Opinion

Cattle slaughter ban and common sense

Published

6 years ago

2020/09/24

By Rohana R. Wasala

It was reported in the media (September 8, 2020) that Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa’s proposal for a ban on cattle slaughter received cabinet approval, as well as the approval of the government parliamentary group. Some Buddhist monks, and allied groups who have long been agitating for such legislation to be enacted, raised euphoric cries and invoked blessings on the Prime Minister and the President. I don’t know how the two privately reacted to the acclamation they received on the basis of a controversial measure, tentatively proposed, but not finally agreed upon: Did they accept the still unearned accolades with a feeling of exultant self-vindication or with a sense of gnawing doubt that the whole thing might misfire? They are more likely to experience the latter state of mind, because this ban cannot be imposed without harmful repercussions, given the unalterable ground realities that must be recognized and accommodated before enacting and implementing the proposed ban. This is so particularly in relation to the prevailing economic and political crises in today’s globalized world, of which Sri Lanka is a small member, hardly noticed, except for her strategic location and her beleaguered state due to the same circumstance, trapped between three superpowers – two global and one regional. The domestic fallout could be even more critical. This is the worst imaginable time for such a radical measure to be implemented, however popular it could be among a section of the people.

But let’s not be too alarmed. Media Minister and Cabinet spokesman Keheliya Rambukwella (a good choice for the latter job, in my view) managed to assuage the fears of sceptics, like me, who are not convinced about the actual benefits, but are really concerned about the possible unsavoury economic, socio-cultural, and political consequences, of a ban being imposed on cattle slaughter, when Rambukwelle told the local media that Prime Minister Rajapaksa ‘hopes to ban cattle slaughter’ and that ‘he would decide when to submit the proposal to the government’. The government announced that a final decision will be delayed by a month (as reported in the online Istanbul/Turkey based TRT News Magazine). Rajapaksa’s cautious non-commitment hints at the possibility of a reassessment of the pros and cons of the move and points towards the likelihood of sanity finally prevailing. But this will need a lot of reverse convincing to do among the convinced (I mean, among those who are for the ban).

From my point of view (for what it is worth), it is vitally important to be mindful of how the ban would be viewed abroad, as well as among domestic non-Buddhist religious minorities, though it might go down well with a majority of Buddhists and Hindus. There is no question about trying to assert our rights as an independent sovereign nation and to pursue political and economic policies that we believe serve the best interest of our people. However, divisive party politics of the recent years have landed Sri Lanka in such a vulnerable situation, globally, that any government that even occasionally dares to defy undue superpower pressures in order to accommodate the legitimate demands of its own people, gets labelled as undemocratic, autocratic, oppressive, and therefore ripe for replacement. For a Sri Lankan government to be on its best behaviour is no guarantor of its survival in a context where India, China, and America are each looking after their own national interest in a competitive relationship with one another at the expense of Sri Lanka’s very survival. But what can we do about it? I think that the present government, under the joint leadership of the President and the Prime Minister, is doing what it can in these internationally beleaguered and internally treacherous times. Insisting on passing potentially divisive legislation is no way to help them.

Today, with Gotabaya Rajapaksa as President, we have the first executive head of government since independence who has found a way to consult with the Maha Sangha as a monolithic entity through non-political, non-sectarian interaction. He appointed a board of monks called the Bauddha Upadeshaka Sabhawa (the Buddhist Advisory Council) to advise him, and had its first meeting on April 24, 2020. It consists of the Mahanayake Theras of the Three Nikayas and a group of prominent scholar monks, who are specialists in various fields, connected with the Buddha Sasana, in which they have time-honoured claims and commitments. The monks meet with the President on the third Friday of every month. In their last meeting, on September 18, they commended the President for taking steps, in accordance with their proposals, for, among other things, the protection of historical sites of archaeological importance, development of Pirivena education, designing of a national educational policy, control of the drug menace, etc. But, as far as the Derana TV news coverage was concerned, there was no mention of the cow slaughter ban proposal. Can’t this be an indication that it is not being perceived as such a pressing issue?

There is no gainsaying the fact that Buddhist monks worked tirelessly for the victory of the nationalist camp, and they did not do so for any personal benefit. There are a number of activist monk groups each articulating different issues of broad national interest such as environment protection in addition to the central issue of the threat to the Buddha Sasana, the predominantly Buddhist nation (the people) and the unitary state that comes from the handful of foreign-sponsored separatist racists and religious extremists among the peaceful mainstream Tamil and Muslim minorities, respectively. These traitorous elements dominated the previous regime. The President appointed the Buddhist Advisory Council, partly in recognition of the service they did in helping to save the country from misgovernance, but primarily in fulfilment of the constitutional requirement of giving foremost place to Buddhism. We can expect nothing but good from this interaction between the prominent Nayake and scholarly monks and the President. Is it likely that they will fail to understand the problematic nature of the proposed ban on cattle slaughter?

Be that as it may, we can’t overlook the fact that some well known leading activists, heads of some animal rights and public health maintenance-related organizations, welcomed the proposal with great enthusiasm, despite the principal proponent’s non-committal stance. These included such prominent personalities as the Justice for Animals and Nature Organization Chairman Ven. Dr Omalpe Sobhita Thera, founder of Sarvodaya Dr A.T. Ariyaratne, and GMOA head, medical specialist Dr Anuruddha Padeniya. They published a public announcement-cum-invitation to ‘all professional and civil organizations’ asking them to attend a meeting at the ‘Sangha Headquarters,’ on Alvitigala Mawatha, on September 20. They are urging the enforcement of the ban proposal. An announcement-cum-invitation was issued on September 17, the day that marked the 156th birth anniversary of Anagarika Dharmapala, who had pioneered the agitation for putting an end to cattle slaughter. In his time, probably, it was more meaningful and less controversial to do so than today. This announcement appeared in the online Lankaweb Forum page the same day, where I read it. It must have been published elsewhere, too. The author and principal signatory to the document, Ven. Sobhita, wrote (in translation): ‘It need hardly be stressed that the principled, determined and fearless enactment of the praiseworthy decision taken by the government MPs, headed by the Prime Minister, requires the approval and support of the general public. We believe that we are going to get your fullest cooperation in this regard. We intend to call a meeting of delegates from such organizations and take decisions in connection with organizing the relevant future activities to achieve this aim.’

Personally, I have the highest respect for these three eminent persons (who have already done much commendable service to Mother Lanka in their different capacities), and the others mentioned in the document, and also empathize fully with their commitment to the cause they believe in, but I do not share their conviction about the feasibility, the functionality, or the actual benefits, of the proposition that they are wholeheartedly supporting. I would support a movement with the same devotion to stop animal slaughter in general, not just cattle slaughter, if there was such a movement, but I know that it is an unlikely initiative, an impossibility even. I don’t see any rationality in such a project. The kind of free rational thinking that the Buddha advised the young Kalamas to adopt without blindly following him – the way to Enlightenment, budh,rational intelligence, that Narendra Modi identified some months ago, invoking the common intellectual heritage of India which we, too, share through Buddhism, as opposed to yudh, war/conflict, as the best way to resolve problems – seems to be at a premium, i.e., there is paradoxically little available of it – in the sacred Treasury of Theravada Buddhism that Sri Lanka is often claimed to be. Occasional submergence of practical rational thinking as in this case – our rational faculty sometimes becomes manifest in its humblest form of common sense – could prove costly in more than one sense for the whole country.

Rational minds can conceive of alternative ways of dealing with a problem, when sometimes the most direct solution is likely to create worse problems than the original problem itself like the cattle slaughter ban, if implemented, will certainly do. It is not likely to contribute towards enhancing intercommunal goodwill as already implied above. Many Muslims are employed in the meat industry, and there are secondary industries, like tanning (making leather out of animal hides), shoe making, and the manufacture of leather products, such handbags, waist belts, saddles, some percussion instruments, etc. Import of beef from abroad will lead to increase in prices, in addition to the loss of jobs, and the drain on scarce foreign exchange that it will entail. We may easily imagine the problematic implications for the important dairy milk industry, the development of which is essential for stopping the import of toxic milk powder.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

Can a punishment-free child become a threat to Sri Lankan society?

Published

9 hours ago

2026/06/19

Thilina Walpola

Children are the future of every nation, and the values they learn during childhood shape the society they will eventually lead. In Sri Lanka, where family traditions, respect for elders, and social responsibility have long been important cultural values, the way children are raised remains a topic of great interest. In recent years, many parents and educators have moved away from traditional forms of punishment and embraced more child-friendly approaches to discipline. While protecting children from physical and emotional harm is essential, an important question arises: can a child who grows up without any form of punishment or consequences become a threat to Sri Lankan society?

To answer this question, it is necessary to understand the difference between punishment and discipline. Punishment is often associated with penalties imposed for wrongdoing, while discipline refers to teaching children self-control, responsibility, and respect for rules. Modern child psychology generally discourages harsh physical punishment because it can cause fear, anxiety, and resentment. However, completely removing consequences for inappropriate behavior may create a different set of problems.

Sri Lankan society has traditionally emphasized discipline within the family. Parents, grandparents, and teachers have often played active roles in guiding children’s behavior. Respect for elders, obedience, and good manners have been considered important virtues. While some traditional disciplinary methods may no longer be acceptable, the underlying principle of teaching accountability remains relevant.

A child who never faces consequences for wrongdoing may struggle to understand the boundaries that exist in society. For example, if a child is allowed to insult others, damage property, or ignore rules without correction, they may develop the belief that their actions have no consequences. Such attitudes can become problematic when the child enters school, the workplace, or the wider community.

Sri Lankan schools already face challenges related to student discipline. Teachers often report difficulties in managing classrooms where some students refuse to follow instructions or respect school regulations. When children are not taught accountability at home, educational institutions may find it harder to maintain a productive learning environment. This can affect not only the individual student but also classmates whose education is disrupted.

Another concern is the development of entitlement. A child who is never told “no” may come to believe that personal desires should always be fulfilled. In a society where cooperation and mutual respect are essential, such attitudes can lead to conflicts with peers, teachers, employers, and even family members. Sri Lanka’s social fabric depends heavily on community relationships, and individuals who fail to respect others can weaken these bonds.

The influence of social media and modern technology has added another dimension to this issue. Today’s children have access to information and entertainment on an unprecedented scale. Without proper guidance and consequences, some may misuse technology, engage in cyberbullying, spread misinformation, or develop unhealthy habits. Parents who avoid setting limits may unintentionally expose children to risks that affect both personal development and social well-being.

The workplace offers another example of why accountability is important. Sri Lanka’s economic development depends on a workforce that is disciplined, responsible, and capable of working with others. Employers value punctuality, respect, and professionalism. Individuals who grow up without learning responsibility may find it difficult to meet these expectations, affecting both their personal success and the productivity of organizations.

However, it is equally important not to interpret this argument as support for harsh punishment. Research has shown that excessive physical or emotional punishment can have serious negative effects on children. Fear-based parenting may produce obedience in the short term but can damage confidence, trust, and mental health in the long term. Therefore, the solution is not stricter punishment but more effective discipline.

Positive discipline provides a balanced alternative. It involves setting clear rules, explaining expectations, and applying fair consequences when those rules are broken. For instance, if a child neglects schoolwork, they may lose certain privileges until responsibilities are fulfilled. If they damage property, they can be required to help repair or replace it. Such consequences teach accountability while preserving the child’s dignity.

Sri Lankan parents, teachers, and community leaders all have a role to play in nurturing responsible citizens. Families should create environments where children feel loved and supported but also understand that actions have consequences. Schools should encourage character development alongside academic achievement. Religious and community organizations can reinforce values such as honesty, compassion, and respect for others.

A balanced approach is especially important in a rapidly changing society. As Sri Lanka continues to modernize and integrate with the global community, young people must learn not only their rights but also their responsibilities. Freedom without responsibility can lead to selfishness, while discipline without compassion can lead to fear. The challenge is to find the middle ground.

A punishment-free child can become a concern for Sri Lankan society if the absence of punishment also means the absence of discipline and accountability. Children who never learn consequences may struggle to respect rules, authority, and the rights of others. However, harsh punishment is not the answer. The most effective approach combines love, guidance, clear boundaries, and fair consequences. By raising children who understand both freedom and responsibility, Sri Lanka can build a future generation that strengthens society rather than threatens it.

Saumya Aloysius

(An essayist, children’s writer and freelance writer who holds a Master’s Degree in Sociology from the University of Kelaniya)

Opinion

SriLankan Airbus struck by lightning

Published

9 hours ago

2026/06/19

Thilina Walpola

A representational image

On Friday 12 June, 2026, a SriLankan Airlines Airbus 330 was en route from Colombo to Sydney, Australia was about 45 minutes into its flight when a loud bang was heard, accompanied by a blinding flash. In what was assumed to be a lightning strike, the airplane’s left (No. 1) engine was damaged, forcing the aircraft to return to BIA-Katunayake, where it landed safely.

Lightning travels from cloud to cloud or cloud to ground. Because the aircraft is not electrically ‘grounded’, or ‘earthed’, it must have been in the path of the thunder bolt purely by chance. There is also a phenomenon whereby the aircraft may travel through an electrically charged atmosphere (for example a cloud) where an electrical charge could build up and strike, or be emitted, as lightning. In such an instance, pilots hear electrical static in their headsets before the strike. Usually, when lightning strikes an aircraft in flight, the electrical charges remain on the outside, as on a ‘Faraday’s Cage’ apparatus, and the passengers and crew are perfectly safe.

To help the efficient and safe discharge of static electricity from the airplane’s structure, static wicks, or static dischargers, are fitted at the trailing (rearmost) edges of the wings and tail surfaces. When an airplane has landed after a lightning strike, ground engineers count the number of wicks that may have been burnt out to ensure that a minimum (recommended) number is available for a subsequent flight. Sometimes, there is minor damage, like pitting of the paintwork at the points where the charges left the aircraft.

The last instance in the USA of an airplane believed to have been lost due to a lightning strike was on December 8, 1963, when a Pan Am Boeing 707-121, en route from Baltimore, Maryland to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, suffered a fuel tank explosion, later determined to have been the result of a lightning strike. Since then, aircraft have been rendered immune from lightning damage thanks to extensive research conducted by manufacturers using high-voltage currents.

Interestingly, modern airliners have electronic instrument displays which don’t even flicker when the aircraft is struck by lightning. By a process of connecting all the metallic parts, known as ‘bonding’, the entire fuselage effectively becomes a protective cocoon, so electrical charges caused by lightning will always reside on the outside of the aircraft.

What is unusual in the recent SriLankan Airlines incident is the extent of damage to the left engine. Did it encounter hail or ingest something?

Only a thorough, independent inquiry by aviation safety investigators will reveal the cause.

GUWAN SEEYA

Opinion

Beyond diagnosis: A strategic design for 7% growth by 2029 (Part I)

Published

1 day ago

2026/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

“Vision without execution is hallucination.” – Thomas Edison

Introduction: Stabilisation Is Not Transformation

Sri Lanka has come a long way since the economic collapse of 2022. Inflation has been brought under control. Foreign reserves have improved. Debt restructuring has advanced. Government revenue has increased significantly through taxation reforms. The exchange rate has stabilised, and confidence has gradually returned to financial markets.

These achievements deserve recognition.

However, stabilisation should not be confused with economic transformation. A patient discharged from intensive care is not necessarily healthy. Likewise, an economy that has escaped collapse has not necessarily achieved sustainable prosperity.

The central economic question facing Sri Lanka today is no longer how to avoid another crisis. Rather, it is how to achieve sustained economic growth of at least 7% per annum by 2029.

Unfortunately, much of the current policy debate remains trapped in economic diagnosis. Policymakers, economists, and commentators repeatedly identify familiar problems: (i) low productivity, (ii) weak exports, i(iii) Inadequate innovation, (iv) poor competitiveness, and (v) insufficient investment. While these diagnoses are correct, they are not new.

Sri Lanka now needs economic engineering.

The country requires a clear, measurable, and actionable National Growth Strategy for 2026-2029 that identifies (i) where growth will come from,(ii) what investments are required,(iii) which institutions will lead implementation, and (iv) how success will be measured.

The difference between diagnosis and engineering is the difference between describing a problem and solving it.

The Missing National Growth Target

One of the most striking weaknesses in Sri Lanka’s economic discourse is the absence of a publicly articulated growth target supported by a detailed implementation framework.

Successful economies establish measurable objectives.

Sri Lanka should adopt the following growth trajectory:

2026 – 4%

2027 – 5%

2028 – 6%

2029 – 7%

Such targets would provide direction to investors, public institutions, universities, exporters, and development partners. Without a destination, even the best policies risk becoming disconnected initiatives.

Today, many policy interventions appear fragmented—valuable in isolation but lacking integration into a broader national growth framework.

Growth Will Not Come From Consumption

For decades Sri Lanka relied heavily on consumption, imports, remittances, tourism, and external borrowing.

That model has reached its limits.

No country has achieved sustained prosperity through consumption-led growth alone.

The countries that transformed themselves—Singapore, South Korea, Ireland, Vietnam, and China—generated growth through productive investment, exports, industrialisation, and integration into global markets.

Sri Lanka’s future growth must therefore be driven by investment and exports rather than domestic consumption.

The challenge is not increasing spending but increasing productive capacity.

Export-Led Growth: The First Pillar of Transformation

Every successful Asian growth story has one characteristic in common: exports.

Exports generate foreign exchange, create jobs, attract investment, encourage innovation, and improve productivity.

Sri Lanka should establish an ambitious target of doubling export earnings within the next decade.

This requires moving beyond traditional exports and expanding into:

High-value agriculture

Food processing

Information technology services

Logistics services

Advanced manufacturing

Professional services

Export growth must become a national mission comparable to post-war reconstruction efforts seen elsewhere in Asia.

Without a major expansion of exports, sustained 7% growth will remain elusive.

Manufacturing: The Forgotten Growth Engine

Manufacturing remains the single most important source of rapid economic transformation worldwide. Vietnam provides perhaps the best recent example.

Through (i) industrial zones, (ii) trade agreements, (iii) infrastructure development, and (iv) targeted investment attraction, Vietnam became deeply integrated into Asian production networks.

Sri Lanka possesses strategic advantages:

A prime Indian Ocean location

Strong port infrastructure

Educated labour force

Proximity to India

The country should establish specialised manufacturing clusters focusing on:

Electronics assembly

Medical devices

Processed food products

Boat building

Rubber-based products

Engineering components

Rather than attempting to compete with every country, Sri Lanka should specialise in selected niches where competitive advantages can be developed.

RCEP: The Strategic Door to Asia

Sri Lanka’s future lies increasingly in Asia.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) represents the largest trading bloc in the world and includes many of the fastest-growing economies.

Membership or closer integration with RCEP supply chains could provide Sri Lankan exporters with access to markets, investment, technology, and production networks that are currently beyond reach.

Unfortunately, discussion on RCEP remains limited compared with its strategic significance.

A dedicated national roadmap for RCEP engagement should become a top economic priority.

The question is not whether Sri Lanka can afford to integrate more deeply into Asia.

The question is whether Sri Lanka can afford not to.

Knowledge Economy: Turning Universities Into Growth Institutions

Sri Lanka’s universities produce thousands of graduates annually, yet their contribution to commercial innovation remains limited.

Globally, universities have become engines of economic development.

Research institutions should not merely produce graduates; they should produce patents, technologies, startups, and commercial solutions.

A national innovation framework should:

Link universities with industry

Encourage commercialisation of research

Support technology transfer

Expand startup financing

Reward innovation and entrepreneurship

Knowledge must become an economic asset rather than an academic exercise.

Dairy, Agriculture, And Import Substitution

Export growth alone is insufficient.

Sri Lanka must also reduce unnecessary import dependence.

The dairy sector offers a compelling example.

For decades, billions of rupees have left the country through dairy imports despite favourable climatic conditions and substantial agricultural potential.

A comprehensive dairy development strategy should focus on:

Improved genetics

Feed production

Commercial farming

Processing investment

Farmer productivity

The objective should be import substitution combined with rural income growth.

The same principle can be applied selectively to other sectors where domestic production is economically viable.

Creating A National Investment Targeting Agency

Sri Lanka does not need another bureaucracy.

It needs a professional institution dedicated exclusively to investment targeting.

Instead of passively waiting for investors, this agency would actively identify and attract strategic investments aligned with national priorities.

Its mandate would include:

Identifying priority sectors

Marketing opportunities globally

Coordinating approvals

Monitoring outcomes

Facilitating technology transfer

Singapore’s Economic Development Board and Ireland’s Industrial Development Agency demonstrate how targeted investment institutions can transform national economies.

Sri Lanka requires a similar mechanism adapted to local realities.

From Economic Diagnosis To Economic Engineering

The next stage of Sri Lanka’s recovery requires a fundamental shift in thinking.

The policy debate must move beyond identifying problems. The country already knows its problems.The challenge is implementation.Every policy proposal should be evaluated against a simple question:

Will this contribute to achieving 7% growth by 2029?

If the answer is no, resources should be redirected.

Economic engineering requires focus, prioritisation, accountability, and measurable outcomes. The era of fragmented initiatives must give way to a coherent national growth strategy.

Summary

Sri Lanka has achieved significant macroeconomic stabilisation, but stabilisation is only the first step toward sustainable prosperity.

To move from recovery to transformation, Sri Lanka should adopt a National Growth Strategy for 2026-2029 built around five pillars:

Export-led growth

Investment-led growth

Manufacturing expansion

Knowledge-economy development

Regional integration through RCEP and Asian supply chains

Supporting sectors such as dairy, tourism, logistics, and information technology should be strategically developed within this framework.

Most importantly, investment must be targeted rather than scattered, supported by specialised institutions and measurable performance indicators.

Conclusion

History demonstrates that no nation has become prosperous by accident. Economic success is rarely the product of isolated policies or short-term political initiatives. It is the outcome of a deliberate strategy pursued consistently over many years.

Sri Lanka stands at a crossroads.

One path leads to modest growth, periodic crises, recurring debt challenges, and continued vulnerability. The other leads to transformation through investment, exports, innovation, manufacturing, and regional integration.

The choice is ultimately strategic.

The time has come for Sri Lanka to move from economic diagnosis to economic engineering.

The future will not be determined by how successfully the country stabilised after the crisis. It will be determined by how effectively it builds the foundations for sustained growth thereafter. If Sri Lanka can articulate and execute a coherent investment-led growth strategy today, achieving 7% growth by 2029 need not be an aspiration.

It can become a national objective—and a national achievement, economic Engineering

The writer, among many, served as the Special Advisor to the Office of the President of Namibia from 2006 to 2012 and was a Senior Consultant with the UNDP for 20 years. He was a Senior Economist with the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (1972-1993). He can be reached via asoka.seneviratne@gmail.com