Midweek Review

Towards a new medico- philosophical model : A short essay

Published

4 months ago

2025/11/19

Sri Lanka, with its long historical traditions, is home to the practice of many medical systems. Western allopathic medicine is the most widespread and is a legacy of our colonial past. The exemplary quality of life in terms of health indices Sri Lanka can rightly be proud of is a result of the successes of the practice of western allopathic medicine in Sri Lanka.

The practice of Ayurveda has been in existence from historical times which reached the shores of Sri Lanka from India, and it remains the main alternative system of medicine. But closest to the cultural practices of the Sinhalese ethnic group is what is termed indigenous medicine – ‘generational’ (paramparika) medical practitioners who carry on an individualised practice with the ‘knowledge base’ differing to each other and kept secret within families and passed on from generation to generation – hence its herbal medicines and practices too differ and are guarded by each family.

The practice of Siddha (from South India), culturally linked to the Tamil ethnic group, is based on the belief that the body is composed of five elements – earth, fire, water, air and sky – and Unani (from a Greco-Arabic tradition) culturally linked to the Muslim ethnic group is based on the body being composed of four elements – earth, water, air and fire – which is similar to the origins of the Hippocratic tradition.

In addition, in very much more recent times, Homeopathy (established by the German Heinemann) and acupuncture (of Chinese origin) have become less well-established medical systems practiced in Sri Lanka.

The main philosophical dichotomy between the western and eastern systems of medicine in Sri Lanka can be exemplified by the differences between western allopathic medicine and Ayurveda/indigenous medicine.

Western medicine derives its conceptual basis from the western philosophical tradition which is the source of the empirical ‘scientific method’. This is basically a reductionist model where the scientific process seeks to ultimately identify the ‘active ingredient’ in medicines. This finally leads to an organic molecule with certain specific properties giving rise to the required effect. On the other hand, Ayurveda approaches medication from a holistic model and the concept that a multiplicity of factors acts in concert to exert the required effect.

Errors of subjectivity over objectivity

This leads to a situation where both systems become prone to errors of subjectivity over objectivity. For example, Ayurveda ignores the possible deleterious side effects of the multiplicity of chemicals (particularly alkaloids) found in their herbal preparations. The errors in this aspect are so much greater when it comes to chronic long-term effects and not acute short-term or immediate effects. This is a result of the fact that the theoretical basis of Ayurveda not establishing a tradition of continuing intellectual and academic investigation of a systematic nature into long-term deleterious side effects of ayurvedic preparations. No systematic clinical studies have been carried out to ascertain the ‘real’ effects of ayurvedic preparations over their placebo effects – i.e., randomised clinical trials. The concept of a placebo effect has not been considered within the paradigms of Ayurveda. The fallback position of the ayurvedic/indigenous schools have been that the herbal preparations and their pharmacopeia has been “tested” and found to be valid by the extensive duration it has been in use. It is argued that the herbal medicines currently in use have been in use for centuries, if not millennia. If there were any such deleterious effects, they would have been definitively identified. Therein, to my mind, lay another serious conceptual error. There is little or no renewal of knowledge in Ayurveda, where the texts used in the teaching and practice of Ayurveda are ‘ancient’ – more ancient, the better according to many adherents of the system. Knowledge derived from hoary traditions, from the vedas and the sacred texts are sacrosanct. It is my view that unless ayurvedic medicines undergo the rigorous continuous monitoring and systematic study – i.e. establishing a regular monitoring procedure for their medicines – which will also include double-blind clinical trials that ensure their efficacy in the first place, there will always be large question marks in the minds of the discerning consumer about the long-term safety of ayurvedic medicines.

While it is also known to Ayurveda that herbs used in its medicinal preparations differ in the composition and concentration of active alkaloids present, from environment to environment, climate to climate, area to area, subspecies to subspecies and variety to variety, no attempt has been made to test the possible differences in their pharmacological effects or efficacies. It has been known to modern plant taxonomists that plants of very similar appearance from gross external appearance have been misclassified by ayurvedic physicians as being the same plant. Some have been of different species or even different genus.

The pitfalls of Ayurveda can be summarised as inconsistencies in dose standardization, possible contamination with harmful alkaloids and heavy metals, lack of uniform quality control systems and an absence of continuing regular clinical trials with standardised prescriptions to ensure patient safety.

In recent times, biochemists, molecular biologists and biotechnologists have ventured to ‘test’ herbal preparations under far stricter standardised laboratory conditions. These have, sometimes, given good promising results. I believe this is a positive trend towards developing a science-based, clinical trials-based indigenous pharmacopeia. Moreover, it could be an internationally marketable proposition – considering the increasing disillusionment in the US and Europe with Western allopathic medicine and the serious concern about the diabolical machinations of the singularly profit-oriented pharmaceutical industry.

Investiment in Ayurvedic hospitals

Already, we have several Sri Lankan corporates that have invested billions in Ayurveda-based hospitals, hotels, spas and the export of herb-based medicines. Certain simplified, freeze-dried and packeted indigenous medicine products have caught the attention of international markets. The Indians and the Chinese have been doing this international marketing of their indigenous medicines very effectively in recent decades. Many of these ‘medicines’ have slipped through the US Foods and Drugs Administration (FDA) approvals by labeling them as ‘dietary supplements’ or ‘traditional remedies’ and are marketed in the USA. Unless the researchers in herbal/ayurvedic/indigenous medicines ‘clean up’ their methodologies to ensure that the preparations have absolutely no alkaloids harmful to health and contain no heavy-metal impurities, a lucrative international market will be lost to them. In the final analysis, all alternate medical/health systems and medicines must conform to the bases of the ‘scientific method’ – whatever methodological deficits remain therein. It still remains the best system through which we try to understand the nature of the universe.

Fallibility

Having said all of the above, in my evening years, I have come to realise the stark fallibility of completely depending on and defending the so-called ‘evidence-based’ knowledge. Evidence derived by the application of the scientific method. I have said elsewhere that ‘evidence-based’ on many occasions has been found to be strictly not evidence-based – at least in the realm of medicine. It has often been found that “evidence” is also ‘created’ by vested interests – mainly the ‘Big Pharma’ who pay medical researchers, through ‘ghost-writers’ to ‘manufacture’ ‘evidence’ that are published in reputed medical journals.

The mindset of over-dependence on so-called modern western science has been so deeply inculcated in us that it is very difficult to find a state from which we can completely or wholly be rid of. Dr. Gundasa Amarasekera (I attended his 96th birthday prathyawalokanaya a few days ago) and Prof. Nalin de Silva tried to popularise an alternative indigenous philosophy in their Jathika Chinthanaya. Dr. Amarasekera has been, in my view, balanced in the approach and exposition he adopted in the enunciation of his hypothesis. But Prof. Nalin de Silva went into extremes that I could neither accept nor fathom.

But where does it leave traditional indigenous and ayurvedic medicine? Can they derive sustenance and philosophical rigour from Jathika Chinthanaya? Have they attempted to do so in any meaningful way? Should it not be the vision and philosophy of indigenous medicine? If not, why not?

At present, the leading institutions of indigenous medicine are the Faculty of Indigenous Medicine – FIM (former Institute of Indigenous Medicine – IIM) of the University of Colombo and the Gampaha Wickramarachchi University of Indigenous Medicine (GWUIM). I do not wish to delve too deep into their respective course contents except to note here that there was a time about two decades ago, when Prof. Nandadasa Kodagoda, Prof. Carlo Fonseka and Prof. Colvin Goonaratna of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo were delivering lectures on anatomy (structure), physiology (function) and pharmacology (Medicines) based on Western medical principles. I did challenge both Profs. Carlo Fonseka and Colvin Goonaratna (my teachers in medical school), as to why they are teaching students of indigenous medicine the principles of anatomy and physiology based on modern, western scientific medicine which is contrary to the basic principles of Ayurveda and indigenous medicine. I believe it corrupted the purity and philosophy of Ayurveda. All I will say here is that the debate was long and arduous. We agreed to disagree. I believe that the reason behind many graduates of the then IIM, prescribing antibiotics in their private clinics was a result of that short-sighted act of misplaced ‘goodwill’. I sincerely hope that the FIM, UoC, no longer continues that false path to ‘scientific’ indigenous medicine.

Hybrid path

I find that to try and legitimise the ‘modernisation’ of indigenous medicine, the two institutions are following, in today’s jargon, a “hybrid” path of including modern science and management-based courses in their postgraduate programmes running in almost parallel lines. I agree that this is both unavoidable and understandable. Even in India, this ‘scientific modernisation’ is taking place. They are integrating scientific methodology into their pharmacology research – using the reductionist principle of isolating ‘active plant chemical compounds’. This, in fact, is what western medicine commenced over two to three centuries ago when they discovered cardioactive digitalis from foxglove and anaesthetic curare and quinine from cinchona bark for treatment of malaria from South American plants.

Chemical compound isolates in the western pharmacopeia were claimed by indigenous medical practitioners as the main cause of undesirable adverse effects and that a more holistic approach in indigenous medicine with its multiplicity of chemicals and alkaloids in their herbal preparations counter-balance the negative adverse effects. Hence, in my view, attempts at isolating active ingredients of herbal preparations in indigenous pharmacological research is a blind mimicry of western pharmacological research. Instead, what they should be doing is researching herbal preparations in its holistic form and clinical trials run on that basis. Whereas this gives rise to many methodological difficulties, they need to be overcome to ensure a more authentic basis for indigenous medicines. But then, who am I to preach to the high priests of indigenous medicine?

Reductionist approach only path?

Is the reductionist approach the only path to definitive knowledge? Are specifics always more important than the general? Are we losing some important aspects of research conclusions by this approach? Have we not grasped the importance of the concept that the “whole is often greater than the sum of its parts”?

Are there alternative methodologies for indigenous medical researchers to follow in parallel lines that do not compromise on basic principles of scientific research – formulate a hypothesis, test it by experiments, collect and analyse the data and draw logical conclusion without falling into the common pitfall of researchers of misreading ‘cause and effect’.

The philosophical bases of modern western scientific medicine and indigenous medical systems dependent on ancient wisdom are principally in contradistinction to each other. In Sri Lanka, like in many societies with civilizational millennia behind them, such as in India and China, where both these medical systems coexist today, we have a great opportunity to evolve a cohesive medical philosophy. Can this ‘great divide’ be bridged? Shouldn’t those within these seemingly contrary medical systems have some intellectual/academic meeting point? Should there not be a ‘movement’ in this direction? AS much as the physicists are seeking a unified field theory to explain the four fundamental forces of nature, is it not opportune for the medical philosophers to begin seeking such unity in the world of medicine? Can we in Sri Lanka, with the cooperation of India and China, set the ball rolling?

What I have attempted to do in this short essay is to bring up some contending, even conflicting, issues in our overarching medical culture. Is it an unrelenting truth that the ‘East is east and the West is west, and never the twain shall meet’? Can we not fall back on the Eastern philosophical tradition that we Sri Lankans are atavistically immersed in, to strengthen our resolve, in all sincerity, to synthesise an alternative medico-philosophical model that will bring out the best of both worlds?

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

At the edge of a world war

Published

1 day ago

2026/03/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

In September 1939, as Europe descended once more into catastrophe, E. H. Carr published The Twenty Years’ Crisis. Twenty years had separated the two great wars—twenty years to reflect, to reconstruct, to restrain. Yet reflection proved fragile. Carr wrote with unsentimental clarity: once the enemy is crushed, the “thereafter” rarely arrives. The illusion that power can come first and morality will follow is as dangerous as the belief that morality alone can command power. Between those illusions, nations lose themselves.

His warning hovers over the present war in Iran.

The “thereafter” has long haunted American interventions—after Afghanistan, after Iraq, after Libya. The enemy can be dismantled with precision; the aftermath resists precision. Iran is not a small theater. It is a civilization-state with a geography three times larger than Iraq. At its southern edge lies the Strait of Hormuz, narrow in width yet immense in consequence. Geography does not argue; it compels.

Long before Carr, in the quiet anxiety of the eighteenth century, James Madison, principal architect of the Constitution, warned that war was the “true nurse of executive aggrandizement.” War concentrates authority in the name of urgency. Madison insisted that the power to declare war must rest with Congress, not the president—so that deliberation might restrain impulse. Republics persuade themselves that emergency powers are temporary. History rarely agrees.

Then, at 2:30 a.m., the abstraction becomes decision.

Donald Trump declares war on Iran. The announcement crosses continents before markets open in Asia. Within twenty-four hours, Ali Khamenei, who ruled for thirty-seven years, is killed. The President calls him one of history’s most evil figures and presents his death as an opening for the Iranian people.

In exile, Reza Pahlavi hails the moment as liberation. In less than forty-eight hours, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps collapses under overwhelming air power. A regime that endured decades falls swiftly. Military efficiency appears absolute. Yet efficiency does not resolve legitimacy.

The joint strike with Israel is framed as necessary and pre-emptive. Retaliation follows across the Gulf. The architecture of energy trade becomes fragile. Shipping routes are recalculated. Markets respond before diplomacy finds its language.

It is measured in the price of petrol in Colombo. In the bus fare in Karachi. In the rising cost of cooking gas in Dhaka. It is heard in the anxious voice of a migrant worker in Doha calling home to Kandy, asking whether contracts will be renewed, whether flights will continue, whether wages will be delayed. It is calculated in foreign reserves already strained, in currencies that tremble at rumor, in budgets forced to choose between subsidy and solvency.

Zaara was the breadwinner of her house in Sri Lanka. Her husband had been unemployed for years. At last, he secured an opportunity to travel to Israel as a foreign worker—like many Sri Lankans who depend on employment in the Middle East. It was to be their turning point: a small house repaired, debts reduced, dignity restored.

Now she lowers her eyes when she speaks. For Zaara, geopolitics is not theory. It is fear measured in distance—between a construction site abroad and a village waiting at home.

The war in Iran has shattered calculations that once felt practical. Nations like Sri Lanka now require strategic foresight to navigate unfolding realities. Reactive responses—whether to natural disasters or external shocks like this conflict—can cripple economies far faster than gradual pressures. Disruptions to energy imports, migrant remittances, and foreign reserves show how distant wars ripple into daily lives.

War among great powers is debated in think tanks. Its consequences are lived in markets—and in quiet kitchens where uncertainty sits heavier than hunger.

The conflict does not unfold in isolation. It enters the strategic calculus of China and Russia, both attentive to precedent. Power projected beyond the Western hemisphere reshapes perceptions in the Eastern theater. Iran’s transformation intersects directly with broader alignments. In 2021, Beijing and Tehran signed a twenty-five-year strategic agreement. By 2025, China was purchasing the majority of Iran’s exported oil at discounted rates. Energy underwrote strategy. That continuity has been disrupted. Yet strategic relationships do not vanish; they adjust.

In Winds of Change, my new book, I reproduce Nicholas Spykman’s 1944 two-theater confrontation map—Europe and the Pacific during the Second World War. Spykman distinguished maritime power from amphibian projection. Control of the Rimland determined balance. Then, the United States fought across two vast theaters. Today, Europe remains unsettled through Ukraine, the Pacific simmers over Taiwan and the South China Sea, Latin America remains sensitive, and the Middle East has been abruptly transformed. The architecture of multi-theater tension reappears.

At this juncture, the reflections of Marwan Bishara acquire weight. America’s ultimate power, he argues, resides in deterrence, not in the habitual use of force. Power, especially when shared, stabilizes. Force, when used with disregard for international law, breeds instability and humiliation. Arrogance creates enemies and narrows judgment. It is no surprise that many Americans themselves believe the United States should not act alone.

America’s strength does not rest solely in its military reach. Its economy constitutes roughly one-third of global output and generates close to 40 percent of the world’s research and development. Structural power—economic, technological, institutional—has historically underwritten deterrence. When force becomes the primary instrument, influence risks becoming coercion.

The United States now confronts simultaneous pressures across continents. The Second World War demonstrated the capacity to sustain multi-theater engagement; the post-9/11 wars revealed the exhaustion that follows prolonged intervention. Iran, larger and geopolitically deeper, presents a scale that cannot be resolved by air power alone.

Carr’s “thereafter” waits patiently. Military victory may be swift; political reconstruction is slow. Bishara reminds us that deterrence sustains stability, while force risks unraveling it.

At the edge of a potential world war, the decisive question is not who strikes first, but who restrains longest.

History watches. And in places far from the battlefield, mothers wait for phone calls that may not come.

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera is a Senior Research Fellow at the Millennium Project, Washington, D.C., and the author of Winds of Change: Geopolitics at the Crossroads of South and Southeast Asia, published by World Scientific

Midweek Review

Live Coals Burst Aflame

Published

1 day ago

2026/03/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

Live coals of decades-long hate,

Are bursting into all-consuming flames,

In lands where ‘Black Gold’ is abundant,

And it’s a matter to be thought about,

If humans anywhere would be safe now,

Unless these enmities dying hard,

With roots in imperialist exploits,

And identity-based, tribal violence,

Are set aside and laid finally to rest,

By an enthronement of the principle,

Of the Equal Dignity of Humans.

By Lynn Ockersz

Midweek Review

Saga of the arrest of retired intelligence chief

Published

3 days ago

2026/03/2

Sahan Weerasooriya

Retired Maj. Gen. Suresh Sallay’s recent arrest attracted internatiattention. His long-expected arrest took place ahead of the seventh anniversary of the bombings. Multiple blasts claimed the lives of nearly 280 people, including 45 foreigners. State-owned international news television network, based in Paris, France 24, declared that arrest was made on the basis of information provided by a whistleblower. The French channel was referring to Hanzeer Azad Moulana, who earlier sought political asylum in the West and one-time close associate of State Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan aka Pilleyan. May be the fiction he wove against Pilleyan and others may have been to strengthen his asylum claim there. Moulana is on record as having told the British Channel 4 that Sallay allowed the attack to proceed with the intention of influencing the 2019 presidential election. The French news agency quoted an investigating officer as having said: “He was arrested for conspiracy and aiding and abetting the Easter Sunday attacks. He has been in touch with people involved in the attacks, even recently.”

****

Suresh Sallay of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) received the wrath of Yahapalana Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, in 2016, over the reportage of what the media called the Chavakachcheri explosives detection made on March 30, 2016. Premier Wickremesinghe found fault with Sallay for the coverage, particularly in The Island. Police arrested ex-LTTE child combatant Edward Julian, alias Ramesh, after the detection of one suicide jacket, four claymore mines, three parcels containing about 12 kilos of explosives, to battery packs and several rounds of 9mm ammunition, from his house, situated at Vallakulam Pillaiyar Kovil Street. Chavakachcheri police made the detection, thanks to information provided by the second wife of Ramesh. Investigations revealed that the deadly cache had been brought by Ramesh from Mannar (Detection of LTTE suicide jacket, mines jolts government: Fleeing Tiger apprehended at checkpoint, The Island, March 31, 2016).

The then Jaffna Security Forces Commander, Maj. Gen. Mahesh Senanayake, told the writer that a thorough inquiry was required to ascertain the apprehended LTTE cadre’s intention. The Chavakachcheri detection received the DMI’s attention. The country’s premier intelligence organisation meticulously dealt with the issue against the backdrop of an alleged aborted bid to revive the LTTE in April 2014. Of those who had been involved in the fresh terror project, three were killed in the Nedunkerny jungles. There hadn’t been any other incidents since the Nedunkerny skirmish, until the Chavakachcheri detection.

Piqued by the media coverage of the Chavakachcheri detection, the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration tried to silence the genuine Opposition. As the SLFP had, contrary to the expectations of those who voted for the party at the August 2015 parliamentary elections, formed a treacherous coalition with the UNP, the Joint Opposition (JO) spearheaded the parliamentary opposition.

The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) questioned former External Affairs Minister and top JO spokesman, Prof. G.L. Peiris, over a statement made by him regarding the Chavakachcheri detection. The former law professor questioned the legality of the CID’s move against the backdrop of police declining to furnish him a certified copy of the then acting IGP S.M. Wickremesinghe’s directive that he be summoned to record a statement as regards the Chavakachcheri lethal detection.

One-time LTTE propagandist Velayutham Dayanidhi, a.k.a. Daya Master, raised with President Maithripala Sirisena the spate of arrests made by law enforcement authorities, in the wake of the Chavakachcheri detection. Daya Master took advantage of a meeting called by Sirisena, on 28 April, 2016, at the President’s House, with the proprietors of media organisations and journalists, to raise the issue. The writer having been among the journalists present on that occasion, inquired from the ex-LETTer whom he represented there. Daya Master had been there on behalf of DAN TV, Tamil language satellite TV, based in Jaffna. Among those who had been detained was Subramaniam Sivakaran, at that time Youth Wing leader of the Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), the main constituent of the now defunct Tamil National Alliance. In addition to Sivakaran, the police apprehended several hardcore ex-LTTE cadres (LTTE revival bid confirmed: TNA youth leader arrested, The Island April 20, 2016).

Ranil hits out at media

Subsequent inquiries revealed the role played by Sivakaran in some of those wanted in connection with the Chavakachcheri detection taking refuge in India. When the writer sought an explanation from the then TNA lawmaker, M.A. Sumanthiran, regarding Sivakaran’s arrest, the lawyer disowned the Youth Wing leader. Sumanthiran emphasised that the party suspended Sivakumaran and Northern Provincial Council member Ananthi Sasitharan for publicly condemning the TNA’s decision to endorse Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election (Chava explosives: Key suspects flee to India, The Island, May 2, 2016).

Premier Wickremesinghe went ballistic on May 30, 2016. Addressing the 20th anniversary event of the Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum, at the Sports Ministry auditorium, the UNP leader castigated the DMI. Alleging that the DMI had been pursuing an agenda meant to undermine the Yahapalana administration, Wickremesinghe, in order to make his bogus claim look genuine, repeatedly named the writer as part of that plot. Only Wickremesinghe knows the identity of the idiot who influenced him to make such unsubstantiated allegations. The top UNPer went on to allege that The Island, and its sister paper Divaina, were working overtime to bring back Dutugemunu, a reference to war-winning President Mahinda Rajapaksa. A few days later, sleuths from the Colombo Crime Detection Bureau (CCD) visited The Island editorial to question the writer where lengthy statements were recorded. The police were acting on the instructions of the then Premier, who earlier publicly threatened to send police to question the writer.

In response to police queries about Sallay passing information to the media regarding the Chavakachcheri detection and subsequent related articles, the writer pointed out that the reportage was based on response of the then ASP Ruwan Gunasekera, AAL and Sumanthiran, as had been reported.

Wickremesinghe alleged, at the Muslim media event, that a section of the media manipulated coverage of certain incidents, ahead of the May Day celebrations.

In early May 2016 Wickremesinghe disclosed that he received assurances from the police, and the DMI, that as the LTTE had been wiped out the group couldn’t stage a comeback. The declaration was made at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRIS) on 3 May 2016. Wickremesinghe said that he sought clarifications from the police and the DMI in the wake of the reportage of the Chavakachcheri detection and related developments (PM: LTTE threat no longer exists, The Island, May 5, 2016).

The LTTE couldn’t stage a comeback as a result of measures taken by the then government. It would be a grave mistake, on our part, to believe that the eradication of the LTTE’s conventional military capacity automatically influenced them to give up arms. The successful rehabilitation project, that had been undertaken by the Rajapaksa government and continued by successive governments, ensured that those who once took up arms weren’t interested in returning to the same deadly path.

In spite of the TNA and others shedding crocodile tears for the defeated Tigers, while making a desperate effort to mobilise public opinion against the government, the public never wanted the violence to return. Some interested parties propagated the lie that regardless of the crushing defeat suffered in the hands of the military, the LTTE could resume guerilla-type operations, paving the way for a new conflict. But by the end of 2014, and in the run-up to the presidential election in January following year, the situation seemed under control, especially with Western countries not wanting to upset things here with a pliant administration in the immediate horizon. Soon after the presidential election, the government targeted the armed forces. Remember Sumanthiran’s declaration that the ITAK Youth Wing leader Sivakaran had been opposed to the TNA backing Sirisena at the presidential poll.

The US-led accountability resolution had been co-sponsored by the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo to appease the TNA and Tamil Diaspora. The Oct. 01, 2016, resolution delivered a knockout blow to the war-winning armed forces. The UNP pursued an agenda severely inimical to national interests. It would be pertinent to mention that those who now represent the main Opposition, Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), were part of the treacherous UNP.

Suresh moved to Malaysia

The Yahapalana leadership resented Sallay’s work. They wanted him out of the country at a time a new threat was emerging. The government attacked the then Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, who warned of the emerging threat from foreign-manipulated local Islamic fanatics on 11 Nov. 2016, in Parliament. Rajapakshe didn’t mince his words when he underscored the threat posed by some Sri Lanka Muslim families taking refuge in Syria where ISIS was running the show. The then government, of which he was part o,f ridiculed their own Justice Minister. Both Sirisena and Wickremesinghe feared action against extremism may cause erosion of Muslim support. By then Sallay, who had been investigating the deadly plot, was out of the country. The Yahapalana government believed that the best way to deal with Sallay was to grant him a diplomatic posting. Sally ended up in Malaysia, a country where the DMI played a significant role in the repatriation of Kumaran Pathmanathan, alias KP, after his arrest there.

Having served the military for over three cadres, Sallay retired in 2024 in the rank of Major General. Against the backdrop of his recent arrest, in connection with the ongoing investigation into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, The Island felt the need to examine the circumstances Sallay ended up in Malaysia at the time. Now, remanded in terms of the Prevention of terrorism Act (PTA), he is being accused of directing the Easter Sunday operation from Malaysia.

Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader and former Minister Udaya Gammanpila has alleged that Sallay was apprehended in a bid to divert attention away from the deepening coal scam. Having campaigned on an anti-corruption platformm in the run up to the previous presidential election, in September 2024, the Parliament election, in November of the same year, and local government polls last year, the incumbent dispensation is struggling to cope up with massive corruption issues, particularly the coal scam, which has not only implicated the Energy Minister but the entire Cabinet of Ministers as well.

The crux of the matter is whether Sallay actually met would-be suicide bombers, in February 2018, in an estate, in the Puttalam district, as alleged by the UK’s Channel 4 television, like the BBC is, quite famous for doing hatchet jobs for the West. This is the primary issue at hand. Did Sallay clandestinely leave Malaysia to meet suicide bombers in the presence of Hanzeer Azad Moulana, one-time close associate of State Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, aka Pilleyan, former LTTE member?

The British channel raised this issue with Sallay, in 2023, at the time he served as Director, State Intelligence (SIS). Sallay is on record as having told Channel 4 Television that he was not in Sri Lanka the whole of 2018 as he was in Malaysia serving in the Sri Lankan Embassy there as Minister Counsellor.

Therefore, the accusation that he met several members of the National Thowheeth Jamaath (NTJ), including Mohamed Hashim Mohamed Zahran, in Karadipuval, Puttalam, in Feb. 2018, was baseless, he has said.

The intelligence officer has asked the British television station to verify his claim with the Malaysian authorities.

Responding to another query, Sallay had told Channel 4 that on April 21, 2019, the day of the Easter Sunday blasts, he was in India, where he was accommodated at the National Defence College (NDC). That could be verified with the Indian authorities, Sallay has said, strongly denying Channel 4’s claim that he contacted one of Pilleyan’s cadres, over, the phone and directed him to pick a person outside Hotel Taj Samudra.

According to Sallay, during his entire assignment in Malaysia, from Dec. 2016 to Dec. 2018, he had been to Colombo only once, for one week, in Dec. 2017, to assist in an official inquiry.

Having returned to Colombo, Sallay had left for NDC, in late Dec. 2018, and returned only after the conclusion of the course, in November 2019.

Sallay has said so in response to questions posed by Ben de Pear, founder, Basement Films, tasked with producing a film for Channel 4 on the Easter Sunday bombings.

The producer has offered Sallay an opportunity to address the issues in terms of Broadcasting Code while inquiring into fresh evidence regarding the officer’s alleged involvement in the Easter Sunday conspiracy.

The producer sought Sallay’s response, in August 2023, in the wake of political upheaval following the ouster of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, elected at the November 2019 presidential election.

At the time, the Yahapalana government granted a diplomatic appointment to Sallay, he had been head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI). After the 2019 presidential election, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa named him the Head of SIS.

The Basement Films has posed several questions to Sallay on the basis of accusations made by Hanzeer Azad Moulana.

In response to the film producer’s query regarding Sallay’s alleged secret meeting with six NTJ cadres who blasted themselves a year later, Sallay has questioned the very basis of the so called new evidence as he was not even in the country during the period the clandestine meeting is alleged to have taken place.

Contradictory stands

Following Sajith Premadasa’s anticipated defeat at the 2019 presidential election, Harin Fernando accused the Catholic Church of facilitating Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory. Fernando, who is also on record as having disclosed that his father knew of the impending Easter Sunday attacks, pointed finger at the Archbishop of Colombo, Rt. Rev Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, for ensuring Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory.

Former President Maithripala Sirisena, as well as JVP frontliner Dr. Nalinda Jayathissa, accused India of masterminding the Easter Sunday bombings. Then there were claims of Sara Jasmin, wife of Katuwapitiya suicide bomber Mohammed Hastun, being an Indian agent who was secretly removed after the Army assaulted extremists’ hideout at Sainthamaruthu in the East. What really had happened to Sara Jasmin who, some believe, is key to the Easter Sunday puzzle.

Then there was huge controversy over the arrest of Attorney-at-Law Hejaaz Hizbullah over his alleged links with the Easter Sunday bombers. Hizbullah, who had been arrested in April 2020, served as lawyer to the extremely wealthy spice trader Mohamed Yusuf Ibrahim’s family that had been deeply involved in the Easter Sunday plot. Mohamed Yusuf Ibrahim had been on the JVP’s National List at the 2015 parliamentary elections. The lawyer received bail after two years. Two of the spice trader’s sons launched suicide attacks, whereas his daughter-in-law triggered a suicide blast when police raided their Dematagoda mansion, several hours after the Easter Sunday blasts.

Investigations also revealed that the suicide vests had been assembled at a factory owned by the family and the project was funded by them. It would be pertinent to mention that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government never really bothered to conduct a comprehensive investigation to identify the Easter Sunday terror project. Perhaps, their biggest failure had been to act on the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) recommendations. Instead, President Rajapaksa appointed a six-member committee, headed by his elder brother, Chamal Rajapaksa, to examine the recommendations, probably in a foolish attempt to improve estranged relations with the influential Muslim community. That move caused irreparable damage and influenced the Church to initiate a campaign against the government. The Catholic Church played quite a significant role in the India- and US-backed 2022 Aragalaya that forced President Rajapaksa to flee the country.

Interested parties exploited the deterioration of the national economy, leading to unprecedented declaration of the bankruptcy of the country in April 2022, to mobilie public anger that was used to achieve political change.