Connect with us

Features

POWER POLITICS

Published

on

CHAPTER 14

(Excerpted from N.U. JAYAWARDENA The first five decades)

Continued From Last Week

It is said that Kotelawala made an application to the Central Bank for the transfer of a large sum of money to Britain for the purchase of property. NU mentioned that the application was made during the first premiership of Dudley Senanayake, “as financial protection from unsettling forces which he [Kotelawala] felt would overtake the country” (N.U. Jayawardena, c.1985, p.62). According to the Central Bank and Exchange Control regulations at that time, the transfer of such a large sum was not permissible, and would have violated existing regulations. As such, NU recommended the refusal of Kotelawala’s application to the Finance Minister J.R. Jayewardene and Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake. This action would have serious repercussions in the future. NU’s daughter describes this episode:

When my father was in the Central Bank, Sir John Kotelawala applied for special approval to remit funds to the United Kingdom, which exceeded the legally approved limit. My father in his tactless way said that he could not do this but that Sir John was welcome to change the law and that my father would grant him the required permit after this was done. My parents always maintained that Sir John Kotelawala never forgave my father for the stand he took on his request. (Neiliya Perera, personal recollections)

To shed some light on the reasons for NU’s stance on the issue, it is important to note that, while the “Rubber Boom” of 1950-51 (at the time of the Korean War) had permitted Sri Lanka to enjoy a brief spell of economic prosperity, due to an increase in the export price of rubber, by 1952 the Central Bank had warned the government about worsening economic conditions and began to re-impose “certain restrictions of [foreign] remittances” (Central Bank, c.1975, p.41). In mid-1952, the government also launched a programme that was “primarily designed to conserve foreign exchange and to eliminate the budget deficit” (ibid, p.49). However, in 1953, an adverse balance of trade still existed, leading to cash shortages, and the government had to obtain a sterling loan from the British government to bridge the gap. NU accompanied OEG, the Finance Minister, to Britain in 1953 to negotiate this loan, and did so again in 1954 to negotiate a further loan (Ranasinghe, 1972, p.306).

Kotelawala did not take kindly to NU’s rejection of his application to remit money abroad. According to Neiliya, NU was “a man who did not suffer fools gladly” and who was “outspoken to the point of being arrogant.” This rejection would have only rubbed further salt into the wounds of a powerful man who was quick to take insult. NU, with legendary abilities to master any subject and administrative skills valued by his superiors, would find that these assets did not serve him well in this case. He would soon learn that it was not wise to displease powerful politicians.

Some time during this period, a verbal skirmish of sorts had taken place between John Kotelawala and NU at the silver wedding reception of a mutual friend, with some name-calling, and Kotelawala threatened to take revenge on NU (Wickramaratne, 2002).

John Lionel Kotelawala

The above-described incidents as well as a few biographical details will provide some insight into the nature of the man who succeeded Dudley Senanayake as Prime Minister, and have relevance when describing the events that took place affecting NU. John Lionel Kotelawala, born in 1897 was the son of John Kotelawala, a police inspector, who after marriage became involved in the “management of his wife’s family estates and properties” (Wriggins, 1960, p.32). Kotelawala Sr. was celebrated in some quarters for his bravado and physical exploits. ( . See Dep, pp.317, 319 & 334; Jeffries, pp.29-30, K. Jayawardena, 1972, pp.125-27; and Kotelawala, pp.12-13 & 14. From the age of ten, Kotelawala Jr. was raised by his mother Alice, after his father died under unfortunate circumstances. (See: de Silva and Wriggins, 1988, p.46 and Wriggins, 1960, p.112.)

By his own account, Kotelawala (Jr.) (1956, p.12), was from his early days, impulsive – prone to “acting first and thinking afterwards” – and his memoirs are full of references to incidents in which he appears to extol the use of violence and strong-arm tactics. There are many anecdotes from his contemporaries and historians that attest to his volatile nature. (See Abeysekera, pp.145-46; Fernando, p.21; Jeffries pp.29-30; Kotelawala; pp.68-69, and Manor pp.192, 223-24 & 226.)

The Politics of Rice Subsidies

Events closely linked to the issue of food subsidies were to occur, which resulted in the decision by Dudley Senanayake to step down as Prime Minister and his replacement by Kotelawala. Food subsidies, which had been introduced during World War II as emergency measures to keep the cost of living down, had not been removed after the war and were regarded by the masses as an entrenched right However, food subsidies were becoming increasingly untenable, as the gap between the world price and the subsidized price of foodstuffs widened – as we have seen in Chapter 12. The opportunitycost of subsidizing food was the crowding out of expenditure on themuch-needed capital investment required to bring Sri Lanka out of its dependency on imports, which was the crux of the problem. In September 1952, the rice ration was reduced from two measures to one and the price of sugar was raised. Yet, by 1953, 20 per cent of the government revenue was being spent to meet the gap between the subsidized price of rice offered to the public and the actual price the government had to pay on the world market to obtain it (Wriggins, 1960, p.289).

Faced with an acute financial crisis, J.R. Jayewardene, as Finance Minister, proposed the withdrawal of the rice subsidy in the Budget of 1953/1954 – which meant that the price of rice would rise from 25 cents to 70 cents a measure. Aggravating the situation, the free midday meal for school children was also abolished, and the cost of rail travel and postal services was increased.

The Budget was passed in Parliament, but before the debate could be concluded, the Opposition seized this opportunity to organize a hartal (a stoppage of work and all activities) on 12 August 1953. All over the country, large crowds participated and blocked the roads in rural and urban areas. In order to disperse the crowds, the police opened fire, and some protesters were killed.

Unnerved by this event, Dudley Senanayake felt unable to cope with the turmoil and gave up his premiership, resulting in John Kotelawala taking office as Prime Minister in October 1953. J.R. Jayewardene was made Minister of Agriculture, and Oliver Goonetilleke became Finance Minister. Sometime after assuming office, Kotelawala lowered the price of subsidized rice to 55 cents, when a recovery in export prices made this possible. Nevertheless, the resentment of the public continued to grow. And though Kotelawala had finally achieved his ambition of becoming Prime Minister, his tenure in office would last barely two and a half years.

Upon Kotelawala’s assumption of office, the personal animosity between Kotelawala and NU appears to have continued unabated. According to Edmund Eramudugolla (2004, p.16), NU “took lightly” the official functions at Temple Trees (the Prime Minister’s residence) and “invariably arrived late… often just at the time [Kotelawala] was getting ready to leave for [his home in] Kandawala.” On one such occasion, as NU arrived, Kotelawala presented him to the other guests: “His Excellency the Governor of the Central Bank,

N.U. Jayawardena, a very busy man, busier than the PM.” NU did not seem to bow to those in power. As Eramudugolla observed, NU “was conscious of his intellectual brilliance but unfortunately built up an intellectual arrogance to the annoyance of important persons in the political and public life of the country” (ibid, p.18). In this atmosphere of political infighting, heightened emotions and intrigue, it did not take long for John Kotelawala to use his power to settle scores with NU.

Kotelawala’s Turbulent Term in Office

Kotelawala’s term in office was no easier than Dudley’s. Personal discord still existed within the party, while Kotelawala’s flamboyant lifestyle and public pronouncements stoked much controversy and anger among the public. In the course of his abbreviated premiership, both R.G. Senanayake and Dudley Senanayake would leave the party in an attempt to distance themselves from Kotelawala’s actions. While the UNP had many economic and social accomplishments of which it could be proud, resentment and outrage against what was seen as bribery and corruption within the government began to gain momentum. According to Wriggins (1960, p.335):

The wealth of the party, the privileged position of its known supporters… the alleged misuse of the public service and the fact that close relatives of the prime minister himself were appointed to lucrative and prominent posts regardless of competence did much to harm the U.N.P. In an apparent bid to deflect public fury away from the government, Kotelawala set up a Bribery Commission with special powers of investigation. It has been alleged that Kotelawala used the powers of this commission as an instrument to intimidate individuals and, as Wriggins (1960, p.335) stated, also for “personal revenge.”

Commission of Inquiry

A few months after becoming Prime Minister, Kotelawala began his campaign against NU by appointing a commission to inquire into his conduct as Governor of the Central Bank. The commission consisted of Justice A.R.H. Canakaratne, Justice H. A. de Silva, and Sir Eric Jansz. It was given the following terms of inquiry: the affairs and general conduct of Neville Ubesinghe Jayawardena… and his wife Gertrude Mildred Jayawardena… and the financial and other dealings with banks, corporations and individuals of Mr. and Mrs. Jayawardena, before and after Mr. Jayawardena was appointed as Governor of the Central Bank and in particular upon forty-nine matters therein mentioned.

Oliver Goonetilleke

The Commission sat for 20 days. The lawyers for the Jayawardenas were D.S. Jayawickrema, Q.C., and G.T. Samarawickrema (NU’s maternal relation). The main charge was that NU, as Governor of the Central Bank, had taken loans for building his house from commercial banks and other sources. NU contended that, like any other citizen, he had the right to do so, and that this did not compromise his position as Governor of the Central Bank, nor jeopardize its interests. After the inquiry, the Commission gave its verdict that NU’s actions were violations of the position he held. The Commission reported that: While Mr. Jayawardena was holding the respective offices of Controller of Exchange, Deputy Governor and Governor of the Central Bank, the financial transactions of Mr. and Mrs. Jayawardena with their banks and other persons were on a scale quite out of proportion to their income. (p.72, No. 315 of Sessional Paper XX of 1954)

While holding high office, NU was alleged to have used his official position as security for loans from banks and individuals for the purchase of land. On the Commission’s verdict, NU was dismissed from the Central Bank on 15 October 1954. This blow could not have come at a worse time in his life. After serving the government for 28 years in various capacities and attending to problems that a lesser man could not have coped with, NU now found himself in the wilderness. His wife was suffering from a heart ailment, and he had two sons and a daughter to support. His elder son Lal was already studying for an Economics degree at Cambridge University, and the younger Nimal was soon to leave for Cambridge, to study Economics and Law. Concerned that his father could not meet the expenses, Nimal wanted to stay behind. However, NU assured him that he would somehow meet his expenses at Cambridge and urged him not to be hasty.

NU and his family, having had to move out of Bank House, had no place of their own to live. Until that time, they had lived in rented premises. Like most Sri Lankans, NU put great store in home ownership. Now, the house he had first owned in Park Road – built before he became Governor – had to be sold. As Neiliya recalls, the house:

was designed by Edward, Reid and Begg and built by the Tudawe Brothers. This house was rented out when we moved to the Bank Governor’s residence. Behind the house, he built two flats in the excess land, funded by the Colombo Commercial Company – which was to take on the premises on a rent-free basis for a number of years in return for the money the company invested. My parents had to sell the Park Road home, which they had so lovingly constructed, in order to pay for the case. My father and mother fortunately had the strength and courage to handle the situation.

The trauma took a toll on the family in other ways as well. Neiliya continues:

The period was extremely difficult for my parents and myself. My brothers were fortunately abroad in university and escaped most of the trauma. My parents suffered greatly as a result of this episode. My father, who was a very social person, became a recluse. He started writing articles on economics and banking and on a variety of subjects for the newspapers, to keep himself occupied.

After long being at the centre of a hectic social and working life, NU suddenly found himself relatively alone and isolated. However, during the crisis, he found out who his true friends were. According to Stanley Wickramaratne, some who had known him shunned him, while a few others came to his assistance. For instance, Clarence Amerasinghe, the owner of Car Mart, lent him a car, and some friends gave the family a place to stay. NU also received letters of support from friends around the world. They included persons high up in the banking sector in Britain, some of whom had known him officially. His friend Cyril Hawker, of the Bank of England, kept in touch with NU’s two sons, reporting back on their progress to their parents. In Sri Lanka, Peri Sunderam, an early mentor and former Minister of Labour who had given NU his first opportunities for advancement, and who greatly appreciated his ability, sent him a reassuring letter. He expressed his “deep regret,” and urged NU to have the “will of mind to face this calamity with courage and hope.” Knowing that NU would overcome this misfortune, Peri Sunderam wrote:

You are still young and your talents may be usefully employed for other service. I am sure that the future is not bleak for you and that your experience and ability will be harnessed. I hope that your children are clever enough not to be blasted by this temporary misfortune of yours. (Letter dated 15 Oct. 1954, N.U. Jayawardena Personal Files)

Chapter 13 can read online on – https://island.lk/the-central-bank-2/

By Kumari Jayawardena and Jennifer Moragoda ✍️



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Disaster-proofing paradise: Sri Lanka’s new path to global resilience

Published

on

iyadasa Advisor to the Ministry of Science & Technology and a Board of Directors of Sri Lanka Atomic Energy Regulatory Council A value chain management consultant to www.vivonta.lk

As climate shocks multiply worldwide from unseasonal droughts and flash floods to cyclones that now carry unpredictable fury Sri Lanka, long known for its lush biodiversity and heritage, stands at a crossroads. We can either remain locked in a reactive cycle of warnings and recovery, or boldly transform into the world’s first disaster-proof tropical nation — a secure haven for citizens and a trusted destination for global travelers.

The Presidential declaration to transition within one year from a limited, rainfall-and-cyclone-dependent warning system to a full-spectrum, science-enabled resilience model is not only historic — it’s urgent. This policy shift marks the beginning of a new era: one where nature, technology, ancient wisdom, and community preparedness work in harmony to protect every Sri Lankan village and every visiting tourist.

The Current System’s Fatal Gaps

Today, Sri Lanka’s disaster management system is dangerously underpowered for the accelerating climate era. Our primary reliance is on monsoon rainfall tracking and cyclone alerts — helpful, but inadequate in the face of multi-hazard threats such as flash floods, landslides, droughts, lightning storms, and urban inundation.

Institutions are fragmented; responsibilities crisscross between agencies, often with unclear mandates and slow decision cycles. Community-level preparedness is minimal — nearly half of households lack basic knowledge on what to do when a disaster strikes. Infrastructure in key regions is outdated, with urban drains, tank sluices, and bunds built for rainfall patterns of the 1960s, not today’s intense cloudbursts or sea-level rise.

Critically, Sri Lanka is not yet integrated with global planetary systems — solar winds, El Niño cycles, Indian Ocean Dipole shifts — despite clear evidence that these invisible climate forces shape our rainfall, storm intensity, and drought rhythms. Worse, we have lost touch with our ancestral systems of environmental management — from tank cascades to forest sanctuaries — that sustained this island for over two millennia.

This system, in short, is outdated, siloed, and reactive. And it must change.

A New Vision for Disaster-Proof Sri Lanka

Under the new policy shift, Sri Lanka will adopt a complete resilience architecture that transforms climate disaster prevention into a national development strategy. This system rests on five interlinked pillars:

Science and Predictive Intelligence

We will move beyond surface-level forecasting. A new national climate intelligence platform will integrate:

AI-driven pattern recognition of rainfall and flood events

Global data from solar activity, ocean oscillations (ENSO, MJO, IOD)

High-resolution digital twins of floodplains and cities

Real-time satellite feeds on cyclone trajectory and ocean heat

The adverse impacts of global warming—such as sea-level rise, the proliferation of pests and diseases affecting human health and food production, and the change of functionality of chlorophyll—must be systematically captured, rigorously analysed, and addressed through proactive, advance decision-making.

This fusion of local and global data will allow days to weeks of anticipatory action, rather than hours of late alerts.

Advanced Technology and Early Warning Infrastructure

Cell-broadcast alerts in all three national languages, expanded weather radar, flood-sensing drones, and tsunami-resilient siren networks will be deployed. Community-level sensors in key river basins and tanks will monitor and report in real-time. Infrastructure projects will now embed climate-risk metrics — from cyclone-proof buildings to sea-level-ready roads.

Governance Overhaul

A new centralised authority — Sri Lanka Climate & Earth Systems Resilience Authority — will consolidate environmental, meteorological, Geological, hydrological, and disaster functions. It will report directly to the Cabinet with a real-time national dashboard. District Disaster Units will be upgraded with GN-level digital coordination. Climate literacy will be declared a national priority.

People Power and Community Preparedness

We will train 25,000 village-level disaster wardens and first responders. Schools will run annual drills for floods, cyclones, tsunamis and landslides. Every community will map its local hazard zones and co-create its own resilience plan. A national climate citizenship programme will reward youth and civil organisations contributing to early warning systems, reforestation (riverbank, slopy land and catchment areas) , or tech solutions.

Reviving Ancient Ecological Wisdom

Sri Lanka’s ancestors engineered tank cascades that regulated floods, stored water, and cooled microclimates. Forest belts protected valleys; sacred groves were biodiversity reservoirs. This policy revives those systems:

Restoring 10,000 hectares of tank ecosystems

Conserving coastal mangroves and reintroducing stone spillways

Integrating traditional seasonal calendars with AI forecasts

Recognising Vedda knowledge of climate shifts as part of national risk strategy

Our past and future must align, or both will be lost.

A Global Destination for Resilient Tourism

Climate-conscious travelers increasingly seek safe, secure, and sustainable destinations. Under this policy, Sri Lanka will position itself as the world’s first “climate-safe sanctuary island” — a place where:

Resorts are cyclone- and tsunami-resilient

Tourists receive live hazard updates via mobile apps

World Heritage Sites are protected by environmental buffers

Visitors can witness tank restoration, ancient climate engineering, and modern AI in action

Sri Lanka will invite scientists, startups, and resilience investors to join our innovation ecosystem — building eco-tourism that’s disaster-proof by design.

Resilience as a National Identity

This shift is not just about floods or cyclones. It is about redefining our identity. To be Sri Lankan must mean to live in harmony with nature and to be ready for its changes. Our ancestors did it. The science now supports it. The time has come.

Let us turn Sri Lanka into the world’s first climate-resilient heritage island — where ancient wisdom meets cutting-edge science, and every citizen stands protected under one shield: a disaster-proof nation.

Continue Reading

Features

The minstrel monk and Rafiki the old mandrill in The Lion King – I

Published

on

Why is national identity so important for a people? AI provides us with an answer worth understanding critically (Caveat: Even AI wisdom should be subjected to the Buddha’s advice to the young Kalamas):

‘A strong sense of identity is crucial for a people as it fosters belonging, builds self-worth, guides behaviour, and provides resilience, allowing individuals to feel connected, make meaningful choices aligned with their values, and maintain mental well-being even amidst societal changes or challenges, acting as a foundation for individual and collective strength. It defines “who we are” culturally and personally, driving shared narratives, pride, political action, and healthier relationships by grounding people in common values, traditions, and a sense of purpose.’

Ethnic Sinhalese who form about 75% of the Sri Lankan population have such a unique identity secured by the binding medium of their Buddhist faith. It is significant that 93% of them still remain Buddhist (according to 2024 statistics/wikipedia), professing Theravada Buddhism, after four and a half centuries of coercive Christianising European occupation that ended in 1948. The Sinhalese are a unique ancient island people with a 2500 year long recorded history, their own language and country, and their deeply evolved Buddhist cultural identity.

Buddhism can be defined, rather paradoxically, as a non-religious religion, an eminently practical ethical-philosophy based on mind cultivation, wisdom and universal compassion. It is  an ethico-spiritual value system that prioritises human reason and unaided (i.e., unassisted by any divine or supernatural intervention) escape from suffering through self-realisation. Sri Lanka’s benignly dominant Buddhist socio-cultural background naturally allows unrestricted freedom of religion, belief or non-belief for all its citizens, and makes the country a safe spiritual haven for them. The island’s Buddha Sasana (Dispensation of the Buddha) is the inalienable civilisational treasure that our ancestors of two and a half millennia have bequeathed to us. It is this enduring basis of our identity as a nation which bestows on us the personal and societal benefits of inestimable value mentioned in the AI summary given at the beginning of  this essay.

It was this inherent national identity that the Sri Lankan contestant at the 72nd Miss World 2025 pageant held in Hyderabad, India, in May last year, Anudi Gunasekera, proudly showcased before the world, during her initial self-introduction. She started off with a verse from the Dhammapada (a Pali Buddhist text), which she explained as meaning “Refrain from all evil and cultivate good”. She declared, “And I believe that’s my purpose in life”. Anudi also mentioned that Sri Lanka had gone through a lot “from conflicts to natural disasters, pandemics, economic crises….”, adding, “and yet, my people remain hopeful, strong, and resilient….”.

 “Ayubowan! I am Anudi Gunasekera from Sri Lanka. It is with immense pride that I represent my Motherland, a nation of resilience, timeless beauty, and a proud history, Sri Lanka.

“I come from Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka’s first capital, and UNESCO World Heritage site, with its history and its legacy of sacred monuments and stupas…….”.

The “inspiring words” that Anudi quoted are from the Dhammapada (Verse 183), which runs, in English translation: “To avoid all evil/To cultivate good/and to cleanse one’s mind -/this is the teaching of the Buddhas”. That verse is so significant because it defines the basic ‘teaching of the Buddhas’ (i.e., Buddha Sasana; this is how Walpole Rahula Thera defines Buddha Sasana in his celebrated introduction to Buddhism ‘What the Buddha Taught’ first published in1959).

Twenty-five year old Anudi Gunasekera is an alumna of the University of Kelaniya, where she earned a bachelor’s degree in International Studies. She is planning to do a Master’s in the same field. Her ambition is to join the foreign service in Sri Lanka. Gen Z’er Anudi is already actively engaged in social service. The Saheli Foundation is her own initiative launched to address period poverty (i.e., lack of access to proper sanitation facilities, hygiene and health education, etc.) especially  among women and post-puberty girls of low-income classes in rural and urban Sri Lanka.

Young Anudi is primarily inspired by her patriotic devotion to ‘my Motherland, a nation of resilience, timeless beauty, and a proud history, Sri Lanka’. In post-independence Sri Lanka, thousands of young men and women of her age have constantly dedicated themselves, oftentimes making the supreme sacrifice, motivated by a sense of national identity, by the thought ‘This is our beloved Motherland, these are our beloved people’.

The rescue and recovery of Sri Lanka from the evil aftermath of a decade of subversive ‘Aragalaya’ mayhem is waiting to be achieved, in every sphere of national engagement, including, for example, economics, communications, culture and politics, by the enlightened Anudi Gunasekeras and their male counterparts of the Gen Z, but not by the demented old stragglers lingering in the political arena listening to the unnerving rattle of “Time’s winged chariot hurrying near”, nor by the baila blaring monks at propaganda rallies.

Politically active monks (Buddhist bhikkhus) are only a handful out of  the Maha Sangha (the general body of Buddhist bhikkhus) in Sri  Lanka, who numbered just over 42,000  in 2024. The vast majority of monks spend their time quietly attending to their monastic duties. Buddhism upholds social and emotional virtues such as universal compassion, empathy, tolerance and forgiveness that protect a society from the evils of tribalism, religious bigotry and death-dealing religious piety.

Not all monks who express or promote political opinions should be censured. I choose to condemn only those few monks who abuse the yellow robe as a shield in their narrow partisan politics. I cannot bring myself to disapprove of the many socially active monks, who are articulating the genuine problems that the Buddha Sasana is facing today. The two bhikkhus who are the most despised monks in the commercial media these days are Galaboda-aththe Gnanasara and Ampitiye Sumanaratana Theras.  They have a problem with their mood swings. They have long been whistleblowers trying to raise awareness respectively, about spreading religious fundamentalism, especially, violent Islamic Jihadism, in the country and about the vandalising of the Buddhist archaeological heritage sites of the north and east provinces. The two middle-aged monks (Gnanasara and Sumanaratana) belong to this respectable category. Though they are relentlessly attacked in the social media or hardly given any positive coverage of the service they are doing, they do nothing more than try to persuade the rulers to take appropriate action to resolve those problems while not trespassing on the rights of people of other faiths.

These monks have to rely on lay political leaders to do the needful, without themselves taking part in sectarian politics in the manner of ordinary members of the secular society. Their generally demonised social image is due, in my opinion, to  three main reasons among others: 1) spreading misinformation and disinformation about them by those who do not like what they are saying and doing, 2) their own lack of verbal restraint, and 3) their being virtually abandoned to the wolves by the temporal and spiritual authorities.

(To be continued)

By Rohana R. Wasala ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

US’ drastic aid cut to UN poses moral challenge to world

Published

on

An UN humanitarian mission in the Gaza. [File: Ashraf Amra/Anadolu Agency]

‘Adapt, shrink or die’ – thus runs the warning issued by the Trump administration to UN humanitarian agencies with brute insensitivity in the wake of its recent decision to drastically reduce to $2bn its humanitarian aid to the UN system. This is a substantial climb down from the $17bn the US usually provided to the UN for its humanitarian operations.

Considering that the US has hitherto been the UN’s biggest aid provider, it need hardly be said that the US decision would pose a daunting challenge to the UN’s humanitarian operations around the world. This would indeed mean that, among other things, people living in poverty and stifling material hardships, in particularly the Southern hemisphere, could dramatically increase. Coming on top of the US decision to bring to an end USAID operations, the poor of the world could be said to have been left to their devices as a consequence of these morally insensitive policy rethinks of the Trump administration.

Earlier, the UN had warned that it would be compelled to reduce its aid programs in the face of ‘the deepest funding cuts ever.’ In fact the UN is on record as requesting the world for $23bn for its 2026 aid operations.

If this UN appeal happens to go unheeded, the possibilities are that the UN would not be in a position to uphold the status it has hitherto held as the world’s foremost humanitarian aid provider. It would not be incorrect to state that a substantial part of the rationale for the UN’s existence could come in for questioning if its humanitarian identity is thus eroded.

Inherent in these developments is a challenge for those sections of the international community that wish to stand up and be counted as humanists and the ‘Conscience of the World.’ A responsibility is cast on them to not only keep the UN system going but to also ensure its increased efficiency as a humanitarian aid provider to particularly the poorest of the poor.

It is unfortunate that the US is increasingly opting for a position of international isolation. Such a policy position was adopted by it in the decades leading to World War Two and the consequences for the world as a result for this policy posture were most disquieting. For instance, it opened the door to the flourishing of dictatorial regimes in the West, such as that led by Adolph Hitler in Germany, which nearly paved the way for the subjugation of a good part of Europe by the Nazis.

If the US had not intervened militarily in the war on the side of the Allies, the West would have faced the distressing prospect of coming under the sway of the Nazis and as a result earned indefinite political and military repression. By entering World War Two the US helped to ward off these bleak outcomes and indeed helped the major democracies of Western Europe to hold their own and thrive against fascism and dictatorial rule.

Republican administrations in the US in particular have not proved the greatest defenders of democratic rule the world over, but by helping to keep the international power balance in favour of democracy and fundamental human rights they could keep under a tight leash fascism and linked anti-democratic forces even in contemporary times. Russia’s invasion and continued occupation of parts of Ukraine reminds us starkly that the democracy versus fascism battle is far from over.

Right now, the US needs to remain on the side of the rest of the West very firmly, lest fascism enjoys another unfettered lease of life through the absence of countervailing and substantial military and political power.

However, by reducing its financial support for the UN and backing away from sustaining its humanitarian programs the world over the US could be laying the ground work for an aggravation of poverty in the South in particular and its accompaniments, such as, political repression, runaway social discontent and anarchy.

What should not go unnoticed by the US is the fact that peace and social stability in the South and the flourishing of the same conditions in the global North are symbiotically linked, although not so apparent at first blush. For instance, if illegal migration from the South to the US is a major problem for the US today, it is because poor countries are not receiving development assistance from the UN system to the required degree. Such deprivation on the part of the South leads to aggravating social discontent in the latter and consequences such as illegal migratory movements from South to North.

Accordingly, it will be in the North’s best interests to ensure that the South is not deprived of sustained development assistance since the latter is an essential condition for social contentment and stable governance, which factors in turn would guard against the emergence of phenomena such as illegal migration.

Meanwhile, democratic sections of the rest of the world in particular need to consider it a matter of conscience to ensure the sustenance and flourishing of the UN system. To be sure, the UN system is considerably flawed but at present it could be called the most equitable and fair among international development organizations and the most far-flung one. Without it world poverty would have proved unmanageable along with the ills that come along with it.

Dehumanizing poverty is an indictment on humanity. It stands to reason that the world community should rally round the UN and ensure its survival lest the abomination which is poverty flourishes. In this undertaking the world needs to stand united. Ambiguities on this score could be self-defeating for the world community.

For example, all groupings of countries that could demonstrate economic muscle need to figure prominently in this initiative. One such grouping is BRICS. Inasmuch as the US and the West should shrug aside Realpolitik considerations in this enterprise, the same goes for organizations such as BRICS.

The arrival at the above international consensus would be greatly facilitated by stepped up dialogue among states on the continued importance of the UN system. Fresh efforts to speed-up UN reform would prove major catalysts in bringing about these positive changes as well. Also requiring to be shunned is the blind pursuit of narrow national interests.

Continue Reading

Trending