Features

Some giants of the Ceylon Bar I encountered on my return

Published

3 years ago

2023/02/26

Excerpted from the Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris

After a couple of days at home, father took me to his classmate and best man at his wedding, B. F. de Silva for advice. B. F. was one of the straightest of men, both at the Bar and in public affairs. He was a man of few words and never wasted the time of the court. He was, at this time, a senior member of the Bar, but got few retainers because each year he raised his fee by one guinea in order that the juniors might get some work.

Would that other seniors followed that example instead of concentrating on their welfare. B. F. was glad to see my father, and welcomed me. His advice to me was crisp and concise, and typical of the man. He said “All I can tell you is this. You are a Barrister-at-law but you don’t know our law. Therefore read our Law Reports from the first to the current volume. Secondly, an advocate’s fee is one guinea. Don’t be ashamed to accept that fee, but don’t appear for two or three rupees and a bundle of cigars as some others seem to be doing. Thirdly, never sign a proctor’s receipt for more than the actual fee paid to you.” And that was all. How correct this advice was will be seen later.

In my practice I was clean and had no contact with the touts who used to hang about the banyan trees that adorn the court premises. I was working in the Chambers of N. K. Choksy, another straight man at the Bar and a perfect gentleman. He was meticulous in his work and I learned a great deal from him, particularly in giving attention to the smaller matters of detail which appeared to weigh heavily with him. He used to spend many hours settling mortgage bonds for which he was well paid. He told me that great care had to be used in drafting pleadings as the entire responsibility would be on you when the matter came to court, and then it would be too late to admit your error.

At the beginning, there was very little work for a Junior. My father’s friend, Francis de Zoysa, K. C., told me that if, at the end of my first year, I averaged four guineas a month, I should consider myself very lucky and as getting on in the profession. According to the fee book which I kept, the fees I earned during my few years in practice did not hit the target, although they came pretty near, which I thought was good according to Francis de Zoysa’s estimate.

My proctor relatives in the outstations and the proctors in my home town, Panadura, used to send me work whenever they could, work in the original courts as well as in appeal, and I took great pains over the study of my briefs.

I received my first brief in the Panadura Magistrate’s court within seven days of my taking my oaths as an advocate and was junior to H. A. P. Sandrasagara, K. C. This eminent silk, well built and very dark in complexion, spoke such good English that if one heard him behind a screen one would have thought it was an Englishman speaking. When my father heard that Sandara, as everyone called him, was to lead me as his junior in my first case, he invited the silk to lunch on the day of the case. The invitation was accepted as the two old gentlemen were friends and as there was no rest house in the town.

He arrived and, while driving from my father’s house to the court, I asked him what he thought about the case. “Which case?” he asked. I said “Today’s case” and he inquired whether I had read the brief. I replied that this was my first case and that I knew my brief inside out. “Young man,” he said seriously, “Take the advice of an old hand. Never study your brief. Always go into court with an open mind.” He was experienced enough to go into court with an open mind, and he won his case too.

There was R. L. Pereira, K. C., a classmate of my father, a dominant personality, who studied his brief so thoroughly that he carried all the facts in his head. He appeared in all the biggest trials, rape, arson, murder, we have had. On one occasion, in a criminal trial, he was opposed to his son R. G. C. who died young. At one stage there was a heated argument between counsel when R. L. said “My learned friend is too old, he has forgotten his law.” After the case, both counsel walked out of court, the incident forgotten, and the son offering the father a cigarette out of his case. Such is the camaraderie of the Bar. Years later, I met R. L. at a party. I went up to him and asked whether he could place me. For a moment he thought and, with that marvellous memory of his, said “Yes, Edmund’s son.”

I have been junior to nearly every King’s Counsel practising at that time. Of them I had the highest regard and respect for F. A. Hayley, who carried with him all the traditions of the English Bar. Without casting any reflection on the other silks at the time, I should like to say this of Hayley. He was the only silk who ever asked me whether I had been paid a proper fee. Bar practice requires that a junior should be paid one-third to half his senior’s fee.

In my first case as Hayley’s junior, he came into the District Court of Colombo fifteen minutes before time and asked me “Have you been feed?” I told him that I had been given a fee and he asked “How much?” I said “One”. He was angry, said he was not appearing in the case until I had been paid my proper fee, and said “Let’s clear out of court”. He then called the proctor and demanded that I be paid my fee. I was then given a further nine guineas, which Hayley asked me to count, after which he marked his appearance in court.

During the case, Hayley asked me only one question “How many square yards are there in an acre?” The case had something to do with a rubber estate with trees planted 15 feet by 15 instead of the normal 18 feet by 18; hence the square yardage. I had to rush to the Law Library and consult Ferguson’s Directory to give Hayley the answer. He once obliged the court by reading a fidei commissum deed which was in Sinhala and which counsel on the other side, a Sinhalese, was unable to read.

H. V. Perera, Q. C. once came to court prepared in a case which, if it was taken up, would have lasted a few days. For some reason, this case was allowed to stand down and another of his cases called. He rose. There was not a mark on his brief. He had not read it. The judges were Garvin and Akbar. He turned to the plaint and summarized it to the Bench. He next read the defendant’s answer, and now knew what the dispute was about.

He then read the issues and had got to the crux of the matter when one of the judges asked him what the trial judge had held on issue four. Quickly, he turned to the judgment and told their Lordships that it would be best if he read the entire judgment to them. Having read it, he put his brief aside, argued a matter of law without reading any of the evidence, and won his case.

A. R. H. Canakeratne had a wonderful memory. He was a simple and a studious man who came daily to the Law Library but did not appear in the courts. He had a large consulting practice. I once had to go to his residence for a consultation and expected to see an extensive library. Instead, I found a small bookcase with a dozen odd volumes of the New Law Reports. The rest of the law he carried in his head.

Sometimes, when a judge put a question to counsel arguing an appeal, Canaks would tug at counsel’s gown and whisper 13 N. L. R. page 43, and that settled the matter. How he carried all this in his head surprised everyone who came in touch with him. In a case of mine, I had looked up all the law to discover a point in my favour but found none. In the end, I went to Canaks and asked him whether he could assist me.

He was always willing to help a junior. When I mentioned my difficulty, he scratched his head for some time, thinking, and then said “You are right. There is no reported case on the point, but if you look at 23 N. L. R. p. 345, you might find three lines in the judgment of the Privy Council which might help you.” And there it was, exactly as he had said.

He had some trouble with his voice, and that was the reason he refused to argue cases in court. If his friends persuaded him to appear, he was brilliant in his argument. After a few appearances in court, he took silk and was shortly afterwards elevated to the Bench.

I remember W. H. Perera, brother of E. W., who had an extensive practice in the District Court of Colombo in land and partition cases. It was W. H. who, in tracing the pedigree in a partition case where the litigants were poor persons, referred to two sections of the descendants of the original owner who had married twice, as being of the first and the second mat respectively. He was a classical scholar and a teetotaller.

There was E. G. P. Jayatilleke, K. C., a leading silk in my time and a charming gentleman. He had a fund of humour and used to entertain us, juniors, with his jokes. In passing, I should like to pay my tribute to F. H. B. Koch, M. T. de S. Amarasekera, N. Nadarajah, C. Nagalingam and his brother Thiagalingam, N. E. Weerasooria, Lalitha Rajapakse, and Gratiaen, whose junior I have been at one time or another. There were G. G. Ponnambalam and Dr Colvin R. de Silva, neither of whom used a small word if a bigger one was available. Colvin never spoke of a page in a book; it was “pagination”, and with him the evidence of a witness was always “testification”. These two friends were small editions of Dr Samuel Johnson.

For a short time with us was Miss Mehta, a Parsee Barrister. When I was working in Choksy’s Chambers one day, he received a letter from Miss Mehta who was then in London, inquiring whether he would have her in his Chambers on her return to Ceylon. Choksy did not like the proposal at all. I told him that he ought to help the only member of his community at the Bar and he agreed on one condition, that I would always be in his Chambers when Miss Mehta was there.

In the Law Library, Choksy sat at the head of our table. He appeared to have a prescriptive right to the seat and no one dared to sit in his seat if he was present. There was Hayley. Others at this table were D.S. Jayawickrama, D. W. Fernando, N. M., son of B. F. de Silva, J. L. M. and H. N. G. Fernando and the lone woman Miss Mehta. At other tables sat my friends Kariapper, Manikkavasagar, Sivagnanasundaram, Panditha Gunawardena, O. L. de Kretser and D. J. R. Gunawardena, later all judges.

All News Advertisement

Features

End of ‘Western Civilisation’?

Published

1 hour ago

2026/03/6

Thilina Walpola

Carney at Davos

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” ––George Orwell, Animal Farm

When I wrote in this column an essay on 4^th February 2026 titled, the ‘Beginning of Another ‘White Supremacist’ World Order?’, my focus was on the hypocrisy of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos address on 20 January 2026 to the World Economic Forum. It was embraced like the gospel by liberal types and the naïve international relations ‘experts’ in our country and elsewhere. My suspicion of Carney’s words stemmed from the consistent role played by countries like Canada and others which he called ‘middle powers’ or ‘intermediate powers’ in the world order he critiqued in Davos. He wanted such countries, particularly Canada, “to live the truth?” which meant “naming reality” as it exists; “acting consistently” towards all in the world; “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” and “building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored.” These are some memorable pieces of Carney’s mantra.

Yet unsurprisingly, it only took the Trump-Netanyahu illegal war against Iran to prove the hollowness in Carney’s words. If he placed any premium on his own words, he should have at least voiced his concern against the continuing atrocities in the Middle East unilaterally initiated by the US and Israel. But his concern is only about Iran’s seemingly indiscriminate attacks across the region targeting US and Israeli installations and even civilian locations in countries allied with the Us-Israel coalition.

Issuing a statement on 3 March 2026 from Sydney he noted, “Canada has long seen Iran as the principal source of instability and terror in the Middle East” and “despite more than two decades of negotiations and diplomatic efforts, Iran has not dismantled its nuclear programme, nor halted its enrichment activities.” A sensible observer would note how the same statement would also apply to Israel. In fact, Israel has been the bigger force of instability in the Middle East surpassing Iran. After all, it has exiled an entire population of people — the Palestinians — from their country to absolute statelessness has not halted its genocide of the same people unfortunate enough to find themselves in Gaza after their homeland was taken over to create Israel in 1948 and their properties to build illegal Jewish settlements in more recent times. And then there is the matter of nuclear weapons. Israel has never been hounded to stop its nuclear programme unlike Iran. There is, in the world order Carney criticixed and the one in his fantasy, a fundamental difference between a ‘Jewish bomb’ and a ‘Muslim bomb’ in the ‘clash of civilisations’ as imagined by Samuel P. Huntington and put into practice by the likes of Messers Trump, Netanyahu, and Carney. That is, the Jewish bomb is legitimate, and the Muslim one is not, which to me evokes the commandments in the dystopian novella Animal Farm.

But Carney, in his new rhetoric closely echoing those of the leaders of Germany, UK and France, did not completely forget his Davos words too. He noted, in the same statement, “we take this position with regret, because the current conflict is another example of the failure of the international order.” But in reality, it is not the failure of the current international order, but its reinforcement by the likes of Mr Carney, reiterating why it will not change.

Coming back to the US-Israel attack on Iran, anyone even remotely versatile in the craft of warfare should have known, sooner or later, the rapidly expanding theatre of devastation in the Middle East was likely to happen for two obvious reasons. One, Iran had warned of this outcome if attacked as it considered those countries hosting US and Israeli bases or facilities as enemies. This is military common sense. Two, this was also likely because it is the only option available for a country under attack when faced with superior technology, firepower and the silence of much of the world. I cannot but feel deep shame about the lukewarm and generic statements urging restraint issued by our political leaders notwithstanding the support of Iran to our country in many times of difficulty at the hands of this very same world order.

When I say this, I am not naïvely embracing Iran as a shining example of democracy. I am cognizant of the Iranian regime’s maltreatment of some of its own citizens, stifling of dissent within the country and its proxy support for armed groups in the region. But in real terms, this is no different from similar actions of Israel and the US. The difference is, the actions of these countries, particularly of the US, have been far more devastating for the world than anything Iran has done or could do. US’s misadventures in Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan come to mind — to take only a handful of examples.

But it is no longer about Carney and the hollowness of his liberal verbal diarrhoea in Davos. What is of concern now is twofold. One is the unravelling fiction of what he called the ‘new world order’ in which he located countries like Canada at the helm. And the second is the reality of continuing to live in the same old world order where countries like Canada and other middle and intermediate powers will continue to do the bidding of powerful aggressors like the US and Israel as they have done since the 20^th century.

Yet, one must certainly thank Trump and Mr Natenyahu for one thing. That is, they have effectively exposed the myth of what used to be euphemistically called the ‘western civilisation.’ Despite its euphemism, the notion and its reality were omnipresent and omnipotent, because of the devastating long term and lingering consequences of its tools of operation, which were initially colonialism and later postcolonial and neocolonial forms of control to which all of us continue to be subjected.

One thing that was clearly lacking in the long and devastating history of the ‘western civilisation’ in so far as it affected the lives of people like us is its lack of ‘civilisation’ and civility at all times. Therefore, Trump and Mr Netanyahu must be credited for exposing this reality in no uncertain terms.

But what does illegal and unprovoked military action and the absence so far of accountability mean in real terms? It simply means that rules no longer matter. If Israel and the US can bomb and murder heads of state of a sovereign country, its citizens including children, cause massive destruction claiming a non-existent imminent threat violating both domestic and international law, it opens a wide playing field for the powerful and the greedy. Hypothetically, in this free-for-all, China can invade India through Arunachal Pradesh and occupy that Indian state which it calls Zangnan simply because it has been claiming the territory of itself for a very long time and also simply because it can. India can invade and occupy Sri Lanka, if it so wishes because this can so easily be done and also because it is part of the extended neighbourhood of the Ramayana and India’s ‘Akhand Bharat’ political logic. Sri Lanka can perhaps invade and occupy the Maldives if it wants a free and perennial supply of Maldive Fish. Incidentally, the Sri Lankan Tamil guerrilla group, People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam nearly succeeded in doing so 1988.

Sarcasm aside, even more dangerous is the very real possibility of this situation opening the doors for small, violent and mobile militant groups to target citizens of these aggressor countries and their allies as we saw in the late 1960s and 1970s. This will occur because in this kind of situation, many people would likely believe this form of asymmetric warfare is the only avenue of resistance open to them. It is precisely under similar conditions that the many Palestinian armed factions and Lebanese militia groups emerged in the first place. If this happens, the victims will not be the fathers and the vociferous supporters of the present aggression but all of us including those who had nothing to do with the atrocities or even opposed it in their weak and inaudible voices.

If I may go back to Carney’s Davos words, what would “to live the truth?”, “naming reality”, “acting consistently” and “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” mean in the emerging situation in the Middle East? Would this kind of hypocrisy, hyperbole, choreographed silence and selective accusations only end if a US invasion of Greenland, an integral part of the ‘White Supremacist’ World Order’ takes place? By then, however, all of us would have been well-trained in the art of feeling numb. By that time, we too would have forgotten yet another important line in Animal Farm: “No animal shall kill any other animal without cause.”

Features

Silence is not protection: Rethinking sexual education in Sri Lanka

Published

2 hours ago

2026/03/6

Thilina Walpola

Sexual education is a vital component of holistic education, contributing to physical health, emotional well-being, gender equality, and social responsibility. Despite its importance, sexual education remains a sensitive and often controversial subject in many societies, particularly in culturally conservative contexts. In Sri Lanka, discussions around sexuality are frequently avoided in formal and informal settings, leaving young people to rely on peers, social media, or misinformation. This silence creates serious social, health, and psychological consequences. By examining the Sri Lankan context alongside international examples, the importance of comprehensive and age-appropriate sexual education becomes clear.

Understanding Sexual Education

Sexual education goes beyond biological explanations of reproduction. Comprehensive sexual education includes knowledge about human anatomy, puberty, consent, relationships, emotional health, gender identity, sexual orientation, reproductive rights, contraception, prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and personal safety. Importantly, it also promotes values such as respect, responsibility, dignity, and mutual understanding. When delivered appropriately, sexual education empowers individuals to make informed decisions rather than encouraging early or risky sexual behavior.

The Sri Lankan Context: Silence and Its Consequences

In Sri Lanka, sexual education is included in school curricula mainly through subjects such as Health Science and Life Competencies, however the content is often limited and taught with hesitation. Many teachers feel uncomfortable discussing sexual topics openly due to cultural norms, religious sensitivities, and fear of parental backlash. As a result, lessons are rushed, skipped, or delivered in a purely biological manner without addressing emotional, social, or ethical dimensions.

This lack of open education has led to several social challenges. Teenage pregnancies, although less visible, remain a significant issue, particularly in rural and estate sectors. Young girls who become pregnant often face school dropouts, social stigma, and limited future opportunities. Many of these pregnancies occur due to lack of knowledge about contraception, consent, and bodily autonomy.

Another serious concern in Sri Lanka is child sexual abuse. Numerous reports indicate that many children do not recognize abusive behaviour or lack the confidence and language to report it. Proper sexual education, especially lessons on body boundaries and consent, can help children identify inappropriate behavior and seek help early. In the Sri Lankan context, where respect for elders often discourages questioning authority, this knowledge is especially crucial.

Furthermore, misinformation about menstruation, nocturnal emissions, and bodily changes during puberty causes anxiety and shame among adolescents. Many Sri Lankan girls experience menarche without prior knowledge, leading to fear and confusion. Similarly, boys often receive no guidance about emotional or physical changes, reinforcing unhealthy notions of masculinity and silence around mental health.

Cultural Resistance and Misconceptions

Opposition to sexual education in Sri Lanka often stems from the belief that it promotes immoral behaviour or encourages premarital sex. However, international research consistently shows the opposite: young people who receive comprehensive sexual education tend to delay sexual initiation and engage in safer behaviours. The resistance is therefore rooted more in cultural fear than empirical evidence.

Religious and cultural values are important, but they need not conflict with sexual education. In fact, sexual education can be framed within moral discussions about responsibility, respect, family values, and care for others principles shared across Sri Lanka’s major religious traditions. Ignoring sexuality does not protect cultural values; rather, it leaves young people vulnerable.

International Evidence: Lessons from Other Countries

Several countries demonstrate how effective sexual education contributes to positive social outcomes.

In the Netherlands, sexual education begins at an early age and is age-appropriate, focusing on respect, relationships, and communication rather than explicit sexual activity. As a result, the Netherlands has one of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy and STIs in the world. Young people are encouraged to discuss feelings, boundaries, and consent openly, both in schools and at home.

Similarly, Sweden introduced compulsory sexual education as early as the 1950s. Swedish programs emphasise gender equality, reproductive rights, and sexual health. This long-term commitment has contributed to high levels of sexual health awareness, low maternal mortality among young mothers, and strong societal acceptance of gender diversity. Sexual education in Sweden is also closely linked to public health services, ensuring access to counseling and contraception.

In many developing contexts, international organisations have supported sexual education as a tool for social development. UNESCO promotes Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) globally, emphasising that it equips young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that enable them to protect their health and dignity. Studies supported by UNESCO show that CSE reduces risky behaviours, improves academic outcomes, and supports gender equality.

In countries such as Rwanda and South Africa, sexual education has been integrated with HIV/AIDS prevention programs. These initiatives demonstrate that sexual education is not a luxury of developed nations but a necessity for public health and social stability.

Comparing Sri Lanka with International Models

When compared with international examples, Sri Lanka’s challenges are not due to lack of capacity but lack of open dialogue and political will. Sri Lanka has a strong education system, high literacy rates, and an extensive public health network. These strengths provide an excellent foundation for implementing comprehensive sexual education that is culturally sensitive yet scientifically accurate.

Unlike the Netherlands or Sweden, Sri Lanka may not adopt early-age sexuality discussions in the same manner, but age-appropriate education during late primary and secondary school is both feasible and necessary. Topics such as puberty, menstruation, consent, online safety, and respectful relationships can be introduced gradually without violating cultural norms.

Sexual Education in the Digital Era

The urgency of sexual education has increased in the digital age. Sri Lankan adolescents are exposed to sexual content through social media, films, and online platforms, often without guidance. Pornography frequently becomes a primary source of sexual knowledge, leading to unrealistic expectations, objectification, and distorted ideas about consent and relationships.

Sexual education can counter these influences by developing critical thinking, media literacy, and ethical understanding. Teaching young people how to navigate digital relationships, cyber harassment, and online exploitation is now an essential component of sexual education.

Gender Equality and Social Change

Sexual education also plays a crucial role in promoting gender equality. In Sri Lanka, traditional gender roles often limit open discussion about female sexuality while excusing male dominance. Comprehensive sexual education challenges these norms by emphasizing mutual respect, shared responsibility, and equality in relationships.

Educating boys about consent and emotional expression helps reduce gender-based violence, while educating girls about bodily autonomy strengthens empowerment. In the long term, this contributes to healthier families and more equitable social structures.

The Way Forward for Sri Lanka

For sexual education to be effective in Sri Lanka, several steps are necessary. Teachers must receive proper training to handle the subject confidently and sensitively. Parents should be engaged through awareness programs to reduce fear and misconceptions. Curriculum developers must ensure that content is age-appropriate, culturally grounded, and scientifically accurate.

Importantly, sexual education should not be treated as a one-time lesson but as a continuous process integrated into broader life skills education. Collaboration between schools, healthcare providers, religious leaders, and community organisations can help normalise discussions around sexual health while respecting cultural values.

Finally , sexual education is not merely about sex; it is about health, dignity, safety, and responsible citizenship. The Sri Lankan experience demonstrates how silence and taboo can lead to misinformation, vulnerability, and social harm. International examples from the Netherlands, Sweden, and global initiatives supported by UNESCO clearly show that comprehensive sexual education leads to positive individual and societal outcomes.

For Sri Lanka, embracing sexual education does not mean abandoning cultural values. Rather, it means equipping young people with knowledge and ethical understanding to navigate modern social realities responsibly. In an era of rapid social and technological change, sexual education is not optional it is essential for building a healthy, informed, and compassionate society.

by Milinda Mayadunna ✍️

Features

A long-running identity conflict flares into full-blown war

Published

1 day ago

2026/03/5

Sahan Weerasooriya

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei / President Donald Trump

It was Iran’s first spiritual head of state, the late Ayatollah Khomeini, who singled out and castigated the US as the ‘Great Satan’ in the revolutionary turmoil of the late seventies of the last century that ushered in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The core issue driving the long-running confrontation between Islamic Iran and the West has been religious identity and the seasoned observer cannot be faulted for seeing the explosive emergence of the current war in the Middle East as having the elements of a religious conflict.

The current crisis in the Middle East which was triggered off by the recent killing of Iranian spiritual head of state Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in a combined US-Israel military strike is multi-dimensional and highly complex in nature but when the history of relations between Islamic Iran and the West, read the US, is focused on the religious substratum in the conflict cannot be glossed over.

In fact it is not by accident that US President Donald Trump resorts to Biblical language when describing Iran in his denunciations of the latter. Iran, from Trump’s viewpoint, is a primordial source of ‘evil’ and if the Middle East has collapsed into a full-blown regional war today it is because of the ‘evil’ influence and doings of Iran; so runs Trump’s narrative. It is a language that stands on par with that used by the architects of the Iranian revolution in the crucial seventies decade.

In other words, it is a conflict between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ and who is ‘good’ and who is ‘evil’ in the confrontation is determined mainly by the observer’s partialities and loyalties which may not be entirely political in kind. It should not be forgotten that one of President Trump’s support bases is the Christian Right in the US and in the rest of the West and the Trump administration’s policy outlook and actions should not be divorced from the needs of this segment of supporters to be fully made sense of.

The reasons for the strong policy tie-up between Rightist administrations in the US in particular and Israel could be better comprehended when the above religious backdrop is taken into consideration. Israel is the principal actor in the ‘Old Testament’ of the Bible and is seen as ‘the Chosen People of God’ and this characterization of Israel ought to explain the partialities of the Republican Right in particular towards Israel. Among other things, this partiality accounts for the strong defence of Israel by the US.

For the purposes of clarity it needs to be mentioned here that the Bible consists of two parts, an ‘Old’ and ‘New Testament’ , and that the ‘New Testament’ or ‘Message’ embodies the teachings of Jesus Christ and the latter teachings are seen as completing and in a sense giving greater substance to the ‘Old Testament’. However, Judaism is based mainly on ‘Old Testament’ teachings and Judaism is distinct from Christianity.

To be sure, the above theological explanation does not exhaust all the reasons for the war in the Middle East but the observer will be allowing an important dimension to the war to slip past if its importance is underestimated.

It is not sufficiently realized that the Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979 utterly changed international politics and re-wrote as it were the basic parameters that must be brought to bear in understanding it. So important is the Islamic factor in contemporary world politics that it helped define to a considerable degree the new international political order that came into existence with the collapsing of the Cold War and the disintegration of the USSR .

Since the latter developments ‘political Islam’ could be seen as a chief shaping influence of international politics. For example, it accounts considerably for the 9/11 calamity that led to the emergence of fresh polarities in world politics and ushered in political terrorism of a most destructive kind that is today disquietingly visible the world over.

It does not follow from the foregoing that Islam, correctly understood, inspires terrorism of any kind. Islam proclaims peace but some of its adherents with political aims interpret the religion in misleading, divisive ways that run contrary to the peaceful intents of the faith. This is a matter of the first importance that sincere adherents of the faith need to address.

However, there is no denying that the Islamic Revolution in Iran of 1979 has been over the past decades a great shaper of international politics and needs to be seen as such by those sections that are desirous of changing the course of the world for the better. The revolution’s importance is such that it led to US political scientist Dr. Samuel P. Huntingdon to formulate his historic thesis that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world currently.

If the above thesis is to be adopted in comprehending the principal trends in contemporary world politics it could be said that Islam, misleadingly interpreted by some, is pitting a good part of the Southern hemisphere against the West, which is also misleadingly seen by some, as homogeneously Christian in orientation. Whereas, the truth is otherwise. The West is not necessarily entirely synonymous with Christianity, correctly understood.

Right now, what is immediately needed in the Middle East is a ceasefire, followed up by a negotiated peace based on humanistic principles. Turning ‘Spears into Ploughshares’ is a long gestation project but the warring sides should pay considerable attention to former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami’s memorable thesis that the world needs to transition from a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ to a ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’. Hopefully, there would emerge from the main divides leaders who could courageously take up the latter challenge.

It ought to be plain to see that the current regional war in the Middle East is jeopardising the best interests of the totality of publics. Those Americans who are for peace need to not only stand up and be counted but bring pressure on the Trump administration to make peace and not continue on the present destructive course that will render the world a far more dangerous place than it is now.

In the Middle East region a durable peace could be ushered if only the just needs of all sides to the conflict are constructively considered. The Palestinians and Arabs have their needs, so does Israel. It cannot be stressed enough that unless and until the security needs of the latter are met there could be no enduring peace in the Middle East.