Connect with us

Features

Dire Predictions, Karmic Quirks, Solheim’s Return and Ranilnomics

Published

on

by Rajan Philips

The Sri Lankan political class has a ‘measurement problem’ with the economic crisis in the country. Political leaders and organizations, specifically the current parliament, seem to be lacking in competence to come to terms with the magnitude of the current economic problem. This failure manifests itself in the same-old-same-old ways in which parliament is conducting itself, and in the President’s facile optimism that although the crisis is grave, the country has in him the man who is capable of overcoming it. The assumption, or even the fact, that Ranil Wickremesinghe is the only one in parliament who has a measure of the problem does not by itself reduce the magnitude of the problem or renders its solution any easier.

The inability to grasp the magnitude of the problem invariably leads to superficial responses, both internally and externally. The optimism on the external front involves the assumption that all the external support mechanisms to overcome the economic crisis will eventually and somehow fall into place. It is only a matter of time. So, give some time and slack to the President. If only the realities were so simple! Cabinet ministers and a good majority of MPs seem to be taking it for granted that the IMF agreement, China’s concessions, the overall restructuring of debt payments, and the reopening of channels for new FDI inflows – all these will somehow start happening.

Dire Predictions

This level of optimism is contrary to the global reality which in every sense involves a highly divided, dog-eat-dog world in which it is already a struggle for Sri Lanka to get the attention and priority it desperately needs. That desperation is not sinking into the heads of cabinet ministers and MPs who are waiting to become ministers. Again, the assumption, or even the fact, that in President Wickremesinghe Sri Lanka has a leader who can reach out and get help from any country in the world does not necessarily mean that help is on the way, in double quick time, and in amounts that help is needed at any given time.

Add to this the dire predictions about a global economic downturn for 2023, and the specific warning in the IMF’s biannual World Economic Outlook released last Tuesday. that “the worst is yet to come, and for many people 2023 will feel like a recession.” Sri Lanka’s situation, by any measurement, is worse than a recession. And releasing the Outlook report, the IMF’s director of research, Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas offered this admonition about low-income countries: “Too many low-income countries are in or close to debt distress. Progress towards orderly debt restructurings through the Group of Twenty’s Common Framework for the most affected is urgently needed to avert a wave of sovereign debt crisis. Time may be soon running out.”

Sri Lanka is well past the point of aversion. Its debt restructuring talks are virtually stalled over the impasse involving the debt owed to China. This week Washington is hosting the annual meetings of the IMF and the World Bank attended by finance officials and central bankers from around the world. How is Sri Lanka going to be prioritized in this climate? State Minister of Finance Shehan Semasinghe is providing ministerial representation for Sri Lanka at the Washington meetings. This is the pathetic level at which Sri Lanka’s economic literacy is being exhibited at world gatherings of finance ministers and experts. Not to be outdone at home, the full Cabinet of Ministers reportedly decided to have Sri Lanka formally downgraded from middle-income status to low-income status. It was left to the much learned Minister Bandula Gunawardana to make the announcement on behalf of the cabinet, only to have it shot down almost immediately by the President’s Media Division. Perhaps one might feel sorry for the President in all this, but then again all of this including the cabinet is his own making.

Karmic Quirks

For his part, the President addressed parliament again on October. When I read the Sunday Island’s editorial last week on the President’s statement to parliament and its banner-coverage by the Daily News, I could not help chuckling how the wheels of political karma have turned over the last fifty years. That is a long time in politics by any measure, but here we have the Lake House papers that were nationalized by an SLFP-led government in 1973 to rebuke the Wijewardenas and the Wickremesinghes, now feting the grandson of DR Wijewardena and the son of Esmond Wickremesinghe, who is also Sri Lanka’s most fortuitous, but not quite fortunate, Head of State and Head of Government.

There was another karmic quirk that occurred recently, figuring Tiran Alles, who was the alleged mastermind behind the equally alleged arrangement between the LTTE and Mahinda Rajapaksa in the 2005 presidential election that led to the infamous fatwa that stopped Tamils in the North and East from voting and precipitated the defeat of Ranil Wickremesinghe by the narrowest of margins. That was then, and now Tiran Alles as Minister of Public Security is said to have misled President Wickremesinghe into signing the abominably extraordinary gazette on High Security Zones. The gazette has been withdrawn and the President’s supporters have blamed the Minister and the over-zealous Defense Secretary for the gazette misadventure. But that does not wholly absolve the President, for he should have known better without asking for the Attorney General’s opinion and he should be held responsible for appointing and/or retaining the current crop of Ministers and Ministry Secretaries.

All these nuggets would have been great for polemic grinding in ordinary times. But we are not in ordinary times, but extraordinary times. Politics itself is extraordinarily different, and the underlying living experiences of the people are extraordinarily difficult. But the government and the SLPP Ministers and MPs in parliament are not at sensitized to the people’s difficulties and the country’s challenges. They have abdicated their responsibilities to the President in return for the President protecting their interests.

In his statement to parliament, the President confessed to being repetitive and said, “I would like to draw your attention to some of the challenges we face today in reviving the collapsed economy” … and insisted that “we have got to consider it over and over again since it would enable us to comprehend the real picture of the situation we are in today.” However, the President did not present in any great detail – what he called “the real picture” of the country’s economy. And to the point of this article, the President’s address was full of words but there were no numbers – either about the severity of Sri Lanka’s debt problems, or about the timelines for their restructuring and repayments. Instead, he papered over the economic crimes of the Rajapaksas, and berated unnamed “groups” for apparently wanting to destroy the economy in order to capture political power.

The return of Solheim

Obviously, the President was having in mind the JVP whom he could not publicly scold after being with the JVP in the yahapalanaya government. His target group of course is the Frontline Socialist Party, which too the President chose not to name, perhaps out of deference to the JVP. Once again, the President reminded the country that he “embarked on this journey taking a huge risk … at a time when no other political party or leader of the opposition would accept this risk” … and requested all parliamentarians “to join a common program to build the country through the National Assembly of Parliament, “Jana Sabhava” which is to be established soon, and Parliamentary Sectoral Committees.”

The President has got himself into a habit of calling, at one moment, all MPs to join him, and then flying off the handle quite immediately and threatening to call a referendum unless parliament acts soon enough according to his timetable, which nobody knows. His latest referendum threat involves the Local Government elections. Few weeks earlier it was all about parliament coming to a consensus about enacting new election laws after sitting on them for nearly ten years. Now out of the blues comes the extraordinary announcement that the President has appointed former Norwegian Minister Erik Solheim as his “International Climate Adviser.”

It is not quite out of the blues when you hear from Mr. Solheim himself, how this appointment came about. According to his email exchange with the Daily Mirror, “My old friend Ranil Wickremesinghe invited me to visit Sri Lanka and asked me to be his International Climate Adviser. I am looking forward to working closely with the President and his great team on how to assist Sri Lanka to find a green pathway out of the economic crisis. Renewable energy, electric mobility, tree planting, green agriculture and ecotourism all offer huge opportunities for jobs and prosperity while taking good care of Mother Earth at the same time.” Is this another turn of the wheel of karma?

Not surprisingly, Mr. Solheim has called “the proposal for a university on climate science in Sri Lanka a brilliant idea,” and noted that “Sri Lanka has a very rich intellectual tradition and can establish a hub for climate science – working closely with other Indian Ocean nations and the rest of the world.” What can you say, except ask, what are friends for? Even when your country is struggling to feed its children. Why did not the President think of appointing Mr. Solheim as his international adviser to prevent malnutrition among Sri Lanka’s children? That would have been a little less indefensible.

Ranilnomics

Through all these distractions, Mr. Wickremesinghe’s ultimate reason for being President is his assumed ability to lead Sri Lanka’s economic recovery. In his many statements since “embarking on this journey taking a huge risk,” first as crisis Prime Minister and now as redeemer President, Ranil Wickremesinghe has been outlining his approach to overcoming Sri Lanka’s economic problems. Dr. W.A Wijewardena, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank and a frequent writer of expert articles on practical economics, has described Mr. Wickremesinghe’s approach in summary as “Ranilnomics.”

Ranilnomics is the Wickremesinghe version of “social market economy policy” that was first tried in postwar Germany. As described by Dr. Wijewardena, it was “an attempt at finding a middle path between pure capitalism and extreme socialism.” Mr. Wickremesinghe has been elaborating on this for some time – first as half-powerful Prime Minister in the yahapalana government and now as all-powerful president in a post-Rajapaksa government. Given Mr. Wickremesinghe’s somewhat long association with ‘social market economy’ (SME) and predating the current economic crisis, the SME approach is not an automatic toolbox with all or most of the tools that might be appropriate for use in the current situation.

In fact, there is no such ready made toolbox, but there are enough economists in Sri Lanka who would be able to provide consistent advice to the government. The President has occasionally referred to experts offering voluntary advice and support to him and to the government. If so, why is it that their involvement is not made public or channeled through formal institutional arrangements? Ever since public protests broke out against the Rajapaksa regime, expectations arose that outside experts would be brought into parliament and cabinet through the National List avenue. The JVP and some of the opposition parties were prepared to sacrifice their MPs to create openings for outside experts to enter parliament and then the cabinet. Of course, that would be anathema to SLPP MPs.

But why has not the President done anything to bring in outside experts as MPs and make them ministers? Instead, there is Shehan Semasinghe, State of Minister of Finance, doing the honours for Sri Lanka at the IMF and the World Bank in Washington. There is Bandula Gunawardene always talking out of turn in Colombo, and the whole cabinet seriously deciding to formally downgrade Sri Lanka from middle-income status to low income status. In all the reporting of interventions by other countries and international agencies, there seems to be an emerging focus on helping vulnerable sections meeting their basic needs and helping children avoid malnutrition.

There might be financial and material support to prevent severe food shortages and malnutrition, but no easy way out for the government to get an IMF agreement on track and to reach agreement on a debt restructuring package. That would be just rewards for a government that in spite of having a new President has learnt nothing and forgotten everything from the exit passage of the Rajapaksa family. Unfortunately, the people will have to suffer collateral damages but they will have their turn, hopefully sooner than later, to vote the present rascals out and elect a new parliament that will have credibility both within and outside the country.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Concept of living wage and cost of living

Published

on

The International Labour Organisation (ILO) now defines a living wage as the wage level necessary for workers and their families to afford a decent standard of living, given national circumstances, for normal hours of work. This standard of living is operationalised through the cost of essential goods and services, typically including food, housing, healthcare, education, transport, and a modest allowance for contingencies and social participation.

In contrast, “cost of living” in economics is a broader price index concept that tracks the overall prices of a representative consumption basket but is not inherently normative about what constitutes decency or dignity.

Living wage methodologies effectively translate a cost-of-living basket, specified for a given family size and living standard, into a monthly income requirement for workers, thereby linking real wages to human development objectives rather than only to market productivity.

Methodologies for computing a living wage

Most contemporary living wage estimates follow a structured “cost of a basic but decent life” approach built around three steps: defining a reference family, costing a normative consumption basket, and converting that cost into a wage per worker.

The Anker methodology, widely used in global supply chains and in Sri Lanka, is a leading example: it defines a model family (e.g., 2 adults and approximately 2–3 children), estimates the cost of a low-cost nutritious diet, adequate housing, and non-food essentials, and then allocates that cost over expected number of full-time workers per family.

Within the Anker framework, the food component is based on locally appropriate diets meeting caloric and nutritional norms, priced using local market surveys and adjusted for waste and home preparation.

Housing costs are derived from standards for minimally acceptable housing (e.g., durable materials, sufficient space, basic services), using rents or imputed rental values from empirical fieldwork. Other essential expenditures, health, education, transport, clothing, and a small margin for unexpected events, are typically estimated as a percentage mark-up over food and housing costs, derived from national household survey data.

Finally, the methodology sets a reference number of workers per family, divides total family living costs by this number to get a net living wage, and then adjusts to a gross living wage by adding payroll taxes and mandatory deductions. Periodic updates are made using consumer price indices (CPIs) to reflect inflation or deflation and, where necessary, new field surveys to capture structural shifts in prices and consumption patterns.

Sri Lanka’s living wage estimates and their link to cost of living (Anker Methodology)

Sri Lanka has been the subject of several living wage studies, notably for the tea estate sector and for urban and rural areas, using the Anker methodology.

In the tea estate sector, an updated 2024 Anker report estimates the cost of a “basic but decent” standard of living for a typical family at about LKR 78,067 per month (approximately USD 260), implying a gross living wage of LKR 48,584 per month (USD 160) and a net, take-home living wage of LKR 44,357.

For urban Sri Lanka, the Anker Living Wage Reference Value was originally set at LKR 84,231 per month in April 2022, corresponding to a net living wage of LKR 77,492 plus social security contributions. After cumulative inflation of about 36.9 percent between April 2022 and June 2025, the updated gross urban living wage is estimated at approximately LKR 115,291 per month (around USD 385), consisting of a net living wage of LKR 106,068 and social security contributions of LKR 9,223

These Sri Lankan figures are explicitly derived from cost-of-living calculations: they incorporate the cost of food, housing, utilities, health, education, and other essentials at local prices and then convert these into wages per adult worker, assuming roughly 1.7–1.8 full-time earners per family. Because living wage estimates are indexed to actual price dynamics, periods of high inflation, as Sri Lanka experienced in 2022–2023, translate almost mechanically into sharp upward revisions in living wages, underlining the tight coupling between living wage levels and the evolving cost of living.

Comparative living wages: Sri Lanka and other countries

Cross-country comparisons require careful normalisation because living wages reflect local prices, family structures, and social norms, but several datasets provide a structured basis for comparison. [asia.floorwage](https://asia.floorwage.org/living-wage/calculating-a-living-wage/)

The Asia Floor Wage Alliance, for example, publishes a regional living wage benchmark expressed in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, with a 2024 benchmark of 1,750.54 PPP dollars per month converted into local currencies using country-specific PPP exchange rates.

Using this PPP-based approach, the 2024 living wage equivalent for Sri Lanka is estimated at around LKR 158,353 per month, assuming a PPP exchange rate of about 90.5 Sri Lankan rupees per PPP dollar.

This PPP-normalised figure is substantially higher than the Anker 2024–2025 estate-sector and urban living wage estimates in nominal rupees, partly because the Asia Floor Wage benchmark is set to ensure a more harmonised standard across Asian garment-producing economies and uses a single PPP wage target.

These figures indicate that, within this PPP-based framework, Sri Lanka’s living wage in local currency is relatively high compared to countries such as India and Bangladesh, but the comparison reflects both different PPP exchange rates and domestic price structures.

From a cost-of-living perspective, this pattern is consistent with Sri Lanka being a lower-middle-income country with relatively higher prices for some essentials compared with low-income South Asian economies, especially after recent macroeconomic and inflationary shocks.

Global patterns and high-income economies

Global datasets covering more than 200 countries show that typical-family living wage levels, whether calculated in PPP or nominal terms, tend to correlate positively with national income levels, with North America, Western Europe, and Australia displaying the highest living wage values.

In this global distribution, living wages in middle- and low-income regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America are lower in absolute terms, though the ratio of living wage to median wages or statutory minimum wages can be high, underscoring the gap between decent-work standards and prevailing labour market outcomes.

Interestingly, some studies note that rural living wage estimates can be relatively high in poorer countries because limited infrastructure and service availability raise the cost of accessing a given standard of living, such as safe water, transport, and education.

For Sri Lanka, rural Anker living wage benchmarks similarly reveal the importance of non-food costs, such as transportation to schools, health facilities, and workplaces, in shaping the total family budget, despite lower nominal rents in many rural areas.

Living wage, social policy, and Sri Lanka’s development trajectory

The emerging international consensus around a living wage is rooted in the human rights-based notion of a “decent life” rather than a subsistence minimum or an arbitrarily set statutory floor.

From a social science perspective, incorporating living wage benchmarks into wage-setting institutions, collective bargaining, and social dialogue reorients labour markets toward social reproduction, intergenerational mobility, and social cohesion, rather than merely cost competitiveness.

For Sri Lanka, where recent crises have eroded real wages and increased household vulnerability, living wage estimates such as the Anker urban and estate-sector benchmarks provide an analytically rigorous yardstick for evaluating whether current wage policies and social transfers are adequate relative to the actual cost of a basic but decent life.

Comparisons with regional PPP-based benchmarks like the Asia Floor Wage suggest that, while Sri Lanka’s living wage requirement in local currency is relatively high, the country also faces significant affordability challenges, especially for low-paid workers in export sectors and informal employment, whose earnings often fall short of these normative thresholds.

In policy terms, the living wage framework highlights the need for coordinated approaches that combine wage-setting reforms, inflation-sensitive social protection, and productivity-enhancing investments, so that rising living-cost-consistent wages do not simply translate into inflationary spirals or employment losses.

For empirical research in Sri Lanka, these benchmarks open avenues for micro-level analysis of wage gaps, household coping strategies, gendered labour outcomes, and the distributional effects of macroeconomic adjustment, all anchored to a transparent and internationally recognised living wage methodology.

(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT, Malabe. The views and opinions expressed in this article are personal.)

Continue Reading

Features

Buddhist philosophy and the path to lasting peace

Published

on

Echoes of ‘The Walk for Peace’

The international Walk for Peace’ reaching Colombo, joined by a large number of monks and devotees, led by spiritual leader Ven Bhikku Pannakara, with the peace dog ‘Aloka,’ completing the 161 km journey.The walk commenced in Dambulla on April 22 following the main ceremony at the Jaya Sri Maha Bodhi in Anuradhapura.Pic by Nishan S.Priyantha

by Ven. Dr. Kirinde Assaji Nayaka Thero
Chief Incumbent, Gangaramaya Temple, Hunupitiya, Colombo

Throughout human history, one of the greatest and most complex challenges has been the establishment of lasting peace and the maintenance of harmonious coexistence. While peace is often understood simply as the absence of war or armed conflict, a deeper, spiritual perspective reveals it as a profound state of social and mental harmony. It is an ideal that must be cultivated within individuals as well as across societies.

Buddhism offers one of the most practical and timeless philosophies of peace. The teachings of the Buddha are rooted in non-violence and the four sublime virtues—loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. Central to this philosophy is the idea that true peace in the world begins with inner peace within the individual. Conflict, the Buddha taught, arises not on battlefields but within the human mind, driven by greed, hatred, and delusion. Without overcoming these negative forces, lasting peace in the external world remains unattainable.

In today’s world, marked by geopolitical tensions, economic competition, and social unrest—this inward approach to peace is more relevant than ever. Despite technological advancement, humanity continues to grapple with violence and division. The Buddha’s teaching points instead to an internal struggle: a battle against anger, jealousy, and ignorance. Rather than weapons of destruction, Buddhism promotes wisdom, compassion, patience, and discipline as the tools to overcome conflict.

The path to peace begins with understanding its causes. Just as muddy water becomes clear when left undisturbed, the human mind achieves clarity and calm when negative emotions are subdued. This principle is reflected in the Buddha’s intervention during a historic dispute between the Sakya and Koliya clans over water, where he reminded them of the greater value of human life, thereby preventing bloodshed.

In a world increasingly threatened by conflict over limited resources and political power, such lessons remain highly relevant. The Buddha also emphasised the principle of moral causation—actions have consequences.

Yadisaṃ vapate bijaṃ tadisaṃ harate phalaṃ
Kalyaāṇakariī kalyaṃ papakariī ca papakaṃ
Pavutthaṃ tata te bijaṃ phalaṃ paccanubhossasiti

“As one sows the seed, so does one reap the fruit.

The doer of good receives good results, and the doer of evil receives evil results.

Dear one, whatever seed you have planted, you will experience the corresponding fruit of it.”

At the heart of Buddhist ethics is respect for life. All beings fear harm and seek happiness, and therefore, violence against others cannot lead to true well-being. This message is particularly significant in an era where the race for power and advanced weaponry continues to overshadow compassion and humanity.

The fundamental moral discipline in Buddhism is respect for life and opposition to harming living beings. The Buddha taught that all beings desire happiness, and fear suffering, and that harming others will not lead to happiness.

Sabbe tasanti dandassa
sabbe bhayanti maccuno
attanam upamam katva
na haneyya na ghataye.

“All tremble at violence; all fear death. Comparing others with oneself, one should neither kill nor cause others to kill.”

Despite technological advancement, the world appears to be moving backwards in terms of compassion and peace. Power-driven politics and the race for advanced weaponry cannot provide lasting solutions. Global leaders, diplomats, and policymakers must urgently recognise the importance of the tolerant, balanced, and non-violent approach taught in Buddhism. Protecting the right to life of all beings, and acting with compassion beyond divisions of race, religion, or politics, is the only true foundation for world peace.

Sri Lanka, as a nation nourished by the essence of Buddhism, has long upheld this principle. The Sri Lankan tradition, rooted in boundless loving-kindness and compassion, strives to uphold human values even amidst the harsh realities of global politics. From the respect shown by King Dutugemunu towards King Elara, to Sri Lanka’s stance at the 1951 San Francisco Peace Conference invoking the words “Hatred is never appeased by hatred,” to recent humanitarian acts in rescuing sailors in distress—these all reflect a single philosophy: valuing human life above all divisions.

The presentation of a “Joint Declaration for Peace” by the Mahanayake Theros at Gangaramaya Temple recently reaffirmed Sri Lanka’s commitment to global peace. Despite global power struggles, Sri Lanka continues to stand as a symbol of compassion and peace, reminding the world that human kindness is more powerful than weapons.

Institutions such as the Gangaramaya Temple have played a vital role in fostering social harmony. Through charitable, educational, and cultural programmes, the temple has encouraged unity across religious and ethnic lines, while also promoting interfaith dialogue and cooperation.

The annual Navam Maha Perahera, organised by the temple, stands as a powerful symbol of national unity, bringing together people from diverse backgrounds in a shared celebration. Similarly, vocational training and educational initiatives have helped empower young people from all communities, strengthening social cohesion.

A recent “Walk for Peace,” led by Venerable Pannakara Thero and supported by the monastic community, further underscored this commitment. More than a physical journey, it represented a spiritual effort to cultivate peace within the human heart and spread a message of compassion to the wider world.

One of the most touching aspects of the event was the participation of a dog named “Aloka,” which accompanied the monks throughout the journey. This simple yet powerful image reflected the Buddhist teaching that all living beings value life and deserve compassion, highlighting the universal nature of peace.

Ultimately, the Buddha’s message remains clear: peace cannot be achieved through hatred or violence. True peace arises from self-discipline, moral conduct, and the cultivation of a pure mind. As the teaching states, avoiding evil, doing good, and purifying one’s mind is the path laid down by the Buddha.

Let us plant the seeds of peace within our hearts and nurture them with loving-kindness. (“Sabba papassa akarananṃ – kusalassa upasampadā – sacitta pariyodapanaṃ – etaṃ Buddhana sasanaṃ”)

In a time when global tensions continue to rise, this timeless message serves as a powerful reminder that lasting peace begins within each individual—and that compassion remains humanity’s greatest strength.

“Devo vassatu kalena – sassa sampatti hetu ca
Pito bhavatu loko ca – rajaā bhavatu dhammiko”

(“May the rains fall at the right time, bringing about abundant harvests.

May the world be joyful and prosperous.

May the ruler be righteous and just.”)

Continue Reading

Features

Peace march and promise of reconciliation

Published

on

Peace walk in progress

The ongoing peace march by a group of international Buddhist monks has captured the sentiment of Sri Lankans in a manner that few public events have done in recent times. It is led by the Vietnamese monk Venerable Thich Pannakara who is associated with a mindfulness movement that has roots in Vietnamese Buddhist practice and actively promoted among diaspora communities in the United States. The peace march by the monks, accompanied by their mascot, the dog Aloka, has generated affection and goodwill within the Buddhist and larger community. It follows earlier peace walks in the United States where monks carried a similar message of mindfulness and compassion across communities but without any government or even media patronage as in Sri Lanka.

This initiative has the potential to unfold into an effort to nurture a culture of peace in Sri Lanka. Such a culture is necessary if the country as the country prepares to move beyond its history of conflict towards a more longlasting reconciliation and a political solution to its ethnic and religious divisions. The government’s support for the peace march can be seen as part of a broader attempt to shape such a culture. The Clean Sri Lanka programme, promoted by the government as a civic responsibility campaign focused on environmental cleanliness, ethical conduct and social discipline, provides a useful framework within which such initiatives can be situated. Its emphasis on collective responsibility and shared public space makes it sit well with the values that peacebuilding requires.

government’s previous plan to promote a culture of peace was on the occasion of “Sri Lanka Day” celebrations which were scheduled to take place on December 12-14 last year but was disrupted by Cyclone Ditwah. The Sri Lanka Day celebrations were to include those talented individuals from each and every community at the district level who had excelled in some field or the other, such as science, business or arts and culture and selected by the District Secretariats in each of the 25 districts. They were to gather in Colombo to engage in cultural performances and community-focused exhibitions. The government’s intention was to build up a discourse around the ideas of unity in diversity as a precursor to addressing the more contentious topics of human rights violations during the war period, and issues of accountability and reparations for wrongs suffered during that dark period.

Positive Response

The invitation to the international monks appears to have emerged from within Buddhist religious networks in Sri Lanka that have long maintained links with the larger international Buddhist community. The strong support extended by leading temples and clergy within the country, including the Buddhists Mahanayakes indicates that this was not an isolated effort but one that resonated with the mainstream Buddhist establishment. Indeed, the involvement of senior Buddhist leaders has been particularly noteworthy. A Joint Declaration for Peace in the world, drawing on Sri Lanka’s own experience, and by the Mahanayakes of all Buddhist Chapters took place in the context of the ongoing peace march at the Gangaramaya Temple in Colombo, with participation from the diplomatic community. The declaration, calling for compassion, dialogue and sustainable peace, reflects an effort by religious leadership to assert a moral voice in favour of coexistence.

The popular response to the peace march has also been striking. Large numbers of people have been gathering along the route, offering flowers, water and support to the monks. Schoolchildren have been lining the roads, and communities from different religious backgrounds extend hospitality. On the way, the monks were hosted by both a Hindu temple and a mosque, where food and refreshments were provided. These acts, though simple, carry a message about the possibility of harmony among Sri Lanka’s diverse communities. It helps to counter the perception that the Buddhist community in Sri Lanka is inherently nationalist and resistant to minority concerns that was shaped during the decades of war and reinforced by political mobilisation that too often exploited ethnic identity.

By way of contrast, the peace march offers a different image. It shows a readiness among ordinary people to embrace values of compassion and coexistence that are deeply embedded in Buddhist teaching. The Metta Sutta, one of the most well-known discourses in Buddhism, calls for boundless goodwill towards all beings. It states that one should cultivate a mind that is “boundless towards all beings, free from hatred and ill will.” This emphasis on universal compassion provides a moral foundation for peace that extends beyond national or ethnic boundaries. The monks themselves emphasised this point repeatedly during the walk. Venerable Thich Pannakara reminded those who gathered that while acts of generosity are commendable, mindfulness in everyday life is even more important. He warned that as people become unmindful, they are more prone to react with anger and hatred, thereby contributing to conflict.

More Initiatives

The presence of political leaders at key moments of the march has emphasised the significance that the government attaches to the event. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya paid her respects to the peace march monks in Kandy, while President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is expected to do so at the conclusion of the march in Colombo. Such gestures signal an alignment between political authority and moral aspiration, even if the translation of that aspiration into policy remains a work in progress. At the same time, the peace march has not been without its shortcomings. The walk did not engage with the Northern and Eastern parts of the country, regions that were most affected by the war and where the need for reconciliation is most acute. A more inclusive geographic reach would have strengthened the symbolic impact of the initiative.

In addition, the positive impact of the peace march could have been increased if more effort had been taken to coordinate better with other civic and religious groups and include them in the event. Many civil society and religious harmony groups who would have liked to participate in the peace march found themselves unable to do so. There was no place in the programme for them to join. Even government institutions tasked with promoting social cohesion and reconciliation found themselves outside the loop. The Clean Sri Lanka Task Force that organised the peace march may have felt that involving other groups would have made it more complicated to organise the events which have proceeded without problems.

The hope is that the positive energy and goodwill generated by this peace march will not dissipate but will instead inspire further initiatives with the requisite coordination and leadership. The march has generated public discussion, drawn attention to the values of mindfulness and compassion, and created a space in which people can imagine a different future. It has been a special initiative among the many that are needed to build a culture of peace. A culture of peace cannot be imposed from above nor can it emerge overnight. It needs to be nurtured through multiple efforts across society, including education, religious engagement, civic initiatives and political reform. It is within such a culture that the more difficult questions of power sharing, justice and reconciliation can be addressed in a constructive manner.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Trending