Connect with us

Features

After Samantha Power’s visit

Published

on

by Kumar David

Ms Power is a formidable power (sic!) in foreign policy and her visit a fortnight ago signals support for Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW). Power is the chief of USAID (Agency for International Development) an “independent agency” of the government that administers “civilian” foreign aid and development programmes with a budget of $27 billion. It is perhaps the largest aid agency in the world and accounts for over half of U.S. foreign hand-outs and is the largest in the world in money terms. Her visit backed by a team of officials is of political significance. It won’t be a surprise if the donkeys in RW’s administration and the asses in the opposition miss the import of one of Obama’s four women (Michelle, Hilary and Susan Rice were the other three) visiting the Island at this moment. Forget these jackasses; the US has put Sri Lanka on its radar screen and that will matter.

First a few words about Ms Power. She is a recognised intellectual, director of a Human Rights outfit at Harvard’s Kennedy School and afterwards a Professor at Harvard who joined Senator Barack Obama but had to resign in March 2008 after she called Hillary Clinton a monster – she thought she was talking off the record. Nevertheless, President Obama took her back into the State Department transition team just eight months later where she played several roles. Obama chose her to Chair the Atrocities Prevention Board in 2012 and then as America’s U.N. Ambassador. Power’s office focused on women’s rights, LGBT rights, religious freedom, human rights, and democracy. She was tough on Sri Lankan human and democratic rights violations. Unfortunately, she is also a supporter of military intervention and was a key figure in persuading Obama to undertake his foolish and ill-fated intervention in Libya.

Ms Power was born in London to Irish parents and schooled in Ireland till age nine and then emigrated to America with her mother. She graduated in history from Yale and obtained a doctorate from Harvard Law School. As a young woman she wrote three books and significant papers on human rights. Some trace the ‘The Right to Protect’ (R2P) concept to Samantha’s youthful writings. This visit signals a decision by the US to intervene in Sri Lanka’s policy directions. This is no trial canary in an experimental mine shaft, it’s the real McCoy. Money will be made available for stabilising a Western oriented regime but at the same time there will be a no-nonsense approach to human and democratic rights.

She announced a $60 million aid package – $40 million for fertiliser and $20 million for humanitarian assistance and declared “I have come to convey that the US stands with you during this unparalleled crisis.” Power also told RW that political and economic agendas go hand in hand and added that the US is trying to engage the US business community to look for opportunities here. She added “You have an incredible private sector and entrepreneurship, but the government, over so many years has largely stood in the way of unlocking its potential. The government has no business running business. If what has been done in the telecoms sector is done in other sectors it would be incredible”. True enough, but to quote Anura Kumara’s remark at the Koloma Foundation Institute “the private sector has no obligations except to its shareholders, the government is answerable to the people”.

For months I have been saying that the West will bail out Sri Lanka (any government) that took a pro-capitalist policy (in these times nothing matters more than money), respected democracy and supported American led foreign policy. It is now clear that I was too cautious; it’s not an option, it is an instruction. Do it (the road laid out by Ms Power) or starve and clearly the West (America-IMF-Europe) will do just that. No one else has the gilt or the gumption to bail us out, certainly not China. I suppose it is settled that for the next three to five years this country will be on the capitalist and hopefully democratic road. The US Ambassador in Colombo has so far handled the JVP with kid gloves, it will be interesting to watch if Ms Power has instructed Ms Julie Chung to change course.

The democracy thing, that is the political side, is rather complicated. It is not that the militarists or the fascists in the defence establishment have a ghost of a chance of throwing their weight around. An uprising in the streets and a naval blockade will finish them off. The threat is from Sinhala-Buddhist extremism. A democratic settlement, a new constitution, winding up of the Executive Presidency and a new electoral system are contentious but the most volatile are the damnable Demalas and Thambiyas. The first fires will be stoked by (Raja)Paksa cutthroats and saffron-clad brigades, but there are deeper conflicts. You see the Tamils, if not the Muslims will demand their pound of flesh – having been political vegans for close upon 70 years they are hungry for a morsel of raw flesh. Tamil leaders cannot settle for less than devolution, Sinhala-Buddhist extremists will not permit devolution.

If Ms Power is still the hard-nut she was in the Libya intervention and if she is still as tough as she was about human rights in Sri Lanka as she was when pushing UNHRC resolutions, the Paksa-clan and the saffron lot are in for a hard knock. If it comes to a showdown, some of the Paksa-mob and the saffron-clad extremists may start pushing up daisies in some corner of Kanatte. Are liberals prepared to shield rogues who embezzled billions from retroactive punishment? Alternatively, will they agree to jeopardise established legal safeguards? Opinion among liberals will be divided.

This brings us face to face with what I may with your permission call the contradictions of democracy. The poser is universal, but first Lanka. Every serious conversation on politics in Lanka ends in the following conundrum. “Yes, we want democracy-freedom etc, yes we are prepared to die for it. Parliamentarians, ministers, prime ministers and presidents are corrupt and power-hungry, seeking rewards for themselves and their kinsmen”. The rib-tickling point is that these blackguards (all but a few dozen parliamentarians) were chosen and put in place by none other than ourselves, the people themselves.

Except in naked dictatorships like Burma the way out is not to dump democracy and launch out on an insurrection a la 1971. The aragalaya that drove out Gota is unique and cannot be repeated to remove a constitutional government. Unique means unique! Gota’s regime was constitutional but its removal cannot be repeated again against a constitutional government; public opinion will not stand for it because it fears the anarchy of 1971. The Front-Line Socialists (FSP) are suffering from delusions.

Nevertheless, things cannot go on the way they are, drastic changes are essential, but must be done by legitimate processes. Tactical and strategic details will change and depend on the needs of the moment but the basics can be spelt out clearly. The Executive Presidency must be abolished, the right to recall elected representatives inserted in the constitution, proportional representation ended not for a simple Westminster model which is unsuitable for Lanka but replaced by a scheme which includes a large number of multimember constituencies to prevent absurd landslides (1956, 1970, 1977) and achieve ethno-religious balance (remember Colombo Central, Balangoda, Kadugannawa, Colombo South). Overall, a new constitution has to be enacted by democratic processes (FSP please note).

To underline the point that salvaging democracy requires different paths in different places I will make a few comments about the USA. Is American democracy under threat and if so by what forces? The answer to the first question is yes but not fatal, and the most palpable threat is from right-wing extremism. Right-extremism is not only the loonies ranged behind Trump and his MAGA (Make America Great Again) shrill. It also includes a number of nasties (Aryan Nations, Posse Comitatus, Covenant, Arm of the Lord, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and adherents of QAnon theory). Though they do pose a threat of domestic terrorism, the deep hazard to democracy is the divide between the mainstream Republican and Democratic Parties. Take for example abortion and women’s rights which are tearing the country apart. California, New York and Michigan States are the sites of the largest pro-abortion and women’s rights activities in their history. Conversely Texas and a few other Neanderthal states have legislated that abortion from the moment of conception even in the case of rape or incest is illegal and that anyone who assists is liable for 99 years of imprisonment; conflict is unavoidable. On abortion the Word of God and Onward Christian Soldiers who underwrite these battles are tearing the country apart.

It’s the same with gun legislation, energy policy (promoting green energy is illegal in Texas; can you believe it!), gerrymandering electoral boundaries and overreach of legislation beyond state boundaries. Republican hopefuls for election will not challenge Trump because they will be denied nomination (getting nominated, not getting elected is the problem). This is not a thesis; so, I have to be brief. The point is not that the US is on the brink of another civil war, it is not. The point is that the protection of democracy is substantially different country by country; Germany, Italy, UK, US and so on. China and Russia are non-capitalist states, nor democratic in the ordinary sense. The aragalaya in these two will be petri dishes carving out their own paths. For sure Socialists desire transition from democratic-capitalism to social-democracy and Marxists understand that the materialism immanent in historical authenticity is inexorable. Therefore, every instance must be placed in its own context.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Rethinking post-disaster urban planning: Lessons from Peradeniya

Published

on

University of Peradeniya

A recent discussion by former Environment Minister, Eng. Patali Champika Ranawaka on the Derana 360 programme has reignited an important national conversation on how Sri Lanka plans, builds and rebuilds in the face of recurring disasters.

His observations, delivered with characteristic clarity and logic, went beyond the immediate causes of recent calamities and focused sharply on long-term solutions—particularly the urgent need for smarter land use and vertical housing development.

Ranawaka’s proposal to introduce multistoried housing schemes in the Gannoruwa area, as a way of reducing pressure on environmentally sensitive and disaster-prone zones, resonated strongly with urban planners and environmentalists alike.

It also echoed ideas that have been quietly discussed within academic and conservation circles for years but rarely translated into policy.

One such voice is that of Professor Siril Wijesundara, Research Professor at the National Institute of Fundamental Studies (NIFS) and former Director General of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Peradeniya, who believes that disasters are often “less acts of nature and more outcomes of poor planning.”

Professor Siril Wijesundara

“What we repeatedly see in Sri Lanka is not merely natural disasters, but planning failures,” Professor Wijesundara told The Island.

“Floods, landslides and environmental degradation are intensified because we continue to build horizontally, encroaching on wetlands, forest margins and river reservations, instead of thinking vertically and strategically.”

The former Director General notes that the University of Peradeniya itself offers a compelling case study of both the problem and the solution. The main campus, already densely built and ecologically sensitive, continues to absorb new faculties, hostels and administrative buildings, placing immense pressure on green spaces and drainage systems.

“The Peradeniya campus was designed with landscape harmony in mind,” he said. “But over time, ad-hoc construction has compromised that vision. If development continues in the same manner, the campus will lose not only its aesthetic value but also its ecological resilience.”

Professor Wijesundara supports the idea of reorganising the Rajawatte area—located away from the congested core of the university—as a future development zone. Rather than expanding inward and fragmenting remaining open spaces, he argues that Rajawatte can be planned as a well-designed extension, integrating academic, residential and service infrastructure in a controlled manner.

Crucially, he stresses that such reorganisation must go hand in hand with social responsibility, particularly towards minor staff currently living in the Rajawatte area.

“These workers are the backbone of the university. Any development plan must ensure their dignity and wellbeing,” he said. “Providing them with modern, safe and affordable multistoried housing—especially near the railway line close to the old USO premises—would be both humane and practical.”

According to Professor Wijesundara, housing complexes built near existing transport corridors would reduce daily commuting stress, minimise traffic within the campus, and free up valuable land for planned academic use.

More importantly, vertical housing would significantly reduce the university’s physical footprint.

Drawing parallels with Ranawaka’s Gannoruwa proposal, he emphasised that vertical development is no longer optional for Sri Lanka.

“We are a small island with a growing population and shrinking safe land,” he warned.

“If we continue to spread out instead of building up, disasters will become more frequent and more deadly. Vertical housing, when done properly, is environmentally sound, economically efficient and socially just.”

Peradeniya University flooded

The veteran botanist also highlighted the often-ignored link between disaster vulnerability and the destruction of green buffers.

“Every time we clear a lowland, a wetland or a forest patch for construction, we remove nature’s shock absorbers,” he said.

“The Royal Botanic Gardens has survived floods for over a century precisely because surrounding landscapes once absorbed excess water. Urban planning must learn from such ecological wisdom.”

Professor Wijesundara believes that universities, as centres of knowledge, should lead by example.

“If an institution like Peradeniya cannot demonstrate sustainable planning, how can we expect cities to do so?” he asked. “This is an opportunity to show that development and conservation are not enemies, but partners.”

As climate-induced disasters intensify across the country, voices like his—and proposals such as those articulated by Patali Champika Ranawaka—underscore a simple but urgent truth: Sri Lanka’s future safety depends not only on disaster response, but on how and where we build today.

The challenge now lies with policymakers and planners to move beyond television studio discussions and academic warnings, and translate these ideas into concrete, people-centred action.

By Ifham Nizam ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Superstition – Major barrier to learning and social advancement

Published

on

At the initial stage of my six-year involvement in uplifting society through skill-based initiatives, particularly by promoting handicraft work and teaching students to think creatively and independently, my efforts were partially jeopardized by deep-rooted superstition and resistance to rational learning.

Superstitions exerted a deeply adverse impact by encouraging unquestioned belief, fear, and blind conformity instead of reasoning and evidence-based understanding. In society, superstition often sustains harmful practices, social discrimination, exploitation by self-styled godmen, and resistance to scientific or social reforms, thereby weakening rational decision-making and slowing progress. When such beliefs penetrate the educational environment, students gradually lose the habit of asking “why” and “how,” accepting explanations based on fate, omens, or divine intervention rather than observation and logic.

Initially, learners became hesitant to challenge me despite my wrong interpretation of any law, less capable of evaluating information critically, and more vulnerable to misinformation and pseudoscience. As a result, genuine efforts towards social upliftment were obstructed, and the transformative power of education, which could empower individuals economically and intellectually, was weakened by fear-driven beliefs that stood in direct opposition to progress and rational thought. In many communities, illnesses are still attributed to evil spirits or curses rather than treated as medical conditions. I have witnessed educated people postponing important decisions, marriages, journeys, even hospital admissions, because an astrologer predicted an “inauspicious” time, showing how fear governs rational minds.

While teaching students science and mathematics, I have clearly observed how superstition acts as a hidden barrier to learning, critical thinking, and intellectual confidence. Many students come to the classroom already conditioned to believe that success or failure depends on luck, planetary positions, or divine favour rather than effort, practice, and understanding, which directly contradicts the scientific spirit. I have seen students hesitate to perform experiments or solve numerical problems on certain “inauspicious” days.

In mathematics, some students label themselves as “weak by birth”, which creates fear and anxiety even before attempting a problem, turning a subject of logic into a source of emotional stress. In science classes, explanations based on natural laws sometimes clash with supernatural beliefs, and students struggle to accept evidence because it challenges what they were taught at home or in society. This conflict confuses young minds and prevents them from fully trusting experimentation, data, and proof.

Worse still, superstition nurtures dependency; students wait for miracles instead of practising problem-solving, revision, and conceptual clarity. Over time, this mindset damages curiosity, reduces confidence, and limits innovation, making science and mathematics appear difficult, frightening, or irrelevant. Many science teachers themselves do not sufficiently emphasise the need to question or ignore such irrational beliefs and often remain limited to textbook facts and exam-oriented learning, leaving little space to challenge superstition directly. When teachers avoid discussing superstition, they unintentionally reinforce the idea that scientific reasoning and superstitious beliefs can coexist.

To overcome superstition and effectively impose critical thinking among students, I have inculcated the process to create a classroom culture where questioning was encouraged and fear of being “wrong” was removed. Students were taught how to think, not what to think, by consistently using the scientific method—observation, hypothesis, experimentation, evidence, and conclusion—in both science and mathematics lessons. I have deliberately challenged superstitious beliefs through simple demonstrations and hands-on experiments that allow students to see cause-and-effect relationships for themselves, helping them replace belief with proof.

Many so-called “tantrik shows” that appear supernatural can be clearly explained and exposed through basic scientific principles, making them powerful tools to fight superstition among students. For example, acts where a tantrik places a hand or tongue briefly in fire without injury rely on short contact time, moisture on the skin, or low heat transfer from alcohol-based flames rather than divine power.

“Miracles” like ash or oil repeatedly appearing from hands or idols involve concealment or simple physical and chemical tricks. When these tricks are demonstrated openly in classrooms or science programmes and followed by clear scientific explanations, students quickly realise how easily perception can be deceived and why evidence, experimentation, and critical questioning are far more reliable than blind belief.

Linking concepts to daily life, such as explaining probability to counter ideas of luck, or biology to explain illness instead of supernatural causes, makes rational explanations relatable and convincing.

Another unique example that I faced in my life is presented here. About 10 years ago, when I entered my new house but did not organise traditional rituals that many consider essential for peace and prosperity as my relatives believed that without them prosperity would be blocked.  Later on, I could not utilise the entire space of my newly purchased house for earning money, largely because I chose not to perform certain rituals.

While this decision may have limited my financial gains to some extent, I do not consider it a failure in the true sense. I feel deeply satisfied that my son and daughter have received proper education and are now well settled in their employment, which, to me, is a far greater achievement than any ritual-driven expectation of wealth. My belief has always been that a house should not merely be a source of income or superstition-bound anxiety, but a space with social purpose.

Instead of rituals, I strongly feel that the unused portion of my house should be devoted to running tutorials for poor and underprivileged students, where knowledge, critical thinking, and self-reliance can be nurtured. This conviction gives me inner peace and reinforces my faith that education and service to society are more meaningful measures of success than material profit alone.

Though I have succeeded to some extent, this success has not been complete due to the persistent influence of superstition.

by Dr Debapriya Mukherjee
Former Senior Scientist
Central Pollution Control Board, India ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Race hate and the need to re-visit the ‘Clash of Civilizations’

Published

on

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: ‘No to race hate’

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has done very well to speak-up against and outlaw race hate in the immediate aftermath of the recent cold-blooded gunning down of several civilians on Australia’s Bondi Beach. The perpetrators of the violence are believed to be ardent practitioners of religious and race hate and it is commendable that the Australian authorities have lost no time in clearly and unambiguously stating their opposition to the dastardly crimes in question.

The Australian Prime Minister is on record as stating in this connection: ‘ New laws will target those who spread hate, division and radicalization. The Home Affairs Minister will also be given new powers to cancel or refuse visas for those who spread hate and a new taskforce will be set up to ensure the education system prevents, tackles and properly responds to antisemitism.’

It is this promptness and single-mindedness to defeat race hate and other forms of identity-based animosities that are expected of democratic governments in particular world wide. For example, is Sri Lanka’s NPP government willing to follow the Australian example? To put the record straight, no past governments of Sri Lanka initiated concrete measures to stamp out the evil of race hate as well but the present Sri Lankan government which has pledged to end ethnic animosities needs to think and act vastly differently. Democratic and progressive opinion in Sri Lanka is waiting expectantly for the NPP government’ s positive response; ideally based on the Australian precedent to end race hate.

Meanwhile, it is apt to remember that inasmuch as those forces of terrorism that target white communities world wide need to be put down their counterpart forces among extremist whites need to be defeated as well. There could be no double standards on this divisive question of quashing race and religious hate, among democratic governments.

The question is invariably bound up with the matter of expeditiously and swiftly advancing democratic development in divided societies. To the extent to which a body politic is genuinely democratized, to the same degree would identity based animosities be effectively managed and even resolved once and for all. To the extent to which a society is deprived of democratic governance, correctly understood, to the same extent would it experience unmanageable identity-bred violence.

This has been Sri Lanka’s situation and generally it could be stated that it is to the degree to which Sri Lankan citizens are genuinely constitutionally empowered that the issue of race hate in their midst would prove manageable. Accordingly, democratic development is the pressing need.

While the dramatic blood-letting on Bondi Beach ought to have driven home to observers and commentators of world politics that the international community is yet to make any concrete progress in the direction of laying the basis for an end to identity-based extremism, the event should also impress on all concerned quarters that continued failure to address the matters at hand could prove fatal. The fact of the matter is that identity-based extremism is very much alive and well and that it could strike devastatingly at a time and place of its choosing.

It is yet premature for the commentator to agree with US political scientist Samuel P. Huntingdon that a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ is upon the world but events such as the Bondi Beach terror and the continuing abduction of scores of school girls by IS-related outfits, for instance, in Northern Africa are concrete evidence of the continuing pervasive presence of identity-based extremism in the global South.

As a matter of great interest it needs mentioning that the crumbling of the Cold War in the West in the early nineties of the last century and the explosive emergence of identity-based violence world wide around that time essentially impelled Huntingdon to propound the hypothesis that the world was seeing the emergence of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Basically, the latter phrase implied that the Cold War was replaced by a West versus militant religious fundamentalism division or polarity world wide. Instead of the USSR and its satellites, the West, led by the US, had to now do battle with religion and race-based militant extremism, particularly ‘Islamic fundamentalist violence’ .

Things, of course, came to a head in this regard when the 9/11 calamity centred in New York occurred. The event seemed to be startling proof that the world was indeed faced with a ‘Clash of Civilizations’ that was not easily resolvable. It was a case of ‘Islamic militant fundamentalism’ facing the great bulwark, so to speak, of ‘ Western Civilization’ epitomized by the US and leaving it almost helpless.

However, it was too early to write off the US’ capability to respond, although it did not do so by the best means. Instead, it replied with military interventions, for example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, which moves have only earned for the religious fundamentalists more and more recruits.

Yet, it is too early to speak in terms of a ‘Clash of Civilizations’. Such a phenomenon could be spoken of if only the entirety of the Islamic world took up arms against the West. Clearly, this is not so because the majority of the adherents of Islam are peaceably inclined and want to coexist harmoniously with the rest of the world.

However, it is not too late for the US to stop religious fundamentalism in its tracks. It, for instance, could implement concrete measures to end the blood-letting in the Middle East. Of the first importance is to end the suffering of the Palestinians by keeping a tight leash on the Israeli Right and by making good its boast of rebuilding the Gaza swiftly.

Besides, the US needs to make it a priority aim to foster democratic development worldwide in collaboration with the rest of the West. Military expenditure and the arms race should be considered of secondary importance and the process of distributing development assistance in the South brought to the forefront of its global development agenda, if there is one.

If the fire-breathing religious demagogue’s influence is to be blunted worldwide, then, it is development, understood to mean equitable growth, that needs to be fostered and consolidated by the democratic world. In other words, the priority ought to be the empowerment of individuals and communities. Nothing short of the latter measures would help in ushering a more peaceful world.

Continue Reading

Trending