Connect with us

Features

JRJ’s 117th Birth Anniversary: Open Economy and Executive Presidency

Published

on

by Rajan Philips

President Ranil Wickremesinghe interrupted his busy flight schedule between conferences to issue a commemorative message on September 17 to mark the 117th birth anniversary of President JR Jayewardene. I am not aware of any special significance associated with #117, nor can I remember Mr. Wickremesinghe issuing birth anniversary statements in the recent past.

What is special this year is that Ranil Wickremesinghe is the incumbent President. The first time in 35 years after President Jayewardene retired from office, someone politically and personally close to him happens to be Sri Lanka’s Executive President. President Jayewardene was not only the founding father of the executive presidency, but also the political godfather and avuncular mentor of Ranil Wickremesinghe. So, the latter’s commemoration of the former is both special and significant. We can appreciate that.

There is of course the little detail that Ranil Wickremesinghe is not a president elected by the people, but by their representatives in parliament. Mr. Wickremesinghe was not even elected as an MP in the last election. He is a double beneficiary of the National List scheme and the constitutional provision for interim presidents.

Some might see the irony in the backdoor path that brought Ranil Wickremesinghe to the high office in contrast to the electoral sweep that brought JRJ to power with a five-sixths majority in the 1977 elections. Others might see the smooth working of JRJ’s 1978 Constitution through the tumults and crises brought upon the country by GR, the infamous Seventh Executive President. Now we have in Ranil Wickremesinghe the Eighth Executive President and the first unelected one. The titles sound more monarchical than republican.

President Wickremesinghe knows full well the dire circumstances that brought him to power without an election. And he will do anything to deflect any blame that may be aimed at JR Jayewardene for the country’s current situation. So, Mr. Wickremesinghe sweepingly said in his message, as reported in the media, that “if Sri Lanka had been able to sustain the socio-economic reforms initiated by the late President in 1977, the nation would be a developed country today.” That is understandable even though it is easily refutable. Quite apart from the formality of argument, the material evidence over the last four decades will give the lie to Mr. Wickremesinghe’s assertion.

What is laughable is the claim that followed: “neighbouring countries like India, China and Vietnam, which transitioned from closed and socialist economic practices, had studied Jayewardene’s approach and prospered by adapting their policies to the changing times.

” This is as laughable as what President Jayewardene once said on a public occasion that the American freedom fighters at the Boston Tea Party must have been drinking tea imported from Sri Lanka for inspiration. Pieter Keuneman characteristically chimed in to remind everyone that there was no tea or coffee in Sri Lanka in 1773. The tea that was the cause of taxation protests in colonial America was imported from China by the East India Company.

JRJ’s Long Legacy

The serious truth of the matter is that President Jayewardene was able to launch his political and economic initiatives on the very morrow of his massive victory in 1977, expand and entrench his power immensely by transubstantiating himself from Prime Minister to President and extending the life of his tyrannical majority in parliament through the subterfuge of a referendum, and hold on to power for 12 long years. Power and longevity that should have been more than enough to permanently “sustain the socio-economic reforms” he initiated. But it didn’t.

It is a bit rich, therefore, for President Wickremesinghe to now suggest that Sri Lanka failed to sustain the reforms initiated by JRJ because of other factors that frustrated JRJ’s initiatives. The fact is that the seeds of unsustainability were in the reforms themselves – both in their content and in their implementation. It is historic comeuppance that Ranil Wickremesinghe should have been called upon to deal with the mess that is the long legacy of JR Jayewardene, even though the immediate trigger for it had arrived in the person of Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

What President Wickremesinghe is referring to as JRJ’s “socioeconomic reforms” are in fact two major initiatives, namely, the liberalization of the economy and the constitutional change that replaced Sri Lanka’s parliamentary system with a presidential system of government. There is a difference between the two which looks more significant in hindsight than it did then.

The difference is that there was no surprise about the economic liberalization program that JRJ implemented. The program was also an extension of traditional UNP policies that the country had grown accustomed to, including those who were opposed to them. The economic changes were much anticipated and were widely seen as an antidote to years of autarkic scarcity that preceded the 1977 elections. The election results showed the magnitude of resentment and the massive desire for change.

The constitutional changes centered on the presidential system were a different beast. The economic program did not require a presidential system for its implementation. There was nothing in the country’s objective conditions that warranted a shift from the parliamentary system to the presidential system. It was all JRJ’s idea, idiosyncratic and egotistical. He was its originator, advocate and champion.

Initially and for a long time there was no support for it even within the UNP, and the country at large couldn’t have cared a hoot about it. But after the death of Dudley Senanayake in 1973, JRJ was able to bring the party along to supporting his idea. With his leadership of the party consolidated and electoral victory assured, it was not at all difficult for him to weave the constitutional changes including the executive presidency into the UNP Manifesto. It would not have happened if Dudley Senanayake were alive in 1977.

After a landslide victory, the newly anointed cabinet ministers had neither the need nor the inclination to critically assess the pros and cons of the change from parliamentary system to presidential system. In any event, none of the ministers could have demurred or disagreed because their individual letters of resignation as MPs were all in the President’s pockets. What was a massive change was adopted with minimum scrutiny. The political purpose behind the constitutional changes would seem to have evolved during President Jayewardene’s long tenure.

This is evident from the frequency of self-serving and ad hominem (directed at people rather than positions) amendments to the constitution during JRJ’s tenure. The eventual purpose was to make the UNP the permanent governing party of the country. The whole scheme backfired because presidential ambitions of leading UNP ministers created intense rivalries within the party. These rivalries were exacerbated by the proportional representation and preferential voting schemes that created caste-based voting blocs in the country.

Toxic fusion at the Top

In the end the UNP was in power for 17 years, and 11 of which were under the Jayewardene presidency. Prime Minister Premadasa succeeded JRJ as President overcoming intense internal opposition. The Premadasa presidency ended in 1994 with his assassination by the LTTE. Since then, the country has not had a single elected UNP President. There is a UNP President now, but he got there, courtesy of Gotabaya Rajapaksa and he is staying there because of the support of the Rajapaksas.

The once mighty UNP was reduced to a single National List MP in the last parliamentary election. The SLFP is a disgrace. The SLPP is vanishing faster than it emerged. The SJB is a rudderless flotsam. The implosion and fragmentation of the mainstream parties cannot be explained in isolation from the devouring behemoth that is the executive presidency. The JVP stands robust because it has been least impacted by the executive presidency. The Tamil and Muslim parties – they are on orbits of their own.

There is no point in invoking every known name from Karl Marx through Antonio Negri to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to make sense of, let alone justify, any aspect of the JRJ contraption even in its most sanitized form. President Wickremesinghe of course offers no defence or justification of the executive presidency. He is not interested in defending it or reforming it. He is interested in it only to satisfy his itch to become an elected executive president. But he takes a different position on JRJ’s economic policies. They are his premise and his launching pad to propel Sri Lanka into its flight of prosperity (hopefully, not fancy). That is why he offered his ringing praise of them in his commemoration message.

But the economy that President Jayewardene triumphantly opened up (“Let the Robber Barons come”) in 1977 has produced mixed results. It ended scarcity, boosted exports and created jobs. Decades of investments in land and agriculture finally brought self-sufficiency in rice production. But the open economy also opened up new avenues of corruption, even as it tore apart the social welfare system that had been developed from even before independence and by every government including UNP governments. The fundamental flaw of the open economy was that expanding consumption became the main driver of the economy without any corresponding increases in production capacities. Consumption demanded imports and ate up the dwindling foreign reserves.

The crisis escalated under Gotabaya Rajapaksa. We cannot say that Gotabaya and his misdoings were inevitable consequences of the open economy and the presidential system. But we can say that it would have been impossible for someone like Gotabaya Rajapaksa to filter up to the very top in a parliamentary system. More than anything else, the presidential system and the political culture that grew with it enabled the toxic fusion of absolute power and absolute ignorance at the summit of the state.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Dilemmas of ‘hurting economies’ – the case of Sri Lanka

Published

on

Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja (right) and Ambassador (Retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha.

Maldives President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu was in Sri Lanka recently on what was apparently a goodwill visit and this event, no doubt, bodes very well for Maldives-Sri Lanka relations. Besides, the visit would go some distance in strengthening Sri Lanka’s claims to Non-Alignment.

However, the commentator on regional politics could be accused of simplistic thinking if he/she glosses over or ignores the regional politics nuances or undertones of the Maldivian President’s visit. In Sri Lanka we currently have a government which is eager to solidify its bridges, so to speak, with China and which, given the chance, would be courting increasingly close relations with Russia. In other words, the NPP government is likely to see itself as a ‘natural ally’ of the East and would prefer to distance itself to the extent possible from the West, if that is a realistic proposition.

Given the foregoing backdrop, it would be in some of the NPP regime’s best interests to be on cordial terms with the Maldives which is a close ally of China in the South Asian region. However, the NPP government, given the utter financial helplessness of Sri Lanka, cannot afford to distance itself politically and diplomatically from India and the West. Sheer economic necessity compels Sri Lanka to adopt this foreign policy stance. In other words, the latter has no choice but to be ‘Non-Aligned.’

This columnist was led to the above observations on listening to a lucid and comprehensive presentation titled, ‘A Global Economy in the Shadow of the Iran War and implications for Sri Lanka’s debt recovery’, by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja, Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo on May 4th. The forum, RCSS Strategic Dialogue – 4, was moderated and presided over by RCSS Executive Director Ambassador (retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha.

The forum brought together a wide cross section of society, including diplomatic personnel, academicians, public and private sector personalities and the media. After the presentation a very lively and informative Q&A followed.

Ambassador Aryasinha at the outset set an appropriate backdrop to the presentation and discussion by stressing ‘the increasing interconnectedness of geopolitical and economic developments, noting how disruptions in the Middle East could have significant ramifications for global markets, trade flows, energy prices and broader economic stability, including Sri Lanka.’

Indeed, there are occurring currently very disruptive economic and material consequences for the world from ‘the Iran War’, and with US-Iran hostilities spiraling in West Asia it may not be wrong to surmise that the worst could be yet to come, unless a peace process materializes in earnest.

Meanwhile, ‘hurting countries’ such as Sri Lanka would need to summon their best economic management capabilities to remain materially and economically afloat. ‘Economic transformation’ is what is urgently needed and not mere management and some of the insights thrown up by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja should have the local polity thinking.

There was the following observation, for instance: ‘Sri Lanka has achieved remarkable cyclical stabilization but faces critical challenges in transitioning to transformative growth, with 2027-2028 debt repayments looming and only $5.4 billion usable reserves.’

Needless to say, the path ahead to ‘transformative growth’ for Sri Lanka is strewn with multiple challenges and meeting them effectively is of the first importance. Sri Lanka must soldier on towards even a semblance of development in the short and medium terms and such initiatives cannot be separated from its foreign policy choices since the country’s economic partners and their growth prowess have a close bearing on the country’s material fortunes.

As mentioned, Sri Lanka will be compelled to be ‘a friend of all countries and an enemy of none’ going forward but it cannot afford to be seen as cultivating China as a close growth partner at the expense of India and other major economies of the region.

This is primarily because while India is remaining a major economic power, the current West Asian crisis notwithstanding, China’s economy is being seen as ‘slowing’. Dr. Wignaraja singled out the following in the main as the factors causing this slow-down: a bursting property bubble, increasing state regulation, and weakening investor confidence. Besides, the speaker sees production cycles moving away from China and India replacing China and Hong Kong as ‘manufacturing hubs’.

Accordingly, the NPP regime in Sri Lanka would need to craft its regional policy in particular with the utmost far-sightedness. It will need to have close economic links with all the growth centres that matter.

On the question of authentic economic transformation, the following observations of Dr. Wignaraja on Sri Lanka’s economy are of the first importance as well: ‘Foreign reserves are now at $ 5.4 billion, the cost of living is high, an estimated 20 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day, the recent cyber security breach at the Treasury would affect some 10 payments.’ These factors were termed ‘critical vulnerabilities’.

It is difficult to conceive of an economic transformation worthy of the phrase minus a steady economic empowerment of the populace. The above data point to the considerable magnitude of the local poverty problem. Right now, the disruptive effects of the West Asian crisis render swift poverty alleviation a most difficult proposition.

One possible way out of the present economic debacle is the forging of a national consensus by the present government on all outstanding problems that have been bedeviling the country’s advancement. That is, there needs to be a meeting of minds across current political divides. Considering the present inflammatory political polarities in Sri Lanka this would prove an insurmountable challenge.

Unfortunately, conscience-filled and civic minded sections in Sri Lanka have chosen to be laid back rather than seize the initiative, come centre stage and impress on politicians the need for enlightened governance and progressive change. There needs to be a historic coming together of the right thinking to ensure that the best interests of the people and of the people only are served by governments. In the absence of such a process, might would be projected as right and brute force would come to increasingly rule politics and society.

Continue Reading

Features

Australia funds project to restore climate-resilient vegetable livelihoods in cyclone-affected highlands

Published

on

(L-R) D. P. Wickramasinghe, Secretary of Agriculture; Matthew Duckworth, Australian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, K. D. Lal Kantha, Minister of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation, and Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Representative for Sri Lanka and the Maldives at the signing ceremony.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation, the Government of Australia, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have launched of a AUD 2 million (USD 1.4 million) recovery initiative to restore and transform vegetable production systems in the cyclone-affected districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla.

The FAO said yesterday (5) that the agreement was formalized through the signing of the grant agreement by Matthew Duckworth, Australian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, and Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Representative for Sri Lanka and the Maldives, alongside the signing of the project document by D. P. Wickramasinghe, Secretary of Agriculture.

Cyclone Ditwah, which struck Sri Lanka in November 2025, caused widespread devastation across the country, severely disrupting agricultural production systems and livelihoods. The highland districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla, key suppliers of vegetables such as beans, carrots, leeks, cabbage, tomato and potato, were among the hardest hit, with thousands of smallholder farmers losing crops, seed stocks, and productive assets.

This 12-month initiative aims torestore and strengthen climate-resilient vegetable production systems, with a strong focus on empowering women farmers and supporting persons with disabilities. The project will directly benefit more than 2,400 smallholder farmers, through improved seed and seedling production systems, small machinery, training, and market linkages while indirectly supporting thousands more.

“This initiative is an important step not only in restoring what was lost, but in building a more resilient and self-reliant agricultural sector,” said Minister Lal Kantha. “By strengthening local seed systems and supporting smallholder farmers, particularly women and vulnerable groups, we are investing in the long-term sustainability of Sri Lanka’s food systems.”

“Australia stands alongside Sri Lanka in its ongoing recovery from Cyclone Ditwah,” said High Commissioner Duckworth. “Australia is a steadfast partner in the agriculture sector with its importance for food security, rural development and climate resilience. By focusing on climate smart practices, farmer-led solutions and inclusive economic opportunities, this project will deliver meaningful and lasting benefits to affected communities.

The project will prioritize the restoration of farmer-led seed systems for beans and potatoes, support the re-establishment of both open-field and protected cultivation systems and women led seedling supply nurseries while empowering all farmers with Climate-Smart Good Agricultural Practices (CSGAP) with small scale machinery and input support.

A key feature of the initiative is the establishment of six accessible and inclusive nurseries in Nuwara Eliya and Badulla. These nurseries will serve as sustainable agri-based enterprises, producing high-quality vegetable seedlings while creating new income opportunities and strengthening local input supply chains.

By combining recovery support with long-term resilience measures, the project will help stabilize vegetable production, improve household food security and nutrition, and reduce reliance on imported seeds.

Continue Reading

Features

War on Iran may hasten unraveling of New World Order

Published

on

It took several decades for the US to realise it was losing the war in Vietnam. It took a bit shorter time in Afghanistan. And what is happening in the countries the US and Israel intervened and broke up? The US has been asked to leave Iraq. Syria is talking to Russia about establishing military bases, President al-Sharaa met with Vladimir Putin in Moscow to discuss the project, which is vital for Russian power projection in the Middle East. Libya has been divided into two competing administrative units with the Eastern section actively engaged with Russia in defence matters. The Sudanese government has finalised a 25-year deal to allow a Russian naval facility in the Red Sea in exchange for weapons, including anti-aircraft systems. On the Eastern side of the Red Sea, Yemen remains divided, with the main power center, the Houthis maintaining a staunchly anti-US, anti-Israel stance, while the internationally recognised government remains in exile.

When the Iranian Foreign Minister recently undertook a tour of Pakistan, Oman and Russia, the US wanted to meet him and got ready to send its negotiators Vice President J. D. Vance and his team to Pakistan, but Iranian FM snubbed them and left Pakistan, saying Iran did not want to talk to the US while a blockade of their ports were in place. The Iranian FM met President Putin, who congratulated Iran for courageously defending their country and then phoned US President Trump and told him further attacks on Iran would not be acceptable. During this conversation on April 27, 2026, Putin reportedly warned Trump that further U.S. or Israeli attacks on Iran would have dangerous consequences, according to Al Jazeera). Such a sequence of events would not have been possible in the unipolar world we had in the past.

Furthermore, the damage that Iran has inflicted on the US and Israel in this war would have been unimaginable in the late 20th Century and early 21st Century. Sixteen US military bases spread across Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan and Oman have been either destroyed or severely damaged. Advanced surveillance aircraft and radar systems worth more than $ 2.8 bn were destroyed. This had a far-reaching effect on the war as the US could not use these bases in the war against Iran and also in the defence of its allies in the Gulf.

The attacks on Israel have been equally damaging. In  Central Israel and Tel Aviv area multiple attacks targeted military and intelligence assets, resulting in massive damage. Iranian missiles hit the Haifa oil refinery, causing a shutdown, and hit residential buildings, leading to injuries and structural damage. Residential and commercial areas were damaged in Bat Yam and Petah Tikva with significant casualties and destruction. Attacks in Dimona and Arad targeted the Negev Nuclear Research Center, with casualties reported in both towns. The Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba was hit in a strike. The strategic port and naval base in Eilat were targeted. In Rishon LeZion suburban residential areas suffered extensive damage.

Usually, Israel makes short work of its many enemies in the region, for example it took just six days to defeat the combined military of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in 1967 and grab their land as well. Hamas, Fatah and Palestinians would suffer ignominious defeats if they dare challenge Israel. However, the recent war against Hamas, following a daring wide scale invasion into Israel by Hamas in October 2023, went on for more than two years with no conclusive victory for Israel.

These significant massive military setbacks suffered by the combined forces of the US and Israel have been made possible by the unprecedented advancement in military technology achieved mainly by China and to a degree by Russia as well. Iran has been able to develop ballistic missile systems that could penetrate the “iron dome” that Israel boasted, with technological assistance from China and North Korea. Iran’s drones are very cheap yet very effective, requiring interceptors worth millions of dollars to counter them, thus making it much more costly for the US to fight this war than it is for Iran.

Further, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthies in Yemen and Hamas in Palestine are well equipped with advanced missiles and drones. Hezbollah has been able to destroy about hundred Israel tanks and stop their advance. According to Larry Johnson, former CIA intelligence analyst, Israel soldiers are much war weary and mentally affected and are being withdrawn. Netanyahu’s 40 year dream of a “Greater Israel” is telling on the poor soldiers.

If a person like Barack Obama had been the US President instead of the hyper egoistic, blustering, intellectually barren Trump, things may have been different. An attempt would have been made to reconcile with the fact that the world is changing, instead of trying to stop it and make “America Great Again”.  Perhaps, it could be said that Trump is facilitating the emergence of the new world order by enabling the US citizens to see the reality, the futility of war and the fact that Israel is a liability because the US is fighting its war. Further, the war has enabled Iran to assert its place in the region and negotiate from a position of strength.

Perhaps, Israeli people may realise that the Palestine problem cannot be solved by militarily occupying their land, and that in a changing world a “Greater Israel” is a “pie in the sky”. They may have to agree to a two-state solution. US support may not always be forthcoming, certainly not at the level that Trump could extend, as this war is very unpopular and expensive. The other very significant fact is that Israeli settlers in the occupied lands feel insecure and one in three wants to leave and the numbers may grow when Palestinians and their sympathisers grow in strength in the new world order.

Moreover, the war on Iran has afforded China the opportunity to demonstrate with authority the fact that it stands for universal peace and does not tolerate illegal wars. Its message to the US conveyed its world view and its desire for peace in no uncertain terms. Trump cannot afford to disregard the Chinese position on the war on the eve of his visit to that country which may decide on future trade between the two countries as the US depends on China for several essential materials like rare earth minerals. Furthermore, China has shown that peace could be achieved by developing the economies of the underdeveloped countries irrespective of their alliances. It helps Iran as well as Saudi Arabia and try to build bridges between these foes. It welcomes Trump in the coming weeks and hopes to strengthen ties between the two countries despite the weaknesses of the latter.

Another important factor is the gradual decline of the critical value of the petro-dollar. Following the end of the gold standard in 1971, the US struck deals with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations (around 1974) to price oil exclusively in USD in exchange for military protection and arms sales. Dollars earned by selling oil came to be known as petro-dollar. Oil producers, holding large dollar surpluses, reinvest these funds in the US Treasury securities, real estate, and financial assets ensuring the recycling of petro-dollars. The system ensures a consistent global demand for US dollars, which helps fund the US budget deficit and maintains the currency’s dominance.

However, the petro-dollar system is on the decline and there are two main reasons for this, firstly the gradual rise of the new world order with organisations like BRICS, making a concerted effort to extricate from the dollar dominance by developing alternate currencies and methods to bypass the dollar. Secondly, the need felt by most countries to develop alternative energy sources to replace enormously harmful fossil fuel would eventually result in a decline in the demand for it and consequently the effectiveness of the petro-dollar. China is leading the world in both these endeavours; depolarisation process and renewable energy production. The war on Iran seems to have hastened the process of depolarisation as Iran insists that it will sell its oil for yuan only.

These revolutionary changes in the aftermath of the Iran war have their undeniable implications for the Global South, where more than 60% of the poor live.

by  N. A. de S. Amaratunga

Continue Reading

Trending