by Rohana R. Wasala

After Ranil Wickremesinghe and Anura Kumara Dissanayake became President one after the other (in 2022 and 2024 respectively) without any sign of full-hearted public approval, though, their social media admirers shared posts that claimed that they both had made a substantial contribution to ending the separatist terrorism that had plagued the country for decades. They may have their arguments to support their claims. Those who know the facts, however, would hardly agree with them. But there is one distinguished UNP politician, who was opposed to the SLFP-led UPFA, about whom such a claim can probably be safely made. He is none other than Karu Jayasuriya.

In an interview with The Island’s Shamindra Ferdinando (‘Parliament approved USAID and other foreign funded projects: Karu J’/February 25, 2025), former UNP MP and Speaker of Parliament during the Yahapalanaya government (2015-20), Karu Jayasuriya, showed the least awareness of or concern about  the subversive agenda run by the USAID (United States Agency for International Development) projects launched in Sri Lanka. In response to the recent flurry of criticism against the USAID, veteran politician Jayasuriya (84) pointed out that all agreements with the USAID implemented during the 2016-20 period had full parliamentary approval and that there was nothing secret about the projects. He also mentioned that Parliament received assistance and expertise from many foreign countries other than the US, including China.

Jayasuriya refused to comment on domestic criticism in America itself about taxpayer’s money being squandered by the USAID in Sri Lanka on wasteful subversive projects as alleged by Elon Musk, head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) newly formed by president Donald Trump. I am not surprised. Jayasuriya is wise. He has one thing in common with Trump and Musk: He’s been a successful businessman like them. Both he and Trump are professional politicians as well; but I don’t think Musk is one. Trump seems to be rewarding him for funding his election campaign as well as speaking at his rallies. Musk has found a chance to avenge himself on the LGBTQ+ lobby and the USAID that supports it for causing him to reluctantly agree as a parent to a sex change operation that turned 18 year old Griffin Musk, his eldest son by his first wife Vivian Wilson, into a woman (dead named Vivian Jenna Wilson) in 2022. Musk called the USAID “a criminal organisation” that ought to be terminated forthwith, for he said, “(It was) … time for it to die!”.

Whereas Trump’s conclusion was different. He didn’t find fault with the USAID itself, but with those who have been running it lately. So, he described it as having “been run by a bunch of radical lunatics, and we’re getting them out”. Unlike the younger Musk stricken by personal tragedy, Trump hadn’t forgotten the fact that the USAID was set up in 1961 by president John F. Kennedy to unite a number of US aid agencies into one body and that it is a vital instrument of US foreign policy. A shrewd politician himself, Jayasuriya must have understood whose utterances should be taken more seriously in this context. Clearly, Trump’s utterances indicate the importance Trump attaches to the perpetuation of the USAID itself.

In my perception, during his interview with The Island, Jayasuriya tries to let it appear as if he didn’t have enough information about the controversy to express an opinion about it. However, it can’t be that he is unaware of what actually is the problem about. It involves, as he surely knows, the locally hotly disputed subject of expressly planned promotion of non-binary gender identities ideology that remains culturally unacceptable to the overwhelming majority in our deeply religious {Buddhist, Hindu, Christian and Muslim} society.

The promotion of the LGBTQ+ ideology is allegedly done in ways including teaching young YouTubers and other journalists to avoid the use of the normal, established gender binary in language. The gender binary uses the pronouns ‘he’ for male and ‘she’ for female. LGBTQ+ lobbyists want to avoid using these established masculine and feminine pronouns on themselves in the accepted way as the usual gender binary pronouns (that recognise only the two sexes that really exist) do not accommodate the multiplicity of sexual identities they want to adopt or claim, against nature.

If confronted with an explicit explanation of the controversy and pressed for a response, Jayasuriya might give an evasive answer like ‘Let Americans sort out their own unique gender identity problems, leaving us free to solve our real problems in our own way’. I won’t be surprised by such an answer. But his ignorance of the issue is fake. Jayasuriya was a key local collaborator of the regime change operation of 2015, which was a good example of political subversion by America of a vulnerable small nation that is of strategic importance for maintaining its global hegemony.

Located at a geostrategically critical point in the Indo-Pacific Ocean, Sri Lanka has great attraction for America in pursuing its central goal in the region of containing China’s influence. This harks back to how the perceived need to curb the growing power of the Soviet Union outside its own borders during the Cold War period (1947-1991) gave rise to the setting up of the USAID organisation in 1961, in the first place.

While judiciously avoiding the LGBTQ+ issue, Jayasuriya dwelt on the immense benefits that Parliament allegedly derived from foreign funded programmes. Explaining how this happened, he said that Parliament was able to maintain good relations with both the US and China. He asked the reporter: “Don’t you think having nearly 200 out of 225 lawmakers (get) an opportunity to visit China on a familiarisation tour in groups is an achievement on our part?”.

Jayasuriya stressed that even the parliamentary staff benefited from the various projects implemented with the financial backing of external parties (meaning, no doubt, USAID and others). Both parliamentarians and senior officials were secured laptops from China, justifying which, he said: “An MP may serve one term, but parliamentary staffers may continue for 20 or 25 years. Therefore, they should have received proper training and been given the opportunity to develop contacts”.

Is subjecting parliamentarians who are democratically elected for a short five years and unelected, state appointed civil functionaries like the parliament staffers who serve indefinitely long until retirement to the manipulative influence of powerful foreign governments on equal terms, good diplomacy or sound statecraft?

Strangely, Jayasuriya never once mentioned whether or how or in what form these benefits were transmitted to the general public who should be the true legitimate beneficiary of whatever material help or expertise that a friendly nation makes available to the country. Countries maintain diplomatic relations for mutual benefit. Foreign diplomats work to promote their own national interests, when necessary, even to the detriment of the host country’s interests, which is what Sri Lanka is experiencing today with the US, India and China. When countries are unequal partners, the weaker nations become subject to various forms of subversion (political, economic, cultural, etc.,) exerted by the stronger nations. Willing submission to international subversion seems to be Jayasuriya’s creed. (To be continued)

By Ifham Nizam

Shyam Selvadurai, an acclaimed writer known for his deep and nuanced portrayals of social justice, identity, and historical narratives, continues to push literary boundaries with his latest work, Mansions of the Moon. His storytelling has long been defined by an immersive approach, bringing to life historical and cultural contexts with an authenticity that captivates readers.

Selvadurai’s ability to weave historical accuracy with imaginative storytelling has cemented his place as a literary figure of significance. His works often explore themes of displacement, gender roles, and class struggles, but Mansions of the Moon marks a shift toward Buddhist philosophy and historical retelling, delving into the life of Yasodhara, the wife of Siddhartha Gautama. The novel challenges widely accepted narratives and presents Yasodhara as a strong, intelligent woman, shaped by the influences of the Pali canon and the Mahabharata‘s Draupadi.

In a conversation with The Island, Selvadurai shares insights into his creative process, the challenges of historical fiction, and the thematic depth of his latest work.

Excerpts of the Interview

Q: What inspired you to retell Yasodhara’s story from a feminist perspective?

A: Well, I didn’t think of it as a feminist perspective because certainly in Yasodhara’s time feminism would not have existed. So to have done it from a feminist perspective would have been an anachronism. What I was more interested in was trying to replicate the women that you find in the Pali canon who are very strong and are very smart too and have strong volition. You know, the ability to act is always there and then of course there is also Draupadi, the great heroine of the Mahabharata. So those are more my examples of what I wanted to do than approach her through a Western feminist point of view.

Q: How did you approach the balance between historical accuracy and creative license in the novel?

A: Well, always in order to create a period especially that’s so far back like 600 BCE, you are not going to get all the details. So you take what you can find and a lot of scholars have actually compiled the data from the Jataka stories and whatever, and so it’s there for you to look at. But then you make a leap of imagination too. So there’s a lot of going back and forth. I mean in the end, you have to feel like you’re there, right there present with Yasodhara. So in order to do that, there has to be some sort of creative license there. Also, we don’t really know that much about the lives of these people because the Pali canon is not really that interested in them pre-enlightenment. What they’re interested in is these people post-enlightenment. And also, as I say in my introduction, there are many fictional accounts of Yasodhara and Siddhartha’s life that are now taken to be fact.

Q: What challenges did you face in exploring the emotional and spiritual journey of Yasodhara?

A: I mean, I can’t think of any specific challenges because writing in itself is a challenge. You know this thing you have to do as a novelist which is immerse yourself in the world that you’re trying to create and in the character who’s the protagonist. That takes a lot of, frankly, emotional and spiritual exhaustion, especially for such a big novel.

Q: How does the cultural and religious context at the time influence the narrative?

A: What influences the structure of the narrative is more the Buddhist stories and the way in which they employ narrative tropes as a means to convey Buddhist concepts or as I like to think about them, Buddhist psychology. What I’m particularly interested in exploring through Mansions of the Moon and particularly through Yasodhara is the idea of moha, which is delusion—the idea that we are going to arrive at a place in our lives where everything is going to be absolutely perfect, but that’s wrong. Such a place does not exist. Such a utopia does not exist. And so we put ourselves through an enormous amount of stress, sadness, grief, and greed in order to achieve something that is illusory. That was what I was very interested in exploring through Yasodhara’s point of view.

Q: Did you discover anything surprising about Gautama Buddha or his family during your research?

A: No, I didn’t. What I found was in the Pali Canon, and perhaps I was a bit surprised to find out that the more common story of Prince Siddhartha not knowing that people got old, sick, or died until he was 29 was a comparatively recent invention. But it’s a great invention because, as I said, what really attracts me is this idea of how Buddhist narratives convey Buddhist concepts and psychology. In that sense, it’s a really elegant story.

Q: How does this novel connect to themes in your previous work?

A: It kind of doesn’t really. I mean it looks at social justice to some extent through the points of view of women and it examines injustices based on class, but really it’s just a different novel.

Q: What message do you hope readers take away from this retelling?

A: I don’t usually write with a message in mind. I write to tell a story and to invite readers into that story. I’ve already talked about moha and exploring it through Yasodhara’s journey, but other than that, I don’t like books that have a heavy message.

Q: Do you have any plans for upcoming novels or projects?

A: No, I never share what I’m working on until it’s done.

Q: Are there other historical or religious figures you are interested in exploring through fiction?

A: No, not at the moment.

Q: Which novels or pieces of literature have had the greatest influence on your writing?

A: There is no particular novel or piece of literature that has influenced me more than any other. When I conceive a novel, I look for a “mentor” writer who has tackled a similar area. For Mansions of the Moon, it was Mary Renault, who wrote extraordinary novels about ancient Greece with very little historical information available.

Q: Do you have a favourite book or author you revisit often?

A: No.

Q: What advice would you give aspiring writers, especially those exploring historical fiction?

A: Do your research to the point where you can create a credible world, then ignore it and write. Too much focus on historical details can bog down the plot and make the story pedantic. Keep the plot moving.

How do you see your work evolving over the next few years?

I have no idea. I just go from book to book. I always want to take on new writing adventures and explore different genres. Currently, I’m working on a young adult fantasy novel with strong Buddhist themes and South Asian folklore.

Are there any genres or themes you haven’t explored yet but would like to?

Not at the moment. Who knows what the future will bring?

What do you enjoy reading in your free time?

I read a lot—sometimes a novel a week. I read both for pleasure and to help with my writing. My reading choices are often guided by recommendations from other writers.

President Vladimir Zelensky’s February 28 visit to the White House with media swarming all over, to sign an agreement giving the US access to Ukraine’s mineral deposits, ended in the most scandalous sending him off. Cassandra is certain the majority of the world was shocked at the behaviour of the Prez of the US, considered the foremost VVIP of the globe, descending to the level of a rank bully with VP Vance aiding him. It was cruelly disturbing to see how the two badgered the visiting Prez, and proud to see how the Ukrainian held his cool and answered to the point. Rumoured it was all pre-planned.

Trump, as usual, badgered his way by repeating himself. You’re not in a good position (many times); You’ve done a lot of talking. Your country is in big trouble. You’re not winning this, (repeated). You don’t have the cards now.  Right now, you don’t – yeah, you’re playing cards. This after Zelensky managed to say: I’m not here to play cards.  Trump: You’re playing cards. You’re gambling, you’re gambling with World War III.

Vance accused Zelensky of not being grateful to the US and thanking the US and more so the Prez not once at the meeting.

Another lowest and unredeemable incident was when Trump commented on Zelensky’s attire as he greeted the Ukrainian President and within the Oval Office, a media person also commented that the visitor should be more formally dressed to be in the holy of holies in the presence of the Boss of the World! They forget how Elon Musk now comes into the Oval Office dressed casually with a cap on, and his young son draped on his shoulders.

Watching many news items on this incident, Cass’ strongest feeling was repugnance at the bullying and utter surprise that such a man as Trump is US Prez. She felt sympathetic to   Zelensky, who later said he had travelled 11 hours by train and longer by plane to get to the Oval Office. Cass watched an American TV news half hour where the host revealed the lies Trump has been spilling of late like how much the US spent on Ukraine and how America will get rich by tariffs imposed on foreign goods, which actually have to be borne by American consumers.

Cass also imagined how such a meeting would have proceeded if Kamala Harris had been seated in the seat occupied by Trump. What a golden chance America missed through their being swayed by big money, white supremacy, gender bias and all that balderdash.

The silver lining in the pathetic, nay scandalous diplomatic disaster and the belittling of a visiting President of a country by two big American bullies occupying the White House, is the hastily arranged meeting of European leaders with the British Prime Minister hosting a gathering of solidarity and sense in Lancaster House. Of course, they have to be diplomatic and extremely cautious in what they announce but the right-thinking Americans may cheer. Cassandra’s prognosis is that the meeting and its meaning will be lost on President Trump.

Our VVIP’s globe trotting

Cartoonist Jeffrey of the Sunday Island captured the euphoric gallivanting of past presidents Mahinda and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, M Sirisena and Ranil W in the newspaper of March 2.  He depicted them as almost salivating as they slouched forward to enplane on luxurious global travel while their fellow citizens were starving, many of them and others struggling to exist. Cass uses the term ‘fellow citizens’ incorrectly here since when the aforementioned were safely ensconced in their presidential seat, they forgot Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans:  minds were totally engaged with themselves and their cohorts; Mahinda had his family as co-benefactors of the Treasury of Sri Lanka, which they reduced to nothing with their profligacy.

A genteel man in our circle of friends opined it was not necessary to reveal amounts spent. He was shouted down with “Of course, we need to know. All should be made privy to how much of tax money that should go to development of the country was spent by these ex-presidents. Worst: while the country was tottering on the edge of the abyss of bankruptcy and people were suffering dire privation, they were globe-trotting extravagantly.”

Even for this one reason of eliminating selfish spending by presidents and prime ministers of this country, the present government must be given an uninterrupted five-year term in office and an extension at the next presidential and general elections. Maybe by the time the next time is here, the position of president may be abolished. However, Cass for one approves strongly of AKD continuing to be prez.

Rumours float there is a sinister move propelling the supposed shortage of petrol; i.e. destabilisation of the country. There definitely are politicians who will not mind a mite to send the country into catastrophe just to save their skins: one person willing to sacrifice 22 million Sri Lankans to save himself from the noose that moves closer as true justice takes over. Maybe the thought is that eliminating the Prez or PM or both is not sufficient to totally destabilise the country, so choose a more drastic method. Cass most definitely does not put this beyond many politicians alive, kicking vigorously and pontificating in public.

Sound advice

Cassandra’s final segment of title reads:  advice on FP stand. What she means is that very good advice has been given on how Sri Lanka’s foreign policy should proceed with the world in somewhat of turmoil and two wars still waging. The advice appeared in The Island of Monday March 3; given by Ali Sabry, PC. He was Minister of Foreign Affairs from July 2022 to September 2024 and previously Minister of Finance in the SLPP government. He was an appointed MP on SLPP national list. All would agree he was an able and just Minister and a Sri Lankan to be proud of who held his own internationally.

The article in which he advises the government of Sri Lanka to move forwards is titled: Lessons from Ukrainian Debacle with elucidation: Why Sri Lanka must continue to pursue a Non-Aligned, yet Multi-Aligned Foreign Policy. Foreign policy even to a novice like me, ignoramus in fact, seems to need to be so carefully policy-drawn and followed. Treading among the giant countries with their shifts and slants, for a small nation like ours, but with geopolitical strategic importance, is a veritable treading on eggshells. Advice from sensible persons is welcome and one thing is sure: this government hearkens unto advice.