Venerable Athuraliye Rathana Thero has concluded his protest fast upon learning that Governors Azath Salley and M.L.A.M. Hizbullah had resigned from their respective posts.
Athuraliye Rathana Thero launched a protest fast in front of Sri Dalada Maligawa in Kandy on 31st May demanding the removal of Minister Rishad Bathiudeen, Eastern Province Governor M.L.A.M Hizbullah and Western Province Governor Azath Salley from their respective posts.
Rathana Thero claimed that he was prepared to sacrifice his life if need be in order to achieve his demands.
Meanwhile, Governors Azath Salley and M.L.A.M. Hizbullah handed their letter of resignation to President Maithripala Sirisena earlier today (03).
Accordingly, Central Province Governor Maithri Gunaratne informed Rathana Thero of the resignations.
Accordingly, the Thero broke fast and was taken to the hospital for treatment.
Rathana Thero stated that the President cannot remove Minister Rishad Bathiudeen from his post and that he believes that Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe would take an action regarding this.
Parliamentarian Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thero, who commenced a protest fast on Friday, has been informed that Governors Azath Salley and M.L.A.M. Hizbullah have tendered their resignations.
The Central Province Governor Maithri Gunaratne arrived at Sri Dalada Maligawa in Kandy, where Rathana Thero had been leading the protest fast, to inform him in this regard.
Eastern Province Governor M.L.A.M. Hizbullah and Western Province Governor Azath Salley had submitted their resignations to President Maithripala Sirisena a short while ago, the President’s Media Division said in a tweet.
A discussion was held at the Presidential Secretariat this morning between President Sirisena, MPs of Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and Governors Hizbullah and Salley regarding the titles of the governors.
MP Rathana Thero stated that the protest fast would proceed until he is informed of this in writing.
Attempts to conquer
heights, be it a mountain or any other carry their own perils and risks.
Generally, glory and peril walk side by side in such endeavors, until the
former or the latter wins, in the end”.
Already eleven or twelve
climbers have perished on the slopes of the Mount Everest, in this year alone
and that is only so far. This sad news made me ponder on ‘the diverse nature of
adventure and that craving for a bit of it present in almost every human being
and the question how much or less of it in each one of us is there, longing for
those quests, some of which are unbelievably dangerous?’
Now at one end of the
scale are the minimal risk takers with hardly any love for or sense of
adventure at all, who cannot even be persuaded to climb anything higher than an
anthill or dare venture out further than to a depth around knee level in any
water body, be it a pool, a lake, a river or even the mighty ocean. They live
lives governed by the principle that as long as you keep away from everything
that has even the slightest chance of going wrong, you are safe. However, the
question is can you find such absolute and guaranteed safety in this world of
ours, where your safety depends as much on numerous external factors that are
beyond your control?
Yet our minimal risk
takers don’t get deterred or disturbed by such arguments. They would as best as
they can try to avoid anything and everything that they think may put them in
danger. And they are also firm believers in superstition so much so that they
will truly think that the little house gecko, who is going after a mosquito on
a wall suddenly abandons its stalking and decides to come up with its usual
chattering call ‘chuck, chuck, chuck’, is actually telling them that it’s a
foreboding. And one of them might even hurriedly start looking for that
handbook of ‘Huunu Sasthare’, if it happens to be at his/her home. Or what
about that innocuous looking black cat that happens to be crossing the same
patch of the road that our superstitious friend is walking along? Would his
casual thoughts as regards it be limited in extent to ‘oh a poor stray cat on
the prowl’: I doubt it.
Now at the other end of
the scale are sitting the exact opposite, who enjoy risk-taking and relish it,
going for adventures of all sorts, mostly very dangerous and doing it for the
sake of glory, sheer thrill, sense of achievement and so on and so forth.
And apart from those
extremely challenging and dangerous adventures such as mountain-climbing, there
are other equally dangerous and at the same time immensely foolish ones too
that some of our friends at the other extreme end of the scale tend to go for.
To keep it short, I will site only a couple here. But then before going any
further; ‘isn’t there a degree of foolishness attached to all extreme types of
adventure and sport, anyway?’
Poking one’s head into
the cavernous mouth lined with razor-sharp, sawtooth-like dental armour of a
fifteen-foot alligator is one, for example. This present-day descendant of
the dinosaurs that roamed the earth millions of years ago, is said to have only
a tiny brain even after all those eons that have passed by, and it’s more like
a chancy game of Russian roulette, when or whether the creature decides to shut
its snout with a human neck inside it for chewing at leisure.
And then we have some,
who, adequately emboldened by alcohol and apparently empowered by those ‘Ali
manthara’ dare challenge a wild elephant that is peacefully chomping away on a
leafy branch in a patch of jungle. In spite of being called gentle giants and
quite correctly so, they too like us the humans don’t take it lightly, when
someone tries to invade their personal space. And unfortunately, those who
dared to do so, didn’t live to tell the rest of the tale, as far as I
know.
Now, this particular form
of adventure could be more or less limited and quite unique to, Sri Lanka only.
And then I am not sure whether this kind of sheer stupidity should be
called an adventure at all, other than that it is plain suicide. However,
according to the ‘Oxford English Dictionary’ an adventure is; ‘An unusual and
exciting or daring experience, Excitement associated with danger or taking of
risks, A reckless or potentially hazardous action or enterprise’ etc. So, it,
nevertheless, is adventure too, of some kind.
Anyway, engaging in true
adventure is no doubt challenging and once accomplished, can be very
exhilarating too. To the person, who wins in the end beating all odds, I am
sure it brings a great sense of achievement and fulfillment, a magical
sensation of unburdening a weight that he/she had carried so long.
And before I leave, must
I say for myself that I am somewhere in the middle of that scale or should I
honestly admit that actually it is now far more to the left than to the right?
Yes. Years have taken their toll and they did teach me a few lessons too!
Now this brief article
wouldn’t be complete without a mention of a very special kind of an adventure,
which is the political adventure. And particularly, in our land like no other,
it is one adventure that still guarantees a victory in the end, if not glory.
Isn’t a hefty pension after just five years of idling in Diyawanna environs
along with ample real estate and other forms of wealth acquired and accumulated
during that state-paid vacation, enough, whether one wins or loses, at the end
of one’s adventurous tenure, so to speak?
After Narendra Modi took oaths on Thursday for a second time as India’s Prime Minister, having steered the BJP-led coalition to a landslide election victory, there was a string of announcements relating to diplomatic engagements involving Sri Lanka, India, China and the United States. Modi will visit Sri Lanka on 9th June, President Maithripala Sirisena told a press conference in Delhi, where he attended the Indian leader’s inauguration ceremony. Before that Modi will visit the Maldives, his first overseas trip as prime minister. The Indian media anticipates that the Indian PM will have bilateral meetings with the US and Chinese leaders in September and October, respectively.
Discussions on what the US calls its ‘Indo Pacific Strategy’ are to figure at meetings of senior US officials in Singapore for the Shangri La Dialogue, and in India – a ‘major US defence partner.’ US Assistant Secretary for Political Affairs Clarke Cooper is on a tour of Singapore, India and Sri Lanka from 29th to 6th June.
Against this backdrop, an unusual statement appeared on Friday titled “Indo-Lanka relations under the second term of Modi – In the backdrop of Chinese foothold in SL and US proposed SOFA,” on the President’s Media Division (PMD) website. It is in the nature of a commentary on Sri Lanka’s relationship with India which, it asserts, is ‘at a high now.’ The gist of it was to reassure Delhi regarding Colombo’s foreign policy moves.
Worrying about India’s possible reactions to controversial defence pacts with the US, it said “… Sri Lanka will have to be very careful not to antagonize India while shifting foreign policy decisions or entering into a new pact to replace Acquisition and Cross Services Agreement (ACSA) with the United States. … Now, the US proposes to replace ACSA with a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA).”
Repeating the US’s misleading assurances in relation to the SOFA – that there is no need to fear the establishment of a US military base, that Sri Lanka ‘will retain all its sovereign rights’, etc. – the article asserts that “Currently, there is an acknowledgement in Washington with regard to India’s regional supremacy and its role in regional security and stability” and that “there is an understanding of the need for cooperation between India and the US to check rapidly expanding Chinese influence in this region.” Inexplicably, it adds: “Hence, it is essential to keep India informed about Sri Lanka’s intended military cooperation with any outside country, especially with a superpower such as the US.”
External pressure
Could the uncharacteristic comment posted on the PMD website be interpreted as an indirect admission that Sri Lanka has in fact agreed to sign up on the SOFA (which, till now, officials have been at pains to say, is still only ‘under discussion’)? Or is this an indirect (if somewhat clumsy) attempt to reassure India – timed to coincide with the president’s visit to Delhi for the Indian president’s oath-taking ceremony? Whatever the purpose, the sub-text of the essay suggests that political leaders are more interested in appeasing external forces and bowing to pressure from diverse quarters, than guiding policy in a manner that serves the national interest. There appears to be much external pressure being exerted to finalise this pact that gives carte blanche to US defence personnel entering the country, and threatens Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.
The SOFA is not the only agreement that the US has been pushing to conclude in Sri Lanka. The country’s pro-US-prime minister led government is working hard to conclude or implement a number of other pieces of legislation and policy at the behest of its Western patrons, against all odds. If there is a sense of urgency in these efforts, it is because time is running out. With a presidential election only six months away, and the government showing a dismal report card on its performance in most areas, its Western backers know that its days are numbered. Hence the pressure is turned up, to fast-track the desired laws and agreements. It is the US-friendly UNP leadership that will be instrumental in this process. The public will need to be on alert because once these laws are passed there is no possibility of judicial review, under the constitution.
One example is the proposed Counter Terrorism Act (CTA). From the moment the Easter Sunday attacks took place Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has been vigorously arguing that a new law is needed to curb terrorism. This is despite multiple arguments that have been made showing that there is ample provision in the country’s existing legislation, to deal with terrorism. It has been pointed out that amendments to the existing Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) would suffice. It is an open secret that the eagerness to have the CTA passed, stems from pressure to comply with the demands of the US-led UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka, which calls for repeal of the PTA.
Land reform and MCC
Parallel to the defence-related agreements and arrangements sought by Western powers, such as the SOFA, a number of laws have been drafted and/or passed relating to the economy as well. Reforms that would bring the economy in line with the Western neo-liberal model, represent the ‘other side of the coin,’ of the defence agreements that advance US hegemony on the military front. Among them are the Millennium Challenge Compact (MCC), new laws that will radically transform patterns of land use and ownership such as the proposed Land Bank Act and already-gazetted State Land (Special Provisions) Bill and, according to some, the revised National Physical Plan 2050 (NPP).
The Millennium Challenge Compact (MCC) is said to be a US grant for development purposes. The MCC was developed in secrecy by a team located in the Sri Lanka prime minister’s office. A government minister in parliament even denied its existence. There has been no public discussion on it. The MCC’s approval of the $480 grant for Sri Lanka was announced by government just days after the Easter Sunday attacks – when one would imagine that Sri Lanka’s investment credentials were at an all-time low. The secrecy, the odd timing of the announcement and other aspects would suggest that the MCC is being imposed by the US for its own purposes, rather than for the benefit of Sri Lankans.
From the little that is known, the MCC relates to two projects, on Transport and Land. The goal of the Land project is said to be to ‘increase land market activity’ and the ‘tradability of land’ through ‘policy and legal reforms.’ Eighty percent of Sri Lanka’s land is owned by the state. Making such land a ‘tradable commodity’ or creating a ‘land market’ as the MCC aims to do, has long been advocated by the World Bank to bring about what it calls ‘market based land consolidation’ for the benefit of private (including foreign) investors.
Dispossession of farmers
Environmental groups and land rights activists who are aware of details of the MCC, are strongly opposed to the project. Smallholder farmers cultivate land on the basis of state grants or other forms of tenure short of outright ownership. Since farmers are chronically indebted, the reforms underway will in all likelihood lead them to sell their plots, activists have pointed out. The end result will be mass dispossession of farmers and other rural populations engaged in animal husbandry, fishing etc. These groups whose livelihoods will be destroyed, are the source of food sovereignty, says Sajeewa Chamikara from MONLAR, a grassroots land-rights organization.
The government’s moves to remove the bar on foreigners owning land, the removal of the 50-acres limit on individual ownership, the proposed ‘Land Bank’ (that will bring publicly owned land under a single hub and make it available for private investors), are inter-related.
“You need to look at all the factors to see the final outcome” explained Chamikara. One needs to ask, if the government is genuinely interested in addressing the land-related and other multiple problems faced by farmers, why doesn’t it address these issues directly, in consultation with the farmer organisations – rather than bowing to pressure from foreign ‘advisors’ who may have their own agendas?
The State Land (Special Provisions) Bill was gazetted on 27.03.19, and the National Physical Plan 2050 was recently reported to have got presidential approval. Both were strongly opposed by the president, during the November-December 2018 constitutional crisis. The land laws which he, at the time, described as ‘anti-national,’ were among reasons he cited for his move to sack the prime minister. What pressure was brought to bear on the president to make him give his assent to them later? Why did he give in? It would seem that the instability caused by in-fighting between president and prime minister has made the country particularly vulnerable at this time.
The State Land (Special Provisions) Bill, gazetted by the UNP’s Minister of Lands (and not the president), will need to be passed in parliament. Its purpose is “to grant absolute title to state lands held by citizens who are holders of grants or instruments of disposition.” Its validity is for seven years. So it would appear the government seeks to dispose of large tracts of land in a short time, to make them quickly available for investors. This again will accelerate the dispossession of smallholders.
Drastic changes
The revised National Physical Plan 2050, prepared by the National Physical Planning Department of the Megapolis and Western Development ministry, is yet to be made public, although it is said to be ‘completed.’ The NPP seeks to concentrate economic activity in four ‘Economic Corridors’ of which the Colombo–Trincomalee corridor will be its showpiece. Attracting private investment is a key objective. According to a draft summary seen by this writer, the NPP’s medium term goals include the ‘transformation of the economy from conventional industries to high tech and innovation based Industries,’ increased international trade and increased ‘attraction for investment and trade.’ The NPP expects to transform land use patterns and bring about movements of population, to achieve a ‘reversal of the rural-urban population ratio’ in 30 years. This gives a clue to the drastic nature of envisaged changes. The NPP however will not be required to be passed in parliament. According to NPP Director General Dr Jagath Munasinghe “it is a policy document, not a Bill” and so it only needs to be gazetted.
It has been observed that the districts covered in the NPP more or less overlap with those coming under the MCC. From the little available information it would appear the goals of the two projects broadly dovetail. It is unlikely that this is coincidental, they both come within the economic thrust of the UNP government that seeks to put the country’s land and other resources at the service of foreign capital. Whatever the merits of these projects, it is unconscionable that plans to bring about such far-reaching social and economic change, are not made available for public debate. The secrecy surrounding them shows that the government knows they will be unpopular. The overarching question is. whether the present government is more interested in pleasing its Western backers, than the constituencies in Sri Lanka, millions of voters, to whom it is answerable.
The wartime Rajapaksa administration, having created the post of Chief of National Intelligence (CNI) to run an efficient network involving all three services, the police and the State Intelligence Service (SIS), placed Maj. Gen. Kapila Hendavithana, in charge of the powerful Office in January, 2007.
The CNI tasks included managing local and foreign intelligence and briefing the National Security Council (NSC) chaired by the President.
Then, President Mahinda Rajapaksa, in his capacity as the Minister of Defence, Public Security and Law and Order, established the Office of CNI by way of a Cabinet Memorandum to accommodate Hendavitharana, who functioned at the Defence Ministry, as the Intelligence Advisor, following his retirement in Oct 2006.
President Rajapaksa secured cabinet approval for the appointment though an attempt was made initially to accommodate Hendavitharana on Pay and Pension scheme.
The post of the CNI was meant to be held by a senior military intelligence officer though the incumbent government replaced Hendavitharana with Sisira Mendis, retired DIG, who was in charge of the Police Narcotics Bureau (PNB) at the time of his retirement.
A Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) probing the alleged lapses on the part of those in authority leading to the single biggest security breach in Sri Lanka’s history on April 21, last week questioned Mendis. During the proceedings opened to the media, it transpired that Mendis lacked the authority to function the way his predecessor Hendavitharana had done.
Hendavitharana was based in Thailand as ‘regional intelligence coordinator’ for several months in the wake of accusations the Military Intelligence, which he served, was undermining the Oslo-led peace process. Hendavitharana was away for about six months and returned in January 2006.
PSC member, Field Marshal Fonseka pointed out to Mendis how Hendavitharana had functioned. Mendis said Hendavitharana had the authority to act.
In addition to Mendis, Defence Secretary Maj. Gen. Shantha Kottegoda, the retired army commander, too, appeared before the PSC.
The PSC first met on May 29 under the leadership of MP Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne, PC, in the absence of its Chairman Ananda Kumarasiri, currently overseas on an official visit. Moneragala District MP was expected to return in the coming weekend, his family said yesterday.
MP Wickremaratne yesterday told The Island that he would chair the PSC when it meets tomorrow (4). UNP representative Dr. Rajitha Senaratne and M. A. Sumanthiran of the TNA would participate in the proceedings though they weren’t present at the inaugural session.
he PSC comprises Ananda Kumarasiri (Chairman/UNP), Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka (UNP National List), Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne (UNP National List), Rauff Hakeem (SLMC), Ravi Karunanayake (UNP), Prof. Arsu Marasinghe (UNP National List), Dr. Nalinda Jayatissa (JVP), M.A. Sumanthiran (TNA) and Dr. Rajitha Senaratne (UNP).
Joint Opposition (JO) lawmaker Wimal Weerawansa yesterday told The Island that their group boycotted the PSC as at the time Speaker Karu Jayasuriya named members for it, there was likelihood of the government not giving dates for debate on two-day the JO’s no-faith motion against Industry and Commerce Minister Rishad Bathiudeen.
Weerawansa said they were also concerned about the government using PSC to clear Bathiudeen, leader of the All Ceylon Makkal Congress (SCMC) accused of having clandestine links to those responsible for the Easter Sunday carnage.
Speaker Jayasuriya subsequently set June 18 and 19 for NCM.
MP Weerawansa said that the government lacked interest in maintaining intelligence services. National security was certainly not a priority for the yahapalana politicians, Weerawansa said, pointing out that the National Security Council (NSC) had last met, on Feb 19, 2019, prior to the Easter bombings. The government owed an explanation as to why it had not met for over a month, Weerawansa said. Answering another query, the MP said that it would be the responsibility of the PSC to identify the person responsible for summoning the PSC in case of an emergency.
There is uncertainty as to the current status of the Compact between the U.S. Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) and Sri Lanka as to whether it has been signed by the President, as the Chairman of the National Physical Planning Council, and whether it has been Gazetted or not. On August 13, 2018, the MCC is reported to have delivered to the U.S. Congress a congressional notification (CN) of its intent to negotiate a Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact with the Government of Sri Lanka. On April 25, 2019, the MCC approved a five-year Compact with Sri Lanka. However, there is uncertainty as to how the U.S. Congress would respond to the request for such a Compact.
SCOPE of the PROJECT
“What the Board of Directors of the Millennium Challenge Corporation has approved is a five-year, $480 million Compact with the Government of Sri Lanka aimed at reducing poverty, through economic growth. The Compact seeks to assist the Sri Lanka Government in addressing two of the country’s binding constraints to economic growth: (1) inadequate transport logistics infrastructure and planning; and (2) lack of access to land for agriculture, the services sector, and industrial investors”.
“The Compact will be composed of two projects: a Transport Project and a Land Project. The Transport Project ($350 M) aims to increase the relative efficiency and capacity of the road network and bus system in the Colombo Metropolitan Region and to reduce the cost of transporting passengers and goods between the central region of the country and ports and markets in the rest of the country. The goal of the Land Project is to increase the availability of information on private land and underutilized state lands or all land in Sri Lanka to which the Government is lawfully entitled or which may be disposed of by the Government (“State Lands”) in order to increase land market activity. The Land Project would increase tenure security and tradability of land for smallholders, women, and firms through policy and legal reforms” (https://www.mcc.gov/where-we-work/program/sri-lanka-compact).
“This is a grant that Sri Lanka has been applying for many years. Even during the previous government, former PM, D. M. Jayaratne’s Secretary, Sirisena Amarasekara, to discuss this among other matters, in Washington. They were unsuccessful,” an official told the Sunday Observer.
“After considering fresh applications made in December 2015, the MCC board of directors selected Sri Lanka for the threshold programme which is the lower programme of the two that is made available by MCC”.
“However, after reviewing the scorecard and observing continued improvements in performance, as measured by the MCC scorecard, the country has been selected for the Compact programme.
“Since early 2017, we have been working with the MCC collaboratively and closely, to develop a dual-sector compact programme in grant funding. This project would have ideally kicked off in December last year, however due to the constitutional instability that took place, it resulted in a major setback in the implementation of the project,” he said.
THE NATIONAL PHYSICAL PLAN
The Compact is based on a National Physical Plan prepared under the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act (No. 49 of 2000). The current Physical Plan (2018 – 2050) is a revision of an earlier Physical Plan (2011 – 2030) prepared in 2011. The earlier Physical Plan had followed all the procedures required by the Act. The question is whether the revised Physical Plan has followed the due process as required by the Act.
Such procedures should include preparing a Draft Physical Plan and conducting hearings with experts, professionals and general public and obtaining provisional approval of the Minister concerned after which it is Gazetted with maps and plans, etc., for inspection and scrutiny by the public for them to propose revisions to be incorporated in the Draft Plan, to mention a few. It is after following such procedures that the final version of the National Physical Plan is submitted to the National Physical Planning Council for approval. The question is: If the final Physical Plan had not followed the required procedures prior to the approval of the National Physical Planning Council, how legitimate would be the final version of the Plan, even if it was approved by the President and the Council, and consequently, the status of the Compact negotiated with MCC?
While the earlier Physical Plan addressed development over the entire territory of Sri Lanka, the revised Physical Plane has deviated from this holistic approach and focused development along “growth corridors”. This approach has resulted in carving out an economic corridor from Colombo to Trincomalee, which is reported to cover 1.2 Million acres in a manner that physically divides the territory of Sri Lanka into two distinct parts.
ADDRESSING POVERTY
Since the stated aim of the MCC is to “reduce poverty through economic growth” it is necessary to explore whether the Compact aims to benefit areas that are in fact currently classified as those that qualify for assistance on the basis of the National Poverty headcount index of 4.1, as determined by the Census and Statistics Dept. of Sri Lanka, for overcoming the poverty trap.
“Under the land administration project, preparation of parcel fabric map and inventory of state land, improvements of deeds registry, improvements in the land valuation system, land grants registration and deed conversion activities and land policy and legal governance improvement activities will be implemented in Kegalle, Kandy, Matale, Kurunegala, Anuradhapura, Polonnaruwa and Trincomalee, along the identified Colombo-Trincomalee economic corridor. Parties are currently negotiating to include the Gampaha district under the said category as well” (The Sunday Observer, May 12, 2019).
Of the eight Districts listed above, the poverty headcount index of five of them, namely, Matale (3.5), Kurunegala (2.9), Anuradhapura (3.8), Polonnaruwa (2.2) and Gampaha (2.0) are below the national headcount index of 4.1. Therefore, only three Districts, Kandy (5.5), Kegalle (7.1) and Trincomalee (10.0) qualify, since their poverty indices are high and well above the national average of 4.1.
The strategy of “growth corridors” have left out several Districts where the poverty headcount index is considerably higher than the national average, and therefore requiring of attention. For instance, Districts such as Ratnapura (6.5), Monaragala (5.8), Badulla (6.8), Batticoloa (11.3), Kilinochchi (18.2), Mullativu (12.7), Jaffna (7.7), Nuwara-Eliya (6.3) are well above the national poverty index. These Districts with higher levels of poverty than the national average are located on either side of the Colombo-Trincomalee economic corridor. Under the circumstances, it would be inevitable for existing disparities to exacerbate as a consequence of the economic growth within the corridor, thus setting in place social imbalances that could become a cause for social unrest on ethnic lines.
CONCLUSION
Commenting on the impact of the Compact within the economic corridor, Emeritus Professor Nimal Gunatilleke of the Peradeniya University states: “Some of the districts in which the MCC and the National Plan Corridor project earmarked for development are located in areas where the Mahaweli Development Project influence has been in existence for over several decades….Some sections of the proposed economic corridor seem to cross the paths of the ecological corridors established for facilitating elephant migration during the USAID funded environmental component of the Mahaweli Project” ( The Island, May 4, 2019). It is evident that the Planners of the economic corridor have shamefully ignored the ground breaking legacies left behind by their predecessors.
A National Physical Plan has to undergo certain procedures for it to be accepted as an official document. The public is uncertain as to the current status of the National Physical Plan in this process, and in particular, whether the President as the Head of the National Physical Planning Council has approved the Plan. Even if the Physical Plan had received all the required approvals, the burning question is whether the 2018 – 2050 Physical Plan could be justified on the claimed basis of reducing poverty when in fact the majority of the Districts within the economic corridor do not qualify on grounds of poverty because they are below the national poverty headcount index of 4.1 and furthermore, that a larger number of Districts with considerably higher levels of poverty are outside the proposed corridor.
This stark reality brings into serious question the real motivations for revising the National Physical Plan of 2011 – 2030 in order to create the current Plan that bifurcates Sri Lanka into two distinct parts. Since the current Plan does not address poverty in deserving Districts per se, speculation is rife that the so called economic corridor is to serve the interests of the U.S. that has upgraded the status of Sri Lanka to that of a Military Logistics Hub, to justify the grant of $ 480 Million for implementation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation Compact.
The story attributed to Rev. Desmond Tutu might be appropriate in this context:
‘When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said ‘Let us pray.’ We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land’.
We should not tolerate the niqab in our public institutions, since it demeans both women and men
You don’t have to be a militant feminist to understand the inherent unfairness of the niqab. No man covers himself up in this way Photo: ALAMY
THERE IS always a conflict over the limits of freedom, even in matters of dress. We take such limits seriously. A man who ran out stark naked in the street would be sure to be apprehended more quickly than if he were breaking into a car. But the opposite extreme, covering up the body so that practically no part of it can be seen, strikes the vast majority of us as sinister and demeaning. When freedom becomes licence (and covering the entire body in public is as licentious in its way as complete nakedness), it cannot long survive.
A college in Birmingham had long forbidden students to wear the niqab (a cloth covering the face apart from the eyes) on its campus but, accused by a student of discrimination” and under pressure from an electronic petition with 9,000 signatories and the threat of a demonstration with every potential for violence of a very nasty kind, the college has paid its Danegeld and given in to the demand to reverse its ban. At more or less the same time, a court in London has allowed an accused to appear in the dock in this tent-like form of attire.
Was the college’s ban justified in the first place? Is its reversal a triumph for individual liberty and the protection of our fundamental human rights, as the organiser of the electronic petition, the constant activist Aaron Kiely, alleged? Or is it, on the contrary, the triumph of a regressive view of human existence whose adherents use the rights and protections of a liberal society to destroy those very rights and protections, with the ultimate aim of imposing an intolerant vision on the world? Is the reversal a triumph for grassroots democracy, or for intimidation and religious thuggery? Is Aaron Kiely a defender of a downtrodden religious minority or, on the contrary, the useful idiot of an aspiring totalitarianism?
Let us put aside the theological question of whether the niqab is religiously required, and suppose for the sake of argument that it is. Would this in itself mean that the college was wrong to ban the niqab in the first place and right to reverse its ban, and that the court also was right in allowing a woman to appear fully covered in the dock?
Religious freedom is not and cannot be absolute in a modern civilised society. The Aztecs believed themselves religiously required – genuinely and sincerely, as far as we know – to sacrifice immense numbers of humans to their god. No one would now justify or permit such a practice on the grounds that everyone must be allowed to practise his religion.
The question of the proper extent of religious liberty is thus not entirely abstract, and cannot be decided on a simple principle such as the right to religious freedom without reference to the social meaning of the religious practices that are to be allowed or disallowed. If the niqab were the garb of a tiny and bizarre religious sect with no universalist pretensions and absolutely no history of aggression towards others, we might be inclined to overlook it as a mere contribution to life’s rich tapestry of eccentricities: but such is not the case here.
The niqab is no doubt sometimes worn by women as a matter of choice, but they wear it often because they have little choice and are coerced. Not long ago there was a case in a medical school that illustrated the point. Four female Muslim students suddenly started to wear it and the authorities were alarmed. Luckily they found a regulation dating from a century and a half ago that was therefore free of all suspicion of religious discrimination, and that required doctors to show their faces to their patients while examining them. The students were told that they must either remove the niqab or leave the medical school, and not surprisingly they chose the former.
A little later they told the authorities that they had never wanted to wear the niqab in the first place but were intimidated and blackmailed into doing so by some male Muslim students. This was easy for them: all they had to do was inform the parents of the students that they, the students, were behaving in a loose” fashion, and the parents would withdraw them from the medical school. If in this case the principle of absolute religious freedom had prevailed the students would have been obliged to wear the niqab, perhaps forever.
It is not necessary to be a militant feminist to understand that the niqab is deeply demeaning of women. No man covers himself up in this way; and not infrequently a young woman covered in this form of dress is to be seen accompanied by a young man in full international slum costume, which is not exactly a sign of a commitment to a puritanical way of life. Indeed, such young Muslim men are often to be seen fully participating in the Sodom and Gomorrah that is Saturday night in the centre of Birmingham, with not a Muslim woman in sight.
The niqab is also deeply demeaning of men, in so far as it implies than no man is capable of controlling himself in the presence of a marginally uncovered female. Perhaps it was for this reason that Birmingham Central Library took its craven precautionary decision to put out tables for women only.
Craven also was the decision of the judge to allow a woman in the dock in the niqab. If ever there were a thin edge of the wedge this was it. The comportment and expression of the accused and witnesses in a trial has always been a vital part of the assessment of a case by the jury, with very few allowable exceptions. This woman’s religious sensibility, even if genuine, was not one of them.
Among other things, the niqab is symbolic of a strong desire not to integrate in Western society, and not only on the part of the woman wearing it. What is being demanded, as the original complaint of the student against the college’s ban illustrates, is the right not to integrate, to be able to demonstrate not only difference from the society in which one lives but implicit hostility towards it, such as the niqab undoubtedly symbolises, and to be absolved of any undesired consequences of that demonstration, such as not being allowed to attend college. This, in fact, is a typical dishonesty of our time: for example, people simultaneously demand the freedom to pierce their faces with any amount of ironmongery and that employers should take no notice of it. How long before wearers of the niqab similarly demand that employers must not discriminate against them, that they, the employers, must take a quota of women dressed in the niqab? In other words, such women want it all and believe that they can have it. In this way they mix medievalism with modernity.
There is no reason for us to tolerate the niqab in our public institutions. Among other things, how are authorities to know that the person within the covering is the person it is supposed to be? It is an invitation to the most flagrant abuses, including disguising a person’s identity in order to commit crime. This, of course, is one of its attractions for some of the men who support the right to wear it.
In
Colombo we have catholic/Christian schools such as St Bridget’s, Mehodist
.Ladies .Bishops etc. which are almost private schools
Then
we have all male schools such as St Josephs .St Peters .St Thomas .St Benedicts,
Carey etc.
.Most
of the Buddhist schools except Museus are state schools like Ananda Nalanda
.Thurstan,Isipapathana ,Mahanama etc .and all girls schools like Devi Balika
.Visaka ,Gothami ,etc .
In
Jaffna you find sought after school like Hartley College ,St Patrick.Jaffna
Central .St Johsn .St Xavior ect with Tamil being being taught in parallel with
English the tamils earmark sending the children abroad .
Mostly
Buddhist parents tend to send children to state Buddhist schools expecting them
to enter university to be doctors or engineers .
Catholic
parents prefer children studying in a religious environment in schools where
English knowledge is vastly improved Private sector hires them due to their
posh upbringing and English fluency as Executives.
Lately
we have Muslim schools called Madarasa
where the children learn Arabic and hardly any Sinhala but fluent in Tami.
In
England there are private schools for girls and boys and also grammar schools
where children can enter after an entrance exam irrespective of their color and
religion. Few schools like Eton, and Harrows Paul’s may
take only children of well to do families who aim to enter universities like
Oxford and Cambridge.
Questions is why in Sri Lanka we have such a segregation of schools? Like in India we should have schools common where every nationality has the right to gain entry .There shouldn’t be discrimination.
The motto
government is promoting now is Best schools is the closest school”
High
time that the vociferous young minister of education take this matter seriously
and change the course of Sri Lankan Education System.
Country
can monitor education System Island wide with a view to monitor the behavior pattern
of the children to prevent ideologies of extremist elements creeping into their
heads
In the petition submitted to court last week and seen by AFP Sunday, Jayasundara said the country’s premier spy agency, the State Intelligence Service (SIS), ordered him last year to stop ongoing police investigations into Islamic militants. The head of the SIS, Nilantha Jayawardena, did not take seriously the intelligence shared by neighbouring India which warned of an impending attack by the NTJ.
Sri Lanka’s suspended police chief has petitioned the Supreme Court, accusing President Maithripala Sirisena of failing to prevent the Easter bombings that killed 258 people, the AFP reported today.
In a 20-page complaint, Inspector-General Pujith Jayasundara disclosed serious communication gaps between intelligence agencies and security arms of the government, all which fall under Sirisena.
In the petition submitted to court last week and seen by AFP Sunday, Jayasundara said the country’s premier spy agency, the State Intelligence Service (SIS), ordered him last year to stop ongoing police investigations into Islamic militants.
The SIS, which reports directly to President Sirisena, wanted the police Terrorist Investigation Department to stop all inquiries into extremist Muslim factions, including the National Thowheeth Jama’ath (NTJ), which was blamed for the Easter Sunday bombings.
Jayasundara said the head of the SIS, Nilantha Jayawardena, did not take seriously the intelligence shared by neighbouring India which warned of an impending attack by the NTJ.
Jayasundara said despite the SIS not sharing information warnings with the police department, he had initiated action to alert his senior men, but he had no input from the main spy agency.
President Sirisena suspended Jayasundara after he refused to accept responsibility for the deadly attacks. The Attorney General has asked for a full bench of the apex court to decide the case.
Jayasundara said he was offered a diplomatic post if he took the fall and stepped down, but he refused as he said he was not responsible for the catastrophic intelligence failure.
He said he had been sidelined by the president since a political rift between the President and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe emerged in October.
Jayasundara’s petition came days after Sirisena publicly rebuked another intelligence official, Sisira Mendis, after he told a parliamentary panel that the Easter suicide bombings could have been avoided.
Mendis’s testimony appeared to put Sirisena in a poor light by implying he had not held National Security Council meetings to review threats such as the attacks carried out by Islamic State.
In a statement, President Sirisena denied claims by Mendis that the country’s highest security body had not met as often as it should have around the time of the attacks, which were blamed on Islamic State-backed militants.
President Sirisena, who is also defence minister, said in a statement he held NSC meetings twice a week, contradicting Mendis who told parliament the last meeting was on February 19, more than two months before the April 21 bombings targeting three churches and three luxury hotels.
President Sirisena said he met with the national police chief and his top brass 13 days before the Easter Sunday attacks and no officer raised warnings which had been relayed by India.
Sri Lanka has been under a state of emergency since the attacks, but President Sirisena announced last week that it will end in a month.(AFP)
Suspended Sri Lanka police chief Pujith Jayasundara has blamed President Maithripala Sirisena for failing to prevent the Easter bombings that killed 258 people
Sri Lanka’s suspended police chief has petitioned the Supreme Court, accusing President Maithripala Sirisena of failing to prevent the Easter bombings that killed 258 people.
In a 20-page complaint, Inspector-General Pujith Jayasundara disclosed serious communication gaps between intelligence agencies and security arms of the government, all which fall under Sirisena.
In the petition submitted to court last week and seen by AFP Sunday, Jayasundara said the country’s premier spy agency, the State Intelligence Service (SIS), ordered him last year to stop ongoing police investigations into Islamic militants.
The SIS, which reports directly to Sirisena, wanted the police Terrorist Investigation Department to stop all inquiries into extremist Muslim factions, including the National Thowheeth Jama’ath (NTJ), which was blamed for the Easter Sunday bombings.
Jayasundara said the head of the SIS, Nilantha Jayawardena, did not take seriously the intelligence shared by neighbouring India which warned of an impending attack by the NTJ.
Jayasundara said despite the SIS not sharing information warnings with the police department, he had initiated action to alert his senior men, but he had no input from the main spy agency.
Sirisena suspended Jayasundara after he refused to accept responsibility for the deadly attacks. The Attorney General has asked for a full bench of the apex court to decide the case.
Jayasundara said he was offered a diplomatic post if he took the fall and stepped down, but he refused as he said he was not responsible for the catastrophic intelligence failure.
He said he had been sidelined by the president since a political rift between the President and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe emerged in October.
Jayasundara’s petition came days after Sirisena publicly rebuked another intelligence official, Sisira Mendis, after he told a parliamentary panel that the Easter suicide bombings could have been avoided.
Mendis’s testimony appeared to put Sirisena in a poor light by implying he had not held National Security Council meetings to review threats such as the attacks carried out by Islamic State.
In a statement, Sirisena denied claims by Mendis that the country’s highest security body had not met as often as it should have around the time of the attacks, which were blamed on Islamic State-backed militants.
Sirisena, who is also defence minister, said in a statement he held NSC meetings twice a week, contradicting Mendis who told parliament the last meeting was on February 19, more than two months before the April 21 bombings targeting three churches and three luxury hotels.
Sirisena said he met with the national police chief and his top brass 13 days before the Easter Sunday attacks and no officer raised warnings which had been relayed by India.
Sri Lanka has been under a state of emergency since the attacks, but Sirisena announced last week that it will end in a month.
Mayor Patrick Brown, MPP Office of the Mayor City of Brampton 2 Wellington Street West Brampton Ontario L6Y 4R2
Your Worship
Mayor Patrick Brown:
Oops! Did someone shatter your and your City Councillors Moral Code of We are Holier than Thou” when you all voted unanimously to Proclaim 18 May 2019, as the ‘Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day’, vilifying the Sri Lanka Government who won decisively, militarily, the 30 year long Tamil Tiger Terrorist War on 19 May 2009. And you all at Brampton’s City Council with bleeding hearts shed tears for the Tamils, and patted the heads of the Tamil Tigers with affection, holding on to their tails.
The whole Sinhalese World objected to the City of Brampton’s proclamation of Tamil Genocide as it did not happen. It was a lie. And you know it, Mayor, and you knew
it.
And you Mayor Patrick Brown who proposed the motion and Councillor Pat Fortini who seconded it, have to take the complete responsibility for waking up the Sinhalese Lions and Lionesses who were at peace with themselves for a decade after the end of the Eelam Terrorist war, who were working feverishly towards a reconciliation, who roared with anger at all of you at Brampton’s City Council with anger on 21st May, for churning the Pot of Lies of a Witches Brew of Separatist Tamil Hate for annihilating the Tamil Tiger terrorists before they achieved their mythical Separate Tamil State, Eelam.
You, Mayor Patrick Brown and your galaxy of Councillors stand guilty of this unnecessary evil which brought that massive tectonic shift in the hearts of the Sinhalese Lions and Lionesses hearts from Peace to visceral Anger, when you had no business to get involved in Internal politics of Sri Lanka 15,000 kilometers away from Brampton. The Brampton Council’s action was hogwash, was buckets full of dead capelin washed on the summer shores of Chance Cove in Newfoundland, strings of baloney hanging from a stall in the summer heat in Ottawa’s Byward market. And you Mayor Patrick Brown, tested the patience for far too long, over a decade since you entered parliament as the MP for Barrie. You were sitting on a powder keg.
And Mayor
Brown, you were wrong when you thought that you could go on beating the
separatist Tamil War drums for the
creation of a Mono-ethnic , racist separatist Tamil State, Eelam, for your
Tamil constituents, not knowing that you were a thorn in the Sinhalese Lion’s
passion for their Motherland, Sri Lanka.
And on May 21, you and your galaxy of your Councillors, heard over 600
thunderous roaring voices of the brave Sinhalese-Canadian Lions and
Lionesses. They had enough of your
piffle you had been marketing,Tamil
Genocide, in Ottawa’s Parliament,
Toronto’s Queens Park, and Brampton’s
City Hall. I am sure you and your
galaxy of Councillors would have had
nightmares that night. You called for
it, and you got it Mayor, in buckets full. ‘You all got it wrong and you lied
to the Bramptonians.
Now what is all this then Mayor Patrick Brown. Today’s (1 November, 2019) news item headlined ‘Deaths of indigenous women ‘a Canadian genocide’, leaked report says. Really! Did I have to believe this tosh really, when the Ontario, Brampton’s Goody Two Shoes, Mayor Patrick Brown and His Councillors, said to the Sinhalese Sri Lankans 15,000 kilometers away, We are Holier than Thou.”
This bit of
news no doubt shattered your Brampton
City Council’s Moral Code into
smithereens. No box of Band-aids are going
to hold your shattered Moral Code together
anymore. It has been flushed down the
drain for good.
This is what
the news item said, in case you and your Brampton City Councillors missed it:
A
national public inquiry into possibly thousands of missing and murdered
indigenous women in Canada has called the deaths a Canadian genocide”.
The report was leaked
to Canada’s national broadcaster CBC which published details on Friday….”
Once this bit of news sinks into you, Your Worship Patrick Brown, the Mayor of Brampton, Ontario, with a population of 595,000, I suggest to be fair on your constituents who voted you in with trust, to give back the honesty and dignity which they lost due to your arrogant foolishness, you ought to come down from your high-horse, and charge yourself with a bit of humility, and offer the Sinhalese-Sri Lankan Communities around the globe a Peace Offering, by saying I am sorry, I made a mistake in my political judgement when I proclaimed 18 May of 2019, a Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day, and I have decided to rescind it. I am sorry if I did bring some hurt on all of you. I thank you for your understanding. I can assure you that it will not happen again.”
If you
decide on such a Peace Offering to my Sinhalese-Sri Lankan communities around the globe,
I will Thank You for your honesty and withdraw my invitation for a Public Debate on the issue
of the Brampton’s Tamil Genocide Remembrance Day on 18 May, 2019. Failing, I still invite you for a public debate on the issue and my three incentives
for you to accept my challenge will still stand.
However, Your Worship, Mayor Patrick Brown, tell me how are going to deal with the Canadian-Genocide of our Indigenous Women. Are you going to Proclaim a day in Brampton City’s Calendar as the Canadian-Genocide of Indigenous Women Remembrance Day? If you did it for the Tamil’s 15,000 kilometers away on a lie, well, are you going to do it for our own First Nation peoples who have their reserves just around the corner from Brampton and Barrie. Are You?
The
Ramayana is one of the two great epics of India, the other being the Mahabharata. Ramayana is a part of the Hindu mythology of
India and is an important part of the Hindu canon. It is believed that the Hindu
sage Valmiki wrote the Ramayana. Analysts say that Valmiki’s
Ramayana is a literary epic and has no historical value. It is a poem and not a historical document.
According to the Ramayana, Rama
was the son and heir of King Dasaratha
of Kosala. He married Sita and together with his brother Lakshmana went
to live in the Dandaka forests. At Dandaka he killed several demons that were
harassing the villagers. This angered the demon king, Ravana, who, in
retaliation, captured Sita and took her to his kingdom in Lanka, in his aerial
car. The monkey king Hanuman discovered her there.
Having received
Hanuman’s report on Sita, Rama and Lakshmana proceed with their allies towards
the shore of the southern sea. There they are joined by Ravana’s brother Vibhishana.
The monkeys named “Naal” and “Neel”
construct a floating bridge (known as Rama Setu)
across the ocean, and the princes and their army cross over to Lanka. A lengthy
battle ensues and Rama kills Ravana and installs Vibhishana on the throne of
Lanka.
According to Hindu tradition, Rama
is an incarnation of the god Vishnu. The main purpose of this incarnation is to
demonstrate the righteous path (dharma) for all
living creatures on earth. Ravana, a rakshasa,
is the king of Lanka. After performing severe penance for ten thousand years he
received a boon from the creator-god Brahma
that he could not be killed by gods, demons or spirits. He is portrayed as a
powerful demon king, Vishnu incarnates as the human Rama to defeat him, thus
circumventing the boon given by Brahma.
A. L. Basham thinks
that Rama may have been a minor chief who lived in the 8th or the 7th century
BC. Rama’s deification occurred in the course of
the evolution of the Bhagavata cult. T.
Paramasiva Iyer said that Ravana was a Gond chief. The ordinary or Dhur-Gonds
are known as Ravana-Vamshis in central India. The
Archaeological Survey of India has stated that there is to date no evidence to
conclusively prove that Rama actually existed.
Others thought it possible that Ramayana was
based on a Jataka story, with embellishments added on later.
Romila Thapar says the original
version of Ramayana could be dated to about 8th century BC. H.D. Sankalia thought it could be dated to 4th century BC. There
may have been earlier Ramayanas before
the one written by Valmiki. The
text was revised many times after Valmiki and today there are many
versions of the Ramayana, including a Jain version. Father Camille Bulcke, (1909-1982) a Belgian
Jesuit missionary living
in India, author of Ramakatha,
has identified over 300 variants of Ramayana.
The Ramayana in North India differs from
Ramayana in South India and South-East Asia. The Hindu religion and the
Ramayana were exported to South East Asia. Hinduism
did not take root, but the Ramayana did. There is an extensive tradition of
oral storytelling based on the Ramayana in Indonesia,
Cambodia, Thailand,
Malaysia, Laos,
Vietnam and Maldives.
There are several versions
of the Ramayana in Indonesia. There is the Kakawin Ramayana, an old Javanese version. Bhattikavya or the Ravanavadham of Bhatti is the most influential. Yogesvara Ramayana
is attributed to the scribe Yogesvara (9 CE), who was employed in the
court of the Medang
in Central Java. It has 2774 stanzas
in manipravala style, a mixture of Sanskrit and
ancient Javanese. The Javanese Ramayana
differs markedly from the Hindu version, said Wikipedia.
The Cambodian version
of Ramayana, the Reamker
adapts the Hindu concepts to Buddhist ones. The Reamker has several differences
from the original Ramayana, including scenes not included in the original and
emphasis on Hanuman. This has
influenced the Thai and Lao versions. Reamker in
Cambodia is not confined to the realm of literature but extends to all
Cambodian art forms, such as sculpture, Khmer classical dancetheatre
known as Lakhorn Luang (the foundation of the royal ballet), poetry
and the mural and bas reliefs seen at the Silver
Pagoda and Angkor
Wat.
Thailand’s popular
national epic Ramakien is derived from the Hindu Ramayana. While the
main story is identical to that of the Ramayana, many other aspects are
given a Thai slant, such as the clothes, weapons, topography, and elements of
nature. It has an expanded role for Hanuman and he is portrayed as a lascivious
character. Ramakien can be seen in an elaborate illustration at the Wat Phra Kaew temple in Bangkok.
Phra
Lak Phra Lam is the Lao
language version. The
title comes from Lakshmana and Rama. The story of Lakshmana and Rama is told as
the previous life of the Buddha.
In Hikayat
Seri Rama of Malaysia,
Dasharatha is the great-grandson of the Prophet Adam.
Ravana receives boons from Allah
instead of Brahma. In many Malay
language versions, Lakshmana is given greater importance than
Rama, whose character is considered somewhat weak.
The location
of Valmiki’s ‘Lanka’ had been keenly discussed by Indian scholars. Indian academics cannot agree on the
location of the ‘Lanka’ in the Ramayana. Romila Thapar says the matter has been
disputed by Indian scholars for centuries and Lanka remains unidentified. The
term Lanka is some Indian languages means island and sagara means a lake not an
ocean.
Hiralal Shukla’s book ‘Lanka ki khoj’
(1977) provides information on the places identified. Lanka had been located in
various places in India, in Assam, / in
Rekanpalli, (between the Godavari and Krishna rivers),/ near Maheshwar on the
Narmada river,/ near Jabalpur, / in Chota Nagpur in the Mahanadi delta ,/ in the Vindhya mountains at Amarakantaka
,/ near Pendra, ( Bilaspur district, Madhya Pradesh) and in the Godavari delta Outside India, Lanka has been located in Lakshadweep,
Maldives, Sri Lanka, Sumatra, Australia
(via the Sunda Islands) and the Lingga Islands on the equator.
Writers
have pointed out that the Lanka mentioned in the Ramayana is not Sri Lanka. To
start with, Sri Lanka was not known as Lanka in ancient times. It was known as
Simhala. Mishra points out that all the Indian chronicles, such as the Puranas,
the writings of Varamihira and the Greek and Buddhist writings all stated that
the Simhala island differed from the island of
Lanka.’ Mahabaratha refers to two distinct islands called Lanka and
Simhala. The Virhatsamhita of
Varamihira recorded Lanka and Sinhala as two different places. Rajasekera in his play Balaramayana also
showed that Simhala was not Lanka. In this play, Ravana addresses a king who
comes from Simhala”. Ravana would not have addressed another king in this
manner if he, Ravana, had been the king of Simhala.
They
also say that Adams Bridge cannot be Ram setu since Rama’s bridge is either
eleven and a half miles or 450 miles, runs north- south and ends at a hill. The
present Adam’s Bridge is over 30 miles long runs east-west and does not end in
a hill.
Sankalia
(1971) says Lanka is in Chotanagpur in
Jharkhand. R.L. Gupta says it is in Narmada Lake, Madhya Pradesh. Mishra
favors the Trikuta islands at the mouth of the river Godavari in Andhra
Pradesh. . But they are all agreed that
the Lanka of the Ramayana is definitely not the Republic of Sri Lanka .They
point out that Sri Lanka was known as Sinhaladvipa in inscriptions and
literature.
T. Paramasiva Iyer, in his 1940
book Ramayana and Lanka, observed that In the Ramayana, Lanka was
surrounded by sea, Rama built a bridge which was 100 yojanas long and
ran due north and south from the foot of Mahendragiri in the north to
Suvelagiri (a hill adjoining Trikuta) on whose slopes Rama marshalled his vanara
hosts.
According to Iyer’s calculations,
100 yojanas would either mean eleven and a half miles or 450 miles. The
existing bridge is neither. Moreover, there is no hill in Rameshwaram or
anywhere near Mandapam. There is no hill in Mannar Island and none in the
northern half of Sri Lanka. Therefore, it is obvious that Sri Lanka has nothing
to do with Ravana’s Lanka. Further, If
Ravana was dragging Sita, Lanka could not have been as far away as Sri Lanka.
It has to nearby.
T. Paramasiva Iyer said that
Ravana’s Lanka, if there ever was one, was located in Madhya Pradesh near
Jabalpur. It is very likely that
Ravana’s Lanka, under the name of Trikuta, was the capital of today’s Kalachari Haihayas known as Trikutakas till
900 AD. Indrana Hill surrounded by the
great Hiran River on three sides was the Trikuta. It rises 650 feet above the haveli
or high-level plain comprising the broad valleys of the Hiran and Narmada.
According to the Jubalpore Gazetteer quoted by Iyer, ‘During the monsoon
months, the haveli presents the appearance of a vast lake…’ It is quite
probable that in the olden days, the Hiran, which hugs the Indrana Hill on
three sides, spread out as a shallow lake all round the hill.
Archaeologist
H.D. Sankalia said in the 1970s that Chotanagpur (Jharkhand State,
India) was the Lanka of Ramayana . He
said that the present day Sri Lanka” cannot be the Ramayana Lanka. Sri Lanka
was known to Indians of the olden days
as Simhala or Tamraparni, and not as Lanka. According to Sankalia
Lanka is a Mundari word which means an ‘island’ and people of
Sonpur on the Madhya Pradesh-Andhra-Orissa border traditionally regard Sonpur
as ‘Pashchim Lanka’ (western Lanka). The
name Lanka came into use only a thousand years ago. Adams Bridge and
Rameshwaram are not the Setu and Shiva
temple of Rama’s era.
R.L. Gupta (? 1982) says Lanka was
an island in Narmada lake, now Bagra hill. The Ramayana says that Lanka was located on Trikuti
Parvata, close to
Dhawlagiri surrounded by the hundred yojana sea and in an area where Sal
trees grew. Bagra hill, a little west
of Pachmarhi Hill, district Hoshangabad, Madhya
Pradesh was known as Dhawlagiri earlier.
for India’s geography to match the
Ramayana, particularly the ‘hundred yojana sea’, the Ramayana era must have
been in the period when there was such a lake near the Vindhya mountains.
fossil finds indicate that there was a big lake or sea in the Narmada valley.
Gupta says the phrase “hundred
yojana sea” only meant ‘large
size’. Setu was also
in Narmada lake. The lake has black
basalt. Mahendra
parvata was north of the Bagra hill and almost at the edge of the Narmada lake.
Gupta had also looked at the time Lord
Rama took to travel between the places he visited,
D.P.
Mishra (1985) says that the evidence
points to the triangular delta of the mouth of the river Godavari in Andhra
Pradesh. The Godavari has a stretch of alluvial islands, called the Trikuta
islands. These are known as the Lankas even today. However, the first meridian of Hindu
astronomers is taken to have passed through Ujjain and Lanka. Ujjain is in
Madhya Pradesh close to the west coast of India. ( continued)
The Indian Law courts are careful
where the Ramayana gods are concerned. Indian Supreme Court summons the two Hindu
gods, Ram and Hanuman to appear in court in order to settle a land dispute in
eastern state of Jharkhand. The temple priest said the land belonged to him,
given to his ancestors by the king, the locals said it belonged to the two
deities. Dispute had been going on for
20 years. It was settled in favor of the
locals but the priest is contesting this.
The emotional strength of the
Ramayana became known, once again, when the Indian
government decided to cut through the Adams Bridge which exists between
Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka to create an 83-km-long deepwater channel that will link
Mannar with Palk Strait.
This Sethusamundran project” called for extensive
dredging and removal of the limestone shoals that constitute the Ram Sethu. Ram
Sethu, also known as Adam’s Bridge, is a continuous stretch of limestone shoals
that runs from Pamban Island near Rameshwaram in South India to Mannar Island
off the northern coast of Sri Lanka. Geological
evidence suggests that in the Ice Age, the stretch used to be a land connection
between India and Sri Lanka.
The idea was
soundly opposed by environmental groups and religious groups. In 2007 The
Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) filed a petition in court. The petition said Hindus
objected to the Sethusamudran project on
the grounds that it will damage the Ram Sethu Bridge which is mentioned in the
Ramayana. This bridge is sacred and should not be destroyed. It was built by
Rama and his army of monkeys.
The media announced,
The Sethusamudran canal has brought the Ramayana to the attention of the
Supreme Court of India.”Court took note of the objection and called for a
response from the Government. The Government of India stated that there is no
scientific evidence to indicate that the events described in the Ramayana ever
took place or that its characters were real.
The Archaeological Survey of India had stated
that there is to date no evidence to conclusively prove that Rama actually
existed. Further, the Setu was not
mentioned in some versions of the Ramayana. If at all, the Ram
Setu of the Ramayana was more likely located in a small stretch of water in
Central India and not in the Palk Strait.
Government of India also stated that the bridge was not a man made one.
.NASA satellite pictures indicated that
the bridge was formed through the sedimentation of clay and lime stone. NASA said the bridge was about 1.75 million years old. The Space Applications Centre,
Ahamedabad, looked through satellite and said that the ‘bridge’ is not manmade.
They thought the formation was associated with a previous shore line. There are
similar reefs in other parts of India, such as Lakshadweep.
Geological Survey
of India did a three year study of the area between Rameshwaram in India and
Mannar in Sri Lanka. The Survey said that the bridge was not a man made (or
monkey made) construction. The sequence of clay, limestone and sandstone which
emerged could not have been manmade. Geologists
suggest that the formation was due to circular wind driven ocean currents.
Sediment may have converged in the sea to create this formation. This line of
islets may also be due to tidal movements which pushed the sand into place and
retreated. This sand over time formed
sandstones.
The Survey also
pointed out that studies of sea level showed that the area between Rameshwaram
and Sri Lanka was exposed, not submerged under the sea, in the period between
18,000 years and 7000 years ago. About 6000 years ago, the sea level was a mere
17 meters below its present level and the sea bed was partially exposed. There
was also the technical issue of building a bridge across a wide stretch of
water, in ancient times.
Adams Bridge
is also rejected on literary grounds . Rama built a bridge which was 100 yojanas long and ran due north and south ending in a hill.
According to Iyer’s calculations, 100 yojanas would either mean eleven and a
half miles or 450 miles. The existing bridge is neither. The Adam’s Bridge or
Rama Setu is over 30 miles long and runs west-north-west to east-south-east.
There is no hill in Mannar Island and none in the northern half of Sri Lanka.
The Hindus declared,
‘The controversy whether the formation is nature-made or man-made is not
relevant. The important thing is that millions of Hindus believe that it is the
bridge built by Rama.’
In the face of
strong BJP opposition, the government backed off. In 2008, Instead of providing
‘yet another affidavit’ against Valmiki’s Ramayana, the
Indian Government withdrew the affidavit, and stated that they would try to find an
alternative route. They also suspended two Archaeological Survey of India officials, holding them responsible for the
fiasco. Some years later, Janata Party
chief Subramaniam Swamy filed a petition in Supreme Court in 2012 asking Court to order the government to declare Ram
Sethu a national monument, as a matter of faith.
In 2017 USA’sDiscovery Communications-owned ‘Science Channel’ aired a video providing scientific evidence that Ram
Setu was a man-made bridge, using satellite imagery from NASA and other
evidence. The rocks connecting India and Sri Lanka are sitting on a sandbar,
also known as a shoal and the investigators believe that the sandbar is
natural, but the stones sitting on top of that sandbar, are not. Stones that
have been brought from afar and set on top of sand bar island chain” said a
geologist. (Continued)
The
motives of the fasting unto death started by Rathana Thero are confusing. Has
he got the backing of Catholic Church? He is a Buddhist Monk.
Muslim terrorists attacked Catholic Churches. Cardinal Malcolm Cooray
appropriately provided an effective leadership at that critical moment
preventing escalation of revenge attacks. Malwatte and Asgiriya
were in hibernation as usual.
In
this situation, one would expect Catholic Priests to commence a fasting unto
death demanding removal of Muslim Extremists Ministers, who have secretly
converted Sri Lankan Buddhist society to a Muslim Power House. Sri
Lankan Muslims with mere 9.7% population has more rights and privileges
than Indonesian Muslims with 87%. As a person who lived in Indonesia for
over 15 years and a frequent visitor, the writer can testify that the
nonsensical Muslim habits in Sri Lanka cannot be found in
Indonesia. Muslim women are quite happy to show their beautiful
faces in public. Indonesian Muslims frequently mix with other religious
partners. Indonesian Muslims enjoy a balanced social life. They enjoy
their best Beer, Bir Bintang. They even enjoy Satay Chicken and Satay Pork.
Pork is available in all parts of Indonesia in Super Markets as well as at
Traditional markets called PASAR, mostly serving low middle and low income
groups. In Sri Lanka, down south, after you pass Wadduwa, you cannot find
Pork. To take the fight upto Muslim Political Leaders, Sinhala traders
must start selling Pork in all parts of Sri Lanka. When I made enquiries
with Weligama Pradeeshiya Saba Chairman, he said that there are no laws
preventing issue of licences for Pork Stalls, but fear Muslim Business
protests. 90% of Weligama, Galbokka and nearby areas businesses are
Muslim owned. Opening Pork Stalls by Sinhala is a small
TRICK, but will be a sound business proposition providing best desired results
and an additional income base plus a solution for unemployed youths
especially in down south where foreigners frequestly visit.
Indonesian
Muslims are religious, but the Indonesian society is not a MUSLIM MAD
HOUSE. Indonesia had 68% Buddhists, Borobudur Temple is a living
testimony. Today Buddhists are 2.5% in Indonesia. Muslim
political leaders in Sri Lanka had virtually destroyed Sri Lankan Buddhist
society.
The
Muslim Ministers, apart from accumulating wealth, infrastructure framework has
been done over the years for a Muslim State.
It
was Gnanasara Thero who exploded loud and clear of the dangers. His
aggressive vocabulary and some of the past personal behaviours eroded his
reputation, resulting less attention paid to his claim. But the
facts and figures provided by Gnanasara Thero had now been substantiated after
a massive loss of human lives.
It
has always been Buddhist Monks, taking leadership in national interest. I
question myself why Catholic Priests are not joining the protest of the Rathana
Thero? Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe will not care for Buddhist
Monks, he is happy if they die or put them behind bars, but if
Catholic Priests also join the protest, then Ranil as a born Catholic will feel
the pressure to initiate action.
During
30 year Tamil Terrorists War against Sri Lankan Sinhala Buddhists, Sri Lanka
lost thousands of Sinhala Buddhists, including Buddhist Priests, Army, Navy,
Police personnel.
Now
they are fighting against the attack on Catholic Churches by Muslims. Are
Catholic Priests also hibernating like our Malwatte-Asgiriya Prelates?
In my work place and in our are we live, poor people
and some middle class people keep buying lottery tickets with fervent hopes
that they will win one day .This legalized gambling promoted by the State are
conning people .We have seen how ministers were so greedy to grab the lotteries
board under their control .Because it is a den of thieves .NLB lavishly spend
for advertising and carry on procurement with no control. We have seen in the
past when some heads make lot of money .
Poor people fall into the trap and spend their hard
earned money to win .When you read the news below .you will feel that you will
never buy lottery ticket in the future .
This country is full of casino kings ,conners ,and
gamblers .Some want to take over the helm of the country to make Sri Lanka the
Kingdom of Gambling and overtake Las Vegas and Macau ?
Auditor General should file criminal action against
NDB and punish them for this cheating act .
Lottery sham: You don’t win big because
DLB plays ball with probability games
By Namini Wijedasa
AG’s explosive report highlights
discrepancies between draws and tickets printed
Wonder why you never win big–or even decently–at the
lottery? One reason is that the Development Lotteries Board (DLB) prints a
strikingly smaller number of tickets for each draw than is required on the
basis of the number of balls in the draw machine.
This
means the probability of there being a winning ticket in your hand is minimal,
the Auditor General’s Department has
said in an explosive new report available on its website. It also found
significant drawbacks in the DLB’s conduct of the lotteries. For instance,
there was no evidence that the number of balls in the draw machine is verified
or their quality inspected before each edition.
The DLB
operates in a duopoly. The other player is the National Lotteries Board (NLB),
which the Auditor General said was run better. The DLB generates income for the
President’s Fund for remittance thereafter to the Mahapola Higher Education
Trust Fund.
The
Auditor General looked at reports that public confidence in winning was lost.
In recent years, there weren’t enough prizes being scored. And the draws
typically extended into many weeks without anyone clinching the first or super
prize.
Data and
trends predominantly between 2012 and 2013 were examined. The Department found
that the DLB printed a lesser number of tickets” than what was required in
relation to the number of balls used in each draw. It placed more balls in the
draw machine than is needed in relation to the number of tickets available for
sale. And there were counterfeit tickets in the market because of a lack of
proper security codes. This showed improper” management control over the draw process,
it said.
Calls the Sunday Times Political Editor and former Defence Secretary to clarify matters amidst protests by even religious leaders
PSC hearings and live telecast stir row; Sirisena calls Ranil, as relationship hits new low
SLFP wants early talks with SLPP on common alliance; Sirisena still hopeful about him being common candidate for presidential poll, but chances remote
A trait in President Maithripala Sirisena, mostly unmatched by his political contemporaries, is his humility. That he is at the butt end of very heavy criticism, after the senseless Easter Sunday carnage, has not been a deterrent for him to turn the searchlight inwards.
On an exceptionally hot and humid last Sunday morning, I was woken up to a call. The operator said in Sinhala that his Excellency the President wished to speak. With the exchange of greetings over, he got to the subject. It was the political commentary in last week’s the Sunday Times headlined President tells UNF: No military deals with the United States. Maawa gahalama daala neyda” or you have hit me hard,” he said laughingly.
Deng balanda, mulpitiuwey warthawa or see the front-page report, he noted and then declared Oyage political kolom eka” or your political column.” He laughed again and exhorted Mey dekama maawa kotu karannai karala thiyanney” or both are intended to corner me. I explained that the front-page account was not mine but a report from Courts. It spoke of IS backed extremist suicide bomber Zahran Hashim had an open warrant for his arrest long before the Easter Sunday carnage. I explained that the news report was a fact. In the political commentary there were of course comments based on facts, I said. He listened.
Eka pethatha daamu ko” or let’s put that aside, he said very politely. President Sirisena then referred to the Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement (ACSA) between the United States and Sri Lanka, much in the news through the Sunday Times exclusive disclosures. His Defence Secretary number two, Engineer Karunasena Kodituwakku (now Sri Lanka Ambassador to Germany) had negotiated the agreement, as revealed last week. It was later signed by Defence Secretary number three Kapila Waidyaratne, who was earlier Senior Additional Solicitor General.
Oya Gotabaya Rajapaksa athsang karapu ekatai, apey ekatai venasak nehe,” or there is no difference in the agreement (ACSA) signed by Gotabaya Rajapaksa (former Defence Secretary on July 4 2007) and ours, he claimed. I replied, with all due respect Sir, there is a huge difference.” The 2007 ACSA under the previous administration, I pointed out, was only seven pages with the cover. I said, Sir, the one negotiated by your second Defence Secretary and signed by your third Defence Secretary was precisely 83 pages.” I added that nowhere in the ACSA agreements signed earlier by the US with Sri Lanka contain any annexures. This time there were over 50 annexures. That gave the lists of US commands and military establishments which will be allowed the use of Sri Lanka’s airports and sea ports. The list was exclusively revealed in the Sunday Times (Political Commentary) of May 19.
President Sirisena listened patiently as I explained how the earlier agreement was only for a period of seven years. The one negotiated by one Defence Secretary and signed by another is open ended, I pointed out. It says, This agreement shall remain in force unless terminated by mutual written consent of the Parties or by either Party giving not less than 180 days’ notice in writing to the other Party of its intention to terminate….” Interestingly, President Sirisena kept on saying Ehemada, Ehemada” or Is that so, is that so,” when I kept explaining the difference between the previous (2007) and the present (2017) ACSA agreements. I told him it had been hurried through even before a thorough study had been done by the armed forces commanders or officials well versed in the matter.
President: Won’t betray the country
At the end, President Sirisena said he had already called for the copies of the two ACSA agreements in question that Sunday morning. He said he would also speak to officials who then dealt with the subject, including former Defence Secretary Hettiaratchchi, now Ambassador in Germany. This was to find out how the features in the 2017 ACSA were broadened and at whose behest. Mama kavadavath mey vagey deval walata ida denney nehe. Mama magey rata paava denney nehe. Mama hoya gannang mokkada vuney kiyala,” or I will never allow room for such things to happen. I will find out. I will not betray my country, he asserted.
President Sirisena cannot be expected to remember every clause in a document that is approved by the Cabinet of Ministers. He has to be advised, guided and correctly directed by those in the know. On the other hand, if he has by any means followed no such advice, he should take the full responsibility as the Minister of Defence. That is why the post of Defence Secretary becomes important and cannot be held by all and sundry in the state administrative structure. It is as simple as saying a butcher cannot be a neuro surgeon. This reality has been lost on most politicians who believed that only personal loyalty to them, being supine and animosity to the Mahinda Rajapaksa family were qualifications enough.
One Defence Secretary was well known for his drinking binges at nights with a service commander. Another frequented a Moghul restaurant run by a casino king where food and drinks were given free, not only for him but his entire security detail. This prompted President Sirisena to once reprimand him and say he should behave like a judge and not a freebooter. In another recent instance, he warned a Defence Secretary to be more circumspect with his remarks and not to shoot his mouth off arrogantly at every turn.
After the conversation with me, President Sirisena spoke that Sunday with Shashikala Premawardena, just named Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner designate to Singapore. She was on secondment from the Foreign Ministry to the Defence Ministry and had been then handling matters relating to the ACSA.
However, the most revealing aspects of how the ACSA was rushed through came when President Sirisena telephoned Ambassador Hettiaratchchi in the German capital of Berlin. The Sunday Times has learned details of President Sirisena’s conversation from a high-ranking source. When he began the call, Sirisena laughed as he remarked Sunday Times eka maawa pethi kapala daala ney or the Sunday Times has cut me to slices. This in turn prompted the Sri Lanka Ambassador to laugh. President Sirisena’s conversation was revealing and laid bare the question whether some diplomats were being paid by the government of Sri Lanka to literally work for the United States. It also raised serious questions over how some Foreign Ministers conducted foreign policy, steering in the opposite direction from being non-aligned.
President Maithripala Sirisena held one-on-one talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi when he went for the latter’s inauguration on Thursday. After the talks, when Sirisena was ready to depart, Premier Modi graciously walked him to his car. On the right is Austin Fernando, Sri Lanka High Commissioner to India
Ambassador Hettiaratchchi told President Sirisena that during the negotiations for the renewal of ACSA in 2017, he was under constant pressure from Prasad Kariyawasam, Sri Lanka’s then ambassador in the US, to expedite the passage of the ACSA. He had made many calls to ensure the draft ACSA be concluded and placed before the Cabinet of Ministers immediately, he said. Also telephoning him periodically over the same matter, Hettiaratchchi revealed to President Sirisena, was then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera.
That indeed, to say the least, was damning from a Sri Lankan Foreign Minister. Here is an instance where Samaraweera commits Sri Lanka to co-sponsor a US backed resolution before the UN Human Rights Council to probe violation of human rights, international humanitarian law and alleged commitment of war crimes by the country’s own troops. This is during the final stages of the separatist war in 2009. At the same time, Samaraweera and his then envoy in Washington DC, who was to later become Foreign Secretary, wants an open house in Sri Lanka for US troops and have included in the ACSA almost all US military establishments to gain access. Ironic enough, one of the elements in the ACSA is to teach Sri Lankan troops human rights, something that has been violated with impunity in some theatres of conflict by Washington’s own troops. What they did in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq to terror suspects is just one glaring example. One rule for the Sri Lankan troops and another for their US counterparts.
Ironic enough, Hettiaratchchi told President Sirisena that both Kariyawasam and Samaraweera had pressured him at a time when the Defence Ministry had sought the observations of the Armed Forces Commanders on the ACSA deal. This was when, as reported last Sunday, President Sirisena declared when told that their (service chiefs) responses were being awaited Ekeng mata vedak nehe. Vahaama assang karanna lesthi karanna or I am not interested in all of that. Make arrangements to immediately sign it.
Thus, the draft went before the Cabinet on June 20, 2017 when armed forces commanders had not responded in full. Now, Ambassador Hettiaratchchi told President Sirisena that the then NAVY Commander, Admiral Ravi Wijegunaratne, had expressed serious reservations over some of the provisions in the ACSA. The power and pressure of the then Foreign Minister and his envoy and later Foreign Secretary put paid to all this. The Cabinet approved it. Some ministers did not even know what they had approved and the implications arising from it. They simply do not read lengthy memoranda.
The Sunday Times asked former Foreign Secretary and now the Speaker’s International Affairs Advisor, Prasad Kariyawasam for his comments on why he applied pressure for the early signing of the ACSA in 2017. His response: I cannot say anything on speculative reports. I have performed duties as a public official and, therefore, cannot make any comment about functions performed during my service.”
President Sirisena asked Ambassador Hettiaratchchi as to what were the key elements of ACSA. He had explained that through it, the two countries had established basic terms, conditions and procedures to facilitate the reciprocal provision of Logistic Support, Supplies and Services. This will mean that a multitude of US military establishments covered by the ACSA (in terms of the Annexes) could use the country’s air and sea ports to obtain logistics support, supplies and services” for a fee. Similarly, what is for Sri Lanka, President Sirisena queried. The Ambassador replied, Sri Lanka could in return use the same facility in the US to seek the same privileges through those listed military establishments in the ACSA.” Why then was it not tabled in Parliament? No questions were asked nor answers given. That way the ACSA remains a secret notwithstanding claims that more than 100 countries have signed it with the US. Even if that is true, no two agreements are alike.
Reciprocity
This is where the issue becomes laughable if not hilarious. Leave alone using such US facilities, for example, could the Sri Lanka Navy’s vessels dock into Camp H.M. Smith in Hawaii, thousands of miles away, where their Indo-Pacific Headquarters is located? Could the Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) land any one of its air assets at the Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida? They simply do not have the required assets to do so? In that sense conceding those facilities only to US military establishments is totally one sided. That itself was proof that the US wanted a strong military foothold in Sri Lanka, though the agreement speaks of reciprocity. It was given to the US on a platter.
Why then was no thought given to these and other aspects? Why then were the reservations of the Navy not gone into? Is it in the belief that self-acclaimed super patriots would always protect the country’s interests and not promote the interests of other nations? Of course, there was also another factor then. The year preceding 2017 was a political honeymoon period with the US. President Sirisena who attended the UN General Assembly that year even shook hands with President Barrack Obama. Then Foreign Minister Samaraweera’s friendship with Samantha Power, the US envoy to the UN, had also blossomed. Now, it’s a different US government and a different US Embassy in Colombo. Long gone are the days of détente and diplomacy. There are Foreign Ministry officials, posted to other ministries with decorated titles. They are also advising foreign diplomats or travelling together to other parts of the country with them.
President Sirisena, as reported in these pages last week, also directed Foreign Minister Tilak Marapana, whilst in the United States capital of Washington DC, not to proceed with the controversial Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the United States. The UNF government has been strongly backing the move. Such an agreement, as revealed last week, would have given an open licence for uniformed US troops with arms and communications equipment to roam any part of Sri Lanka.
The revelations in this regard last week did cause serious concerns in the defence and security establishment. They were of the view that in post-independence Sri Lanka, such a drastic move was halted by Sirisena at the eleventh hour did bring relief among them. Another area where there were signs of relief was at the highest levels of the Foreign Ministry. One official opined that there had been a move to rush through SOFA with Sri Lanka under cover whilst India was embroiled in parliamentary general elections. Otherwise, the presence of foreign troops in the neighbourhood would have been a serious cause for concern for New Delhi,” the source said. Yet, letters have been exchanged in this regard suggesting formally that talks would continue.
Now, Clarke Cooper, Assistant Secretary of State for Political and Military Affairs in the State Department, is due in Colombo during a tour of Singapore and India. Diplomatic sources believe he will, during his talks with government leaders, broach the subject of SOFA despite President Sirisena’s directive not to go ahead. There is likely to be some amount of diplomatic arm twisting but we will not change position,” said a senior Foreign Ministry official. Significantly, Colombo’s Archbishop Malcolm Cardinal Ranjit, during a significant visit met the Malwatter Chapter Mahanayake, the Most Ven. Thibbatuwawe Sri Sumangala Thera, and the Asgiriya Chapter Mahanayake, the Most Venerable Warakagoda Sri Gnanarathana Thera, on Friday in Kandy. They issued a statement warning against the presence of foreign troops in Sri Lanka.
A high-ranking military official, conversant with the geopolitics of the Asian region and holding a senior command appointment said yesterday, Why did we fight a separatist war for almost three decades. Many thousands were killed and more thousands wounded? It was to protect our sovereignty and national integrity. Our troops showed the world we could defeat a deadly terrorist enemy and ensure the writ of the government ran to every nook and corner of our beloved island. Why do we need foreign troops on our own soil? We have to safeguard what we have won in the battlefield and not to fritter them away for the greed of a few.”
President Sirisena was also livid on Wednesday over the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) that is probing the Easter Sunday attacks by IS-backed Muslim extremist groups. The parliamentary body made up of the UNF, TNA and JVP began sittings in the morning that day by directing Defence Secretary Shantha Kottegoda and former crime investigator, retired DIG Sisira Mendis, Chief of National Intelligence (CNI), to testify. They were broadcast live by the national broadcaster Rupavahini. As the programme was on air, security top brass and those in the Presidency expressed concerns to Sirisena that national security matters were being publicly aired. This was even before investigations into such matters had been concluded or fuller normalcy has been restored.
His first response was to immediately summon the Telecom Regulatory Commission (TRC) Chairman and Defence Secretary Kottegoda and the TRC’s Director General P.R.S.P. Jayatilleke. The idea was to immediately disconnect the live broadcast. The TRC comes under President Sirisena, However, by that time, the live coverage was over and the PSC had adjourned. Video clips of testimonies went viral thereafter in the social media highlighting the tragi-comedy that is being played out at the highest levels of government.
President chides PM
President Sirisena, a source said, thereafter made a telephone call to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. He charged that he had not been consulted on the appointment of a PSC or about live broadcasts. According to the source, President Sirisens had also contended that the live television coverage was to embarrass him and the armed forces. He had cautioned that serious consequences would follow” if the practice was continued. The PSC is set to meet on June 4 again. A UNP source confirmed the call and added that Premier Wickremesinghe listened to what President Sirisena said” and he did not make any comments. President Sirisena has, in the meanwhile, directed that no state broadcasters should televise live proceedings. The UNF is defiant and will not call off the PSC or inviting those concerned to testify.
This telephone call between the two leaders of Sri Lanka illustrates personal and working relationships have deteriorated. More worrying is the blame game over the Easter Sunday massacre. President Sirisena insists he was unaware of intelligence warnings. The UNF leadership seems wanting to demonstrate that he, in fact, was. There is no way President Sirisena could put a halt to the PSC process though the entire exercise is driven by the United National Front government together with its two proxies, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). Hence, there is a likelihood that the acrimony would rise as more security forces personnel are invited to testify.
In fact, the Presidential Media Division on Thursday contradicted remarks attributed to retired DIG Sisira Mendis, Chief of National Intelligence, who testified before the PSC. It said media reports had quoted him as saying that the National Security Council (NSC) did not meet after the Easter Sunday massacre. The statement claimed that the NSA has been meeting every two weeks, and on some occasions” the President had convened it every week. The statement said on April 8 the President convened the monthly meeting of the IGP and senior Police officers……none of the police officers informed the President that advance reports on a possible terrorist attack had been received.” Who is right? President Sirisena or his Chief of Intelligence?
Retired DIG Mendis’ testimony, besides those challenged by the President’s Office, had raised some issues in the intelligence community. One of the key questions being raised is why he did not use his right as a witness to testify before the PSC in camera – that is without the presence of the media. The man who holds the office of Chief of National Intelligence (CNI), the highest-ranking intelligence officer in the country, it is common sense, deals with matters of national security and issues of a secretive nature.
Such conduct impacts on public morale, in the confidence of the business sector that is clamouring for foreign investment or the tourism sector struggling to survive. There is also another strong message – if not for the Easter Sunday carnage, the chaotic state of the national intelligence mechanism, where there is gross incompetence and acute inadequacies, would not have surfaced. It is no secret that personal loyalty becomes the reward for promotions and perks in this important sector responsible for the well-being of the community and the nation.
At the PSC hearing, controversial minister Ravi Karunanayake asked Mendis what the meaning of Eyes Only” was. His reply: It is a term used in intelligence circles. It was from them that I learned it…..” The term Eyes Only” means the matter is of utmost importance…” He was not quite right. In intelligence parlance in any part of the world, it is a secret or confidential communication to be seen only by the person to whom it is directed. That is fundamental.
Referring to CNI Mendis, former Inspector General of Police Pujith Jayasundera, now under suspension, in a Fundamental Rights Application filed by him, said that he received a letter on April 9, 2019 from Sisira Mendis, Chief of National Intelligence. It enclosed certain contents of a letter by the Director, State Intelligence Service (DIG Nilantha Jayawardena) containing information regarding a planned attack by Zaharan Hashim and associates. The letter had said secret inquiries” were being conducted and concluded it is important to alert the Law Enforcement agencies to be vigilant concerning the information.”
Jayasundera’s petition claims that the warnings from Mendis as well as the SIS did not contain any indication of the urgency of the situation, nor did they contain a classification to indicate the urgency or priority level, whereas the usual practice is to mark relevant letters Top Priority” or Top Urgent.” It is the Supreme Court that will eventually determine the validity of the claims. However, one factor that comes out is very clear. Retired DIG Mendis is not an intelligence officer and is not trained in intelligence work. He was a criminal investigator and spent more of his time at the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). Thus intelligence was an unfamiliar terrain for him. There are many others who find themselves in this situation. For more than a month, they have neither been identified nor has any form of action been taken for colossal failures.
Not only what transpired at the PSC, President Sirisena’s anger spilled over to other areas, too. At Sirisena’s request, key players in the now troubled Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) held a news conference on Thursday. National security must not be compromised by revealing intelligence information to the public. It would only lead the country to an unstable situation,” declared Senior Deputy SLFP leader, Nimal Siripala de Silva. UPFA General Secretary Mahinda Amaraweera added, Revealing intelligence information is a very dangerous thing. In no other country is such a practice followed.” Both were missing the point. They appear to have blissfully forgotten that a monumental intelligence failure cost the lives of more than 250 men, women and children. A further 450 were injured. The whole world is talking about it, besides Sri Lankans. Instead of parroting inanities they should have focused on the damage caused to national interest by what is unfolding before the PSC and the resultant public exposure. That there is politics is not a secret.
It is in this backdrop that President Sirisena was to cope with a number of other issues this week. Important among them was a meeting of the SLFP Central Committee on Monday. A variety of political issues came up for discussion.
One is the re-introduction of criminal defamation laws to deal with what was claimed to be reporting by the electronic media. It was agreed that draft laws should be formulated by the Parliamentary Oversight Committee headed by Malith Jayatileke MP. It oversees defence matters. Thereafter, the draft is to be discussed with leaders of political parties and civil society groups. Such a new law, it was agreed, should also encompass provisions to ban hate speech and related matters. Despite the faithful commitments, whether these laws would become a reality before this year’s presidential election remains unlikely. This is in view of the time taken to draft, discuss, formulate a final draft and later present it to Parliament.
Opinion of the SC
There were also some proposals, which, to say the least, were laughable. One such proposal to come in the form of new laws under Higher Education is to closely monitor all Sri Lanka youth who return to their country after studies abroad. The learned rationale behind this is to determine whether those students have undergone any mental inculcation and would become suicide bombers. That the country’s politicians could think of such things is more repulsive than putting their plans into action. Thank god they are not talking of brain surgery,” said a former SLFP minister who took part in the meeting. Another agreed but added it is these jokers who keep us going.”
It was also agreed that steps should be taken to stop the desegregation of schools on religious basis. Together with this move, there will be no separate ministers in charge of Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim Affairs. All those subjects, it was agreed, should be brought under the President. Public representations are to be invited in this regard before giving effect to the move. The Muslim Marriages Act is to be amended to prevent underage marriages. It will require adherence to the 18-year age limit. The report of a Committee now studying the matter is being awaited.
Uva Province Chief Minister Chamara Sampath surprised those present by proposing that President Sirisena should seek an opinion from the Supreme Court in terms of the Constitution. He lost his six-year tenure in office to five after the 19th Amendment. He has every right to ask whether his office for five years took effect from the day he took his oaths, or when the Speaker of Parliament gave his assent to the 19A, he argued. There was no decision on the matter and President Sirisena remained non-committal when the proposal was made.
The most important subject of discussion at the Central Committee meeting was the eagerness of the SLFP to resume early talks with the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP). As revealed in these pages last week, the talks set for June 30 have now been advanced to June 8 at President Sirisena’s request. The talks that originally began with the objective of forming a joint alliance had veered away to other issues as they progressed. Speakers at the meeting expressed concern over this and wanted specific issues discussed since the presidential election was only five months away. They will need us and we will need them,” said one of the speakers. Sirisena agreed when a speaker declared, We cannot make it alone.” Another remarked, We are the deciding factor.” It was agreed that SLFP General Secretary Dayasiri Jayasekera should discuss the main aspects of a joint alliance – its structure, a common symbol, office bearers and formulation of lists for nominations at a parliamentary election. Jayasekera was asked to conclude the talks within one or two months. Whether it is in concert or not is unclear. But a smaller section in the Joint Opposition is also voicing the same view — expedite the formation of a joint alliance.
It is relevant to note President Sirisena’s remarks to the media during his New Delhi visit for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s inauguration. He said he had not yet decided whether he would contest. He is obviously focusing on reviving talks for an alliance and trying to explore whether there still a chance for his joint candidacy.
However, it is not going to be easy. It is near impossible. Firstly, any such prospect has already been ruled out. Those at the higher levels of the SLPP are confident they could win even if they go it alone. Thus, there are clear indications that they would place their own set of demands to the SLFP and declare take it or leave it.” One of the main reasons for this is President Sirisena’s vacillations and SLFP General Secretary Jayasekera’s aggressive stance towards the SLPP earlier.
Whilst the SLFP is leaning towards the SLPP, its proxy war with the UNP-led United National Front (UNF) is escalating over the Easter Sunday carnage. The battle is over who is responsible? The words of Sir Winston Churchill, the war time Prime Minister of Britain, ring true: The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
Two Buddhist monks from the Dimbulagala Aranya Senasana have joined the protest fast of TNA Parliamentarian S. Viyalendiran who has commenced a protest fast in Batticaloa, supporting the hunger strike launched by MP Ven. Athureliye Rathana Thero.
Rathana Thero commenced a protest fast in front of Sri Dalada Maligawa in Kandy yesterday (31) demanding the removal of Minister Rishad Bathiudeen, Eastern Province Governor M.L.A.M Hizbullah and Western Province Governor Azath Salley from their respective posts.
The TNA Batticaloa District MP S. Viyalendiran, who has pledged support to the Joint Opposition, commenced the protest last morning (01) supporting the demands made by Ven. Rathana Thero.
Accordingly, Dewagala Dewalankara Thero and Dimbulagala Rahulalankara Thero from Dimbulagala Aranya Senasana joined the fast of Viyalendiran.
The Theros stated that the President and the Prime Minister should take immediate action to save Northern Province from Muslim extremists
