Opinion

Challenge before main presidential candidates

Published

2 years ago

2024/07/31

Sahan Weerasooriya

Ranil - Sajith - Anura

by Krishantha Prasad Cooray

There’s a political poster that’s been splashed on the walls of Colombo. Black letters on a yellow background mean that the author or the party cannot be identified. It is obviously a teaser campaign. It comes with a promise, which of course is the bread and butter of all politicians. Apparently, ‘the lie will come to an end,’ and on the 29th, the name of the messiah who will take all Sri Lankans to some yet-to-be-named promised land will be revealed.

This is the season for that kind of thing, so the timing is not bad at all. After all, people are talking about elections these days. They are wondering if elections will be held soon and, if so, whether it would be a presidential or parliamentary election. They talk about candidates, those who have announced their intentions and those who might very soon.

An election there will be, that much is certain. Will it be to elect a president or 225 parliamentarians? Let’s first consider the second option, which at this point is something that the president can decide upon.

A general election will tell us the relative strengths of the various parties and, of course, the temper of the electorate. As things stand, two political groups stand to gain: the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) and the National People’s Power, better known as the NPP, which is made up of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and a scattering of individuals of varying stature and more or less nondescript organisations.

The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, or the ‘Pohottuwa’, would benefit only in the sense that a few would get elected, whereas they would probably fare even worse if a presidential election comes first; the winner and the winner’s party would gain enough edge to shove the Pohottuwa closer to the dustbin of history. In any event, they wouldn’t even get king-making numbers. The Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) is where the United National Party was after Gotabhaya Rajapaksa won the presidential election in 2019. The SLFP might secure a few seats in an alliance but would be an also-ran if it opts to contest alone.

How about the NPP? Today, the NPP is being considered by people who would not have a few years or even a few months ago. They say, ‘let’s try these people out.’ That’s the slogan of the desperate, dispossessed, and maybe the hopeful. Nevertheless, that ‘default option’ might work in their favour, although anything less than an absolute majority would make the ‘we can and we will win’ mantra they’ve been marketing sound a bit hollow.

The UNP was the Grand Old Party, but the ‘grand’ part of it is no longer valid. They have a president, but the question is, ‘where are his people?’ Some may answer, ‘with Sajith’, while others might think that in a season of shifting alliances, prominent stalwarts may gravitate back to the political walawwa. In a word, unlikely, especially if a parliamentary election is held first.

Why should the President risk it all by going for a general election when he may be able to cobble together a workable alliance should he run for President and win? He is risk-averse, as he clearly showed in 2010 and 2019 when the stars were aligned against him. In 2015, he worked out the arithmetic: Maithripala Sirisena had a better chance, and the premiership was a decent consolation prize.

It’s a presidential election that’s on the cards. This forces us to consider the contenders: as of now, Ranil Wickremesinghe (UNP, with or without the support of ex-UNPers), Sajith Premadasa (SJB sans Sarath Fonseka and Champika Ranawaka from his 2019 team), and Anura Kumara Dissanayake (JVP plus all those who have to utter the prayer ‘We are NPP and not JVP’ to convince themselves that they are not gullible).

We could delve into the histories of the relevant parties, ideologies espoused and amended, and track records, but that would only produce dirty and bloodied hands. Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans are realists; they go for the ‘best of the bad lot’ simply because it’s their names that are on ballot papers. In a presidential election, they look at candidates more than parties, personalities more than ideology or party history. So, let’s consider these three because the others are still peripheral to the case: Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW for convenience), Sajith Premadasa (SP), and Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD).

RW is the most experienced politician in the country. He’s either been a cabinet minister, the Leader of the Opposition, Prime Minister, or the President since the age of 28, except for a few months between Gotabhaya’s rise and fall. His detractors may say that he was a pin-chance president, but in all sobriety, it has to be acknowledged that when everyone was ready to slash and burn, only he undertook the unenviable task of dousing a nation that had been set on fire. Chest-beaters and braggarts ranted and raved, but RW brought about some semblance of stability. We are not out of the woods, as he often says, but he has made it possible for people who believe that they will not be lost in the wilderness forever.

The question is, ‘RW with whom?’ He simply doesn’t have a team that’s worth talking about. He has depended on the same set of people whose one and only character trait is self-interest, in other words, keeping RW in power so they could exercise power. Their blemishes are many. Let’s leave it at that.

A few weeks ago, at an event marking Rohitha ‘Raththaran’ Abeygunawardena’s 27 years in politics, Pohottuwa strongman Basil Rajapaksa took a not-so-veiled dig at the President, ‘Nayath nae, bayath nae (we are not in debt to you, and neither do we fear you).’

That was one of many moments where RW could have shed the Pohottuwa baggage. After all, at this point, the Pohottuwa needs RW more than he needs the Pohottuwa. He could have spoken about debts owed by the Rajapaksas, not just to him but to every citizen of this country and those yet unborn.

He could have spoken about fear. He could have said, for example, that it’s quite alright for anyone not to fear him, but that he knows how terrified Basil was during the last days of the Aragalaya, where he took refuge and who offered him protection. He didn’t say anything, which begs the question, ‘if a man is not willing to stand up for himself, will he stand up for you?’

In the end, RW continues to stand with the debtors and the arsonists. Why then should anyone believe he would abandon them at any point?

Speaking of standing up, we can also talk about SP. Just the other day, party stalwart Hirunika Premachandra was arrested. Now Hirunika, without a doubt, is a brave woman. She stood up to the supposedly invincible Rajapaksas all by herself. Indeed, the events she set off helped RW, SP, and AKD; this too must be mentioned.

This is not to say she’s a paragon of virtue and can do no wrong. She took the law into her hands, albeit on behalf of a victim. No one says that SP should have criticised the judges in this case, but he could have talked about Hirunika’s courage or simply offered a word of support in her moment of distress. He did not. In a country where thugs get away scot-free and politicians pamper them no end, this was the least he could do. He did nothing. If he doesn’t have a kind word for someone like Hirunika, would he care about the trials and tribulations of the ordinary citizen?

SP is no ‘fresh face’ in politics. He’s been in Parliament for 24 years. He’s been a cabinet minister and the Leader of the Opposition. He adds to this the half a century of his father’s political life, almost at every turn. He thereby lays claim to President Premadasa’s legacy but forgets that it was not untainted.

To his credit, he has a team or rather has so far managed to make them toe his line. That says a lot about his team, though. The SJB was launched in opposition to RW, RW’s dictatorial ways, and the UNP’s lack of internal democracy. Today, SP is no better than RW when it comes to giving leadership to a party. It’s his way or the highway. He has arrogated upon himself all decision-making powers. The stalwarts say nothing. Are they fascinated with navel-gazing, one must ask.

RW is the leader of the party of which SP was the deputy leader for a long time. So, the UNP’s one-time leader and deputy are the President and Leader of the Opposition, respectively. Ironically, they have no ideological differences. They are actually very much alike in the way they lead their parties. However, even to save the country or defeat a common enemy, these two just can’t come together. Their egos and self-interest are bigger than all that.

RW is around 20 years older than SP. SP didn’t realise that he doesn’t lose if RW wins. RW didn’t realise that it is not a disgrace to go out of his way to talk SP into returning to the UNP. Is self-interest and ego what’s most important to these two? If so, it disqualifies both of them. They are not the leaders most suited to face the challenges of the next five years.

What about AKD? AKD, like SP, came to Parliament in 2000. He too was a cabinet minister. He was very vocal when the JVP backed President Chandrika Kumaratunga, Mahinda Rajapaksa, and Sarath Fonseka. He was the leader of the party when the JVP backed Maithripala Sirisena. He cannot wash away the sins he was party to, even if today’s JVP talks and acts as though political life in Sri Lanka began after 1988-89.

The JVP, for all their rhetoric, still seems to be a confused political entity. They simply cannot go beyond populist slogans. There’s a glaring lack of coherence and clarity in the statements issued by party stalwarts. Their concerns about governance are legitimate, and one might even believe that they are serious about fixing the flaws. Indeed, AKD must at some point understand that the make-or-break matter is finance and governance, not only governance. We are simply too close to the brink to have the luxury of a system-fix first. As of now, they are in “dennam-kaasi” mode, or ‘we will fix this, we will do that, etc.’ Nothing of the ‘how.’ Ask them a question about policies and processes, and the NPP boys and girls get hot under the collar, shower invective on the well-meaning questioner and their political rivals. That’s been the JVP’s history. The NPP is no better.

Despite some inconsistencies by certain members of the NPP regarding policy issues, AKD comes out as a man of sincerity. He does not belong to some political family and, as such, does not carry dynastic baggage. Most importantly, he undoubtedly has empathy for the people who bear the brunt of all the manufacturing defects of the system and the additional burdens created by the major political parties when in power.

So, where do we stand? Does Sri Lanka need RW’s experience? Should Sri Lanka be wary of his isolationist tendency and an unelected inner circle who has his ear and, worse, may be controlling his mind? Can Sri Lanka afford not to have SP’s team? Should Sri Lanka worry about a team that may waive intellect, reason, and integrity in favour of a clearly self-absorbed leader, a man who tends to be about ‘I, me and myself’? Can Sri Lanka afford AKD’s idealism in a party that has the word but not the wisdom?

We need a candidate who thinks, feels, and acts like a leader. We need a candidate who understands that he may not have the answers but has the wisdom and humility to seek out those who may have them and embrace them regardless of what’s happened in the past. We need a candidate who has the fortitude to see beyond presidential powers and fortunes of party and loyalists. We need the candidate who least fears talent, ability, and vision in political rivals or non-political actors. We need, above all, a candidate who respects the independence of the judiciary to a fault and follows the rule of law.

None of the above three could be described in the above manner right now. They could move in those directions and perhaps offer some hope so that people may vote for someone who can unify the country, face challenges, and deliver.

RW, SP, and AKD have a task: convince the electorate that they should not give up on hope and that they should not look elsewhere for a leader.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

Could Sri Lanka once again face an economic crisis similar to 2022?

Published

3 hours ago

2026/06/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

This article examines whether Sri Lanka faces the risk of once again moving towards a situation similar to the 2022 economic crisis. The 2022 crisis was not the result of a single cause, but a multidimensional crisis created by the combined effects of fiscal weaknesses, foreign exchange shortages, debt burdens, policy mistakes, and the weakening of the productive economy. Although foreign exchange reserves, the exchange rate, and the fiscal position have now stabilized to some extent, that stability remains fragile.

The continuity of the IMF programme, debt sustainability, investor confidence, and policy discipline are decisive factors in this regard. At the same time, poverty, the quality of employment, pressures on the SME sector, price levels, and income inequalities remain serious socio-economic challenges. Therefore, while it may not be accurate to say that the 2022 crisis will immediately recur, abandoning the reform path and failing to correct structural weaknesses could once again push Sri Lanka towards a crisis-prone path.

Recently, the Chief Executive Officer of the Advocata Institute issued an important warning regarding Sri Lanka’s economic future. That statement also received wide attention across various media platforms. His central argument was that if Sri Lanka moves away from the current path of economic reforms, there is a risk that a situation similar to the severe economic crisis experienced in 2022 could re-emerge.

This statement cannot be dismissed merely as a political or ideological remark. It is an important warning that deserves deeper consideration in relation to the country’s economic stability, policy continuity, and the future of the reform process. Therefore, the purpose of this note is to examine the strength and validity of that statement through selected macroeconomic indicators and structural economic factors.

A particularly important point to remember is that the 2022 economic crisis was not caused by a single factor or a single policy mistake. It was a complex economic crisis created by the accumulation of fiscal imbalances, excessive debt, foreign exchange shortages, weak export and investment growth, the decline of the productive economy, policy uncertainty, and weak institutional governance over many years.

Therefore, in assessing whether Sri Lanka could once again move towards such a situation, it is not sufficient to rely on a single indicator or a short-term trend. Instead, it is essential to consider a broad macroeconomic range, including the fiscal position, foreign exchange reserves, debt sustainability, investment and export performance, unemployment, poverty levels, the condition of small and medium-sized enterprises, price levels, interest rates, and the overall path of economic growth.

Our main question should not be whether the 2022 crisis will return tomorrow. The more important question is whether the fundamental structural weaknesses that caused that crisis have truly been corrected, or whether they have only been temporarily managed. Sri Lanka’s economic future will be determined by the answer to this question.

1. Foreign Exchange Reserves

By early 2022, Sri Lanka’s usable foreign exchange reserves had fallen to extremely low levels, making even payments for fuel, medicine, and other essential imports a serious challenge.

At present, foreign exchange reserves have recovered significantly, providing a stronger protective buffer compared with the situation in 2022. However, this stability could once again be weakened by a breakdown in the continuity of the IMF programme, a slowdown in foreign direct investment flows, a decline in tourism earnings or remittances, or disruptions to the debt restructuring process.

2. Exchange Rate Stability

In 2022, the rapid depreciation of the rupee was a major factor that increased import prices, production costs, and the cost of living.

Today, the exchange rate shows relative stability, but that stability depends on foreign exchange inflows, market confidence, and policy credibility. Therefore, if the IMF programme is disrupted, foreign exchange earnings decline, or investor confidence weakens, the rupee could once again come under severe pressure.

3. Fiscal Position

Among the root causes of the 2022 crisis were the collapse of government revenue, dependence on excessive borrowing, and the long-term weakening of fiscal discipline.

Under the IMF programme, the fiscal position has been strengthened to some extent through increased tax revenue and expenditure control. However, reversing tax reforms for political popularity, failing to reform loss-making state-owned enterprises, or losing control over public expenditure could once again widen fiscal imbalances.

4. Debt Sustainability

In 2022, Sri Lanka was forced to suspend external debt servicing for the first time in its history.

Although the debt restructuring process has now made considerable progress, debt sustainability depends on continuous economic growth, maintaining a primary budget surplus, and policy discipline. If these conditions weaken, concerns over debt stability could re-emerge.

5. Employment Conditions

Although the official unemployment rate appears to be under some control, problems relating to the quality of the labour market remain unresolved.

Many people have moved into low-income informal employment, while the shortage of employment opportunities among educated youth remains significant. In addition, the migration of skilled and educated workers has placed pressure on the country’s human capital and long-term productive capacity.

6. Poverty and Living Standards

With the 2022 crisis, poverty increased significantly. Although inflation has declined, the cost of living still remains a heavy burden for many families.

A large number of households continue to struggle to meet expenses related to food, transport, education, and health. Therefore, it is still difficult to say that the benefits of macroeconomic stability have adequately reached lower- and middle-income groups.

7. Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

SMEs, which are a central source of employment and income generation in Sri Lanka, were severely affected by the crisis.

High interest rates, energy costs, raw material prices, and weak consumer demand forced many enterprises to close down, downsize, or become burdened with debt. The pace of economic recovery will depend heavily on the revival of this sector.

8. Weakness of the Productive Economy

A deeper structural cause of the 2022 crisis was the limited base of Sri Lanka’s productive economy.

Even today, the country remains heavily dependent on tourism earnings, remittances, and the services sector. High value-added industries, technology exports, knowledge-based services, and innovation-driven sectors have not grown at the expected pace. Without a structural transformation of the economy, long-term stability cannot be guaranteed.

9. Income and Distributional Inequalities

Although some economic groups recovered quickly after the crisis, a large section of the population has still not escaped economic pressure.

The gap between urban and rural areas, as well as between high- and low-income groups, appears to have widened. If the benefits of economic growth are not distributed more broadly, macroeconomic stability will not translate into social and political stability.

10. Price Levels and Inflation

Inflation has declined, but people are still facing price levels that have already risen and become entrenched.

A decline in inflation does not mean a decline in prices. If income growth does not keep pace with price levels, the real purchasing power and living standards of households will remain weak.

11. Interest Rates and Investment

Although interest rates have declined, private investment and new business activity have not yet grown at the expected pace.

Investment decisions are influenced not only by interest rates, but also by policy stability, legal clarity, the protection of property rights, market expectations, and investor confidence. Therefore, sustained investment growth requires broader institutional and policy stability.

12. What Could Happen If IMF Conditions Are Not Implemented?

The IMF programme is not merely a loan facility. It is a key foundation of the confidence that the international financial community places in Sri Lanka’s economic policies.

programme breaks down:

* IMF disbursements could be suspended.

* Support from development partners, including the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, could weaken.

* Confidence among creditors and international markets could deteriorate.

* Foreign direct investment could slow down.

* Pressure on the rupee could increase.

* Interest rates could rise.

* Inflation could accelerate again.

* Fiscal crises could re-emerge.

* Economic growth could slow down.

* Jobs, incomes, and living standards could be adversely affected.

This does not mean that Sri Lanka would return to the 2022 situation overnight. However, it could gradually weaken the protective buffers required for economic stability and significantly increase the risk of the country being drawn back into a crisis-prone path.

by Prof. Ranjith Bandara, PhD (Qld.,)

Opinion

Beware of Yanks bearing gifts

Published

1 day ago

2026/06/8

Thilina Walpola

Helicopters from the US. (Pic courtesy SLAF)

The US Government has gifted 10 Bell 206, Sea Ranger Helicopters to the SLAF for Training and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) purposes. The full specifications are as follows.

Contractor:

Bell Helicopter Textron
Date Deployed: First flight: 1961; Operational: 1968
Propulsion: One Allison 250-C20BJ turbofan engine
Length: Fuselage – 31 feet (9.44 meters); Rotors turning – 39 feet (11.9 meters)
Height: 10 feet (3.04 meters)
Rotor Diameter: 35 feet 4 inches (10.78 meters)
Weight: 1595 pounds (725kg) empty, 3200 pounds (1455 kg) maximum take-off
Airspeed: 138 miles (222 km) per hour maximum; 117 miles (188 km) per hour cruising
Ceiling: 18,900 feet (5,761 meters)
Range: 368 nautical miles (420 statute miles, 676 km)
Crew: One pilot, four students

While they are good for training, I have my serious doubts whether these helicopters are ideal for HADR. As they have only a single engine and They can’t even operate into high rise helipads in hospitals and hotels in Colombo. The law requires twin engine helicopters! What happens if there is an engine failure while operating over the sea or in a mountainous area? There will be hell to pay!

Three twin engine versions would have been better.

How many helicopter pilots does the SLAF require anyway?

Will we be stuck with junk? Like two Russian KA -26’s during the Sirimavo Government and French Aerospatiale Dauphins SLAF acquired. which were not ‘tropicalised’, during the JRJ Government.

Will the Sea Ranger Spares support be available, free of charge?

I doubt it.

There will also be other Geopolitical strings attached. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Guwan Seeya

Opinion

Will AI kill solar and wind energy?

Published

1 day ago

2026/06/8

Thilina Walpola

Global warming policies were expected to drive a rapid shift toward a renewables-based energy system dominated by wind and solar. While growth in these sources did occur, it has not matched the pace that was widely anticipated. In the United States, the rise of cheap and abundant shale natural gas significantly reshaped the energy mix, displacing coal and limiting the relative share of wind and solar in electricity generation. In China and India, the situation has been different.

Coal remains dominant because it is widely available domestically, while natural gas is more limited or expensive to secure at scale. As a result, coal has retained its central role in both countries’ power systems. Solar and wind always provide intermittent, variable power. It was widely assumed that a cost-effective, utility-scale electricity storage solution would emerge to solve this problem, but that has not yet happened at the scale originally expected. In the pre-AI era, solar and wind were typically integrated into power systems alongside more reliable sources such as coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy.

For example, if the sun was shining on a Monday, electricity demand could be met largely by solar power during the day. At night, coal, natural gas, or nuclear plants would supply the required electricity. If the following Tuesday was cloudy or gloomy, generation would shift back toward coal, gas, or nuclear to maintain supply. AI introduces a new and more demanding challenge. AI data centers require continuous, high-quality, always-on electricity, which solar and wind alone struggle to guarantee without large-scale storage or back-up systems. In addition, they require very large amounts of power.

As a result, the AI industry is now actively searching for new and expanded sources of reliable electricity. One of the major challenges in powering AI systems is electricity transmission. High-voltage transmission lines are expensive, slow to build, and often face regulatory and land-use constraints. As a result, some companies are exploring more localized power solutions, sometimes referred to as microgrids. These are self-contained energy systems that can operate independently from the main electricity grid. Technologies such as small modular nuclear reactors are an example of such microgrids.

In such isolated systems, the focus is on highly reliable, always available power generated close to the point of use. In this context, solar and wind are expected to play a limited role because their output is variable and depends on weather conditions, making them less suited as primary sources in fully self-contained AI-focused microgrids. The pace of AI infrastructure development is extremely rapid in both the United States and China. AI systems are widely seen as transformative technologies that promise significant new wealth creation, which is driving aggressive and sustained investment. As a result, development is moving quickly, without waiting for long-term solutions such as large-scale energy storage to mature alongside renewable energy systems.

In this environment, electricity demand is rising faster than new infrastructure can be built. In the United States, this reinforces the role of natural gas as the dominant source of reliable power. In China and India, where coal remains more established and readily available, it is likely to continue playing a central role in meeting growing demand. In India, AI data centers have not yet been built at the scale seen in the United States and China. When India does reach that stage, it will need to supply large amounts of reliable electricity. India has placed strong emphasis on solar energy in particular and has had some success in meeting the needs of ordinary consumers through renewable expansion. However, the key question is what choices will be made when large-scale AI data centers begin to arrive.

Will India rely more on coal generation, which is relatively cheap, widely available, and highly reliable, or on solar power, which is intermittent, variable, and often more expensive when reliability is taken into account? My view is that India is more likely to turn to coal to meet this demand, given its existing infrastructure and the need for dependable electricity supply. Then there is an overall question. Solar and wind were already struggling in the pre-AI days to displace coal and natural gas at the system level, despite strong expectations that they would become dominant sources of electricity. Now that AI is here and electricity demand is rising rapidly, will they push solar and wind further behind in the energy mix? (The Statesman)

(The writer is an expert on energy and contributes regularly to publications in India and overseas.)

by SUNIL SHARAN