Features
Sri Lanka’s Foreign Policy amid Geopolitical Transformations: 1990-2024 – Part III
Global Strategic Transformations
Since the 16th century, global power has largely been concentrated in the West, driven by European colonial expansion, industrialisation, and later, US dominance. However, in the 21st century, this balance is gradually, yet profoundly, shifting. This global power shift is evident in four key trends that have shaped the post-Cold War era: the relative decline of the United States, a renewed Cold War-style rivalry between China and the US, Asia’s resurgence, and the US policy shift—its pivot to Asia and the Indo-Pacific. Sri Lanka’s foreign policy must navigate these structural shifts, which carry significant implications for economic partnerships, security alliances, and geopolitical positioning.
Relative Decline of the United States
The relative economic and political decline of the United States, in the new millennium, marked a pivotal turning point in global power dynamics. The US leadership interpreted the end of the Cold War as an ideological victory for liberal democracy. The Cold War did not end through a violent military confrontation, but rather as a result of the voluntary dissolution of the Soviet Union. In the immediate aftermath, the United States emerged as the world’s sole superpower, the undisputed leader of the global order. However, over time, the US began to face mounting challenges from both internal and external factors. The 2008 financial crisis, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, the protracted wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and increasing domestic political polarization all contributed to a decline in US global influence.
The decline of US power, as a global leader, is not sudden. As early as 1973, President Richard Nixon acknowledged that the post-war era in international relations had ended. He observed that the United States had shifted from a nuclear monopoly in the mid-1940s to nuclear superiority in the 1950s and, by the 1960s, to rough strategic parity with the Soviet Union. The Nixon-Kissinger leadership predicted that more complex multi-polar power relations were emerging, replacing the simple bi-polar alignments that characterised the post-World War II era. He also noted that the changing mood of the American people signalled the end of the postwar international order. At the beginning of the Cold War, the US public strongly supported a global leadership role. However, Nixon observed that “after almost three decades, our enthusiasm was waning and the results of our generosity were being questioned. Our policies need change, not only to match new realities in the world but also to meet a new mood in America” (Nixon, Shaping a Durable Peace, 1973: 3). Nixon’s observations on the shifting US global role became particularly relevant in the post-Cold War era, three decades later. The rise of nationalist and inward-looking policies, epitomised by President Donald Trump’s ‘Make America Great Again’ démarche, reflected a renewed skepticism toward US global commitments. His policies, along with his return to the political stage, underscored the tensions between America’s global leadership roles and growing concerns about its relative US economic and political decline.
The transformation of US policy in the Indian Ocean reflects the relative decline of American hegemony in the region. While the US initially relied on military dominance—anchored by Diego Garcia as a critical logistics hub—shifts in global power dynamics have forced a strategic recalibration. The growing influence of China, the rise of regional naval powers, like India, and increasing challenges to unilateral US military presence, have made it difficult to sustain the same level of dominance. As a result, US policy has evolved from a posture of overwhelming military superiority to a more nuanced, cooperative, and regionally integrated approach, signalling a shift in its ability to unilaterally dictate security dynamics in the Indian Ocean. The Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm (1991) successfully expelled Iraqi forces from Kuwait but entangled the US in prolonged Middle Eastern conflicts. Similarly, Operation Enduring Freedom (2001) swiftly removed the Taliban from power in Kabul, yet the economic and human costs of maintaining a long-term presence in Afghanistan underscored the limitations of US military interventions in the post-Cold War historical context.
China’s Rise and Evolving
‘New Cold War’
China has taken on an increasingly proactive role in global diplomacy and economics, solidifying its position as a 21st-century superpower. This growing leadership is evident in major initiatives, like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), both of which expand China’s influence on the world stage. The Economist noted that “China’s decision to fund a new multilateral bank rather than give more to existing ones reflects its exasperation with the glacial pace of global economic governance reform” (The Economist, 11 November 2014). Thus far, China’s ascent to global superpower status has been largely peaceful.
China’s influence is evident in its extensive investments in port infrastructure, maritime trade routes, and strategic partnerships under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The United States sees this growing presence as a direct challenge to its global dominance, particularly as China deepens its economic entrenchment and modernises its military. US officials worry that dual-use facilities, an expanding naval footprint, and greater regional influence could undermine power projection, disrupt open sea lanes, and weaken allied security. In response, the US has intensified alliances, expanded security cooperation, and bolstered its military presence to counteract what it perceives as an erosion of its global primacy. As a result, the intensifying rivalry between China and the United States appears to be shaping the global strategic landscape in the 21st century.
The current Sino-US rivalry differs from the US-Soviet Cold War in several key aspects. Unlike the Soviet Union, which primarily contested US dominance in military and strategic spheres, China’s challenge to US hegemony is largely economic. This competition intensified during the Trump administration, particularly through the US-China trade war. Given the deep interdependence of global economic activities, US tariffs on Chinese goods have had repercussions for both countries, affecting Americans as much as Chinese producers and consumers.
Indian Ocean small states, such as Sri Lanka, do not necessarily perceive Chinese economic initiatives through a power-political lens. Instead, they assess these initiatives based on their own economic interests and the benefits they offer. Consequently, the US strategy used to counter the Soviet threat during the Cold War is unlikely to be effective in addressing the current challenge posed by China.
China’s progress in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) adds another dimension to US-China rivalry in trade and technology, digital geopolitics. In 2015, China initiated its ‘Made in China 2025’ plan, aimed at advancing high-tech manufacturing capabilities.The worldwide challenge of the dominance of US IT giants, including Google, Facebook, Amazon, and Microsoft by Chinese IT giants, such as Alibaba, Baidu, and Tencent of came forefront in digital geopolitics. The competition to develop 5G infrastructures, viewed by both powers as pivotal for enabling the next generation of digital application, has added a new dimension to their rivalry.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is another critical frontier in UU-China competition. In March 2016, Google advanced machine-learning technology by integrating algorithms and reinforcement learning to process big data and enhance predictive capabilities. A year later, in July 2017, President Xi Jinping unveiled China’s ‘New Generation AI Development Plan,’ aiming to position China as the global leader in AI by 2030. The plan underscores the strategic advantage of exclusive technological control, allowing a nation to establish dominance before rivals can catch up (Pecotic, 2019). As Sri Lanka embarks on acquiring Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), it must navigate the intensifying digital geopolitical rivalry among global tech giants. Countries like Sri Lanka, which have only recently begun acquiring Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), must navigate carefully in the face of digital geopolitical rivalry among global powers such as China, India, and the United States.
Resurgence of Asia and the Asian Century
Another crucial development that signifies the global shift of power is the resurgence of Asia, driven by the strategic rise of China and India, along with the sustained economic growth of other key Asian economies, often referred to as the ‘Asian Tigers.’ This transformation has led to the widespread characterisation of the 21st century as the ‘Asian Century.’ The region’s rapid economic expansion, technological advancements, and growing geopolitical influence have reshaped global power dynamics, positioning Asia at the heart of international affairs. In 2019, the World Economic Forum declared, “We’ve entered the Asian Century, and there is no turning back” (World Economic Forum, 2019). This assertion reflects Asia’s role as the primary driver of global economic growth, trade, and innovation. With China and India leading the way, alongside the economic resilience of nations like Japan, South Korea, and the ASEAN bloc, Asia is not merely rising—it is redefining the global order.
In the Asian Century, the Indian Ocean has emerged as a pivotal geopolitical arena where the global balance of power is increasingly contested and reshaped. As major economic and military powers vie for influence in this strategically vital region, Sri Lanka’s geostrategic significance has grown exponentially. Positioned at the crossroads of key maritime trade routes connecting East and West, Sri Lanka occupies a central role in global politics, attracting the attention of global and regional powers alike.
Sri Lanka’s enhanced strategic relevance presents both opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, it allows the country to leverage its geographic advantage for economic development, foreign investment, and diplomatic engagement. On the other hand, it requires careful navigation of complex geopolitical dynamics to maintain strategic autonomy while balancing the competing interests of global powers. In this evolving landscape, Sri Lanka’s foreign policy choices will be instrumental in shaping not only its national trajectory but also broader regional stability in the Indian Ocean.
Pivot to Asia and Indo-Pacific Concept
The emergence of the Indo-Pacific strategic concept reflects the shifting global balance of power towards the Indian Ocean. In response to Asia’s rise, the US recalibrated its approach through the ‘Pivot to Asia’ and ‘Strategic Rebalancing’ under the Obama Administration. While Obama championed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as a signature initiative, the Trump administration abandoned it in favour of the ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP) strategy. The Indo-Pacific Strategy Report of the US Department of Defence (2019) asserts: “The United States is a Pacific nation. Our ties to the Indo-Pacific are forged by history, and our future is inextricably linked… The past, present, and future of the United States are interwoven with the Indo-Pacific.” To align with this policy slant, the US Pacific Command (PACOM) renamed itself as the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) in May 2018.
In addition to the United States, India, Australia, and Japan are in the forefront in promoting the concept of Indo-Pacific. Since 2010, Indian political leaders and the strategic community have actively promoted the Indo-Pacific framework. It reinforces the strategic rationale behind India’s Look East, Act East policy and expands its maneuverability beyond the Indian Ocean, aligning with its aspirations as an emerging global power. Under the Indo-Pacific strategic framework, US-India defence relations have reached a new stage, with the INDUS-X, launched on June 20, 2023, to bring together US and Indian stakeholders, including research and academic institutions, industry leaders, startups, and investors, to accelerate and scale up commercial technologies with military applications.
Southeast Asia emerges as the centre of the strategic theatre in the Indo-Pacific strategic construct, while South Asia appears to be positioned further west. At first glance, this shift may suggest a reduced strategic focus on other small states in South Asia like Sri Lanka. In fact, the connectivity of the Pacific and Indian Oceans reinforces the strategic importance of the Indian Ocean, too. Rather than being sidelined, small South Asian states are positioned to benefit from the economic dynamism of Southeast and East Asia through the Indo-Pacific framework.
Sri Lanka remains strategically relevant despite a growing regional focus on Southeast Asia. Its central location ensures continued engagement from major regional and global powers. Sri Lanka’s engagement in Indo-Pacific security discourse, economic frameworks, and infrastructure initiatives will shape its ability to benefit from regional growth while balancing competing strategic interests. Strengthening regional connectivity, trade partnerships, and infrastructure development could unlock new economic opportunities. However, success will depend on Sri Lanka’s ability to navigate regional power dynamics while maintaining strategic autonomy. This highlights the critical role of foreign policy in securing the country’s interests. (To be continued)
by Gamini Keerawella
Features
Science and diplomacy in a changing world
Today marks a truly historic and momentous occasion in the realm of transdisciplinary diplomacy in our country. We gather here with a twofold purpose of profound national and global significance: the establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum, and the launch of the volume Science Diplomacy: National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World.
This volume brings together valuable and timely contributions from internationally renowned experts representing all key regions of the world — North America, Latin America, Europe, Africa, West Asia, South Asia, and Oceania. It reflects a rich diversity of perspectives, experiences, and insights that speak to the increasingly interconnected nature of science, policy, and diplomacy in our rapidly transforming world.
I am deeply heartened — and indeed humbled — by the presence of such a distinguished constellation of leaders, professionals, intellectuals, scholars, and luminaries from diverse domains, including international relations, science and technology, higher education, and governance. It is rare to witness such an extraordinary and diverse assembly of intellectual, professional, and academic excellence under one roof. Your presence affirms the importance of the cause we serve and the promise of the path we are charting together. Your support, encouragement, and engagement give life, purpose, and direction to this vital endeavour.
As Chief Editor of this volume, it is both a great honour and a profound responsibility to extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all our distinguished guests and invitees. I am conscious that this august gathering is not assembled to listen to a lengthy welcome address, but rather to engage with the substantive proceedings of this event, enriched by five eminent personalities, four distinguished speakers, and an able and competent moderator — all of whom possess exceptional mastery of the subject. I shall therefore be brief.
Among us today are former and current Ministers and people’s representatives, members of the diplomatic corps, Secretaries to Ministries, distinguished panelists, valued contributors to the volume, Vice-Chancellors, Members of the Board of Management and Academic Affairs Board of the BCIS, Heads of institutions, professors, senior government officials, professionals, journalists, and many others — too numerous to acknowledge individually, yet each of you is most warmly welcomed. I receive you all, whether present in person or online, with the utmost warmth, respect, and appreciation.
The panel discussion constitutes the pièce de résistance of this event. We are deeply honoured to be joined by four eminent personalities:
Her Excellency Siri Walt, Ambassador of Switzerland to Sri Lanka;
Professor Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, former Chair of the EU Science Diplomacy Alliance; and former Ambassadors Mr. Bernard Goonatilleke and Dr. Palitha Kohona — all of whom bring exceptional depth of experience and insight to this important subject.
Their discussion will be guided by our distinguished moderator, Mr. Naushard Cader, a truly cosmopolitan personality, widely respected for his breadth of knowledge and his keen understanding of global affairs and science diplomacy. I extend to all our speakers and our moderator a very warm welcome and my sincere appreciation for their willingness to share their wisdom with us this evening.
Allow me, however, to place this event in perspective.
We gather this evening not merely to introduce a book, nor solely to inaugurate a forum, but to reflect together on an idea whose time has unquestionably arrived.
We meet at a moment of profound global transition and conflict. The international landscape is marked by turbulence, uncertainty, and rapid transformation. The world is shifting from a relatively stable post–Cold War configuration toward an increasingly multipolar order. While multipolarity carries the promise of greater balance and strategic autonomy, it also brings intensified competition among major powers, fluid alliances, and growing unpredictability.
At the same time, the rules-based international order — which for decades provided smaller nations with a measure of predictability and protection — is under visible strain and threat. Institutions are contested. Norms are challenged. Economic interdependence deepens even as geopolitical fragmentation intensifies. Supply and value chains now account for nearly seventy percent of global trade, binding nations in complex webs of mutual dependence. Yet such interdependence has not prevented trade wars, sanctions regimes, technological decoupling, and regional conflicts.
For small and economically vulnerable states, this evolving environment is especially daunting. When global rules weaken, asymmetries of power become more pronounced. Bilateral negotiations between unequal partners can leave smaller nations disadvantaged. Without adequate legal, geological, scientific, technological, and diplomatic expertise, such states may struggle to safeguard their long-term national interests and sovereignty. Vulnerability, in the absence of knowledge and capacity, risks translating into marginalisation.
Overlaying this geopolitical transformation is a constellation of interconnected global challenges. Climate change is no longer a distant projection; it is a lived reality. Sea levels are rising. Extreme weather events are intensifying. Food, water, and energy security remain fragile. Pandemics have exposed vulnerabilities in global health systems. Cyber threats transcend borders. Environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and marine pollution threaten livelihoods and ecosystems alike.
These challenges are systemic and transboundary. Almost every major issue — whether global, regional, or national in scale — involves science and technology, either in understanding root causes or in devising effective solutions.
Traditional diplomacy, while indispensable, is no longer sufficient on its own. The defining issues of our time are not purely political or military; they are scientific, technological, environmental, and societal. They demand evidence-based policymaking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and sustained transnational cooperation.
It is within this context that science diplomacy emerges — not as an academic abstraction, but as a strategic necessity.
Nowhere are these realities more visible than in the Indian Ocean.
Unlike the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, which possess longstanding institutional architectures and extensive scientific mapping, the Indian Ocean remains comparatively underexplored and under-institutionalised. Covering roughly one-fifth of the world’s oceanic expanse, it carries a substantial share of global energy shipments and maritime trade. Its seabed resources — including critical and rare-earth minerals — remain only partially surveyed. Many of its coastal and island nations are developing economies with limited scientific and technological capacity to explore, monitor, and sustainably manage these resources.
The Indian Ocean is unique. It is bordered predominantly by developing and emerging states. It hosts remarkable cultural, religious, and political diversity. It is home to some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities. Increasingly, it has become a central theatre of global strategic competition, viewed by some nations through distinct geostrategic lenses.
This maritime space is simultaneously a lifeline and a fault line. It sustains global commerce and local livelihoods. Yet it is also a theatre where geopolitical interests intersect — sometimes converge, sometimes collide.
At the heart of this ocean lies Sri Lanka.
Geographically, our island sits astride one of the busiest East–West shipping routes in the world. Historically, Sri Lanka has been a hub of commercial, cultural, and intellectual exchange. Today, that strategic location presents both opportunity and responsibility.
Sri Lanka’s history, enriched by iconic figures such as Dr. Gamini Corea, Hon.
Lakshman Kadirgamar, Judge Christopher Weeramantry, Dr. Neville Kanakaratne and Dr. Jayantha Dhanapala, stands as a powerful testament to our long-standing contributions to global diplomacy and international governance. Our nation provided leadership within the Non-Aligned Movement, positioning itself as a bridge between civilizations at a time of deep ideological division. We also made history by producing the world’s first woman Prime Minister, affirming our commitment to political progress and inclusive governance.
Today, we are called upon once again to build upon this distinguished legacy — by championing regional unity, promoting sustainable development, and addressing critical contemporary challenges such as climate change, maritime security, and environmental sustainability.
We must navigate complex geopolitical currents while safeguarding sovereignty and strengthening economic resilience. We face vulnerabilities common to island and littoral states: climate change, coastal erosion, marine pollution, and supply chain disruptions. Our development aspirations must be balanced with environmental stewardship and maritime security considerations.
Yet within these challenges lies profound opportunity.
Sri Lanka can position itself as a regional convener — a hub for ocean science, climate research, marine biodiversity studies, disaster risk reduction, and blue economy innovation. Through platforms such as BIMSTEC, the Indian Ocean Rim Association, and SAARC, we can advance cooperative marine research, harmonise environmental standards, strengthen early warning systems, and promote sustainable maritime governance grounded in international law.
But to do so effectively, we must invest in knowledge — and in the diplomacy of knowledge.
Science diplomacy operates along three mutually reinforcing dimensions:
First, science in diplomacy — where scientific evidence informs foreign policy decisions.
Second, diplomacy for science — where diplomatic engagement enables international research collaboration and shared infrastructure.
Third, science for diplomacy — where scientific cooperation itself becomes a bridge for confidence-building, even when political relations are strained.
Importantly, science diplomacy extends beyond the natural sciences. The humanities and social sciences are equally vital. Technology must be guided by ethics. Data must be interpreted within cultural contexts. Policy must consider equity and justice. Diplomats of the future must be fluent not only in international law and negotiation, but also in scientific literacy and interdisciplinary thinking.
In a fragmented world, science offers a neutral vocabulary. It encourages transparency, peer review, and open data. It shifts discourse from rhetoric to evidence. It fosters long-term thinking in political environments often dominated by short-term calculations.
For small and vulnerable nations, science diplomacy is empowerment. It strengthens capacity. It enhances credibility. It enables engagement with larger powers on firmer ground — armed not merely with moral argument, but with data, research, and technical expertise.
The book we launch today reflects a diversity of experience and insight. It is intentionally transdisciplinary because the problems we face are transdisciplinary. It is intentionally global because no region can address these challenges in isolation.
In Sri Lanka, science diplomacy remains at a formative stage. The establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum signals our determination to move beyond dialogue toward sustained institutional engagement. It envisions training programmes for diplomats and scientists, embedding scientific advisory mechanisms within governance structures, and building networks among universities, research institutes, industry, and policymakers. It seeks to cultivate a new generation equipped to navigate the interface between knowledge and negotiation.
We aspire for the Science Diplomacy Forum to be transformative — a true game changer.
Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen,
We live in an era of mounting uncertainty — but also of extraordinary human ingenuity. The same interconnectedness that transmits crises also enables collaboration. The same technologies that disrupt can also heal and transform.
Change is inevitable. The deeper question is whether we will shape that change cooperatively, constructively, and inclusively.
For Sri Lanka, for the Indian Ocean region, and for the broader global community, science diplomacy offers a pathway beyond zero-sum thinking. It channels competition into collaboration around shared public goods. It aligns national interest with regional stability. It transforms vulnerability into resilience through knowledge.
Let this book be not merely a publication, but a platform for sustained reflection and action.
Let the Science Diplomacy Forum be not merely an institution, but a living bridge between evidence and policy, between research and responsibility, between nations and neighbours.
Let Sri Lanka reaffirm its role as a bridge — not a battleground — in the Indian Ocean.
In a world where rules may falter, let evidence guide us.
In a world where tensions may rise, let dialogue endure.
In a world of turbulence, let science diplomacy be our compass — guiding us toward peace, stability, dignity, and shared prosperity.
Welcome Address and Opening Remarks made by Emeritus Prof. Ranjith Senaratne
Former General President,
Sri Lanka Association for the Advancement of Science recently on the occasion of the Founding of the Science Diplomacy Forum and the Launch of the Book Science Diplomacy:
National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World
Features
Be a woman who re-designs life!
From one day of celebration to 364 days of transformation
The international women’s day was just celebrated all over the world. I saw many organiations share their slogans, and organize panel discussions, presentations, and exhibitions to support women empowerment. Slogans, themes, colors play vivid and vociferous role across the world, commemorating the international women’s day.
Alas, the colors are faded, slogans are weaned, themes are forgotten, over the next 364 days, pushing UN Chapter on Women’s Rights come up with more illustrious themes and slogans.
From Bread and Peace to Rights and Action
According to the recorded history, the Women’s day first introduced on 28th February 1909 in America, raising a voice of women against poor working conditions and poor pay in garment factories. This took a more revolutionary form in 1917 in Russia against World War I, where a mass of women protested under the theme of “Bread and Peace”.
Starting from basic needs such as bread and peace, the International Women’s Day theme has evolved towards freedom and independence, justice and inclusion.
Over the years, the rise of feminism brought cultural refinements and highlighted women’s rights. Looking back the historical evolution of women’s role, we see that matrimony has faded and patriarchy evolved with religious and geopolitical forces intertwined with the social expectation. The importance and respect for women, given in the ancient civilisations, diminished with medieval civilization, and subsequent colonisation. The rise of patriarchy domesticated women as homemakers, at the same time prompting their voices to rise for dignity and equitable treatment.
Rise of Feminism
In a typical Western-household of 20th century, husband was the bread winner of the family and the wife managed household affairs. In this era, women’s affairs were restricted to daily chores, creating a boundary wall restricting their access to corporate jobs, free voices. Betty Friedman was a remarkable lady who observed the domestic suffering of women and challenged ‘feminine mystique’ through her 1963 book. She disclosed the feminine mystique, which celebrated women as good housewives, and the belief that women could find satisfaction from domestic chores, home making, marriage, raising children, cooking, washing and taking care of husband’s needs. Betty disclosed that the unhappiness and boredom experienced by the domesticized women, and their inability to live up to the feminist mystique defined by the male dominant society had no name and difficult to express in words. Betty’s claim was supported by the theories of Abraham Maslow, who introduced motivation to grow along the hierarchy of needs. Betty, declared that feminine mystique denies basic growth needs of women, where their desires limited to shelter, food, safety and love only.
In this era women’s jobs were confined preeminently to teaching, and caregiving. STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and medicine were dominated by males, leaving less space for women. As you may have heard in the medieval era women who practiced medicine were branded as ‘witches’ and many were burned alive rooting out the knowledge and courage of women. Women who practiced and taught science and astronomy, were also branded for witch craft and condemned to death. The social pressure suppressed women confining them to domestic chores. In the industrial era women were hired for factory work under low wages and less facilities. In this period Women’s organisations were gathered demanding freedom and justice for women, calling for equal opportunities and rights enjoy their male counterparts. The evolution of women’s movements culminated in 1975, where the first International Women’s Day was commemorated on 8th March 1975.
Celebration and Contradiction
Since 1975, women were celebrated for a day in every year across the globe, with various themes and color codes to showcase the world that all women have rights and demanding fair treatment. The theme colors of International Women’s day are Purple, Green and White.
Purple stands for justice, dignity, and loyalty to the cause.
Green for hope and growth.
White for purity and unity.
In 1996, the International Women’s Day declared a theme to embrace, which is; “Celebrating the Past, Planning for the Future.” In the year 2023, the theme was ‘Embrace Equity’, which evolved to ‘Inspire inclusion’ in 2024, and the year 2025 theme was ‘Accelerate Action’. In 2026, there are three themes; 1. Give to Gain, 2. Balance the Scales, 3. Rights. Justice. Action.
Fragmented Focus Diminishes Values
Multiple themes and competing messages can unintentionally dilute momentum. Unity is not uniformity, but coherence matters; shared direction makes shared progress possible. Emerging three themes to celebrate international women’s day in 2026, implicate lack of solidarity, and unity among women’s organizations to share a common theme. Inclusion, equity and accelerated action have not yet achieved by the women globally, neither locally, nor in small communities. We are bound to question whether the women stay true to the meanings of theme colors that represent womanhood.
Thus, isn’t it vital to explore what goes wrong with our themes and slogans on this Women’s day, before setting foot without solid foundation for what we claim for? Or is it only a day that dawn women’s organisations to gather women in elite society, or identified group of women to enjoy a cup of tea over futuristic speeches of identical society, which treat women with high respect and equity?
One thing we must understand is the world is evolving, so does the roles, rights, and actions of women. Although, women shouted and pleaded for opportunities to enter male dominate world of work, today in many countries including Sri Lanka, women occupies majority of administrative positions and clerical level jobs. Even, the labour positions, dominated by males, are now occupied by the females in many sectors. However, women still bear the traditional homemaker role as well, while juggling with work, and studies to sustain jobs and promotions. This modern day scenario has made women more prone to chronic stress related deceases. The break of rest, too rigid demands coming from work and family, their own desires to move up the corporate ladder, outsmart neighbourers, and craving to make their children better than the others have made women’s lives miserable and breaching the themes and slogans that cater to the women’s prosperity.
Today’s environment has resulted many women to abandon dignity, purity, and hope, overlook unity and justice. If you see social media contents shared by women, you may not be surprised by my statements. The dignity, purity and hope for betterment of women is vanishing on screen. Young girls’ addiction to drugs, liquor and tobacco, sexual misbehaviour, and rising school-aged pregnancies are critical concerns that women’s movements must pay attention today.
What We Must Demand Now: Right Education and Just Acts
Women’s day slogans need a shift. Rather than demanding equal rights as men, we must demand right education for women and girls. We shall not stop at demanding justice as given to the men, but shout and make women and girls aware of ‘Just Acts’, and encourage them to act justly, for themselves, without exposing them to be victims of social media, and ill temptations.
Digital lives of women and girls can amplify comparison, quick outrage, and performative ideals. For girls and women, this can mean unrealistic bodies, curated success, and unsafe online spaces. What we need isn’t more judgment; it’s digital literacy, psychological safety, reproductive health awareness, and robust support systems, so women can flourish on and off‑line. We must educate women and nourish and foster the moral values among women and girls to stay pure in thoughts and actions, we must empower women and girls to keep hope and grow continuously. We must share a culture of inclusion among women to enhance solidarity and stay true to unified action for the betterment of women, and the society.
Women as Creators and Modifiers of the World
The history of International Women’s Day is a call for rights and justice. Today, the next horizon is to build cultures at home, at work, and society. Women are the creators and modifiers of the world. They are to add color to lives of those around them. In fact, WOMEN, do not need to call for justice, rights and action. WOMEN, need to call the hidden power, strength and courage within them and create a world that assures every being in it receives justice, and enjoys rights.
Thus, whether themes multiply or fade, the test is not in the rally or the ribbon, it is in the 364 days after. The colours may be vivid on stage, yet the colors are faded in practice if we do not live them. Let us re‑design life with dignity, unity, courage, and continuous growth. Let us educate, include, and act justly. Let us awaken strength within, so that every woman, every girl, and every community can thrive by being a Woman Who Re‑designs Life!
(The author is a senior education administrator, researcher,
management consultant and a lecturer.)
By Dr. Chani Imbulgoda
cv5imbulgoda@gmail.com)
Features
Illegal solar push ravages Hambantota elephant habitat: Environmentalist warns of deepening crisis
A large-scale move to establish solar power plants in Hambantota has triggered a major environmental and social crisis, with more than 1,000 acres of forest—identified as critical elephant habitat—cleared in violation of the law, environmental activist Sajeewa Chamikara said.
Chamikara, speaking on behalf of the Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform, said that 17 companies have already begun clearing forest land along the boundaries of the Hambantota Elephant Management Reserve. The affected areas include Sanakku Gala, Orukemgala and Kapapu Wewa, which are known to be key elephant habitats and long-used movement corridors.
He said that what is taking place cannot be described as development, but rather as a large-scale destruction of natural ecosystems carried out under the cover of renewable energy expansion.
According to Chamikara, the clearing of forests has been carried out using heavy machinery, while large sections have also been deliberately set on fire to prepare the land for solar installations. He said that electric fences have been erected across wide stretches of land, effectively blocking elephant movement and fragmenting their natural habitat.

“These forests are not empty lands. They are part of a living system that supports wildlife and nearby communities. Once destroyed, they cannot be easily restored,” he said.
The projects in question include a 50 megawatt solar development undertaken by five companies and a larger 150 megawatt project implemented by 12 companies. The larger project is reported to be valued at around 150 million US dollars.
Chamikara stressed that these projects are being carried out in a coordinated manner and involve extensive land clearing on a scale that raises serious environmental concerns.
He further alleged that certain companies had paid about Rs. 14 million to secure support and move ahead with the projects. He said this points to a troubling failure of oversight by state institutions that are expected to protect forests and wildlife habitats.
“This is not only an environmental issue. It is also a serious governance issue. The institutions responsible for protecting these lands have failed in their duty,” he said.
Chamikara pointed out that under the National Environmental Act, any project of this scale must receive prior approval through a proper Environmental Impact Assessment process.
He said that clearing forest land before obtaining such approval is a direct violation of the law.
He added that legal requirements relating to archaeological assessments had also been ignored. Under existing regulations, large-scale land clearing requires prior evaluation to ensure that sites of historical or cultural value are not damaged.

“The law is very clear. You cannot go ahead with projects of this nature without proper approval. What we are seeing is a complete disregard for legal procedure,” Chamikara said.
The environmental impact of these activities is already becoming visible. With their natural habitats destroyed, elephants are increasingly moving into nearby villages in search of food and shelter. This has led to a sharp rise in human-elephant conflict in several areas.
Areas such as Mayurapura, Gonnooruwa, Meegahajandura and Thanamalvila have reported increasing encounters between humans and elephants. According to Chamikara, more than 5,000 farming families in these areas are now facing growing threats to their safety and livelihoods.
He warned that farmers are being forced to abandon their lands due to repeated elephant intrusions, while incidents involving damage to crops and property are rising. There have also been increasing reports of injuries and deaths among both humans and elephants.
“This is turning into a serious social and economic problem. When farmers cannot cultivate their lands, it affects food production, income and rural stability,” he said.
Chamikara also raised concerns about the broader environmental consequences of clearing forests for solar power projects. While renewable energy is promoted as a solution to reduce carbon emissions, he said that destroying forests undermines that goal.
“Forests play a key role in absorbing carbon dioxide. When you clear and burn them, you are increasing emissions, not reducing them. That defeats the purpose of promoting solar energy,” he explained.
He added that large-scale deforestation in dry zone areas such as Hambantota could also affect local weather patterns and reduce rainfall, which would have further negative impacts on agriculture and water resources.

Chamikara called for a shift in policy, urging authorities to focus on more sustainable approaches to solar power development. He said that rooftop solar systems on homes, public buildings and commercial establishments should be given priority, as they do not require clearing large areas of land.
He also recommended that solar projects be located on degraded or abandoned lands, such as areas affected by past mining or other low-value lands, rather than forests or productive agricultural areas.
“Renewable energy development must be done in a way that does not destroy the environment. There are better options available if there is proper planning,” he said.
Chamikara urged the Central Environmental Authority and the Department of Wildlife Conservation to take immediate action to stop ongoing land clearing and investigate the projects. He stressed that all activities carried out without proper approval should be halted until legal requirements are met.
He warned that failure to act now would lead to long-term environmental damage that could not be reversed.
“If this continues, we will lose not only forests and wildlife, but also the balance between people and nature that supports rural life. The consequences will be felt for generations,” he said.
The situation in Hambantota is fast emerging as a critical test of whether development goals can be balanced with environmental protection. As pressure grows, the response of authorities in the coming weeks is likely to determine whether the damage can still be contained or whether it will continue to spread unchecked.

By Ifham Nizam
-
Business4 days agoBrowns EV launches fast-charging BAW E7 Pro at Rs. 5.8 million
-
Life style5 days agoFrom culture to empowerment: Indonesia’s vision for Sri Lanka
-
News2 days agoCIABOC questions Ex-President GR on house for CJ’s maid
-
Business6 days agoSri Lanka Institute of Information Technology raises the bar for academic excellence
-
Life style5 days agoRanjith Fernando celebrates cricketing journey with Hob Nails to Spikes
-
Latest News5 days agoQR code system will be implemented for fuel with effect from 06.00 a.m. today (15th)
-
News3 days agoAustralian HC debunks misleading travel risk claims for Sri Lanka
-
News3 days agoSri Lankan marine scientist Asha de Vos honoured at UNGA opening
