrive at a solution that meets the aspirations of the Tamil community for equality, justice, peace, and dignity.
Russian Navy ship Perekop of the Baltic Fleet is docked in Hambantota Port this week. The 138-meter long and 17-meter wide ship has a displacement of 6,900 tonnes and is commanded by Commander Roman Pakhomov. Perekop, whose crew includes 399 naval personnel, is equipped with modern radio-technical and navigational equipment as well as combat armament. During the three-day visit, the crew members of the ship will take part in sporting events as well as cultural programmes organised by the Sri Lankan navy. o make it more inclusive.
India hopes that the new dispensation in Colombo will disallow any foreign militar ..
The populist mandate in the recent elections calls into question post-civil war efforts at reconciliation.
New Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa addresses the media after his victory in the presidential polls on Sunday. | AFP
In the aftermath of the 2019 Presidential elections which concluded another era of the Sri Lankan political journey, it is necessary to delve into the fragility of the Sri Lankan state. The results of this election depict that the Sri Lankan state continues to be aversive to the One Nation – One State” concept, signifying further polarisation within the voter base and questioning the efforts of nation-building and reconciliation in the recent past.
Having won the election with a significant majority, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa represents more than the stronger sentiments of the ethnic majority, the Sinhala-Buddhist camp: he now represents the entire Sri Lankan population. Significantly, the President-elect failed to secure the vote of the minorities in not only the Northern and Eastern provinces of Sri Lanka but also in the upcountry region. Despite the lapse of a decade since the conclusion of the 30-year civil war, the Rajapaksa regime has repeatedly failed to secure the trust of the minorities since 2010. This, however, is not a surprise given the nature of their campaign, which carries deeply problematic political implications for the country in the long run.
The tyranny of the majority
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s campaign was founded upon two populist notions: the Sinhala-Buddhist ethnic identity, and the idea of strengthening national security in the aftermath of the Easter Sunday attacks.
Populism is a form of politics that creates an us against them” distinction and seeks to mobilise the general will of the common people” against the corrupt elite”. Ideally, the general will of the people represents the majority. This is a democratic feature because democracies function on the will of the majority. However, the idea of populism and its compatibility with democracy is debatable (this is a wider debate that the author will not delve into in this article).
Since populism can take various forms at the outset, it can look and feel democratic but can result in democratic backsliding or even outright authoritarianism, both innately inconsistent with the principles of liberal democracy. In fact, populism is aversive to liberal democratic principles where it erodes respect for reason, liberal institutions, and minority populations. Further, it can be hostile to liberal democracies when accompanied by ethnonationalism and authoritarianism, bequeathing the ultimate danger of a tyranny of the majority”.
A supporter of Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna waves a flag and walks past a cut-out of the Rajapaksa brothers, Mahinda (left) and Gotabaya (centre), in Colombo. Credit: AFP
A tyranny of the majority arises when the majority of a country (in the case of the Sri Lankan Presidential election 2019) exclusively pursues its own interests at the expense of those representing the minority (in numbers as well as ideology). This is a problematic implication for Sri Lanka, which has already suffered long-standing consequences of the majority-minority divide inherited through the colonial legacy of divisive ethnic politics between the majority and minority populations.
In a global context where identity politics and its populist frenzy have emerged attractive and successful in various parts of the world such the United States, India and the United Kingdom, it is not a surprise that Sri Lanka is no different. Particularly in countries like Sri Lanka, where ethnicity is at the very heart of nationhood and statehood debate, the legitimacy and acceptance of the state, as well as its political leaders, is woven around these ethnic identities.
Populist implications
This results in the fragmentation of the idea of a nation”, an essential factor in demarking statehood. What is generally understood as a legitimate state is a territorial entity which is comprised of a distinct population identifying itself as a nation and a government that holds the monopoly over the territory and its people. In such a context, friction on what constitutes the Sri Lankan nation” fragments the foundation of the Sri Lankan state”.
When the election results were released, several distinctions concerning the voters in the North and the South as well as voters belonging to different ethnicities were made by the general public. Theoretically, whilst a division of this nature should not exist in a stereotypical western model of a nation-state, in practice it was apparent that the Sinhala Buddhist majority in the South were questioning the political will expressed by the people who did not belong to their camp.
It was interesting to observe how the Tamil ethnic group in the North and the East despite having cast their vote for a non-Tamil leader, Sajith Premadasa (as opposed to MK Sivajilingam, a prominent member of Parliament representing the Tamil National Alliance or TNA), were still labelled separatists”, and in certain extreme cases as terrorists” by the majority camp residing in the South.
Security personnel stand guard in front of St Anthony’s Shrine in Colombo after the Easter attacks. Credit: Reuters
The ideas about the Muslim ethnic group was no different, especially given the xenophobia following the national security argument of the aforementioned populist campaign. In light of this observation, even though the minority populations seem to be trying to get involved in national politics in spite of the leaders’ ethnicity, the Sinhala-Buddhist camp in the South continues to voice against such inclusivity within the national political discourse.
Perhaps, the reason underlying the trust placed in Sajith Premadasa by the minority ethnic groups was his sentiment towards eliminating poverty, a problem that relates to everyone. On the other hand, it can also be a result of the lack of trust placed in the new president by the minority groups, given the blatant exclusion of their interests in his political campaign. In the case of the latter, the continuation of this exclusion furthers the deeply fractured notion of the Sri Lankan national identity and is a canary in a coal mine, signalling at the continuing dissatisfaction on the part of the minority ethnic groups with regard to the Sri Lankan political leadership, eventually leading to another ethnic conflict lingering at dusk.
Alas, given that national security is at the heart of President Rajapaksa’s victory, in theory, it is vital to strengthen the identity of a nation”, one of the key foundational factors of the Sri Lankan state”. National security in Sri Lanka then becomes more of a political question as opposed to a wholly strategic and military one. However, given that President Rajapaksa’s campaign sought to solidify the identity politics of the ethnic majority, a factor that bore dire implications on the island in the past, the real question now boils down to the political will of the new Sri Lankan president as well as his regime to create an all-inclusive national identity. Without such a sense of national identity, realising national security will be quite far-fetched.
Rather than a reactionary response to the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, India appeared prepared for the political developments in Sri Lanka.
On November 18, Gotabaya Rajapaksa took the oath to become the eighth president of Sri Lanka. Well-known as the brother of former Sri Lankan President (and newly appointed Prime Minister) Mahinda Rajapaksa, Gotabaya also earned a reputation as the man who crushed the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) during his terms as defense secretary under his brother’s presidency (2005-2015).
According to several reports, the return of the Rajapaksas to the helm of power in Sri Lanka is bound to interest the Indian government, which was accused of orchestrating the Rajapaksas’ defeat in the 2015 elections. But India has showcased a combination of pre-emptive and proactive approaches rather than a reactionary approach toward the new Sri Lankan government.
A Proactive Strategy?
Going against reactionary expectations, New Delhi’s pro-active approach — primarily stemming from its preparedness for Rajapaksa’s victory — has surprised many. New Delhi’s preparedness can be seen in the fact that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was among the first leaders to call the president-elect after his victory on November 17 and invite him to visit India at his early convenience.” The invitation-by-phone was then followed by a not-so-publicized visit by India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on November 19, during which he formally forwarded Modi’s invitation to President Gotabaya. Gotabaya accepted and is set to visit India on November 29 , which in all probability will be his first foreign visit after the election.
Glimpses of this proactive Indian approach were first seen all the way back in September 2018, when Modi met Mahinda Rajapaksa while the latter was on a personal visit to Delhi. The meeting came after Rajapaksa’s Sri Lanka Pdujana Peramuna (SLPP) swept local elections in February 2018, thus indicating a wave of support in his favor. The two again met in June 2019 during Modi’s first bilateral visit to Sri Lanka following his re-election in May.
A Pre-emptive Economic Approach?
An ongoing narrative running parallel to the return of the Rajapaksas is the island country’s further tilt toward China. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s term as president — from 2005 to 2015 — coincided with Colombo tilting heavily toward Beijing, at least when viewed from India’s perspective. This was deemed to be one of the core reasons for sourness in the relationship between India and Sri Lanka and led to the accusation from Rajapaksa that India meddled in the 2015 election, turning it against him.
But even as New Delhi witnessed increasing bonhomie between Colombo and Beijing, it did not stop the Indian government from upping its foreign aid assistance to the island country. Between 2012-13 and 2013-14, New Delhi’s aid assistance witnessed a significant increase from 2.48 billion Indian rupees to 4.20 billion rupees. This trend continued under the Modi government as well: 4.99 billion rupees were spent in 2014–15 and 4.03 billion rupees in 2015–16. It was around this time that there was also much chatter about how the Indian government might increase foreign aid to the Rajapaksa government in Colombo, despite the latter’s pro-China tilt. This suggests an attempt on the part of New Delhi to counter Beijing’s increasing influence in Colombo with cash. ADVERTISEMENT
India’s foreign aid spending in Sri Lanka started dropping from 2015-16 onward. The numbers witnessed a sudden drop in 2016-2017, when India spent a meager 990 million rupees, followed by an even lower figure of 770 million rupees in 2017–18. This shift began about right around the time of Sri Lanka’s 2015 national election, which saw the election of President Maithripala Sirisena. Sirisena came to power critical of the sitting government’s pro-Beijing policies. What could explain the rapid dip in aid? Maybe India believed that it was no longer necessary to spend large sums of money on the island country as a geopolitical incentive, now that a more pro-India leader was in power? Or, was it for pragmatic reasons, such as land acquisition hurdles? Or was it simply that the Indian projects in Sri Lanka witnessed completion during this period, hence the dip?
Subsequently, the figures have climbed back up modestly, with New Delhi allotting 1.65 billion rupees ($30.56 million) for 2018–19 and 2.5 billion rupees in 2019–20. The actual figures are yet to be published. Interestingly, the upward climb in aid allocations from FY 2017–18 came after Sirisena signed the $1.1 billion debt-for-equity deal on Hambantota Port with China in July 2017, permitting the latter to operate the strategic port on a 70 percent stake for a 99-year lease period. This was certainly a cause of concern for India, which probably wanted to regain lost ground in bilateral ties with higher aid allocations.
The modest upward trend also coincides with the victory of Rajapaksa’s SLPP in the local elections and Modi’s subsequent meetings with Mahinda. Modi’s outreach to Mahinda and subsequent climb back in New Delhi’s foreign aid to Colombo together form a solid argument for India’s preparedness and proactive approach toward Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka’s geopolitical and geostrategic importance to India is clear: It is a critical node in the Indian Ocean and a time-tested partner in the regional neighborhood. Thus, the island-nation fits perfectly with the Modi government’s Neighborhood First” policy. New Delhi’s current proactive approach has given the picture that its neighborhood policy is flexible and diplomatic.
It will be important for New Delhi to back its proactive approach with solid practical engagements with Colombo in order to not replicate the 2015 scenario. Luckily for India, Gotabaya, who has been assumed to be pro-China, recognizes the benefits of balancing between India and China. In his election manifesto, Gotabaya promised to renegotiate the Chinese lease of the Hambantota port. A report in The Indian Express quoted sources close to the Rajapaksas as saying that Gotabaya will have a special interest in strengthening a healthy relationship with India while exploring more trade partnerships with China and potential investors.” This along with Gotabaya’s acceptance of Modi’s invitation to visit India showcases the new Sri Lankan leadership’s eagerness to signal goodwill toward India and strike a balance between the two Asian powerhouses.
India’s proactive approach seems to be well appreciated by the Sri Lankan regime, and this can reap benefits for the relationship between the two nations. New Delhi cannot expect Colombo to reduce its economic and commercial engagement with and dependence on Beijing. What it can do in Sri Lanka is to strengthen its ongoing engagements, become punctual with its deliverables, and try to engage further into spheres in which the Chinese have a limited presence and India has the capacity to deliver. This will help New Delhi to strengthen its political capital in Colombo thus helping it reap gains for its current proactive overture.
Ashutosh Nagda is a researcher with the South East Asia Research Programme (SEARP) at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS).
Sri Lanka’s visitor numbers have plummeted since April due to series of terror attacks on hotels and churches
The tenth of the population of the country that relies on tourism has suffered its worst year in memory
Seven months on from the attacks, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office has lifted its ban on casual visits
The ancient city of Polonnaruwa in central Sri Lanka is a shining place of palaces and shrines. I particularly admire the superb inscription left by one haughty ruler, informing an envious rival that he is like a jackal wanting to be a lion, a worm, a cobra, a sheep, a horse, a firefly, the sun. That’s one heck of a putdown.
These royal ruins — a UNESCO World Heritage Site dating back to the tenth century — are sprawling, staggering and world-class. Yet they are almost deserted.
It’s the same story all over the country. Gleaming hotels, empty. Glittering beaches, abandoned. Gripping museums, echoing with the absence of visitors.
Exotic charm: One of Sri Lanka’s many beaches. Sri Lanka’s visitor numbers plummeted because on April 21, Islamist suicide bombers with links to ISIS walked into three hotels and three Catholic churches and detonated devices, killing 259 people
Why? Because on April 21, Islamist suicide bombers with links to ISIS walked into three hotels and three Catholic churches and detonated devices, killing 259 people and injuring another 500.
Sri Lanka’s visitor numbers plummeted, and the tenth of the population that relies on tourism has suffered its worst year in memory.
I speak to Wasantha, 42, a soft-voiced souvenir vendor at Polonnaruwa who, from boyhood, has sold his cobra flutes and palm-leaf hats to visitors. Recently he took out a loan to buy a small guesthouse, but since April he has had to default on repayments. His message to foreigners is simple: ‘Our country needs you.’
The sad-eyed owner of an excellent nearby restaurant, Lasantha, 48, has pawned his wife’s jewellery to pay his staff to wait on empty tables.
It’s not surprising the bombings have affected tourism. But we’re now seven months on and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office has lifted its ban on casual visits. So where is everybody?
They’ll be back. But for the time being, you can enjoy everything this wonderful island in the Indian Ocean has to offer — and you can have most of it to yourself.
When I go snorkelling on the coral reefs off Trincomalee in the east, I’m the only client in the 20-seat motorboat.
‘There are many sharks here,’ says the boatman, Kaleel, as I wrestle with my flippers. ‘Would you like to see them?’
Stilt fishermen off the south coast of Sri Lanka. The tenth of the population that relies on tourism has suffered its worst year in memory
Sure, the blacktip reef sharks I swim with are small, about 4ft long. But their silhouettes look pretty disturbing as they pass by, grey and ghostlike.
Again, I’m almost alone when I reach the rock temple at Gal Vihara, and gaze on the four mighty statues of the Buddha. They’re among the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen, particularly the last of them, lying down, eyes closed, his hand seeming to cup his ear.
‘Not sleeping,’ the elderly attendant with the pencil moustache tells me. ‘Nirvana.’
I try a joke (‘He’s listening to Nirvana?’), but the old boy doesn’t seem to hear. By now my mood is as calm as a bodhisattva and I let it go.
Of course, I know my inner peace, born of blissful near-solitude, is at the cost of pain for millions of Sri Lankans.
‘In July and August, we had 350 tours booked,’ says my driver guide, Harold. ‘All of them were cancelled. English market, German market, Dutch market. All.’
Negombo, which is renowned for its golden sand and safe swimming. There are also a pageant of colourful boats
The charming Harold, 51, who is married with three sons to support, has had to accept help from his boss to pay his rent. His wife has gone to work, in a factory, for the first time since they married. ‘My oldest son is working,’ he says, ‘but he earns a very small salary. So four people depend on me.’
While we drive towards Jaffna, Harold’s mobile rings with good news: his middle son, 20-year-old Jeewantha, has been offered a job as a trainee pastry chef at the Shangri-La Hotel in Colombo.
But isn’t that one of the hotels that was blown up in April? ‘Yes.’ And isn’t he worried about the boy’s safety? He isn’t, and he explains why.
Sri Lanka is a mainly Buddhist nation, ethnically Sinhalese. Historically, the strife — most notably in the civil war that blighted the country from 1983 to 2009 — has always been between this majority and the Tamil minority in the north, most of whom are Hindu. There are also Muslim and Christian minorities, but, broadly speaking, these are a peaceful presence in the country, neither hating nor hated.
High season starts in Sri Lanka starts in November, so it’s not too late to book some winter sun. Pictured is Kali Kovil Trincomalee, a Hindu temple dedicated to the goddess Bhadrakali
TRAVEL FACTS
Thomas travelled with Rickshaw Travel on its 14‑night Sri Lanka Uncovered itinerary, from £2,398 pp (excluding flights) and includes accommodation, breakfast, transport with private driver and excursions (rickshawtravel.co.uk, 01273 322398).
To stay at Wasantha’s Monkey Garden guesthouse near Polonnaruwa, call +94 71 335 0823.
To book a table at Lasantha’s restaurant at Giritale, email hotelwaana@gmail.com or call +94 76 931 8308. To book a snorkelling trip with Kaleel, email nawfeer2005@gmail.com.
Even during the war, bombs were aimed at government buildings, never at Christian churches, let alone hotels. The point is, there is no pattern of targeting tourist areas. ‘The attacks that happened this April were a one-off,’ says Harold
It’s confirmed wherever I go: in 2019, things have been tougher for tourism even than during the civil war.
‘It’s the worst period in 40 years,’ says Prasath, 58, the boatman who takes me on a tour of the lagoon at Negombo. This is one of the places that was bombed, but the pageant of brightly coloured fishing boats makes it easy to forget.
It’s my first morning, yet in a couple of hours on the uncrowded water I see enough to justify my entire trip: idle iguanas, macaque monkeys busy among the mangroves, fat fruit bats hanging like black lanterns from the taller trees.
On my last morning, I stop in at the Shangri-La Hotel for a cup of coffee. Since it was hit in April, the place has been restored to its former pristine condition: you wouldn’t know anything had happened here. A slim and smiley boy, the hotel’s newest pastry chef, asks me to write that Sri Lanka is ‘the best country in the world to travel to’.
I’m happy to say so. What’s more, new developments set to open in 2020 include the Pekoe House hotel in Kandy and a new Alila hotel at Koggala in the south.
High season starts in November, so it’s not too late to book some winter sun. And you really should. This country needs you.
Sri Lanka: Where to go… and the best places to stay
THE SOUTH: Galle, the coast and Yala
The city of Galle in the south of Sri Lanka. It is a charming Dutch colonial city with 16-century stone ramparts and an imposing clock tower in the old quarter
The gateway to the south is Galle, a charming Dutch colonial city with 16-century stone ramparts and an imposing clock tower in the old quarter.
Beyond Galle are beautiful beaches: Weligama, Mirissa, Unawatuna and Tangalle — though some shelve into deep water and have strong currents, which make swimming dangerous.
Along this stretch are many of the island’s emblematic stilt fishermen, who perch on tall wooden poles. Inland are villages and rice paddies dotted with toffee-coloured cattle.
Wildlife — be it leopard, elephant or exotic birds — is prolific in the Yala and Bundala national parks.
Cultural highlight: The pilgrimage town of Kataragama, one of Sri Lanka’s most important religious sites with colourful nightly ceremonies.
Where to stay: Amangalla, Galle’s colonial grande dame, has 31 rooms and suites, a pool, Ayurvedic spa, two restaurants, library and mature gardens that date to the 1860s. B&B doubles from £424 (aman.com/resorts/amangalla). Fort Bazaar has 18 Moorish-inspired rooms and suites, a spa and a brassiere. B&B doubles from £212 (teardrop-hotels.com/fort-bazaar). The Bungalow has six stylish rooms and a charming restaurant in a 17th-century building; B&B doubles from £58 (thebungalowgalle.com).
On or near the beach: KK Beach is a boutique hotel with ten rooms and suites, an infinity pool and ocean-facing restaurant. B&B doubles from £193 (kkbeach.com). Overlooking the Indian Ocean and in 21 acres of gardens, Anantara Peace Haven Tangalle has 152 rooms and pool villas, three restaurants, an Ayurvedic spa and 25-metre pool. B&B doubles from £177 (anantara.com/en/peace-haven-tangalle). Peacock Villa — a family-run, four-room guesthouse set in a private garden — is a five-minute walk from Mirissa beach. B&B doubles from £50 (peacockvilla.lk).
Near Yala National Park: Bordering Yala National Park, Chena Huts by the Indian Ocean has 14 thatched cabins with ensuite bathrooms and plunge pools. All-inclusive doubles from £640 with daily safaris (ugaescapes.com/chenahuts). Located on the beach, a few miles from Yala National Park, Jetwing Yala has 80 contemporary rooms spread across 38 acres, a 75-metre outdoor pool, two restaurants and a spa. B&B doubles from £116 (jetwinghotels.com/jetwingyala). Close to the entrance of Yala National Park is Eco Island Sri Lanka, a campsite with eight tents with mosquito nets and private bathrooms. B&B tents from £61 (ecoislandsrilanka.com).
THE WEST COAST
A green sea turtle on Hikkaduwa’s coral reef. Resorts such as Hikkaduwa and Negombo are popular with beach goers
When visitors touch down at Sri Lanka’s international airport, many bypass the urban sprawl of Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital, and head to the west coast beaches.
Resorts such as Beruwala, the stylish Bentota and old hippy haunt Hikkaduwa to the south and Negombo (five miles north of the airport) are renowned for their golden sand and safe swimming.
Further north lies Kalpitiya, a top spot for kitesurfing and dolphin and whale-watching.
Nearby Wilpattu National Park — home to leopards, elephants, monkeys, Coromandel sacred langurs and sloth bears — is Sri Lanka’s largest national park.
Cultural highlight: The Gangaramaya and Seema Malaka Buddhist temples in Colombo.
Where to stay: Wattura Resort and Spa, between the Gin Oya River and the Waikkal Beach, has 27 villas and suites, a pool and spa. B&B doubles from £232 (watturaresortandspa.com). The Scape is a contemporary hotel, a ten-minute walk from Negombo town, with 32 rooms, a beachfront pool and two restaurants. B&B doubles from £116 (pledgescape.com). Avani Bentota Resort has 75 ocean-view rooms, two restaurants, two freshwater pools and watersports. B&B doubles from £134 (avanihotels.com/en/bentota). Centara Ceysands Resort and Spa, on the Bentota peninsula, has a pool, spa, kids club and three restaurants. B&B doubles from £76 (centarahotelresorts.com).
CENTRAL: Kandy and the Hill Country
Tea pickers in the central province. The cultural highlight here is The Temple of the Tooth, which is the hub of the central highlands
Kandy, the cultural capital of the Sinhalese and home to its most important Buddhist shrine, the Temple of the Tooth, is the hub of the central highlands.
To the south is the Hill Country with regimented rows of tea plants, and the charming British colonial town of Nuwara Eliya.
East of Kandy is the dense forest of the rugged Knuckles mountain range. To the west is the Pinnawala Elephant Orphanage.
Cultural highlight: The Temple of the Tooth.
Where to stay: Originally a 1926 colonial planter’s bungalow, the Rosyth Estate House is set in a 62-acre private tea and rubber estate, with eight rooms, a huge Rock Villa comprised of two suites, a pool, spa and yoga sala. Half-board doubles from £197 (rosyth.lk). Vista House is a simple villa with three bedrooms, four bathrooms, a guest pantry and a private garden. Doubles from £27 (vista-house-lk.book.direct).
CENTRAL: The Cultural Triangle
Five of Sri Lanka’s eight World Heritage Sites are in the Cultural Triangle. Pictured is Sigiriya on Lion’s Rock
Five of Sri Lanka’s eight World Heritage Sites are in the Cultural Triangle, which is defined by the cities of Anuradhapura to the north, Polonnaruwa to the east and Kandy to the south-west.
The 5th-century fortress of Sigiriya is a challenging 1,200 steps to the top. Ten miles north-west are the Dambulla caves decorated with colourful murals of Buddhist and Hindu deities.
Cultural highlight: Sigiriya on Lion’s Rock.
Where to stay: Set on a ridge above a teak forest, Elephant Stables Dambulla has six villas (each sleeping up to four people) and a pool. B&B doubles from £147 (elephantstablesdambulla.com). Lak Nilla Guest House, a ten-minute drive from Polonnaruwa, has four simple rooms with ensuite bathrooms. B&B doubles from £25 (booking.com).
THE EAST COAST
Passekudah, Kalkudah and Arugam Bay, pictured, are excellent for surfing and other watersports
Its cities, Trincomalee and Batticaloa, are charming colonial outposts ringed by deep-sea harbours and labyrinthine lagoons.
At Trincomalee, visit historic Koneswaram Kovil, one of the island’s holiest Shaivite temples.
The beachside villages of Uppuveli and Nilaveli are diving and snorkelling hotspots, while Passekudah, Kalkudah and Arugam Bay are excellent for surfing and other watersports.
Cultural highlight: Koneswaram Kovil (temple).
Where to stay: The only hotel on Kalkudah beach, Karpaha Sands, has 17 tented suites, an infinity pool and a restaurant. Doubles from £166 (karpahasands.com). Hideaway is a rustic retreat with 14 rooms in tropical gardens, a restaurant and yoga lessons. B&B doubles from £56 (hideawayarugambay.com). A short walk from Uppuveli beach, Anantamaa Hotel has 28 rooms, two pools, a spa and restaurant. B&B doubles from £54 (anantamaa.com).
THE NORTH
Jaffna is a charming city with a discernible Indian influence and vibrant Tamil culture. Pictured is the Vallipuram Alvar temple
This region — considered Sri Lanka’s final frontier — is now accessible by rail.
Jaffna is a charming city with a discernible Indian influence and vibrant Tamil culture, despite the Dutch architecture.
Connected to the mainland by a mile-long bridge is Mannar Island where donkeys roam freely under Baobab trees, and the white beach stretches for miles.
Cultural highlight: Nallur Kandaswamy Temple in Jaffna.
Where to stay: The 44-room Jetwing Jaffna has a pool and restaurant. B&B doubles from £100 (jetwinghotels.com). Fifteen minutes from Jaffna, Dayanithi, a simple family-run guesthouse, has five rooms. B&B doubles from £15 (dayanithi.lk).
Colombo, November 22 (newsin.asia): Sri Lanka’s new Foreign Minister, Dinesh Gunawardena (70), is a hardcore left-wing nationalist belonging to the Mahajana Eksath Peramuna (MEP), an ally of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) led by Mahinda Rajapaksa.
The soft-spoken Dinesh Chandra Rupasinghe Gunawardena, born in 1949, has a background which should help him handle countries as diverse as the United States, India and China. These countries, which have developed high strategic and economic stakes in Sri Lanka because of its location in the Indian Ocean, pose a formidable foreign policy challenge to Sri Lanka. Previous Foreign Ministers have had to face tricky situations with mounting rivalries between big powers in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR).
After his schooling in the prestigious Royal College in Colombo, Dinesh, as he popularly known, went to Nyenrode Business Universiteit in Amsterdam and then to the University of Oregon in the US.
His father, Philip Gunawardena, was among the founder-leaders of the leftist Lanka Sama Samaj Party (LSSP), which had fraternal ties with the Indian National Congress during the struggle for Indian and Sri Lankan independence.
When Philip escaped from detention in Sri Lanka (then known as Ceylon) during World War II for opposing the war with Germany and Japan,, he headed for India for safety as the Congress too was opposing the war. But he was detained there also.
Dinesh’s mother, Kusuma Gunawardena, was also a left-wing politician whose ‘Viplawakaari Sama Samaja Party (VLSSP), had fraternal ties with the Communist Party of China. Kusuma, who was the second woman MP to be elected to the Sri Lankan parliament, was President of the Ceylon-China Friendship Society.
Though a staunch Sinhala-Buddhist nationalist, Dinesh is said to be worldly-wise” and not given to antagonizing those opposing him needlessly or wantonly. He will stand his ground as a Sri Lankan nationalist while diplomatically engaging his country’s detractors.
His close connections with the West, India and China and his amiable disposition will enable him to engage these countries in a non-abrasive manner. As a politician and Minister, Dinesh has also been in regular contact with a wide range of diplomats based in Colombo over a long period.
Dinesh is expected to handle the war crimes issues which will come up with the US and the UN Human Rights Council with a judicious combination of firmness and flexibility.
In his dealings with the world, Dinesh will be guided by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and his senior in politics and long-time political ally, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Since Japan is keen on playing a leading role in Sri Lanka (to checkmate China, its historical rival) Dinesh would be required to balance the interests of Japan and China even as he balances relations between rivals India and China. He is said to have close ties with Japan too which should stand him good stead.
The newly appointed Cabinet of Ministers is as follows:
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa– Minister of Finance, Economic Affairs, Policy Development, Buddha Sasana, Cultural, Water Supply & Urban Development, Housing Facilities Ministry
Nimal Siripala de Silva– Minister of Justice, Human Rights & Legal Reforms
Arumugam Thondaman– Minister of Community Empowerment & Estate Infrastructure
Dinesh Gunawardene– Minister of Foreign Affairs, Skills Development, Employment & Labour Relations
Douglas Devananda– Minister of Fisheries & Aquatic Resources
Pavithra Wanniarachchi– Minister of Women & Child Affairs, Social Security, Health & Indigenous Medicine
Bandula Gunawardene– Minister of Information & Communications Technology, Higher Education, Technology & Innovations
Janaka Bandara Tennakoon– Minister of Public Administration, Home Affairs, Provincial Councils & Local Government
Chamal Rajapaksa– Minister of Mahaweli Development, Agriculture & Trade,
Dullas Alahapperuma– Minister of Education, Sports and Youth Affairs
Johnston Fernando– Minister of Roads & Highways, Ports & Shipping
Mahinda Amaraweera– Minister of Passenger Transport, Power & Energy
Wimal Weerawansa– Minister of Small Medium Enterprise (SME) & Enterprise Development, Industries & Supply Management
S.M. Chandrasena– Minister of Environment, Wildlife, Land & Land Development
Ramesh Pathirana– Minister of Plantations & Export Agriculture
Prasanna Ranatunga– Minister of Industrial Exports & Investment Promotions, Tourism & Aviation
There are no new faces in the cabinet. Addressing the appointees, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa said that State Ministers (Junior Ministers with independent charge of ministries) will be appointed next Monday, November 25.
The present government headed by Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa is a temporary one. It could either stay until the next parliamentary elections in mid 2020, if a decision is taken to manage with the existing parliament, or it could go, if a decision is taken to dissolve the House and go for fresh elections ahead of time with a resolution backed by two-thirds of the MPs.
To get two-thirds majority, all parties in parliament must agree. While the ruling SLPP is keen on immediate dissolution to exploit the pro-SLPP mood in the country, the United National Party (UNP)-led alliance, which currently has majority in the House, is divided on the issue. Negotiations are on to resolve the contradictions.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa says that a general election will be held at the first opportunity granted by the constitution.<br /><br />He was addressing his first Cabinet that was sworn in before him at his office this morning.
The swearing in of the 16 member cabinet of the caretaker government was held this morning at the presidential secretariat.
Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa was sworn in as the minister of Finance, Economic affairs, policy development, buddha sasana, cultural, water supply and urban development.
Nimal Siripala de Silva took oaths as the minister of Justice, Human rights and legal reforms.
Arumugan Thondaman was sworn in as the minister of community empowerment and estate infrastructure.
Dinesh Gunawardena foreign relations, skills development, employment and labour relations.
Douglas Devananda fisheries and aquatic resources
Pavithra Wanniarachchi women’s and child affairs, social security and health and indigenous medicine.
Bandula Gunawardena information and communication technology, higher education, technology and innovations.
Janaka Bandara Tennakoon state administration, home affairs, provincial council and local government.
UNP leader and former Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe says that he rejects the allegations which claim that he weakens the victory of Sajith Premadasa.
He was addressing a media conference held at Sirikotha today.
Meanwhile, the retired disabled soldier who staged a sit-in protest in front of Sirikotha is still continuing his agitation.
The disabled soldier demanded that Ranil step down from the party leadership allowing MP Sajith Premadasa to take over.
The disabled soldier told our news team that Sirikotha authorities are influencing him to withdraw from the protest.
