Connect with us

Features

At 80, CPSL launches economic alternative, but United Front is unclear

Published

on

The writer and his wife at the CP anniversary meeting

Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

The Communist Party of Sri Lanka can be proud of itself. A relatively small party, it’s 80th anniversary event was a big splash or as we might observe retrospectively, a big bang. It produced a lively, well-attended event, with significant foreign Communist representation. The CPSL showed itself to be unlike its older sibling on the left, the LSSP.

Samasamajism remains politically alive only in the elderly personality of Vasudeva Nanayakkara, who leads the Democratic Left Front. It has been unable to reproduce itself, but the Communist Party with its new, middle-aged leadership of Dr. Weerasinghe a medical specialist, shows that the CP has made the generational shift. For an old, modestly-sized party, the CPSL’s Maharagama event demonstrated dynamism, enthusiasm, and in a word, life.

DR. WICKS: FOUNDING FATHER

Clearly and rightfully the party had given Dr SA Wickramasinghe, rather than the more determinedly revisionist Pieter Keuneman, the pride of place. ‘Doctor’ is accurately named the founding father– and therefore the more ‘organic’ ‘Southern’ Communist tradition is the wellspring of inspiration. In long retrospect, the figure of Dr SA Wickramasinghe emerges as the greatest of the founding fathers of the Lankan Left.

The secret of the CPSL’s spiritedness was disclosed by Dew Gunasekara’s opening remark that theirs was “not just a political party but a political Movement”. That Movement, as demonstrated by the grainy, black and white footage in the documentary clips that were superbly used at the 80th anniversary, was an international movement the history of which included the Red Army’s defeat of Nazi fascism and the Vietnamese communists expulsion of the mighty US military.

Delegates from the Communist Party of China, India’s two main Communist parties the CPI-M and CPI, the Communist Party of Nepal-UML and the Communist Party of Bangladesh attended the 80th anniversary event of the CPSL, testimony to the actuality of that international movement.

The excellent speech by the CPI-M delegate mentioned comrade N. Sanmugathasan, commended the Aragalaya (which was hopefully not lost on Wimal Weerawansa seated in the audience) and urged the devolution of power as solution to the Tamil National Question.

It is the pride in that history which forms a part of world history and remains concretized in the mighty achievements of China and Vietnam, that has given the CPSL its elan vital and kept it alive while the LSSP has withered even beyond mummification.

IDIRIMAGA-2

The CPSL had a text it was rightly proud of, that had stood the test of time. That text was “Idirimaga” — The Way Forward—whose prime author and articulator was Dr SA Wickramasinghe. As DEW disclosed in his speech, its co-author was GVS de Silva, economist and Communist (before he joined Philip Gunawardena after 1956) with a razor-sharp mind. ‘GVS’ was the most brilliant Marxist mind of his generation.

The ideas in ‘Idirimaga’ influenced both the UNP’s accelerated Mahaweli project and Rohana Wijeweera’s five lectures.

Nowhere in its history did Samasamajism (with its ‘golden brains’) produce anything as memorable and durable as ‘Idirimaga’. Among other things, it was, as Dew said, the first Sri Lankan text to set out a strategy of sustainable development.

On its 80th birthday, the CPSL returned to ‘Idirimaga’ and produced its sequel: “Idirimagen Idiriyata” (‘Forward from The Way Forward’), a 250-page alternative economic platform and program for the Sri Lankan crisis, produced by a team of 25, which contains 11 PhD-holders, five of whom are full professors. The team’s intellectual hard-drive is the Asia Progress Forum, a non-party think-tank of political economists. Their product makes much more sense than the ex-left ‘New Conservatism’ in economics that buys into the ‘There Is No Alternative’ but Ranil’ propaganda. It also makes more sense than Dr Harsha de Silva’s Economic Blueprint.

At the 80th anniversary event, the alternative economic platform – let’s hope posterity can call it ‘Idirimaga 2’—was accompanied by a political formula. The party’s Gen-Sec Dr Weerasinghe and its fiery parliamentary orator Weerasumana Weerasingha stressed the need for a broad united front. They were taking their cue from party chairman Dew Gunasekara who made the link between (1) the broad national united front (of a four-class bloc) slogan presented by Dr SA Wickramasinghe at the CP’s fourth Congress in Matara in 1950, and (2) the economic program for national regeneration contained in the ‘Idirimaga’ (The Way Forward) in 1955.

UNCLEAR UNITED FRONT

However, that’s where the real problems come in. Where is the united front, what are its constituent components, what is its main objective?

If the main objective is to build an anti-neoliberal bloc around a viable economic alternative program, a credible progressive answer to the crisis, then there has to be a roundtable which brings together three progressive-reformist alternatives already on the table, namely those of the CPSL, the Freedom People’s Congress (FPC) and the NPP-JVP. When will that discussion commence and who will convene it?

If on the other hand, the main idea is a united democratic front, then there should be a conclave of the broadest sort, involving all Opposition parties or more correctly all parties who are willing to fight for the holding of elections next year, starting with the local government elections and provincial council elections right now.

If the united front is to be of the Left, or have Left unity as its core, then it is a pointless exercise without the JVP-NPP and the FSP.

If it is to be an anti-Ranil united front, then all Opposition parties in and out of parliament should be invited. The same goes if the goal is to be an anti-autocracy, anti-austerity bloc.

Those who advocate a united front, which is indeed the need of the hour, must be realists above all. Even if all the shards of the 2019-2020 SLPP-led coalition form a united front, it will be similar to the United Left Front (ULF) of 1977 which also drew in PDP, led by the SLFP progressive dissidents TB Subasinghe, Nanda Ellawela, Tennyson Edirisuriya, and AM Jinadasa.

The United Left Front was wiped out at the 1977 general election because the voters were unconvinced that they had paid adequately for the sin of not leaving the United Front coalition government of Sirimavo Bandaranaike when there was great economic privation from 1973. The same thing could happen to any combination of the 2019-2020 coalition.

If the CPSL’s new ‘Idirimaga’ is to have any chance of implementation it must influence mainstream policy, which means it must be inserted into a coalition that has a chance of governing. Plainly put, any united front worth the effort must be capable of being elected, ideally to office and if not, at least to the Opposition as a fraction that can have an impact.

Any serious attempt at building a united front must firmly grasp two principles enunciated by the greatest political theorist of the Marxist tradition, the Italian Communist leader Antonio Gramsci:

“The proletariat can become the leading and dominant class to the extent that it succeeds in creating a system of alliances which allows it to mobilize the majority of the population…” (Gramsci, Some Aspects of the Southern Question’, SPW II)

“It is necessary to draw attention violently to the present as it is, if one wants to transform it”. (Gramsci, Prison Notebooks)

What is the answer that confronts us when one puts these two propositions together and applies it to Sri Lanka today? What in the current situation is the system of alliances that can bring together a majority of the population? Above all, the matter has to be considered concretely.

There are only two ‘centers’ which in alliance with each other or with the center-left, can unite the majority. They are, in no particular order, the centrist-populist SJB or the left-populist JVP-NPP.

One can rule out any united front which contains these two rivals, though it is problematic how anyone can secure an election next year from the autocrat Wickremesinghe without a broad bloc, perhaps an action bloc rather than a political-programmatic one, that contains both the SJB and the JVP.

Let us set that consideration aside for the rest of this year. This leaves the obvious conclusion that the parties of the left and center-left cannot merely unite with each other because their post-election presence in parliament is likely to be marginal. They have to enter a united front either with the SJB or the JVP-NPP.

I have no intention of tilting the outcome of the discussion in one way or another, except to warn that the ultra-nationalists in Uttara Lanka will desperately play the chauvinist-xenophobic card for electoral purposes and discredit the Left.

However, I do wish to point out that there are precedents in the history of the CPSL for an alliance with either the centrist SJB or the left-populist NPP-JVP:

The Ceylon Communist Party entered the Ceylon National Congress and played an influential role in 1943-1947, especially 1943-44. This model would clearly support a united front with the SJB.

The Ceylon Communist Party was a constituent member of the United Left Front of 1963-64. This model would clearly support a united front with the JVP-NPP and/or the FSP.

In 1947, at the (negatively) historic discussion at Sri Nissanka’s residence ‘Yamuna’, the Left had a chance of uniting with the progressive centrists such as SWRD Bandaranaike, but sectarianism as symbolized by Dr Colvin R de Silva’s remark that such unity would be a “three-headed donkey” wrecked that chance. Fifteen years later the LSSP would also break the United Left Front (and swing on “Sirima’s saree pota” as more radical leftists denounced it).

Those parties gathered at the 80th anniversary of the CPSL constituted the progressive or center-left camp. The progressives must partner either the Center (SJB) or the Left (JVP). There is no viable third option. After decades, the Old Left has the intellectual capital to invest in any partnership: the CPSL-Asia Progress Forum’s alternative economic program, ‘Idirimagen Idiriyata’.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines

Published

on

Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.

Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.

Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.

Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.

Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.

The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.

The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:

=Joint planning across operational divisions

=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making

=Continuous cross-functional consultation

=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates

Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.

Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.

By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst

Continue Reading

Features

Why Pi Day?

Published

on

International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow

The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.

Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.

Archimedes

It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.

Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.

Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.

π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)

The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.

π = 9801/(1103 √8)

For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.

It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.

This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.

Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.

Happy Pi Day!

The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.

by R N A de Silva

Continue Reading

Features

Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink

Published

on

A combined US-Israel attack on Iran.(BBC)

The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.

As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.

It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.

Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.

Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.

Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.

The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.

While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.

On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.

Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.

Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.

Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.

Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.

Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.

However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.

Continue Reading

Trending