Monday 11th May, 2026

Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) leader Chandrasekar Joseph Vijay has achieved his chief ministerial dream in Tamil Nadu, with the help of some other parties, including the Congress. His meteoric rise to power was possible mostly due to his popularity as a film star, his unrealistic promises and a massive protest vote fuelled by anti-politics. Winning elections is one thing, but living up to people’s expectations by fulfilling campaign promises is quite another. In politics, a beginner’s luck rarely lasts long. If implemented, the freebies promised by Vijay to garner favour with voters, are estimated to account for more than 50% of Tamil Nadu’s tax revenue. Thus, Vijay has his work cut out to prevent his first chief ministerial term from facing the same fate as his first film, which reportedly became a box office bomb.

The paradigm shift in Tamil Nadu politics has sent the Colombo commentariat into overdrive, with divergent assessments of its implications for Sri Lanka and Indo-Lanka relations. Some commentators are of the view that Vijay’s anti-Sri Lanka utterances were mere campaign rhetoric; Vijay himself will forget them with the passage of time, and even if he wants to pursue his pledges, especially the one to retrieve Katchatheevu, there will be nothing he cannot do, as New Delhi considers the issue long settled. The proponents of this argument have apparently ignored the fact that the Indian Centre is swayed by Tamil Nadu, and New Delhi has even resorted to extreme measures to appease the Tamil Nadu politicians and further its own interests at the expense of Sri Lanka. India trained, armed and funded pro-Eelam terror groups, and rammed the Indo-Lanka Accord down President J. R. Jayewardene’s throat in 1987, paving the way of devolution. India was hoist with its own petard, with the LTTE turning against it, a few years later, and the situation changed.

The current world order is anything but “rules based”. International pacts, accords, covenants, treaties, charters, etc., become worthless when the powerful signatories thereto feel like violating them. The US has violated the UN Charter, perhaps for the umpteenth time, by abducting President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro and his wife. It has also carried out unprovoked air strikes on Iran, killing its Spiritual Leader and thousands of civilians besides destroying assets worth billions, if not trillions, of dollars.

It has been alleged that at the height of the 2022 uprising here, following the forced resignation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Indian High Commissioner Gopal Baglay pressured Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardene to take over the presidency in violation of the Constitution. Abeywardene told Parliament subsequently that the goal of those who tried to force him to appoint himself the Acting President was to plunge this country into anarchy. Baglay allegedly acted in violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which requires diplomats to refrain from interfering with the internal affairs or politics of the host countries. Curiously, this very serious allegation remains unprobed though the grandees of the JVP-NPP government and the SJB-led Opposition wrap themselves in the flag and often declare their commitment to protecting the national interest.

The possibility of the new Tamil Nadu administration escalating the issue of illegal fishing in Sri Lankan waters to such an extent that New Delhi may feel compelled to intervene more assertively, if not aggressively, cannot be ruled out. In 2013, the then Minister of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Development Dr. Rajitha Senaratne disclosed that certain Tamil Nadu politicians owned trawlers and rented them out on the strict condition that they be used for poaching in Sri Lankan waters. These troublemakers are likely to step up their illegal fishing operations to belittle Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and bring New Delhi and Colombo on a collision course.

Responses to vital bilateral issues should not be grounded solely in suspicions and perceptions if they are to be workable. Tamil Nadu politicians’ hostility towards Sri Lanka is a problem to be managed diplomatically. Foreign relations are layered and dynamic, and diplomacy requires calibrated responses to contentious issues. It is, however, prudent to be cautious.

There seems to be no end to the JVP-NPP government’s volte-face. The ruling party leaders vehemently opposed Emergency regulations while out of power, launching into tirades against the previous governments for abusing Emergency to further their political interests by suppressing the democratic rights of the Opposition and the public. But they are now practising the very opposite of what they preached; they keep on extending the state of Emergency, which was imposed in the aftermath of the landfall of Cyclone Ditwah, six months ago. It also has no qualms about using the Prevention of Terrorism Act, which it promised to do away with.

The government made a mockery of its much-touted commitment to upholding democracy once again on Thursday (07) by extending the state of Emergency. The Opposition never misses an opportunity to condemn the government for doing so, but most of its members are absent when motions seeking parliamentary approval for extending Emergency are put to the vote.

On Thursday, the motion presented by the government to extend Emergency regulations received 145 votes, with only six Opposition MPs being present in the House to vote against it. Seventy-three MPs, including 13 government members, were absent during the crucial vote. That the ayes would have it was a foregone conclusion, but the Opposition MPs should have remained in the House when a division was called on the motion. Last month 60 MPs, representing both sides of the House, were absent when a vote was taken on Emergency. The MPs’ absence during crucial debates and votes amounts to a dereliction of legislative duty and an abdication of parliamentary responsibility.

The Chief Opposition Whip and party whips are responsible for ensuring that the Opposition MPs are present during debates and votes. They only talk nineteen to the dozen in the House. A wag says it is a case of all sizzle and no steak. Shouldn’t these Opposition bigwigs, given to pontification, put their house in order before lecturing the government on how to conduct its affairs?

Our legislators parade their knowledge of Erskine May’s authoritative work, Parliamentary Practice. They however do not follow the principles enunciated by May in his seminal treatise. May has viewed parliamentary attendance not merely as a procedural obligation but also as an essential condition for representative democracy and effective scrutiny. Reflected in his writings is the traditional Westminster belief that Parliament functions properly only when its members are physically present and actively participate in debates, scrutinise government actions, serve on committees and vote.

May’s emphasis is also on the ethical dimension of the MPs’ attendance during debates. The members are expected to be present during the proceedings, listening to dissenting views and responding to questions. He has frowned on the practice of members departing immediately after delivering their speeches in the House. This is something the Sri Lankan Presidents ought to pay attention to. They have the bad habit of haranguing the MPs and hurrying out of the chamber immediately afterwards. They apparently consider it infra dig to remain in the chamber and listen to the Opposition MPs. In Westminster democracies, influenced by May, parliamentary attendance has come to symbolise political responsibility, discipline and commitment to public service. Sadly, the members of the Sri Lankan Parliament do not seem to care much about this cherished tradition.

A parliamentary sitting reportedly costs about Rs. 32.2 million, and it does not make sense to spend so much money if the MPs skip sittings. Those who do not participate in debates and votes in the House make a strong case, albeit unwittingly, for a smaller Parliament.

If Parliament can manage with about 150-170 members, as it does at present, why should the taxpayers be made to pay through the nose to maintain as many as 225 MPs besides 445 provincial council members (including 45 ministers) and more than 8,500 local councillors. No wonder there is a resurgence of anti-politics.

Saturday 9th May, 2026

An exchange of fire between the US and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz sent shockwaves across the world yesterday, and oil prices soared as a result. Thankfully, it was a brief clash. The US has claimed that it foiled Iranian attacks on three of its ships. Iran has said it came under unprovoked attacks. Ceasefires in military conflicts are never free from such shocks, and care needs to be exercised to prevent skirmishes from spiraling out of control. The international community has a pivotal role to play in ensuring that the ceasefire in West Asia lasts, and negotiations continue.

The US-Iran peace negotiations have been stuck in the Hormuz chokepoint, and they will have to progress, leading to a durable truce lest the region should face a protracted conflict. There is nary a country that has not been affected by the West Asia conflict either directly or indirectly.

About 1,500-2,000 ships and 20,000 seafarers are reportedly stranded in and around the Hormuz Strait, and this a very serious issue that the world cannot ignore. The US sought to make a naval intervention to escort commercial vessels through the chokepoint, but subsequently paused its “Project Freedom”, which would have jeopardised the fragile ceasefire.

However, so many ships and their crews must not be kept waiting indefinitely in a sea passage, and international navigation via the Hormuz Strait must resume fast but without any US military intervention, which will only make matters worse.

Many economies are reeling the world over, especially in the Global South, owing to the closure of the Hormuz Strait, through which about 20 percent of global oil supplies and about 30 percent of global fertiliser supplies pass. The impact of the destruction of oil assets in Iran and its neighbours will be felt for decades to come. Even if hostilities cease, it will not be possible to repair the damaged assets any time soon.

The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has repeatedly warned that prolonged disruption of fertiliser shipments through the Strait of Hormuz could trigger serious global food shortages, food inflation and reduced crop yields, as we pointed out in a previous comment. FAO officials have said that the crisis threatens global agrifood systems because up to 30–45% of internationally traded fertilisers and large volumes of energy supplies move through the strait. This alone is proof of the enormity of the problem the conflict has created for the world.

The general consensus is that a way out is to ensure that the ongoing ceasefire and negotiations create conditions for the return of the status quo ante in the Hormuz Strait soon. However, that will be possible only if both the US and Iran soften their stands. Iran has asked the US to end its naval blockade, and this can be considered a fair demand, and if the US complies, Iran will be compelled to reopen the Hormuz chokepoint, paving the way for further de-escalation and helping bring down oil and fertiliser prices. That alone may not help resolve the conflict, which is far more complex than it looks, but the resumption of international navigation through the Hormuz Strait will give a tremendous boost to the peace process, which is said to be in the doldrums, with both sides resorting to brinkmanship.