Connect with us

Features

A strange paradox: Political stability in spite of circumambient crises

Published

on

by Rajan Philips

Every crisis in Sri Lanka’s checkered history, both before and after independence, began and ended with a political crisis. More accurately, perhaps, every crisis got extended, for nothing ever ended except the war. Ironically, it is the Rajapaksas, who claim sole ownership for ending the war, that are now caught all ends up in all manner of crises. What is strange and paradoxical about their situation is that for all the crises that they are the primary cause of and are being resoundingly blamed for, their political positions are in no immediate danger.

There is no threat to the presidency of Gotabaya Rajapaksa. No one is even thinking of impeachment, let alone saying it. The SLPP government has a solid majority in parliament to ward off any no confidence motion (NCM). Not that anyone is looking like trying one. And the Samagi Jana Balawegaya will not risk a second setback after falling on their face when they tried an NCM against Minister Gammanpila over petroleum price hikes. Where there might be some reason for worry, for President Rajapaksa and the SLPP in parliament, is over prospects at the next elections. But elections are a full three years and more away, which are a long time in politics by any measure.

When government worked

The next three years are also going to be peppered with crises if what is going on now is any indication of what is going to follow. It is this juxtaposition of political stability and circumambient crises that renders the current situation strange and paradoxical. This is a uniquely unprecedented situation. In the past there was political instability, governments were elected and ejected, but the departments of government did their job like clockwork, unlike the broken clocks and daily alarms we now have for government agencies.

In the past there was always a political dimension and overtone to a serious crisis. The malaria health crisis in the 1930 became the baptismal fire for Sri Lanka’s left movement. The 1947 General Strike, Sri Lanka’s belated substitute for an independence struggle, hastened the departure of the Empire and the arrival of independence. Public outrage over food scarcity and prices precipitated the Great Hartal of 1953 and the resignation of a young Prime Minister (Dudley Senanayake) who had won a popular landslide victory barely a year earlier.

Three years later, in 1956, the blunderbuss government of Sir John Kotelawala was routed at the polls. The next eight years were years of tumults and crises – communal riots, labour strikes, the assassination of a Prime Minister, schools take-over, a failed army coup, Tamil satyagraha in the North, emergency rule and so on. There were three elections, four Prime Ministers, two centre-left coalition governments and several cabinet overhauls. Through it all, and to my point in this essay, the government worked.

The schools and hospitals were open. Children studied and played. The sick were attended to. Look where they are now. Trains and buses ran, though not like in Japan or Singapore, but infinitely better than now after 40 years of economic liberalization and privatization. Farmers and fishers, the largest of Lanka’s working populations, subsisted and produced. Colonial era plantations were past their productive peaks, but they were kept on a plateau through careful research and correct ministering. Now the bottoms are coming apart.

The farmers effortlessly straddled tradition and modernity, switching from the plough to the tractor, blending the organic and the inorganic, and reaching the elusive self-sufficiency in rice in the 1980s. There were middlemen in agriculture, but no mafia. No one executively told farmers, no more pohora, only manure. Until now. And no one apparently advised the current omnipotent executive that tea doesn’t grow on cow dung unless there is a cow for every bush.

For all its travails, the 1956 government introduced income tax and taxation became the staple source of government revenue. Until someone lamebrained in the current government decided that removing taxes is a shortcut to economic growth and bigger revenue. In one stroke, half a billion rupees of revenue were written off. Balance of payments and imports became chronic problems in the 1960s, but government after government kept managing them.

Foreign reserves began to be counted in terms of months of imports, but never in terms of weeks or days. No one ever thought there will come a day when a Sri Lankan government will run out of cash to import basic food and the new necessity of fuel. And after imposing the biggest import ban in history, this government actually ended up increasing the annual import bill. That is the record. Not even the most blinkered Rajapaksa apologist can pretend to not see the record for what it is.

Stability and Crisis

After two decades of government turnovers, electoral stability was realized for the first time between 1965 and 1970, when the third and the last Dudley Senanayake government lasted its full elected term. It was badly defeated in the 1970 election, but the UNP maintained its largest vote base despite the poor electoral returns. After 1970, electoral stability came to be more contrived than democratic.

The 1972 Constitution provided for a one-time extension of parliament by two years. Objectively, it should have been a defensible extension to make up for the time lost owing to the JVP insurrection. But the United Front government’s intentions were not pure, and the First Republican Constitution itself was arrogantly adopted as a proud government product to the exclusion of not only the UNP opposition but also the constitutionally sensitive Tamil Federal Party.

After lambasting the two-year extension of parliament from 1975 to 1977, JR Jayewardene went for broke and cancelled a whole election for the chicanery of a referendum in 1982. JRJ had already upended the country’s parliamentary system in the name of providing political stability. The outcome though was not political stability but electorally enduring governments.

Internal instability of governments has been a feature of Sri Lanka’s political history from 1947, if not from 1931. The difference before and after 1977 is that, before 1977 internal instabilities eventually brought down governments and precipitated elections. After 1977, governments lasted in spite of internal instability. More often than not, after 1977, presidents and governments have lasted in office much longer than they deserved to last. But there has been no political stability in spite of prolonged government tenures.

What President Jayewardene was planning to achieve by way of political stability, was to have the same party, obviously for him – the UNP — in power over several electoral terms, if not for ever. What he did not bargain for was that internal instability would arise within his Party (and his government) almost instantly over the position and powers of the Prime Minister in the new presidential system, and more persistently over presidential succession. As it turned out, the presidential system that was created to entrench the UNP in power ended up devouring the grand old United National Party itself.

What JRJ could not also have foreseen was how his constitutional experimentation would play out in the event of the SLFP returning to power with a younger Bandaranaike as President. True to form, as under the UNP presidential governments, internal political instability became a government problem for President Chandrika Kumaratunga. More so in her second term, and she was even forced to bow out earlier than she was planning to, and reluctantly left the family torch to be usurped by the newly arrived Mahinda Rajapaksa.

What JRJ most certainly could not have seen coming, at least in President Jayewardene’s view of the Sri Lankan society, was the arrival of the Rajapaksas out of nowhere. The now powerful brothers and their extensions were not only out of JRJ’s political radar, but were not even embryonic in the presidential order when it was newly set up. Whatever may have been their status in the 20th century, the Rajapaksa brothers have dominated Sri Lankan politics in the 21st century, and it would be correct to say that their dominance over the last two decades has no parallel in the politics of the last century.

There has never been an instance in Sri Lankan politics when so many brothers and sons and nephews have been part of the same kinship political apparatus. It is their kinship apparatus and their success in subordinating the state resources to kinship power that has made their hold on power internally stable. The 2014 defection of Maithripala Sirisena was an aberration that has only proved the rule, in that even after defeating Mahinda Rajapaksa in the presidential battle, Sirisena lost the war over the SLFP to the Rajapaksas. Whether there will be another defection to end the Gotabaya presidency three years from now, it is too early to speculate.

The more immediate question is how will the current contradictions between regime stability, on the one hand, and the plethora of crises – health, social and economic, on the other, play themselves out between now and the electoral reckoning more than three years from now? The traditional perspective is one of crisis heightening and potential confrontations between public protests and government forces. The government is far too entrenched to be knocked over by a single strike. Equally, the government is not in a position to permanently rule by force, suppressing protests.

Between these contending options, is there a role for the national parliament to play – to make the current regime change its ways, rather than the proverbial regime change? The 1972 Constitution exalted parliament, the National State Assembly, as the Supreme Instrument of State Power. The 1978 Constitution trashed that notion and introduced the notion of separation of powers between the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. But from day one of the 1978 constitution, the executive has been the dominant instrument of state power. It is time for parliament to restore its role as a co-equal branch of government. Is the current parliament capable of restoring itself? (To be continued).



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Dilemmas of ‘hurting economies’ – the case of Sri Lanka

Published

on

Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja (right) and Ambassador (Retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha.

Maldives President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu was in Sri Lanka recently on what was apparently a goodwill visit and this event, no doubt, bodes very well for Maldives-Sri Lanka relations. Besides, the visit would go some distance in strengthening Sri Lanka’s claims to Non-Alignment.

However, the commentator on regional politics could be accused of simplistic thinking if he/she glosses over or ignores the regional politics nuances or undertones of the Maldivian President’s visit. In Sri Lanka we currently have a government which is eager to solidify its bridges, so to speak, with China and which, given the chance, would be courting increasingly close relations with Russia. In other words, the NPP government is likely to see itself as a ‘natural ally’ of the East and would prefer to distance itself to the extent possible from the West, if that is a realistic proposition.

Given the foregoing backdrop, it would be in some of the NPP regime’s best interests to be on cordial terms with the Maldives which is a close ally of China in the South Asian region. However, the NPP government, given the utter financial helplessness of Sri Lanka, cannot afford to distance itself politically and diplomatically from India and the West. Sheer economic necessity compels Sri Lanka to adopt this foreign policy stance. In other words, the latter has no choice but to be ‘Non-Aligned.’

This columnist was led to the above observations on listening to a lucid and comprehensive presentation titled, ‘A Global Economy in the Shadow of the Iran War and implications for Sri Lanka’s debt recovery’, by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja, Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo on May 4th. The forum, RCSS Strategic Dialogue – 4, was moderated and presided over by RCSS Executive Director Ambassador (retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha.

The forum brought together a wide cross section of society, including diplomatic personnel, academicians, public and private sector personalities and the media. After the presentation a very lively and informative Q&A followed.

Ambassador Aryasinha at the outset set an appropriate backdrop to the presentation and discussion by stressing ‘the increasing interconnectedness of geopolitical and economic developments, noting how disruptions in the Middle East could have significant ramifications for global markets, trade flows, energy prices and broader economic stability, including Sri Lanka.’

Indeed, there are occurring currently very disruptive economic and material consequences for the world from ‘the Iran War’, and with US-Iran hostilities spiraling in West Asia it may not be wrong to surmise that the worst could be yet to come, unless a peace process materializes in earnest.

Meanwhile, ‘hurting countries’ such as Sri Lanka would need to summon their best economic management capabilities to remain materially and economically afloat. ‘Economic transformation’ is what is urgently needed and not mere management and some of the insights thrown up by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja should have the local polity thinking.

There was the following observation, for instance: ‘Sri Lanka has achieved remarkable cyclical stabilization but faces critical challenges in transitioning to transformative growth, with 2027-2028 debt repayments looming and only $5.4 billion usable reserves.’

Needless to say, the path ahead to ‘transformative growth’ for Sri Lanka is strewn with multiple challenges and meeting them effectively is of the first importance. Sri Lanka must soldier on towards even a semblance of development in the short and medium terms and such initiatives cannot be separated from its foreign policy choices since the country’s economic partners and their growth prowess have a close bearing on the country’s material fortunes.

As mentioned, Sri Lanka will be compelled to be ‘a friend of all countries and an enemy of none’ going forward but it cannot afford to be seen as cultivating China as a close growth partner at the expense of India and other major economies of the region.

This is primarily because while India is remaining a major economic power, the current West Asian crisis notwithstanding, China’s economy is being seen as ‘slowing’. Dr. Wignaraja singled out the following in the main as the factors causing this slow-down: a bursting property bubble, increasing state regulation, and weakening investor confidence. Besides, the speaker sees production cycles moving away from China and India replacing China and Hong Kong as ‘manufacturing hubs’.

Accordingly, the NPP regime in Sri Lanka would need to craft its regional policy in particular with the utmost far-sightedness. It will need to have close economic links with all the growth centres that matter.

On the question of authentic economic transformation, the following observations of Dr. Wignaraja on Sri Lanka’s economy are of the first importance as well: ‘Foreign reserves are now at $ 5.4 billion, the cost of living is high, an estimated 20 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day, the recent cyber security breach at the Treasury would affect some 10 payments.’ These factors were termed ‘critical vulnerabilities’.

It is difficult to conceive of an economic transformation worthy of the phrase minus a steady economic empowerment of the populace. The above data point to the considerable magnitude of the local poverty problem. Right now, the disruptive effects of the West Asian crisis render swift poverty alleviation a most difficult proposition.

One possible way out of the present economic debacle is the forging of a national consensus by the present government on all outstanding problems that have been bedeviling the country’s advancement. That is, there needs to be a meeting of minds across current political divides. Considering the present inflammatory political polarities in Sri Lanka this would prove an insurmountable challenge.

Unfortunately, conscience-filled and civic minded sections in Sri Lanka have chosen to be laid back rather than seize the initiative, come centre stage and impress on politicians the need for enlightened governance and progressive change. There needs to be a historic coming together of the right thinking to ensure that the best interests of the people and of the people only are served by governments. In the absence of such a process, might would be projected as right and brute force would come to increasingly rule politics and society.

Continue Reading

Features

Australia funds project to restore climate-resilient vegetable livelihoods in cyclone-affected highlands

Published

on

(L-R) D. P. Wickramasinghe, Secretary of Agriculture; Matthew Duckworth, Australian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, K. D. Lal Kantha, Minister of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation, and Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Representative for Sri Lanka and the Maldives at the signing ceremony.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation, the Government of Australia, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have launched of a AUD 2 million (USD 1.4 million) recovery initiative to restore and transform vegetable production systems in the cyclone-affected districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla.

The FAO said yesterday (5) that the agreement was formalized through the signing of the grant agreement by Matthew Duckworth, Australian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, and Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Representative for Sri Lanka and the Maldives, alongside the signing of the project document by D. P. Wickramasinghe, Secretary of Agriculture.

Cyclone Ditwah, which struck Sri Lanka in November 2025, caused widespread devastation across the country, severely disrupting agricultural production systems and livelihoods. The highland districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla, key suppliers of vegetables such as beans, carrots, leeks, cabbage, tomato and potato, were among the hardest hit, with thousands of smallholder farmers losing crops, seed stocks, and productive assets.

This 12-month initiative aims torestore and strengthen climate-resilient vegetable production systems, with a strong focus on empowering women farmers and supporting persons with disabilities. The project will directly benefit more than 2,400 smallholder farmers, through improved seed and seedling production systems, small machinery, training, and market linkages while indirectly supporting thousands more.

“This initiative is an important step not only in restoring what was lost, but in building a more resilient and self-reliant agricultural sector,” said Minister Lal Kantha. “By strengthening local seed systems and supporting smallholder farmers, particularly women and vulnerable groups, we are investing in the long-term sustainability of Sri Lanka’s food systems.”

“Australia stands alongside Sri Lanka in its ongoing recovery from Cyclone Ditwah,” said High Commissioner Duckworth. “Australia is a steadfast partner in the agriculture sector with its importance for food security, rural development and climate resilience. By focusing on climate smart practices, farmer-led solutions and inclusive economic opportunities, this project will deliver meaningful and lasting benefits to affected communities.

The project will prioritize the restoration of farmer-led seed systems for beans and potatoes, support the re-establishment of both open-field and protected cultivation systems and women led seedling supply nurseries while empowering all farmers with Climate-Smart Good Agricultural Practices (CSGAP) with small scale machinery and input support.

A key feature of the initiative is the establishment of six accessible and inclusive nurseries in Nuwara Eliya and Badulla. These nurseries will serve as sustainable agri-based enterprises, producing high-quality vegetable seedlings while creating new income opportunities and strengthening local input supply chains.

By combining recovery support with long-term resilience measures, the project will help stabilize vegetable production, improve household food security and nutrition, and reduce reliance on imported seeds.

Continue Reading

Features

War on Iran may hasten unraveling of New World Order

Published

on

It took several decades for the US to realise it was losing the war in Vietnam. It took a bit shorter time in Afghanistan. And what is happening in the countries the US and Israel intervened and broke up? The US has been asked to leave Iraq. Syria is talking to Russia about establishing military bases, President al-Sharaa met with Vladimir Putin in Moscow to discuss the project, which is vital for Russian power projection in the Middle East. Libya has been divided into two competing administrative units with the Eastern section actively engaged with Russia in defence matters. The Sudanese government has finalised a 25-year deal to allow a Russian naval facility in the Red Sea in exchange for weapons, including anti-aircraft systems. On the Eastern side of the Red Sea, Yemen remains divided, with the main power center, the Houthis maintaining a staunchly anti-US, anti-Israel stance, while the internationally recognised government remains in exile.

When the Iranian Foreign Minister recently undertook a tour of Pakistan, Oman and Russia, the US wanted to meet him and got ready to send its negotiators Vice President J. D. Vance and his team to Pakistan, but Iranian FM snubbed them and left Pakistan, saying Iran did not want to talk to the US while a blockade of their ports were in place. The Iranian FM met President Putin, who congratulated Iran for courageously defending their country and then phoned US President Trump and told him further attacks on Iran would not be acceptable. During this conversation on April 27, 2026, Putin reportedly warned Trump that further U.S. or Israeli attacks on Iran would have dangerous consequences, according to Al Jazeera). Such a sequence of events would not have been possible in the unipolar world we had in the past.

Furthermore, the damage that Iran has inflicted on the US and Israel in this war would have been unimaginable in the late 20th Century and early 21st Century. Sixteen US military bases spread across Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan and Oman have been either destroyed or severely damaged. Advanced surveillance aircraft and radar systems worth more than $ 2.8 bn were destroyed. This had a far-reaching effect on the war as the US could not use these bases in the war against Iran and also in the defence of its allies in the Gulf.

The attacks on Israel have been equally damaging. In  Central Israel and Tel Aviv area multiple attacks targeted military and intelligence assets, resulting in massive damage. Iranian missiles hit the Haifa oil refinery, causing a shutdown, and hit residential buildings, leading to injuries and structural damage. Residential and commercial areas were damaged in Bat Yam and Petah Tikva with significant casualties and destruction. Attacks in Dimona and Arad targeted the Negev Nuclear Research Center, with casualties reported in both towns. The Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba was hit in a strike. The strategic port and naval base in Eilat were targeted. In Rishon LeZion suburban residential areas suffered extensive damage.

Usually, Israel makes short work of its many enemies in the region, for example it took just six days to defeat the combined military of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in 1967 and grab their land as well. Hamas, Fatah and Palestinians would suffer ignominious defeats if they dare challenge Israel. However, the recent war against Hamas, following a daring wide scale invasion into Israel by Hamas in October 2023, went on for more than two years with no conclusive victory for Israel.

These significant massive military setbacks suffered by the combined forces of the US and Israel have been made possible by the unprecedented advancement in military technology achieved mainly by China and to a degree by Russia as well. Iran has been able to develop ballistic missile systems that could penetrate the “iron dome” that Israel boasted, with technological assistance from China and North Korea. Iran’s drones are very cheap yet very effective, requiring interceptors worth millions of dollars to counter them, thus making it much more costly for the US to fight this war than it is for Iran.

Further, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthies in Yemen and Hamas in Palestine are well equipped with advanced missiles and drones. Hezbollah has been able to destroy about hundred Israel tanks and stop their advance. According to Larry Johnson, former CIA intelligence analyst, Israel soldiers are much war weary and mentally affected and are being withdrawn. Netanyahu’s 40 year dream of a “Greater Israel” is telling on the poor soldiers.

If a person like Barack Obama had been the US President instead of the hyper egoistic, blustering, intellectually barren Trump, things may have been different. An attempt would have been made to reconcile with the fact that the world is changing, instead of trying to stop it and make “America Great Again”.  Perhaps, it could be said that Trump is facilitating the emergence of the new world order by enabling the US citizens to see the reality, the futility of war and the fact that Israel is a liability because the US is fighting its war. Further, the war has enabled Iran to assert its place in the region and negotiate from a position of strength.

Perhaps, Israeli people may realise that the Palestine problem cannot be solved by militarily occupying their land, and that in a changing world a “Greater Israel” is a “pie in the sky”. They may have to agree to a two-state solution. US support may not always be forthcoming, certainly not at the level that Trump could extend, as this war is very unpopular and expensive. The other very significant fact is that Israeli settlers in the occupied lands feel insecure and one in three wants to leave and the numbers may grow when Palestinians and their sympathisers grow in strength in the new world order.

Moreover, the war on Iran has afforded China the opportunity to demonstrate with authority the fact that it stands for universal peace and does not tolerate illegal wars. Its message to the US conveyed its world view and its desire for peace in no uncertain terms. Trump cannot afford to disregard the Chinese position on the war on the eve of his visit to that country which may decide on future trade between the two countries as the US depends on China for several essential materials like rare earth minerals. Furthermore, China has shown that peace could be achieved by developing the economies of the underdeveloped countries irrespective of their alliances. It helps Iran as well as Saudi Arabia and try to build bridges between these foes. It welcomes Trump in the coming weeks and hopes to strengthen ties between the two countries despite the weaknesses of the latter.

Another important factor is the gradual decline of the critical value of the petro-dollar. Following the end of the gold standard in 1971, the US struck deals with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations (around 1974) to price oil exclusively in USD in exchange for military protection and arms sales. Dollars earned by selling oil came to be known as petro-dollar. Oil producers, holding large dollar surpluses, reinvest these funds in the US Treasury securities, real estate, and financial assets ensuring the recycling of petro-dollars. The system ensures a consistent global demand for US dollars, which helps fund the US budget deficit and maintains the currency’s dominance.

However, the petro-dollar system is on the decline and there are two main reasons for this, firstly the gradual rise of the new world order with organisations like BRICS, making a concerted effort to extricate from the dollar dominance by developing alternate currencies and methods to bypass the dollar. Secondly, the need felt by most countries to develop alternative energy sources to replace enormously harmful fossil fuel would eventually result in a decline in the demand for it and consequently the effectiveness of the petro-dollar. China is leading the world in both these endeavours; depolarisation process and renewable energy production. The war on Iran seems to have hastened the process of depolarisation as Iran insists that it will sell its oil for yuan only.

These revolutionary changes in the aftermath of the Iran war have their undeniable implications for the Global South, where more than 60% of the poor live.

by  N. A. de S. Amaratunga

Continue Reading

Trending