Features
A Bilingual Public Sphere of Visual Art Criticism:
SCRAP BOOK OF CHANDRAJEEWA – Part II
by Laleen Jayamanne
Shirani Rajapakse’s short piece has a delicious bit of visual analysis which brings out the playful nature of Sarath’s mati wada, that most folk of craft practices, loved instinctively by many Lankans. She says, ‘the quaint ornamental structure in the picture looks very much like a bird-house, but it’s not [….] It is a lamp stand which the designer says he was inspired to make after seeing the lamps lighted by many and placed in their gardens as a mark of respect for the gods. My friend and colleague Sarath (who I have never met or talked to), gives me the impression of being a very serious, quiet person.
Therefore, ‘playful’ is not a term I associate with his work that I have studied. But when Shirani described her doubled perception of the lamp stand also as a bird house, what came to my mind were his clay toys, the owl and the pussy cat are delightful, but I found his ornamented clay fish a bit disturbing. The fish, with one large eye has its mouth open to either breath or smile (hovering in between the two), but it’s full of fierce Pirana like large sharp teeth, bared. And whenever I re-see it, I smile again, but also see at the same time its mouth full of large murderously sharp teeth such as I have never seen in a fish.
Then I realised that Lankan mati wada must be replete with folk humour, violence and imagination, which is robust and varied in the folk ritual performance modes and masks I am familiar with. The writers understand the importance of Dankotuwa for the tile industry which gets its clay from that region when they situate Sarath in that milieu, to show how he innovates on this traditional craft by experimenting with the more durable red tile clay to make his earthenware pieces.
The late Charith Pelpola is the critic who, I think, writes most profoundly of Sarath’s red earthenware pots and of their painterly qualities, seeing in one pot the colours of nature of pealing bark, for example. He describes how colour is created through experimental firing techniques, which makes Sarath a modern artist, drawing from tradition, but also departing from it decisively, without severing that ‘nourishing umbilical cord’, as AJ might say. Charith was a wildlife photographer who preferred to spend his time in the forest and a poet, gone much too soon. His prose is delicate, nuanced. He also photographed some of these pots for the book on Sarath, Path of Visual Arts (2005), which images are a consolation in the absence of the originals.
I won’t provide more examples of the excellent critical work preserved in this volume, but hope that I have been able to arouse some curiosity in the reader to seek it out, so that new histories (in the plural), of the 90s might be written without self-interest as the main driver. And also, simply to learn the craft of interviewing and writing, so as to engage the mind of the reader with respect, imaginatively.
We academics can learn heaps from good journalists because they are very disciplined in their awareness of time (in minutes and seconds) and space (column inches)! and appear to be more careful with words than we verbose academics, enamoured of ‘Theory’, creating bubbles. Let’s burst them, they are just soap! Don’t get me wrong. Some continental schools of thought are essential for my teaching and researching film and art and many of our students at Sydney University’s Art History and Film Dept. have a voracious appetite for ideas and theories which they seek out. I saw this very thing happening during the Aragalaya thanks to the internet. That excitement requires dedicated, systematic work over years to be of use.
But it’s certainly possible to introduce Benjamin (or anyone), briefly (also mentioning that he was a German Jew writing in the context of the rise of the Nazi party), if a little home work is done first. And to begin with, when addressing people in the public sphere with a mixed audience, at the very least, it’s essential to say, for example, who ‘Walter Benjamin’ was in the context of the ‘Frankfurt school of Critical Theory’ of the mid-20th Century. At the very least, one must introduce and situate a thinker respectfully, like we say in Sinhala when we are introduced to a stranger: ‘me kaude? (Who is this?) Kage kaude? (Whose who is s/he or who is s/he connected with?) Kinde manda?’ (So, what’s s/he on about?), as first steps in intellectual public speech.
If, for example, it was noted that Benjamin was a close friend of Brecht’s and that he wrote a series of essays (Understanding Brecht), defending and explaining his novel idea of ‘Epic Theatre’ (when it was subject to criticism by the progressive German left), it would certainly have helped, for the obvious reason that Brecht is a beloved playwright in Lanka. A critic must create the conditions for open receptivity of ideas. And it is crucial when introducing any concept or idea, to do so with a degree of precision and explain why it’s useful, relevant in that particular context to understand something.
The Bourgeoise Public Sphere of the 18th Century
Before I end, let me say a few words about the derivation of the concept of ‘the public sphere’ in my title. It’s a political idea as theorised by the thinkers of the Frankfurt School of Social Research, Benjamin, Adorno and others, including Habermas who is still alive. Here’s a potted account. The public sphere is the product of the 18th Century European Enlightenment. ‘Bourgeoise’ derived from ‘Bourg’ means the city in French.
So, it’s in the urban centres of European cities that an educated professional and business middle class first emerged, well before the French Revolution separated the public sphere from the control of the Church and the State. With the creation of the press and a journal culture and leisure, conversation on art and politics flourished in coffee houses where new democratic values were discussed. But the separation of the home from the public sphere meant that most bourgeoise women were stuck at home with children, in a private domestic sphere, with domestic ‘servants’ for help. So, the public sphere was largely male even in the 19th century, with most women having very limited access to professional education until the mid-1890s.
The ‘Third Estate’ is the term for this rising middle-class in the French parliament before the revolution, and the ‘Fourth Estate’ became the free press, to express diverse opinions and ideas and news. With industrialisation and modernisation this exclusive class structure changed with mass education, literacy and mass culture. Crucially, the democratic public sphere then included the urban working classes working classes as also consumers, especially of film.
An Australian Feminist Public Sphere: 70s and 80s
I have an impression that, while there are many women speaking publicly in Sinhala on the arts in Lanka, the theoretical discourses are still wielded by a few men (I stand happily corrected here too), as I am a distant observer-participant. This was exactly the case in Australia in the 70s when we began to read what then was called ‘French Theory,’ in translation. It was the case that a few men dominated art forums and spun theory with ease, using obscurantist language, often culled freely from, for example, Jacque Derrida’s philosophy, among others.
His use of language was especially easy to parrot like a manthra. It was intimidating when this happened in Australia, though we were all studying this stuff at the University, in the late 70s and 80s. The men wrote for the art press in an obfuscating theoretical jargon. Their lack of deep contextual understanding, covered up by the jargon, didn’t stop them from speaking in public with a certain masculine bravado. Some were seduced. They created followers. Male narcissism knew no limits.
But our independent public sphere of cinema in Australia changed once some female scholars educated in France returned (having actually studied with some of the major philosophers such as Deleuze, Foucault, Lacan and others), and translated their stuff while worked in both the main stream media as journalists, film reviewers and in the University as casual lecturers, formulating new courses to study this material systematically. They began to write, using the ‘difficult French Theory’, even in the popular press, in a lively prose which made it both accessible and engaging.
They taught us by giving us tools to analyse the rhetoric of ‘male theory-speak’ to see through its tactics, which were undemocratic because mystifying. In contrast, these women used language not as a weapon of seduction and control, but as a means to make ideas accessible. We never looked back, and since then, female intellectuals in Australia, due to many other reasons as well, have become confident and publicly articulate in significant numbers.
I recount this Australian story here as a little parable for the feminist writers and speakers working in the vernacular public sphere of visual culture in Lanka. As a feminist elder I say, do not feed male narcissism of intellectuals (a bottomless well), and allow them to dumb yourself down in the process. Enjoy teaching yourself and others and speaking in public with flare and intelligence and in this way a democratic public sphere of visual culture will be nourished.
Don’t feel shy if you slip up every now and then make a fool of yourself, just get up and brush yourself like Chaplin, and do it again and again if you must, so you get practiced. I’ve been there many times. Ouch! Each time, I had the feeling I got a bit stronger. But we know we can’t do this alone, we need likeminded women and men too.
A respected Lankan academic retiring back home after a career overseas (having reinvented himself as an ‘Asian Film Specialist’ which is how I met him) gave a lecture on Derrida once, which may have been an early example of this trend of fetishizing Theory. He spun bits and pieces of ‘Derridean theory’ which didn’t make any sense to me. There were Sinhala specialist words I didn’t understand but I understood the main thrust.
This specialist (true to a dark Sri Lankan academic trait) tried to obstruct the publication of a book of mine as one of the three readers of my manuscript on The Epic Cinema of Kumar Shahani (Indiana University Press, 2015, 300 pages). His reader’s report stated that I must ‘revise and resubmit’ the text, with further research as outlined by him! Perhaps he didn’t understand my work.
But I did correct the spelling of the Pali word (‘Dhamma Dweepa’) as pointed out by him. The other two readers, one an Indian media scholar from the US and the other an English scholar of Hindi Cinema said that the manuscript was ready to go to press! I had the pleasure of formally rebutting my compatriot’s intellectually feeble report (my democratic right), which the press accepted.
I recall this nasty, intellectually indefensible act today, just a few days after Kumar Shahani (my guru and one of the great visionary film directors of India), passed away at the age of 83. His very first words to me, when I called him to say my book was out, were: ‘Is there something of yourself in it?’ I feel that my book made him happy, the only one so far on his profound and delicate oeuvre of seven films.
We didn’t talk about it. There was no need to. He took great care of me over the decade and more of researching this book, learning about India a little from him. He kept in touch with me, I sought his advice while writing my piece for the Island on Sarath’s book on Karaikkal Ammaiyar of Polonnaruwa, but my last email remained unanswered … but he is present as a shadow guiding me in what I write.
Two women critics I heard recently, speaking (in Matale and Melbourne, in Sinhala), on Manuwarna’s Whispering Mountains, were both fluent and highly sophisticated in their ability to intermesh politics, aesthetics, and also able to evoke the memory of existential dread of that era of national sate violence and shame. It was utterly moving. They made me long to see the film, which is what good criticism can do. That’s on my short list for the next life, if there is one!
To come back to Sarath – I will leave you with his response to Chamila Somirathna’s probing enquiry:
“A sculptor is always a painter but a painter cannot always be a sculptor’.
Go figure!
Features
Science and diplomacy in a changing world
Today marks a truly historic and momentous occasion in the realm of transdisciplinary diplomacy in our country. We gather here with a twofold purpose of profound national and global significance: the establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum, and the launch of the volume Science Diplomacy: National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World.
This volume brings together valuable and timely contributions from internationally renowned experts representing all key regions of the world — North America, Latin America, Europe, Africa, West Asia, South Asia, and Oceania. It reflects a rich diversity of perspectives, experiences, and insights that speak to the increasingly interconnected nature of science, policy, and diplomacy in our rapidly transforming world.
I am deeply heartened — and indeed humbled — by the presence of such a distinguished constellation of leaders, professionals, intellectuals, scholars, and luminaries from diverse domains, including international relations, science and technology, higher education, and governance. It is rare to witness such an extraordinary and diverse assembly of intellectual, professional, and academic excellence under one roof. Your presence affirms the importance of the cause we serve and the promise of the path we are charting together. Your support, encouragement, and engagement give life, purpose, and direction to this vital endeavour.
As Chief Editor of this volume, it is both a great honour and a profound responsibility to extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all our distinguished guests and invitees. I am conscious that this august gathering is not assembled to listen to a lengthy welcome address, but rather to engage with the substantive proceedings of this event, enriched by five eminent personalities, four distinguished speakers, and an able and competent moderator — all of whom possess exceptional mastery of the subject. I shall therefore be brief.
Among us today are former and current Ministers and people’s representatives, members of the diplomatic corps, Secretaries to Ministries, distinguished panelists, valued contributors to the volume, Vice-Chancellors, Members of the Board of Management and Academic Affairs Board of the BCIS, Heads of institutions, professors, senior government officials, professionals, journalists, and many others — too numerous to acknowledge individually, yet each of you is most warmly welcomed. I receive you all, whether present in person or online, with the utmost warmth, respect, and appreciation.
The panel discussion constitutes the pièce de résistance of this event. We are deeply honoured to be joined by four eminent personalities:
Her Excellency Siri Walt, Ambassador of Switzerland to Sri Lanka;
Professor Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, former Chair of the EU Science Diplomacy Alliance; and former Ambassadors Mr. Bernard Goonatilleke and Dr. Palitha Kohona — all of whom bring exceptional depth of experience and insight to this important subject.
Their discussion will be guided by our distinguished moderator, Mr. Naushard Cader, a truly cosmopolitan personality, widely respected for his breadth of knowledge and his keen understanding of global affairs and science diplomacy. I extend to all our speakers and our moderator a very warm welcome and my sincere appreciation for their willingness to share their wisdom with us this evening.
Allow me, however, to place this event in perspective.
We gather this evening not merely to introduce a book, nor solely to inaugurate a forum, but to reflect together on an idea whose time has unquestionably arrived.
We meet at a moment of profound global transition and conflict. The international landscape is marked by turbulence, uncertainty, and rapid transformation. The world is shifting from a relatively stable post–Cold War configuration toward an increasingly multipolar order. While multipolarity carries the promise of greater balance and strategic autonomy, it also brings intensified competition among major powers, fluid alliances, and growing unpredictability.
At the same time, the rules-based international order — which for decades provided smaller nations with a measure of predictability and protection — is under visible strain and threat. Institutions are contested. Norms are challenged. Economic interdependence deepens even as geopolitical fragmentation intensifies. Supply and value chains now account for nearly seventy percent of global trade, binding nations in complex webs of mutual dependence. Yet such interdependence has not prevented trade wars, sanctions regimes, technological decoupling, and regional conflicts.
For small and economically vulnerable states, this evolving environment is especially daunting. When global rules weaken, asymmetries of power become more pronounced. Bilateral negotiations between unequal partners can leave smaller nations disadvantaged. Without adequate legal, geological, scientific, technological, and diplomatic expertise, such states may struggle to safeguard their long-term national interests and sovereignty. Vulnerability, in the absence of knowledge and capacity, risks translating into marginalisation.
Overlaying this geopolitical transformation is a constellation of interconnected global challenges. Climate change is no longer a distant projection; it is a lived reality. Sea levels are rising. Extreme weather events are intensifying. Food, water, and energy security remain fragile. Pandemics have exposed vulnerabilities in global health systems. Cyber threats transcend borders. Environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and marine pollution threaten livelihoods and ecosystems alike.
These challenges are systemic and transboundary. Almost every major issue — whether global, regional, or national in scale — involves science and technology, either in understanding root causes or in devising effective solutions.
Traditional diplomacy, while indispensable, is no longer sufficient on its own. The defining issues of our time are not purely political or military; they are scientific, technological, environmental, and societal. They demand evidence-based policymaking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and sustained transnational cooperation.
It is within this context that science diplomacy emerges — not as an academic abstraction, but as a strategic necessity.
Nowhere are these realities more visible than in the Indian Ocean.
Unlike the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, which possess longstanding institutional architectures and extensive scientific mapping, the Indian Ocean remains comparatively underexplored and under-institutionalised. Covering roughly one-fifth of the world’s oceanic expanse, it carries a substantial share of global energy shipments and maritime trade. Its seabed resources — including critical and rare-earth minerals — remain only partially surveyed. Many of its coastal and island nations are developing economies with limited scientific and technological capacity to explore, monitor, and sustainably manage these resources.
The Indian Ocean is unique. It is bordered predominantly by developing and emerging states. It hosts remarkable cultural, religious, and political diversity. It is home to some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities. Increasingly, it has become a central theatre of global strategic competition, viewed by some nations through distinct geostrategic lenses.
This maritime space is simultaneously a lifeline and a fault line. It sustains global commerce and local livelihoods. Yet it is also a theatre where geopolitical interests intersect — sometimes converge, sometimes collide.
At the heart of this ocean lies Sri Lanka.
Geographically, our island sits astride one of the busiest East–West shipping routes in the world. Historically, Sri Lanka has been a hub of commercial, cultural, and intellectual exchange. Today, that strategic location presents both opportunity and responsibility.
Sri Lanka’s history, enriched by iconic figures such as Dr. Gamini Corea, Hon.
Lakshman Kadirgamar, Judge Christopher Weeramantry, Dr. Neville Kanakaratne and Dr. Jayantha Dhanapala, stands as a powerful testament to our long-standing contributions to global diplomacy and international governance. Our nation provided leadership within the Non-Aligned Movement, positioning itself as a bridge between civilizations at a time of deep ideological division. We also made history by producing the world’s first woman Prime Minister, affirming our commitment to political progress and inclusive governance.
Today, we are called upon once again to build upon this distinguished legacy — by championing regional unity, promoting sustainable development, and addressing critical contemporary challenges such as climate change, maritime security, and environmental sustainability.
We must navigate complex geopolitical currents while safeguarding sovereignty and strengthening economic resilience. We face vulnerabilities common to island and littoral states: climate change, coastal erosion, marine pollution, and supply chain disruptions. Our development aspirations must be balanced with environmental stewardship and maritime security considerations.
Yet within these challenges lies profound opportunity.
Sri Lanka can position itself as a regional convener — a hub for ocean science, climate research, marine biodiversity studies, disaster risk reduction, and blue economy innovation. Through platforms such as BIMSTEC, the Indian Ocean Rim Association, and SAARC, we can advance cooperative marine research, harmonise environmental standards, strengthen early warning systems, and promote sustainable maritime governance grounded in international law.
But to do so effectively, we must invest in knowledge — and in the diplomacy of knowledge.
Science diplomacy operates along three mutually reinforcing dimensions:
First, science in diplomacy — where scientific evidence informs foreign policy decisions.
Second, diplomacy for science — where diplomatic engagement enables international research collaboration and shared infrastructure.
Third, science for diplomacy — where scientific cooperation itself becomes a bridge for confidence-building, even when political relations are strained.
Importantly, science diplomacy extends beyond the natural sciences. The humanities and social sciences are equally vital. Technology must be guided by ethics. Data must be interpreted within cultural contexts. Policy must consider equity and justice. Diplomats of the future must be fluent not only in international law and negotiation, but also in scientific literacy and interdisciplinary thinking.
In a fragmented world, science offers a neutral vocabulary. It encourages transparency, peer review, and open data. It shifts discourse from rhetoric to evidence. It fosters long-term thinking in political environments often dominated by short-term calculations.
For small and vulnerable nations, science diplomacy is empowerment. It strengthens capacity. It enhances credibility. It enables engagement with larger powers on firmer ground — armed not merely with moral argument, but with data, research, and technical expertise.
The book we launch today reflects a diversity of experience and insight. It is intentionally transdisciplinary because the problems we face are transdisciplinary. It is intentionally global because no region can address these challenges in isolation.
In Sri Lanka, science diplomacy remains at a formative stage. The establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum signals our determination to move beyond dialogue toward sustained institutional engagement. It envisions training programmes for diplomats and scientists, embedding scientific advisory mechanisms within governance structures, and building networks among universities, research institutes, industry, and policymakers. It seeks to cultivate a new generation equipped to navigate the interface between knowledge and negotiation.
We aspire for the Science Diplomacy Forum to be transformative — a true game changer.
Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen,
We live in an era of mounting uncertainty — but also of extraordinary human ingenuity. The same interconnectedness that transmits crises also enables collaboration. The same technologies that disrupt can also heal and transform.
Change is inevitable. The deeper question is whether we will shape that change cooperatively, constructively, and inclusively.
For Sri Lanka, for the Indian Ocean region, and for the broader global community, science diplomacy offers a pathway beyond zero-sum thinking. It channels competition into collaboration around shared public goods. It aligns national interest with regional stability. It transforms vulnerability into resilience through knowledge.
Let this book be not merely a publication, but a platform for sustained reflection and action.
Let the Science Diplomacy Forum be not merely an institution, but a living bridge between evidence and policy, between research and responsibility, between nations and neighbours.
Let Sri Lanka reaffirm its role as a bridge — not a battleground — in the Indian Ocean.
In a world where rules may falter, let evidence guide us.
In a world where tensions may rise, let dialogue endure.
In a world of turbulence, let science diplomacy be our compass — guiding us toward peace, stability, dignity, and shared prosperity.
Welcome Address and Opening Remarks made by Emeritus Prof. Ranjith Senaratne
Former General President,
Sri Lanka Association for the Advancement of Science recently on the occasion of the Founding of the Science Diplomacy Forum and the Launch of the Book Science Diplomacy:
National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World
Features
Be a woman who re-designs life!
From one day of celebration to 364 days of transformation
The international women’s day was just celebrated all over the world. I saw many organiations share their slogans, and organize panel discussions, presentations, and exhibitions to support women empowerment. Slogans, themes, colors play vivid and vociferous role across the world, commemorating the international women’s day.
Alas, the colors are faded, slogans are weaned, themes are forgotten, over the next 364 days, pushing UN Chapter on Women’s Rights come up with more illustrious themes and slogans.
From Bread and Peace to Rights and Action
According to the recorded history, the Women’s day first introduced on 28th February 1909 in America, raising a voice of women against poor working conditions and poor pay in garment factories. This took a more revolutionary form in 1917 in Russia against World War I, where a mass of women protested under the theme of “Bread and Peace”.
Starting from basic needs such as bread and peace, the International Women’s Day theme has evolved towards freedom and independence, justice and inclusion.
Over the years, the rise of feminism brought cultural refinements and highlighted women’s rights. Looking back the historical evolution of women’s role, we see that matrimony has faded and patriarchy evolved with religious and geopolitical forces intertwined with the social expectation. The importance and respect for women, given in the ancient civilisations, diminished with medieval civilization, and subsequent colonisation. The rise of patriarchy domesticated women as homemakers, at the same time prompting their voices to rise for dignity and equitable treatment.
Rise of Feminism
In a typical Western-household of 20th century, husband was the bread winner of the family and the wife managed household affairs. In this era, women’s affairs were restricted to daily chores, creating a boundary wall restricting their access to corporate jobs, free voices. Betty Friedman was a remarkable lady who observed the domestic suffering of women and challenged ‘feminine mystique’ through her 1963 book. She disclosed the feminine mystique, which celebrated women as good housewives, and the belief that women could find satisfaction from domestic chores, home making, marriage, raising children, cooking, washing and taking care of husband’s needs. Betty disclosed that the unhappiness and boredom experienced by the domesticized women, and their inability to live up to the feminist mystique defined by the male dominant society had no name and difficult to express in words. Betty’s claim was supported by the theories of Abraham Maslow, who introduced motivation to grow along the hierarchy of needs. Betty, declared that feminine mystique denies basic growth needs of women, where their desires limited to shelter, food, safety and love only.
In this era women’s jobs were confined preeminently to teaching, and caregiving. STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and medicine were dominated by males, leaving less space for women. As you may have heard in the medieval era women who practiced medicine were branded as ‘witches’ and many were burned alive rooting out the knowledge and courage of women. Women who practiced and taught science and astronomy, were also branded for witch craft and condemned to death. The social pressure suppressed women confining them to domestic chores. In the industrial era women were hired for factory work under low wages and less facilities. In this period Women’s organisations were gathered demanding freedom and justice for women, calling for equal opportunities and rights enjoy their male counterparts. The evolution of women’s movements culminated in 1975, where the first International Women’s Day was commemorated on 8th March 1975.
Celebration and Contradiction
Since 1975, women were celebrated for a day in every year across the globe, with various themes and color codes to showcase the world that all women have rights and demanding fair treatment. The theme colors of International Women’s day are Purple, Green and White.
Purple stands for justice, dignity, and loyalty to the cause.
Green for hope and growth.
White for purity and unity.
In 1996, the International Women’s Day declared a theme to embrace, which is; “Celebrating the Past, Planning for the Future.” In the year 2023, the theme was ‘Embrace Equity’, which evolved to ‘Inspire inclusion’ in 2024, and the year 2025 theme was ‘Accelerate Action’. In 2026, there are three themes; 1. Give to Gain, 2. Balance the Scales, 3. Rights. Justice. Action.
Fragmented Focus Diminishes Values
Multiple themes and competing messages can unintentionally dilute momentum. Unity is not uniformity, but coherence matters; shared direction makes shared progress possible. Emerging three themes to celebrate international women’s day in 2026, implicate lack of solidarity, and unity among women’s organizations to share a common theme. Inclusion, equity and accelerated action have not yet achieved by the women globally, neither locally, nor in small communities. We are bound to question whether the women stay true to the meanings of theme colors that represent womanhood.
Thus, isn’t it vital to explore what goes wrong with our themes and slogans on this Women’s day, before setting foot without solid foundation for what we claim for? Or is it only a day that dawn women’s organisations to gather women in elite society, or identified group of women to enjoy a cup of tea over futuristic speeches of identical society, which treat women with high respect and equity?
One thing we must understand is the world is evolving, so does the roles, rights, and actions of women. Although, women shouted and pleaded for opportunities to enter male dominate world of work, today in many countries including Sri Lanka, women occupies majority of administrative positions and clerical level jobs. Even, the labour positions, dominated by males, are now occupied by the females in many sectors. However, women still bear the traditional homemaker role as well, while juggling with work, and studies to sustain jobs and promotions. This modern day scenario has made women more prone to chronic stress related deceases. The break of rest, too rigid demands coming from work and family, their own desires to move up the corporate ladder, outsmart neighbourers, and craving to make their children better than the others have made women’s lives miserable and breaching the themes and slogans that cater to the women’s prosperity.
Today’s environment has resulted many women to abandon dignity, purity, and hope, overlook unity and justice. If you see social media contents shared by women, you may not be surprised by my statements. The dignity, purity and hope for betterment of women is vanishing on screen. Young girls’ addiction to drugs, liquor and tobacco, sexual misbehaviour, and rising school-aged pregnancies are critical concerns that women’s movements must pay attention today.
What We Must Demand Now: Right Education and Just Acts
Women’s day slogans need a shift. Rather than demanding equal rights as men, we must demand right education for women and girls. We shall not stop at demanding justice as given to the men, but shout and make women and girls aware of ‘Just Acts’, and encourage them to act justly, for themselves, without exposing them to be victims of social media, and ill temptations.
Digital lives of women and girls can amplify comparison, quick outrage, and performative ideals. For girls and women, this can mean unrealistic bodies, curated success, and unsafe online spaces. What we need isn’t more judgment; it’s digital literacy, psychological safety, reproductive health awareness, and robust support systems, so women can flourish on and off‑line. We must educate women and nourish and foster the moral values among women and girls to stay pure in thoughts and actions, we must empower women and girls to keep hope and grow continuously. We must share a culture of inclusion among women to enhance solidarity and stay true to unified action for the betterment of women, and the society.
Women as Creators and Modifiers of the World
The history of International Women’s Day is a call for rights and justice. Today, the next horizon is to build cultures at home, at work, and society. Women are the creators and modifiers of the world. They are to add color to lives of those around them. In fact, WOMEN, do not need to call for justice, rights and action. WOMEN, need to call the hidden power, strength and courage within them and create a world that assures every being in it receives justice, and enjoys rights.
Thus, whether themes multiply or fade, the test is not in the rally or the ribbon, it is in the 364 days after. The colours may be vivid on stage, yet the colors are faded in practice if we do not live them. Let us re‑design life with dignity, unity, courage, and continuous growth. Let us educate, include, and act justly. Let us awaken strength within, so that every woman, every girl, and every community can thrive by being a Woman Who Re‑designs Life!
(The author is a senior education administrator, researcher,
management consultant and a lecturer.)
By Dr. Chani Imbulgoda
cv5imbulgoda@gmail.com)
Features
Illegal solar push ravages Hambantota elephant habitat: Environmentalist warns of deepening crisis
A large-scale move to establish solar power plants in Hambantota has triggered a major environmental and social crisis, with more than 1,000 acres of forest—identified as critical elephant habitat—cleared in violation of the law, environmental activist Sajeewa Chamikara said.
Chamikara, speaking on behalf of the Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform, said that 17 companies have already begun clearing forest land along the boundaries of the Hambantota Elephant Management Reserve. The affected areas include Sanakku Gala, Orukemgala and Kapapu Wewa, which are known to be key elephant habitats and long-used movement corridors.
He said that what is taking place cannot be described as development, but rather as a large-scale destruction of natural ecosystems carried out under the cover of renewable energy expansion.
According to Chamikara, the clearing of forests has been carried out using heavy machinery, while large sections have also been deliberately set on fire to prepare the land for solar installations. He said that electric fences have been erected across wide stretches of land, effectively blocking elephant movement and fragmenting their natural habitat.

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

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

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

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