Editorial

EU gets down and dirty

Published

4 years ago

2021/03/18

Thursday 18th March, 2021

The vaccine war is intensifying in Europe. The European Union (EU) is apparently determined to make the UK regret Brexit. It is doing everything in its power to hurt Britain. British exports to the EU fell by nearly 41% in January as opposed to a 28.8% drop in its imports, due to the post-Brexit new trading rules. Britain’s trade with non-EU states has remained stable, indicating that Brexit, and not the pandemic, is the reason for the drop in British exports to the EU. This is a worrisome proposition for the UK. The EU now stands accused of having targeted the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine to settle scores with the UK. The number of EU member states that have stopped using the Oxford AZ vaccine allegedly on the grounds that it causes blood clots is increasing. Politics and economics have taken precedence over science and concern for humanity! Big pharma, which has not taken kindly to the affordable Oxford AZ vaccine, which has become popular, will go to any length to monopolise the vaccine market and make a killing.

A UK-based senior cardiologist has, in an article we publish today, given the lie to the EU’s claim at issue, and explained why erstwhile European allies of the UK are rallying support for their campaign against the Oxford AZ vaccine. Dr. Upul Wijayawardhana points out that the UK has already vaccinated almost 25 million, and up to the end of February, only 30 cases of blood clots were detected among 9.7 million people given the Oxford AZ vaccine. The figure is slightly higher for the Pfizer vaccine—about 38 cases among the first 10.7 million recipients, the good doctor says, noting that these figures are lower than what would be expected in the general population, suggesting that neither of the vaccines causes blood clots. This has also been the position of many independent medical specialists the world over, according to media reports, but the EU remains impervious to reason; its anti-British campaign is fraught with the danger of people across the globe losing faith in not only the Oxford AZ vaccine but also all other vaccines. The ongoing vaccine war is likely to put the global vaccination drive in jeopardy. An erosion of public faith in vaccination is the last thing the world needs at this juncture because as many people as possible have to be vaccinated in double-quick time for the global community to develop herd immunity, which is the be-all and end-all of the ongoing efforts to beat the virus.

The EU campaign against the Oxford AZ vaccine has apparently benefited Pfizer, which is fishing in troubled waters. Pfizer, driven by an insatiable thirst for maximising profits, has stepped up vaccine imports to the EU. It as well as BioNtech is expected to deliver to the EU 10 million more doses than originally due. Has the EU helped these two companies by campaigning against the Oxford AZ vaccine?

The UK’s angry reaction to the EU using unsubstantiated claims in support of the ongoing anti-Oxford AZ vaccine campaign is understandable. The EU has refused to listen even to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), which has recommended that the use of Oxford AZ vaccine be continued. The World Health Organisation has also dismissed concerns about the safety of the Oxford AZ vaccine as baseless. But having already made up their minds, the EU leaders apparently do not want anyone to confuse them with facts. Ironically, the UK is doing to Sri Lanka, in Geneva, what it flays the EU for doing to it as regards the Oxford AZ vaccine—taking hostile action based on unsubstantiated claims.

The EU campaign against the Oxford AZ vaccine is likely to put paid to the global efforts to control the pandemic, thereby facilitating the transmission of the much-feared virus. Similarly, the politically-motivated human rights offensive led by the UK (and the US), based on unsubstantiated allegations of war crimes against Sri Lanka, which has effectively neutralised terrorism, is likely give a fillip to the spread of terrorism across the globe.

All News Advertisement

Editorial

Cushioning tariff shock

Published

6 hours ago

2025/04/10

Sahan Weerasooriya

Thursday 10th April, 2025

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s letter to US President Donald Trump over the US tariff hikes has received much publicity. The NPP government is reportedly sanguine about a positive response from Washington to its request for lower tariff on Sri Lanka’s exports, especially apparels. Hope is said to spring eternal, and there is nothing wrong with being optimistic, but it behoves Sri Lanka to prepare for the worst-case scenario. President Trump’s mind is so elusive that it is not possible to predict his moves, much less guess what he expects the smaller economies to do if they are to qualify for US tariff reductions, if any. He is eyeing mineral resources in Ukraine in return for US military aid to that war-torn nation. Sri Lanka has no such resources to offer. Is the Trump administration trying to pressure it into going out of its way to help further Washington’s geostrategic interests in this part of the world?

China has retaliated by increasing tariffs on imports from the US thereby aggravating global economic uncertainty. Washington says its tariff increases are reciprocal, and therefore the countries affected by them may think they can gain relief by reducing duties on US exports. But the question is whether such action will help the US rectify its massive trade imbalance significantly. The demand for American exports will not increase substantially even if countries like Sri Lanka lower duties thereon, for factors such as cost and quality basically drive demand. Imports from the West, especially input materials, are not in high demand in the developing world because of the availability of cost-effective alternatives.

So, the Trump administration is likely to insist that apparel producing nations like Sri Lanka import commodities such as cotton fabric from the US so as to give a fillip to the American industries. This is what US Ambassador Julie Chung told former Minister Mano Ganeshan at a recent meeting, according to a report we published on 27 March. Such a move is bound to increase the cost of Sri Lankan apparels because US products are very expensive and will adversely affect the competitiveness of Sri Lanka’s apparels in the global market.

President Trump is hopeful that ‘jobs and factories will come roaring back’ because of the tariff hikes at issue, but he does not seem to have factored in the high cost of production in the US and increases in the prices of imports due to high tariff hikes. Tech analysts have pointed out that Apple iPhone prices would soar if they were to be made in the US, and even if the existing supply chains are maintained, their prices will increase substantially. The same may hold true for other commodities, whose prices remain low in the US at present owing to cheap labour and lax environmental laws in the other countries where they are produced.

The countries hit by the US tariff increases have adopted different strategies to cushion the blow from the drastic US action, which has led to a global stock market rout, and sparked protests in the US itself. India is seeking to strike more trade deals with other nations, according to Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, who says such measures have become necessary in view of prevailing global uncertainty. Sri Lanka can learn from how India is trying to mitigate the impact of the US tariff hikes.

Prof. C. A. Saliya, a senior banker turned academic, has pointed out in his latest column, Out of the Box, in this newspaper that if the emerging economies get their act together, they may be able to turn disruptions caused by the isolationist, protectionist, and coercive US trade practices into an opportunity to diversify their exports and trade relations, invest in technology and undertake structural reforms to ensure their economic resilience.

Meanwhile, the formulation of Sri Lanka’s strategy to navigate the new US tariff regime should arise from a tripartite effort if it is to be effective. The government, industrialists and workers should be represented in discussions on the issue. It is high time trade unions shifted their focus from their demand-oriented activism to the pressing need to play a crucial role in protecting the domestic industrial sector. The government should do everything in its power to help industrialists keep costs manageable, ensuring the competitiveness of their products in the global market, and the captains of industry must carry out their export operations in a transparent manner without resorting to sordid practices such as parking most of their export proceeds overseas.

Editorial

Lies, damned lies, and political claims

Published

1 day ago

2025/04/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

Wednesday 9th April, 2025

Hardly a day passes in Sri Lanka without the government and the Opposition locking horns and trading allegations of deception, lying and corruption. Deputy Minister of Vocational Education Nalin Hewage, who is at the forefront of the government’s propaganda campaign against the ruling NPP’s political rivals, has caused quite a stir by making a false claim about Sri Lanka’s economic recovery process.

Politicians as well as their mistruths, half-truths and blatant lies are rarely, if ever, out of the news in this country. Politics is generally thought to be a web of deceit, intrigue and lies due to manipulation, horse dealing, dishonesty, power struggles, scandals, corruption and other negative factors it is often associated with.

It may not be fair to paint all politicians with the same brush and label them as liars; there are honourable men and women in politics. However, the general perception is that only the politicians following Machiavelli, who has argued that rulers sometimes have to resort to deception and lying, achieve success in Sri Lanka. This view is not without some merit if our experience with politicians’ claims is anything to go by.

Most Opposition politicians who were lucky enough to survive last year’s Maroon Wave, which swept the NPP to power with a steamroller majority, are lying through their teeth. Denying allegations of corruption against them, they make themselves out to be paragons of virtue, but they won’t account for their wealth. It has now been revealed that the SLPP politicians who lost some of their properties due to mob violence in 2022 falsified the estimates of their losses and obtained compensation far exceeding the actual damages. They also have the audacity to make absurd claims and insult the intelligence of the public. Prior to the 2019 presidential election, the SLPP propagandists claimed that a huge cobra had emerged from the Kelani Ganga and it was a miracle signalling the rise of their candidate to the presidency. When the first Treasury bond scam was committed in early 2015, most UNP parliamentary group members, some of whom are in the SJB at present, told blatant lies in a bid to cover it up.

Deputy Minister Hewage has come under a social media piranha attack, as it were, over his claim at a recent NPP local government election rally in Galle that when the NPP took over the reins of government, last year, Sri Lanka’s foreign reserves had plummeted to USD 20 million, and under the incumbent government they had increased to USD 6.1 billion. Interestingly, disappointed that his claim had not elicited a rapturous applause, Hewage faulted his audience!

Hewage is not alone in claiming that it is the incumbent government that put the economy back on an even keel. Almost all NPP leaders make that claim at political rallies. Besides, they have sought to grab the credit for the completion of some projects previous governments launched, such as the restoration of the Elephant Pass salt factory and the construction of a cold storage facility in Dambulla. What takes the cake is the NPP’s claim that the country has gained nothing since Independence.

It will be interesting to see the NPP’s reaction to Hewage’s claim, which continues to draw heavy criticism on social media. The CID is conducting a probe into SLPP National Organiser and MP Namal Rajapaksa’s law exam results. Going by the absurd claims made by the ruling party politicians, it looks as if the NPP government had to order an investigation into the educational qualifications of some of its own parliamentary group members, especially those who claim to be economic experts.

Editorial

Who will guard the guards?

Published

2 days ago

2025/04/8

Sahan Weerasooriya

Tuesday 8th April, 2025

The Opposition has been protesting against what it describes as a veiled threat issued by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, at a recent NPP Local Government (LG) election rally. The United Republican Front led by former Minister Champika Ranawaka has complained to the Election Commission (EC) that President Dissanayake has made a statement, implying that his government will make financial allocations expeditiously only to the local councils the NPP will win in the upcoming LG polls, and others will find it difficult to obtain state funds.

One can argue that it is not legally possible for a government to deprive the local councils controlled by the Opposition of funds, but threats of fund cuts or restrictions, made by the President himself, could demoralise the people who intend to vote for parties other than the NPP in next month’s LG polls. Political power takes precedence over the law, ethics and morals, in this country, and therefore anything is possible.

In politics, words can be as impactful as actions, shaping public opinion and influencing decisions. One may recall that in 2015, the then President Maithripala Sirisena, as the SLFP leader, queered the pitch for his bete noire, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was contesting that year’s general election as the prime ministerial candidate of the SLFP-led UPFA. In the run-up to that crucial election, Sirisena said in a television interview something to the effect that Rajapaksa would not be appointed Prime Minister even if the UPFA won enough seats to form a government. His statement had a devastating impact on the morale of UPFA supporters who wanted to make Rajapaksa Prime Minister. The rest is history. Besides, former Minister S. B. Dissanayake was sentenced to prison for contempt of the Supreme Court over a derogatory remark he made, at a public rally in 2003, about the judiciary and its rulings.

Meanwhile, there are numerous questionable practices pertaining to Sri Lankan elections. Political leaders in power, such as the President, the Prime Minister and Ministers, conduct election campaigns at a substantial cost to the state coffers, as we have argued over the past so many years. When the Presidents and other government leaders stump for their parties, across the country, the public has to bear the cost of their travel, security, etc. The Presidents and Prime Ministers even travelled in the Air Force helicopters for campaign purposes. The state-owned media outfits are misused as propaganda organs of the party in power although they belong to the people who hold diverse political views. A large number of meetings of state officials are held on some pretext or another, ahead of elections, to give a boost to the ruling party’s campaign. These practices are not only unethical but also tantamount to violations of the election laws, as they place the ruling party at an advantage at the expense of its rivals in elections. All Presidents, namely J. R. Jayewardene, R. Premadasa, D. B. Wijetunga, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, Mahinda Rajapaksa, Maithripala Sirisena, Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe unflinchingly used state resources for election campaigns. The public expected a radical departure from the past when they voted the JVP-led NPP into office last year. But what is unfolding on the political front does not offer much hope.

As for presidential statements, it was while speaking at a temple ceremony in the South in 1989 that the then President Premadasa announced his decision to ask India to withdraw the IPKF (Indian Peacekeeping Force) from Sri Lanka. Thus, the Executive Presidents’ statements should not be taken lightly, no matter where they are made.

How can a level playing field be ensured in the upcoming LG polls when the incumbent President himself goes around, issuing a veiled threat that the local councils will face fund cuts or restrictions unless they are controlled by his party––the NPP? It has been revealed in Parliament that at the height of a rice shortage, a few months ago, the NPP government did not supply some popular varieties of rice to the cooperative societies won by its rivals. Such action amounts to collective punishment meted out to the public for defeating the NPP in elections. So, the presidential threat in question, albeit veiled, cannot be dismissed as mere platform rhetoric. The JVP has demonstrated that it is capable of far worse things than fund cuts. The EC therefore must act on the complaints the Opposition has lodged in respect of the presidential statement if it is to arrest the erosion of public trust and confidence in the electoral process. That is also the only way the EC can prevent the public from thinking less of it.

As for President Dissanayake’s statement at issue and the EC’s alleged lukewarm response thereto, Juvenal’s famous question comes to mind: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? — Who will guard the guards themselves?