Connect with us

Opinion

Self-reliance, only option for Global South

Published

on

Global South

Countries of the Global South, mainly Africa, Asia and South America, have a history of subjugation, oppression, colonial occupation and plunder of their natural resources by the Global North comprising the Europe and the US. Discovery of gun powder and development of navigation enabled Europe to conquer the world. China had developed these technologies hundred years before Europe, but their Confucian philosophy restrained them from resorting to colonialism and plunder in other countries (Joseph Needham, 1900 – 1955). Christianity, born in the Roman province of Judea (present day Palestine and Israel) and adopted by Europe as its national religion, though a pacific religion, could not have a similar influence on the avaricious and acquisitive nature of Europeans. Today, Global North is rich and the Global South is poor due to the emergence and growth of greed, the base characteristic of human nature, among the Europeans and the US.

Since the end of colonialism, neo-liberalism has taken over, as the main tool of exploitation of the poor. Trade and aid are manipulated to keep the underdeveloped countries in a state of poverty and dependence. A three-pronged neo-colonialism, comprising economic, military and cultural means, is in operation at present which would maintain the status quo, where the rich get richer at the expense of the poor, till eternity, unless the worm turns.

The worm has started to turn, and the North is taking counter measures to stop the process and maintain its dominance. They are trying their utmost to hamper the growth of BRICS and such other associations of the South, to maintain the overwhelming pervasive influence of the dollar and to undermine the developing unity among countries of the Global South, particularly between China and India. Brazil, India and China are being targeted with high tariffs. As The Island editorial says the US has no allies, it uses them for its gains. India, which appeared to be its buddy, has nevertheless been hit hard for purchasing oil from Russia (The Island, 28.08.2025).

India must not capitulate at this juncture; it must pursue its policy of exploring peace with China and also Pakistan and help build a strong self-reliant South. Modi must change his dependence on racial rhetoric for political gain and see how he could bring about communal harmony which would go a long way in building bridges between India and Pakistan, and which would help his poor people and also stabilise peace in the region. Politics in both India and Pakistan has prolonged the agony of conflict and poverty.

It is time the Global South shed its political rivalries and past animosity, and unite for its own sake. China and India must provide leadership for this enterprise and show by example what could be achieved by peaceful coexistence. These two countries with their common friend, Russia, must forget their differences and work together to unleash the full potential of the BRICS. It must not adopt an exclusive attitude towards other countries which seek its membership. Any poor country and those who are at the receiving end of the South should be welcome to join the organisation.

Associations similar to BRICS include other emerging power alliances like IBSA (Indonesia, Brazil, South Korea, Australia) and BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India and China) and regional organisations such as the African Union (AU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), all of which seek to increase the influence of Global South countries on the global stage through economic and political cooperation and to reshape international decision-making processes. Other examples include the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). Proliferation of these organisations may reflect the realisation by the South of their plight and the need for cooperation and interaction in the fields of economy, knowledge, trade, culture and even defence. However, there is a need to bring these seemingly disparate organisations and countries under one umbrella. Some of these countries are strong allies of the West. Unless they are genuinely committed to the cause it may be risky to have them in the organisation.

The collective GDP of the BRICS countries is higher than that of the G7 countries. This shows the potential of the organisation to develop into a really effective counterforce to the neo-colonialism and imperial hegemony of the West. The impediment to the further development and realisation of its goals could be the intrinsic politics and longstanding disputes between member states such as China and India. It is of existential importance to these countries that they reconcile to the intractable nature of some of these issues and develop workable relationships based on economy and trade and reduce as far as possible the impact of these politics and disputes. They must think of the greater good that could accrue from such a policy and work together for the cause. Else, everybody would be trampled under the feet of imperial exploitation and remain poor forever.

The organisation that should be developed in the South must aim for self-sufficiency in essential goods like food, medicine, environmental protection, etc., and promote each other in reaching that goal. Exports among them need not be fiercely competitive but tailored to meet the essential needs of each other. Development for the sake of development driven by GDP growth and other parameters, which could be detrimental to the environment should be avoided. Instead, a policy of sustainable and environment friendly development must be undertaken and the countries must cooperate and share knowledge in that regard. Improvement of the living standards of the poor people must be given priority.

China, in this regard, which has experience of lifting millions out of poverty would be able to advise and provide technological knowhow necessary for this undertaking.

BRICS has been working to develop a common currency to replace the dollar with some success. There are several countries that use this currency for transactions involving China. This is crucial for the economic development of the South. Dependence on the dollar, which is used as a hegemonic and political tool, will have to be gradually weaned off. An alternate currency acceptable to all member countries will have to be developed.

It is often said that the Global South must maintain good relations with all countries, if they are to benefit with regard to economic development and transfer of technology. This is fine if it works but it doesn’t seem to, and that is why groups like BRICS have emerged. Global South need not go on a confrontational path, but economic dependence on the West will not help them to lift their poor people out of poverty. Maintaining cordial diplomatic relations with all countries is of course desirable and is a different matter all together.

If the Global South succeeds in reaching the stated goals that it has decided upon and develop a workable order, with consensus among the members, it will sooner than later reach a stage from which it could deal with the West on equal terms. The West by then would learn the lesson that what the world wants is equality, dignity, respect and peace and not dominance, hegemony and war. A new World Order may develop with meaningful and sustainable goals that may give the Earth a chance to recover from the environmental damage man has caused it. World would be a better place to live in.

by N. A. de S. Amaratunga



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

U.S. foreign policy double standards and Iran’s Iron theocracy

Published

on

The world’s most theatrical stage

Welcome to the Grand Circus

If global geopolitics were a TV show, it would be cancelled after the first season for being too unbelievable. Consider the plot: the world’s largest arms exporter lectures others about peace; a government that executed over 500 people in a single year tells its citizens it governs by divine law; and international bodies created to enforce rules seem to apply those rules with remarkable … flexibility. Welcome to the real world of international relations, where the rules are made up and the principles don’t matter.

This analysis examines two of the most consequential actors shaping global instability today: the United States of America, a democracy that can’t quite decide whether it believes in democracy, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, a theocracy that has perfected the art of punishing its own people for simply existing.

Episode I: The United States, ‘Do as I Say, Not as I Do’

The Democracy Export Business

The United States has, for decades, positioned itself as the global guardian of democracy, freedom, and human rights. It is a noble brand. The marketing budget alone, in the form of military expenditure at $886 billion in 2023, is staggering. And yet, the product being sold and the product being delivered have often been … different things.

The CIA-backed coup of 1953, codenamed Operation Ajax, removed Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and reinstated the autocratic Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, primarily to protect Anglo-American oil interests.

Nuclear Exceptionalism: The World’s Worst-Kept Secret

The United States currently holds approximately 5,044–5,177 nuclear warheads (depending on the source and year), while Russia being the largest with a stockpile estimated at approximately 5,580 warheads. yet it leads international campaigns demanding that other nations not develop nuclear weapons. This is a bit like the world’s most heavily armed person standing at the door of a gun shop, telling customers they cannot purchase firearms.

Furthermore, Israel is widely believed to possess 80–90 nuclear warheads. The United States has never imposed sanctions on Israel for this. India and Pakistan, both outside the NPT, were rewarded with nuclear cooperation deals after the tested nuclear weapons.

The Saudi Arabia Paradox

Perhaps, no relationship illustrates U.S. foreign policy hypocrisy more vividly than Washington’s alliance with Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom is an absolute monarchy with no elections, no free press, where women were legally barred from driving until 2018, and where the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, carried out, according to U.S. intelligence, on orders from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, resulted in … arms sales continuing and diplomatic ties intact.

The United States sold Saudi Arabia over $37 billion in arms between 2015 and 2020, weapons used in a Yemen war that the United Nations described as one of the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophes. Yet the U.S. simultaneously held press conferences about human rights. The cognitive dissonance is not a bug. It is the feature.

Iraq: The Weapons of Mass Distraction

In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq on the basis of alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that did not exist. The invasion resulted in an estimated 150,000–1,000,000 Iraqi civilian deaths depending on methodology, the displacement of millions, the destabilization of an entire region, and the rise of the Islamic State, none of which appeared in the original brochure. The officials responsible for this foreign policy catastrophe faced no international tribunal. No sanctions were imposed on the United States. Several architects of the war are today respected media commentators.

Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court (ICC), an institution the United States has never ratified, is expected to hold others to account for far lesser offenses. As of 2024, the U.S. has actively sanctioned ICC officials who attempted to investigate American personnel for potential war crimes in Afghanistan.

Episode II: Iran, The People’s Nightmare

Iran’s political system is built on the concept of Velayat-e Faqih, the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist, a political-theological doctrine holding that a senior Islamic cleric should govern society. In practice, this means that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, unelected by the general public, holds veto power over all branches of government, controls the military, the judiciary, state media, and the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The elected president, whether ‘moderate’ or ‘hardliner’, operates within a system where real power resides with the Supreme Leader and an unelected Guardian Council that vets all candidates and can disqualify anyone it deems insufficiently Islamic. In the 2021 presidential election, the Guardian Council disqualified over 590 candidates out of 592 who applied. The word ‘election’ is being used loosely here.

Women’s Rights: A Systematic Dismantling

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iranian women have endured one of the most comprehensive rollbacks of rights in modern history. Within weeks of the revolution, mandatory hijab laws were imposed, women were barred from serving as judges, and the minimum marriage age for girls was reduced to 9 years (later revised to 13 in 1982). This was not incidental policy; it was ideological architecture.

Today, Iranian women face legal discrimination across virtually every domain. Under the Iranian Civil Code, a woman’s testimony in court counts as half that of a man’s. Women cannot travel abroad without the written permission of their husband or male guardian. Married women cannot work without spousal consent in many circumstances. The diyeh (blood money) for a woman’s life is legally valued at half that of a man.

In September 2022, 22-year-old Mahsa (Zhina) Amini died in the custody of Iran’s Morality Police, after being arrested for allegedly wearing her hijab improperly. Her death triggered the Woman, Life, Freedom uprising, one of the largest protest movements in Iranian history. The government’s response was to kill over 500 protesters, arrest more than 19,000, and execute at least four people in connection with the protests by early 2023.

The IRGC and State-Sponsored Repression

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is a military-economic-political entity unlike any other in the region. It controls an estimated 20–40% of Iran’s economy through businesses, construction contracts, and import monopolies. It commands proxy militias across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. And it suppresses domestic dissent with a ruthlessness that has drawn consistent condemnation from United Nations human rights bodies.

Amnesty International’s 2022-2023 annual report documented the IRGC and security forces using live ammunition, birdshot, and metal pellets against protesters, deliberately targeting eyes, resulting in hundreds being blinded. The UN Special Rapporteur on Iran documented ‘serious, widespread and systematic human rights violations’ constituting potential crimes against humanity.

Episode III: Where the Two Hypocrisies Meet

The relationship between the United States and Iran is, in many ways, a story of two entities who deserve each other in the sense that the behavUior of each government has fed the domestic narrative of the other for decades.

Washington uses Iran as justification for its military presence in the Gulf, its arms sales to autocratic Gulf states, and its general posture as indispensable regional hegemon. Tehran uses American hostility and sanctions as justification for economic failure, political repression, and nuclear advancement. Both governments’ hard-liners need each other to remain in power.

The Iranian people, 85 million of them, majority under 35, highly educated, and overwhelmingly wanting engagement with the world, are trapped between a government that treats them as subjects and an international sanctions regime that punishes them for their government’s choices. The American people, meanwhile, continue paying for a foreign policy architecture that serves arms manufacturers, defense contractors, and geopolitical abstractions more than it serves democratic values or human security.

Some Uncomfortable Truths

The United States is not the villain of every story, nor is Iran irredeemably authoritarian in the hearts of its people. What is consistent, and what this analysis has documented, is that both governments operate by standards they refuse to apply to themselves.

Tehran’s theocratic governance has failed its population economically, politically, and most visibly in its treatment of women and dissidents. The Woman, Life, Freedom movement showed the world what Iranian society wants. The government’s violent response showed the world what the Islamic Republic fears.

The lesson, uncomfortable as it is, is that powerful states, whether wielding aircraft carriers or theology, tend to exempt themselves from the rules they want others to follow. The only antidote is an informed public that refuses to accept these double standards as the natural order of things. Read critically. Follow the money. And remember: when a government tells you it acts in the name of God or democracy.

(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)

Continue Reading

Opinion

SLC Grants to clubs and associations under scrutiny

Published

on

The scale and manner of grant distributions underscore the urgent need to rectify the weaknesses identified by the Auditor General. Remarkably, the accounts for the years 2024 and 2025 are still not published and only the 2023 accounts are available for public scrutiny.

Grants to clubs and associations increased from LKR 1.30 billion in the prior year to LKR 2.46 billion in 2023, representing an escalation of over LKR 1.15 billion year-on-year. These grants were distributed among 36 recipient clubs and associations, with individual allocations ranging from approximately LKR 1.5 million to almost LKR 300 million. Such wide variation and substantial growth warrant clear public disclosure of the allocation framework, the approval processes, and the beneficiary criteria.

While it is understandable that higher profitability enables greater financial support to clubs, the absence of a transparent, rule-based grant policy gives rise to governance concerns, and unless properly explained, leaves room for malicious or unfounded allegations that grant allocations may be used to influence voting behaviour or entrench existing officials. Robust disclosure and effective oversight are therefore essential to safeguard institutional credibility. The precise immediate need for high funding and their monitoring processes need to be divulged.

A case in point is Colombo Cricket Club (CCC), which received LKR 279,531,827 in 2023, making it the highest individual club recipient. As disclosed under the related-party notes to the financial statements, the President of Sri Lanka Cricket is also the President of Colombo Cricket Club, resulting in this transaction being classified as a related-party transaction.

In contrast to several grant recipient entities reporting profits, Sri Lanka Cricket recorded a deficit of approximately Rs. 2 billion in its Statement of Financial Performance for 2023.

It is also noteworthy from the cash flow statement that cash and fund balances declined sharply, from approximately LKR 10.8 billion in the previous year to around LKR 5.6 billion in 2023, representing a significant depletion of liquid resources within a single financial year.

A more meaningful and complete evaluation of these developments—particularly the position of funds available as at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2025—will only be possible once the financial statements for 2024 and 2025 are released and subjected to public scrutiny.

A cricket enthusiast – Moratuwa

Continue Reading

Opinion

Microfinance and Credit Regulatory Authority Act 2026 fails all affacted communities

Published

on

A protest against exploitation by microfinance companies

The Microfinance and Credit Regulatory Authority Bill was passed into law by the Parliament of Sri Lanka on 4 March. According to Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning Dr. Anil Jayantha, the main object of the Act is to establish an Authority to “license and supervise the under-regulated microfinance and moneylending sector, aiming to protect borrowers from exploitation and ensure financial stability”.

However, the Yukthi Collective is saddened and disappointed that a government which pledged to take “measures to alleviate the burden of predatory microfinance loans with high interest rates on women” (NPP Manifesto, 2024: Page no. 44), will now add to their unbearable weight.

The new Act, as virtually all legislation enacted by Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government, is a legacy of the anti-working class Ranil Wickremesinghe regime. It evades the root causes of the microfinance trap, and ignores debt justice for women borrowers.

It fails in understanding the connections between household debt and public debt. The vicious cycle of national debt is sustained by lack of growth in economic activity because of poor access to affordable credit.

It fails to make equal representation of women mandatory in the new Authority. If representatives of women borrowers and their self-run organisations are not present in the regulatory body, how will its members know of their lived experiences and make decisions that value women’s unpaid and paid contributions to sustaining life?

System Change

Millions of indebted households voted for the NPP with hope and expectation of ‘system change’. But instead of honouring its manifesto promise to them, the government has let them down in the law-making process; as well as the focus and substance of the new Act.

It is appalling that NPP parliamentarians, including some of its women members, appear not to have read and understood the bill they enacted into law, nor spoke to the rural credit community providers in their electorates for their views.

Predatory lending exists in the formal and informal sectors. Within this ecosystem, the Act fails to understand, identify, and prohibit predatory lending and recovery practices. It is a cover for the Central Bank’s failure to properly regulate ‘Licensed Finance Companies’ in the interests of citizens.

The biggest offenders are the big finance companies, in which some parliamentarians are deposit-holders. Therefore, some lawmakers benefit from excess profitmaking through exploitative practices, at the expense of poor mostly rural women.

Where law reform should discipline the bullies and thugs in credit delivery, it will instead wipe out, through over-regulation, community-based and managed lenders such as death donation societies, farmer associations, and urban and rural women’s collectives, which have been a lifeline for vulnerable working-class women and a defence from harmful recovery practices.

Structural Adjustment Programmes

The motivation for this new law are the market- and capital- friendly structural reforms insisted by International Financial Institutions; not the concerns and needs of those at the mercy of predatory lenders.

From the Microfinance Act 2016, to the 2023 version of the Ranil Wickremesinghe regime, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) through its loans has been a promoter of these regressive reforms.

The 2026 Act, with some changes suggested by the Supreme Court in 2024 and hardly any of the changes demanded by affected communities, has been moved forward by the NPP government in line with ADB loan conditionalities.

The path of de-regulation for banking, finance, trade, and investment; and over-regulation of poor people’s savings and credit institutions, smacks of the bias to big capital, which the NPP in opposition once criticised.

Reforms needed

The financial and banking reforms we want to see are to make credit from state banks and public funds accessible and affordable to women producers in agriculture and micro and small business operators; with decent wages and social protection for workers; that improve household opportunity for a dignified livelihood and decent lives.

Yukthi is a forum supporting working people’s movements and people’s struggles for democracy and justice in Sri Lanka.

by Yukthi Collective

Continue Reading

Trending