Features

Experiences in France as SL Ambassador

Published

4 years ago

2021/10/24

Excerpted from the memoirs of Chandra Wickramasinghe, Retd. Addl. Secy. to the President

I was a member of the Public Service Commission when President Chandirka Kumaratunga appointed me as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to France in 2001. I was fortunate to have had as my predecessor Danesan Casie Chetty, a very senior career diplomat, who had organized the work in the Embassy meticulously, making things so much easier for me to step in and take over. He and his wife Shanti had refurbished and decorated the fine apartment which was in a prime residential area in Paris (which had been purchased by the Govt. of SL), most tastefully and elegantly.

Within months of my appointment, the Govt. entered into a Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE, brokered by the Norwegians. My major concern while serving as Ambassador was to work towards increasing the volume of our exports which were primarily tea, spices and garments; to promote tourism to SL and to do my utmost to counter the sustained propaganda blitz directed against us by the Tamil Diaspora in France. When I met President Chirac for the presentation of my credentials, I expressly told him of my plans to try and increase the volume of our major export items to France adding I would also endeavor to popularize Sri Lanka as a prime destination for French tourists.

He interjected to say that Sri Lanka being a beautiful country, it should not be difficult to make it an attractive destination for French tourists. Referring to the terrorist problem that was plaguing SL, I told him that the LTTE was actively supported by the Tamil Diaspora in Paris who collected and remitted substantial funding to the terrorists in SL to pursue their destructive activities and that if the French Intelligence Services could curb these illegal activities of LTTE sympathizers in Paris, it would help SL to combat the terrorist scourge .(President Chirac gave some instructions to one of his aides on this issue). He graciously agreed to do whatever possible to assist SL in the matters raised by me.

Arrangements were made thereafter by Nimal Karunatilleke, the Trade Attache of the Embassy, to liaise with the exporters of the major SL export products to France and facilitate their participation in a number of International Exhibitions and Trade Fairs that were held in Paris. On my visits to these Exhibitions and Trade Fairs subsequently, I found a good many SL exporters busily contracting trade deals with the French importers of our export items.

I also attended an International Tea Exhibition in Bordeaux called ‘The Road to Tea’, where I was able to interact closely with French tea importers. I was invited to tea by the Mayor of Bordeaux at his residence where to my surprise, I was served ‘Dimbula’ tea and was pleasantly surprised to learn that the Mayor was himself a lover of ‘Dimbula’ tea. I must record here, the unstinted support I received from Nimal Karunatilleke of our Embassy in all matters pertaining to Trade between France and Sri Lanka and make mention the enthusiastic support I received from Manisha Gunasekera and Saroja Sirisena who were two senior career diplomats at the Embassy during my entire period there. Saroja Sirisena in particular, with her charm and winning ways, proved a veritable asset to me during election time to various international bodies. Come election time, she used to give Ambassadors a dainty peck on their cheek and they would come in droves and vote for SL! When the former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar asked me how SL managed to win certain crucial elections, I related Saroja’s technique (he knew Saroja well) and he laughed loud and long!

Soon after I assumed office, I discovered that the French Tea importers had formed themselves into a cartel comprising four major tea importers, of whom I was able to cultivate two of the more influential to help me to promote SL tea. This I did by inviting them for meetings and by hosting them to dinner at my residence etc. One of them, a lady told me that although Ceylon tea was by far the best in the world, our marketing was poor. She said we should promote our tea the way the French promoted their vintage wines with attractive labels giving information of the origins on the tea, its vintage, subtleties of it’s bouquet et al. She further said that Ceylon tea deserves to be similarly advertised in attractively designed packs stating that it is grown in the central highlands at an elevation of over 4,000 feet, with plucking done with the onset of the first flush of leaf. Having taken the cue from her, I emailed the Chairman/Tea Board at the time, Ronnie Weerakoon, conveying the information I had gathered from the French lady on how Ceylon tea could be attractively packaged and marketed.

Within days, Ronnie who had latched onto the concept, sent out circular instructions to all the tea exporters advising them on the above lines. I have no doubt that the tea producers who followed his instructions would have received a substantial boost to their tea exports in good time.

I also found that although the French are inveterate coffee drinkers, the upper classes were, strangely enough, aficionados of high grown good Ceylon tea. I used to occasionally entertain Members of the French Parliament to high tea in a room in the Parliament premises with the permission of the Speaker who I knew. The French MPs, curiously enough, had a partiality for our mutton cutlets , rolls and fish patties and in between sessions used to come in large numbers to partake of these snacks with the high point being fine Ceylon tea – Dimbula tea to be specific, served at the end.

Once I decided to have a little Kandyan dancing session performed by a Sinhalese boy and a girl living in Paris with drum accompaniment thrown in. The little drummer boy got a bit carried away and with the din reaching the Parliament Chamber where there was I think, a debate in progress on Corsica, the Sergeant at Arms sent a message to keep the noise levels low. I remember at one of these informal gatherings I addressed the French Members of Parliament who were present saying that although the French were traditionally coffee drinkers, it should not be forgotten that pristine Ceylon tea is like their wine, red in colour and that they were both healthy drinks. They had a good laugh while sipping our good high grown tea!

The French Perfumery Association

Our spices are much valued in France, with cinnamon occupying pride of place. SL cinnamon and lemon grass oil are in high demand by the French perfumery industry for their unique and distinctive quality and aroma. The French Perfumery Association is a powerful guild in France that is extremely quality conscious laying down and rigidly enforcing the highest quality standards in the manufacture of their world famous brands like Chanel etc. With their long and distinguished tradition of manufacturing quality perfumes, they were wont to pick the best spices, flowers and oils used in the perfume industry from across the globe with scrupulous care.

My relationship with the French Perfumery Association became so close that they made me a Life Member of the Association. I was able to open lines of communication with the Association and some of the leading cinnamon and lemon grass exporters of SL, some of whom even visited Paris and had fruitful discussions. In fact, my association with the FPA became so close, that they even created a special perfume called the ‘Spirit of Lanka’ and presented it to my wife at a formal ceremony arranged by them. This newly created perfume made of spices, oils and the essence of flowers exclusively from SL was a special, limited issue of 100 bottles which were distributed among the Ambassadors and other VIPs present at the ceremony. They even let me into what they said was a closely guarded secret – one of the perfume extracts that went into the manufacture of their world famous ‘Chanel’ brand came from the ‘Araliya’ flower which grew in SL. This SL Araliya flower they said, had a distinct and unique scent , not found in this genre of flower, anywhere else in the world.

I must record here, my appreciation of a friendly couple who were resident in France –Pierre and Ionie Silliere for making arrangements for me to visit cities and townships in Normandy to deliver talks on Sri Lanka with video presentations showing the scenic beauty and historical sights of Sri Lanka. Many people who attended these talks had only heard of Ceylon and it’s tea and were astounded by the breathtaking beauty of the island and the many places of historical and archaeological interest visitors could see. They just could not believe that we had enormous monuments (dagobas), the tallest being just five feet shorter than the tallest Egyptian Pyramid- Cheops. The Silliers told me later that many who had been present at the lecture /slide presentations were planning to visit Sri Lanka with their friends.

Despite the Ceasefire, the LTTE were still active in Paris

Despite the Ceasefire between the SL Govt. and the LTTE bringing about an uneasy calm and a tenuous cessation of hostilities, as the terms and conditions were heavily weighted in favour of the LTTE and decidedly unfavourable to the Govt. of SL , the LTTE in Paris had not let up on their propaganda activities. There was a particular area in Paris called Le Chappel which had virtually been commandeered by the Tamil Diaspora. Once I visited the area incognito on the pretext of purchasing Sri Lanka curry stuffs etc., which were available in the shops there with my driver shadowing me at a discreet distance. But despite all these precautions, one or two of the hard core LTTE sympathizers got suspicious, which I could see from their reactions in reaching for their cell phones and talking animatedly to whoever at the other end. This was enough of a warning for me to beat a hasty retreat.

Interacting with Ambassadors and important personages

It was also my view that an Ambassador representing a country should interact not only with other Ambassadors, but should also make the acquaintance of prominent personages in the host country while also mixing with the ordinary people to the extent possible. The French, with their long and illustrious tradition of suave and elegant diplomacy, are a people who treat Ambassadors with a lot of deference and respect. This is made abundantly clear when you are introduced to them as an Ambassador. Following tradition, French Ambassadors have remained a cultured and elegant lot. They are knowledgeable and conduct themselves with appropriate diplomatic finesse wherever they go. They would naturally expect the same standards of decorum and conduct from their foreign counterparts.

This does not mean that one should assume an unprepossessing hauteur, which would immediately be taken note of and often find reflection in certain cynical reactions. Being knowledgeable and convivial, at receptions and social gatherings is crucially important and would unfailingly elicit the correct responses from them. These were my perceptions which I am sure will be shared by many senior diplomats who have served particularly in Missions in the West.

I must say that I successfully made the acquaintance of academics, prominent public figures, former Ambassadors, leading businessmen dealing with our principal export products etc. by entertaining them at my residence at the many receptions my wife and I hosted. In my discussions with them, I was able to disabuse them of the misconceptions they may have had about SL, exposed as they were, to the relentless barrage of LTTE propaganda. Of course the former Foreign Minister par excellence, Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar had already done a lot of damage control by the brilliant speeches made by him at numerous international fora by convincingly assuaging the fears and suspicions of many countries in the West to the point of veering them round and making them go to the extent of banning the LTTE in those countries. He was ably assisted in this stupendous task by Rohan Perera who was the Legal Advisor in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the time.

Among the people with whom I struck up firm friendships, I can name Prof. Meyer of Sorbonne University and Bernard de Gaulle, nephew of the late President and President of the de Gaulle Foundation. They were particularly sympathetic towards SL and the unfortunate predicament the country was in. I was quite touched when Bernard de Gaulle presented me with the ‘de Gaulle Medal’, when I was about to relinquish duties as Ambassador. He said it was in appreciation of my efforts to strengthen Sri Lanka –France cordiality and friendship.

I feel I must further state here, that I was able to interact in this amicable and informal manner with French academics and other Frenchmen of stature, due to the broad education I had received in Sri Lanka in the English medium. English was indeed a pass word to knowledge to all those who were fortunate enough to study in that medium. It opened up to us the best in English literature as well as access to the better known books in Russian, French, Italian, German literature et al, in translation. In fact, other Ambassadors used to often express their surprise when I quoted extensively from

Shakespeare, Satre, Balzac, Goethe, Plato, Aristotle, Omar Kayyaam and the lot. This certainly was not an advantage that was peculiar to me, but was a distinct advantage enjoyed by the great many who had studied in the English medium and who thereby acquired the knowledge and the breadth of vision that came with wide reading.

These are by no means self-congratulatory statements by me, but are hard facts which powers that be, should take cognizance of in making appointments at the level of Heads of Missions to important countries in the larger interests of our country. I must re-iterate that these candid observations are being made having the best interests of Sri Lanka at heart. One cannot, of course, blame the younger generations who followed in our wake, for their lack of proficiency in the English language. They were the unfortunate victims of the woeful chicanery of self-serving politicians who deluded the masses with their hugely populist measures, sacrificing long term national interests for short term political expediency.

I daresay there are still certain areas where persons proficient only in Sinhala and Tamil languages in Sri Lanka, could work admirably in discharging the duties expected of them. But with the rapid advances made in Information and Communication Technology, people are increasingly realizing the value of English as a necessary tool for knowledge enhancement and for gaining access to certain fields of study which would be denied to those possessing proficiency exclusively in Sinhala and Tamil languages.

The four Presidents whom I served, I must say, tried their best to take certain remedial measures in this regard, but the magnitude of the problem was much too overwhelming for such corrective measures attempted by them to register any lasting impact. The present Govt. too is acutely aware of the enervating effects of the problem, reflected in the lowering of knowledge and competence levels across the board, and is doing its utmost to remedy the situation by having a Special English Unit under a competent Advisor in the Presidential Secretariat dedicated to the training of English teachers. But it is proving to be an uphill task even for this Special Unit, due to the paucity of competent teachers of English.

It is therefore necessary that the problem be addressed frontally with due resolve if the situation is to be prevented from deteriorating further. It is suggested that the authorities try selecting newly passed out graduates and putting them through a six months ‘total immersion’ course in the English language. These young graduates are intelligent and already equipped with learning skills which should enable them to acquire the required proficiency in the English language with ease within the stipulated six month intensive training period. This should, whilst providing gainful employment to the increasing numbers of graduates passing out annually from Universities, also enable the authorities to tackle the problem of improving English proficiency island wide in a pragmatic manner.

Accreditation to UNESCO as Ambassador

In addition to my duties as Ambassador to France, I also represented SL at UNESCO in Paris. I had to devote considerable time to UNESCO discussions where I was elected to Chair certain Committees. UNESCO has always been at the forefront of the UN Agencies in SL assisting the country substantially in the areas of Education development and in the cultural field. UNESCO is currently primarily concerned with encouraging developing countries who are its members, in the rather daunting task of meeting the Millennium Development Goals that have been laid down by the United Nations. During this time, Dr. Sarath Amunugama and Prof. Carlo Fonseka visited Paris in a delegation to attend a UNESCO conference on the theme -‘Towards achieving the Millennium Development targets’. I remember Dr. Amunugama, (who was a familiar figure in UNESCO circles) making a stirring speech on the subject which was rapturously received by the representative audience.

On the 50th Anniversary of the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth the Second, my wife and I received an invitation from Sir John Holmes, the British Ambassador, to attend the Commemoration Ceremony which was to be held at Notre Dame Cathedral. We were conducted to the seats reserved for Commonwealth Ambassadors in the front row, from where we were able to get an unobstructed view of the entire ceremony. The event was indeed a memorable one as the wondrous ‘ambience’ of Notre Dame Cathedral, lent a special grandeur and solemnity to the occasion.

Addressing the UN General Assembly on the subject of Ageing

I consider it a singular privilege and honour to have addressed the United Nations Second World Assembly on Ageing, held in Madrid Spain in April 2011. My address was on “Perspectives of the Ageing population in Sri Lanka”.

On my return to the island I was appointed Senior Advisor to the President. It was during this period that I worked in collaboration with my colleague SMSB Niyangoda, on nine Presidential Committees to study and make recommendations on numerous problems relating primarily to land matters. These recommendations made by the two of us received the approval of the President as well as the Cabinet of Ministers. I was also a member of the Presidential Commission on ‘Law and Order’,with Nihal Wadugodapitya former Justice of the Supreme Court who was Chairman and Frank de Silva former IGP. The Commission submitted a comprehensive report to the then President recommending sweeping changes to the entire Criminal Justice system which unfortunately did not find favour with the gentlemen occupying the highest echelons of the Judiciary at the time for reasons best known to them.

(Concluded)

All News Advertisement

Features

The NPP Government is more than a JVP offspring:

Published

1 day ago

2026/04/12

Thilina Walpola

Rohana Wijeweera

It is also different from all past governments as it faces new and different challenges

No one knows whether the already broken ceasefire between the US and Iran, with Israel as a reluctant adjunct, will last the full 10 days, or what will come thereafter. The world’s economic woes are not over and the markets are yo-yoing in response to Trump’s twitches and Iran’s gate keeping at the Strait of Hormuz. The gloomy expert foretelling is that full economic normalcy will not return until the year is over even if the war were to end with the ceasefire. That means continuing challenges for Sri Lanka and more of the tough learning in the art of governing for the NPP.

The NPP government has been doing what most governments in Asia have been doing to cope with the current global crisis, which is also an Asian crisis insofar as oil supplies and other supply chains are concerned. What the government can and must do additionally is to be totally candid with the people and keep them informed of everything that it is doing – from monitoring import prices to the timely arranging of supplies, all the details of tender, the tracking of arrivals, and keeping the distribution flow through the market without bottlenecks. That way the government can eliminate upstream tender rackets and downstream hoarding swindles. People do not expect miracles from their government, only honest, sincere and serious effort in difficult circumstances. Backed up by clear communication and constant public engagement.

But nothing is going to stop the flow of criticisms against the NPP government. That is a fact of Sri Lankan politics. Even though the opposition forces are weak and have little traction and even less credibility, there has not been any drought in the criticisms levelled against the still fledgling government. These criticisms can be categorized as ideological, institutional and oppositional criticisms, with each category having its own constituency and/or commentators. The three categories invariably overlap and there are instances of criticisms that excite only the pundits but have no political resonance.

April 5 anniversary nostalgia

There is also a new line of criticism that might be inspired by the April 5 anniversary nostalgia for the 1971 JVP insurrection. This new line traces the NPP government to the distant roots of the JVP – its April 1965 founding “in a working-class home in Akmeemana, Galle” by a 22-year old Rohana Wijeweera and seven others; the short lived 1971 insurrection that was easily defeated; and the much longer and more devastating second (1987 to 1989) insurrection that led to the elimination of the JVP’s frontline leaders including Wijeweera, and brought about a change in the JVP’s political direction with commitment to parliamentary democracy. So far, so good, as history goes.

But where the nostalgic narrative starts to bend is in attempting a straight line connection from the 1965 Akmeemana origins of the JVP to the national electoral victories of the NPP in 2024. And the bend gets broken in trying to bridge the gap between the “founding anti-imperialist economics” of the JVP and the practical imperatives of the NPP government in “governing a debt-laden small open economy.” Yet this line of criticism differs from the other lines of criticism that I have alluded to, but more so for its moral purpose than for its analytical clarity. The search for clarity could begin with question – why is the NPP government more than a JVP offspring? The answer is not so simple, but it is also not too complicated.

For starters, the JVP was a political response to the national and global conditions of the 1960s and 1970s, piggybacking socialism on the bandwagon of ethno-nationalism in a bi-polar world that was ideologically split between status quo capitalism and the alternative of socialism. The NPP government, on the other hand, is not only a response to, but is also a product of the conditions of the 2010s and 2020s. The twain cannot be more different. Nothing is the same between then and now, locally and globally.

A pragmatic way to look at the differences between the origins of the JVP and the circumstances of the NPP government is to look at the very range of criticisms that are levelled against the NPP government. What I categorize as ideological criticisms include criticisms of the government’s pro-IMF and allegedly neo-liberal economic policies, as well as the government’s foreign policy stances – on Israel, on the current US-Israel war against Iran, the geopolitics of the Indian Ocean, and the apparent closeness to the Modi government in India. These criticisms emanate from the non-JVP left and Sinhala Buddhist nationalists.

Strands of nationalism

To digress briefly, there are several strands in the overall bundle of Sri Lankan nationalism. There is the liberal inclusive strand, the left-progressive strand, the exclusive Sinhala Buddhist Nationalist (SBN) strand, and the defensive strands of minority nationalisms. Given Sri Lanka’s historical political formations and alliances, much overlapping goes on between the different strands. The overlapping gets selective on an issue by issue basis, which in itself is not unwelcome insofar as it promotes plurality in place of exclusivity.

Historically as well, and certainly after 1956, the SBN strand has been the dominant strand of nationalism in Sri Lanka and has had the most influential say in every government until now. Past versions of the JVP frequently straddled the dominant SBN space. Currently, however, the dominant SBN strand is in one of its more dormant phases and the NPP government could be a reason for the current dormancy. This is an obvious difference between the old JVP and the new NPP.

A second set of criticisms, or institutional criticisms, emanate from political liberals and human rights activists and these are about the NPP government’s actions or non-actions in regard to constitutional changes, the future of the elected executive presidency, the status of provincial devolution and the timing of provincial council elections, progress on human rights issues, the resolution of unfinished postwar businesses including the amnesia over mass graves. These criticisms and the issues they represent are also in varying ways the primary concerns of the island’s Tamils, Muslims and the Malaiyaka (planntationn) Tamils. As with the overlapping between the left and the non-minority nationalists, there is also overlapping between the liberal activists and minority representatives.

A third category includes what might be called oppositional criticisms and they counterpose the JVP’s past against the NPP’s present, call into question the JVP’s commitment to multi-party democracy and raise alarms about a creeping constitutional dictatorship. This category also includes criticisms of the NPP government’s lack of governmental experience and competence; alleged instances of abuse of power, mismanagement and even corruption; alleged harassment of past politicians; and the failure to find the alleged mastermind behind the 2019 Easter bombings. At a policy and implementational level, there have been criticisms of the government’s educational reforms and electricity reforms, the responses to cyclone Ditwah, and the current global oil and economic crises. The purveyors of oppositional criticisms are drawn from the general political class which includes political parties, current and past parliamentarians, as well as media pundits.

Criticisms as expectations

What is common to all three categories of criticisms is that they collectively represent what were understood to be promises by the NPP before the elections, and have become expectations of the NPP government after the elections. It is the range and nature of these criticisms and the corresponding expectations that make the NPP government a lot more than a mere JVP offspring, and significantly differentiate it from every previous government.

The deliverables that are expected of the NPP government were never a part of the vocabulary of the original JVP platform and programs. The very mode of parliamentary politics was ideologically anathema to the JVP of Akmeemana. And there was no mention of or concern for minority rights, or constitutional reforms. On foreign policy, it was all India phobia without Anglo mania – a halfway variation of Sri Lanka’s mainstream foreign policy of Anglo mania and India phobia. For a party of the rural proletariat, the JVP was virulently opposed to the plantation proletariat. The JVP’s version of anti-imperialist economics would hardly have excited the Sri Lankan electorate at any time, and certainly not at the present time.

At the same time, the NPP government is also the only government that has genealogical antecedents to a political movement or organization like the JVP. That in itself makes the NPP government unique among Sri Lanka’s other governments. The formation of the NPP is the culmination of the evolution of the JVP that began after the second insurrection with the shedding of political violence, acceptance of political plurality and commitment to electoral democracy.

But the evolution was not entirely a process of internal transformation. It was also a response to a rapidly and radically changing circumstances both within Sri Lanka and beyond. This evolution has not been a rejection of the founding socialist purposes of the JVP in 1968, but their adaptation in the endless political search, under constantly changing conditions, for a non-violent, socialist and democratic framework that would facilitate the full development of the human potential of all Sri Lankans.

The burden of expectations is unmistakable, but what is also remarkable is their comprehensiveness and the NPP’s formal commitment to all of them at the same time. No previous government shouldered such an extensive burden or showed such a willing commitment to each and every one of the expectations. In the brewing global economic crisis, the criticisms, expectations and the priorities of the government will invariably be focussed on keeping the economy alive and alleviating the day-to-day difficulties of millions of Sri Lankan families. While what the NPP government can and must do may not differ much from what other Asian governments – from Pakistan to Vietnam – are doing, it could and should do better than what any and all past Sri Lankan governments did when facing economic challenges.

by Rajan Philips

Features

A Fragile Ceasefire: Pakistan’s Glory and Israel’s Sabotage

Published

1 day ago

2026/04/12

Thilina Walpola

Smokes over Beirut: Israel’s Ceasefire Attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon

After threatening to annihilate one of the planet’s oldest civilizations, TACO* Trump chickened out again by grasping the ceasefire lifeline that Pakistan had assiduously prepared. Trump needed the ceasefire badly to stem the mounting opposition to the war in America. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu wanted the war to continue because he needed it badly for his political survival. So, he contrived a fiction and convinced Trump that Lebanon is not included in the ceasefire. Trump as usual may not have noticed that Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Shariff had clearly indicated Lebanon’s inclusion in his announcement of the ceasefire at 7:50 PM, Tuesday, on X. Ten minutes before Donald Trump’s fake deadline.

True to form on Wednesday, Israel unleashed the heaviest assault by far on Lebanon, reportedly killing over 300 people, the highest single-day death toll in the current war. Iran responded by re-closing the Strait of Hormuz and questioning the need for talks in Islamabad over the weekend. There were other incidents as well, with an oil refinery attacked in Iran, and Iranian drones and missiles slamming oil and gas infrastructure in UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Qatar.

The US tried to insist that Lebanon is not part of the ceasefire, with the argumentative US Vice President JD Vance, who was in Budapest, Hungary, campaigning for Viktor Orban, calling the whole thing a matter of “bad faith negotiation” as well as “legitimate misunderstanding” on the part of Iran, and warning Iran that “it would be dumb to jeopardise its ceasefire with Washington over Israel’s attacks in Lebanon.”

But as the attack in Lebanon drew international condemnation – from Pope Leo to UN Secretary General António Guterres, and several world leaders, and amidst fears of Lebanon becoming another Gaza with 1,500 people including 130 children killed and more than a million people displaced, Washington got Israel to stop its “lawn mowing” in southern Lebanon.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to “open direct negotiations with Lebanon as soon as possible,”. Lebanese President Joeseph Aoun has also called for “a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, followed by direct negotiations between them.” Israel’s involvement in Lebanon remains a wild card that threatens the ceasefire and could scuttle the talks between the US and Iran scheduled for Saturday in Islamabad.

Losers and Winners

After the ceasefire, both the Trump Administration and Iran have claimed total victories while the Israeli government wants the war to continue. The truth is that after more than a month into nonstop bombing of Iran, America and Israel have won nothing. Only Iran has won something it did not have when Trump and Netanyahu started their war. Iran now has not only a say over but control of the Strait of Hormuz. The ceasefire acknowledges this. Both Trump and Netanyahu are under fire in their respective countries and have no allies in the world except one another.

The real diplomatic winner is Pakistan. Salman Rushdie’s palimpsest-country has emerged as a key player in global politics and an influential mediator in a volatile region. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Chief of Defence Field Marshal Asim Munir have both been praised by President Trump and credited for achieving the current ceasefire. The Iranian regime has also been effusive in its praise of Pakistan’s efforts.

It is Pakistan that persisted with the effort after initial attempts at backdoor diplomacy by Egypt, Pakistan and Türkiye started floundering. Sharing a 900 km border and deep cultural history with Iran, and having a skirmish of its own on the eastern front with Afghanistan, Pakistan has all the reason to contain and potentially resolve the current conflict in Iran. Although a majority Sunni Muslim country, Pakistan is home to the second largest Shia Muslim population after Iran, and is the easterly terminus of the Shia Arc that stretches from Lebanon. The country also has a mutual defense pact with Saudi Arabia that includes Pakistan’s nuclear cover for the Kingdom. An open conflict between Iran and Saudi Arabia would have put Pakistan in a dangerously awkward position.

It is now known and Trump has acknowledged that China had a hand in helping Iran get to the diplomatic table. Pakistan used its connections well to get Chinese diplomatic reinforcement. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar flew to Beijing to brief his Chinese counterpart and secured China’s public support for the diplomatic efforts. The visit produced a Five-Point Plan that became a sequel to America’s 15-point proposal and the eventual ten-point offer by Iran.

There is no consensus between parties as to which points are where and who is agreeing to what. The chaos is par for the course the way Donald Trumps conducts global affairs. So, all kudos to Pakistan for quietly persisting with old school toing and froing and producing a semblance of an agreement on a tweet without a parchment.

It is also noteworthy that Israel has been excluded from all the diplomatic efforts so far. And it is remarkable, but should not be surprising, the way Trump has sidelined Isreal from the talks. Prime Minister Netanyahu has been enjoying overwhelming support of Israelis for starting the war of his life against Iran and getting the US to spearhead it. But now the country is getting confused and is exposed to Iranian missiles and drones far more than ever before. The Israeli opposition is finally coming alive realizing what little has Netanyahu’s wars have achieved and at what cost. Israel has alienated a majority of Americans and has no ally anywhere else.

It will be a busy Saturday in Islamabad, where the US and Iranian delegations are set to meet. Iran would seem to have insisted and secured the assurance that the US delegation will be led by Vice President Vance, while including Trump’s personal diplomats – Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner. Iran has not announced its team but it is expected to be led, for protocol parity, by Iran’s Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, and will likely include its suave Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Vice President Vance’s attendance will be the most senior US engagement with Iran since Secretary of State John Kerry negotiated the 2015 nuclear deal under President Obama.

The physical arrangements for the talks are still not public although Islamabad has been turned into a security fortress given the stakes and risks involved. The talks are expected to be ‘indirect’, with the two delegations in separate rooms and Pakistani officials shuttling between them. The status of Iran’s enriched uranium and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz will be the major points of contention. After Netanyahu’s overreach on Wednesday, Lebanon is also on the short list

The 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan) took months of negotiations and involved multiple parties besides the US and Iran, including China, France, Germany, UK, Russia and the EU. That served the cause of regional and world peace well until Trump tore up the deal to spite Obama. It would be too much to expect anything similar after a weekend encounter in Islamabad. But if the talks could lead to at least a permanent ceasefire and the return to diplomacy that would be a huge achievement.

(*As of 2025–2026, Donald Trump is nicknamed “TACO Trump” by Wall Street traders and investors as an acronym for “”. This term highlights a perceived pattern of him making strong tariff threats that cause market panic, only to later retreat or weaken them, causing a rebound.)

by Rajan Philips

Features

CIA’s hidden weapon in Iran

Published

1 day ago

2026/04/12

Thilina Walpola

We are passing through the ten-day interregnum called a ceasefire over the War on Iran. The world may breathe briefly, but this pause is not reassurance—it is a deliberate interlude, a vacuum in which every actor positions for the next escalation. Iran is far from secure. Behind the veneer of calm, external powers and local forces are preparing, arming, and coordinating. The United States is unlikely to deploy conventional ground troops; the next moves will be executed through proxies whose behaviour will defy expectation. These insurgents are shaped, guided, and amplified by intelligence and technology, capable of moving silently, striking precisely, and vanishing before retaliation. The ceasefire is not peace—it is the prelude to disruption.

The Kurds, historically instruments of Tehran against Baghdad, are now vectors for the next insurgency inside Iran. This movement is neither organic nor local. It is externally orchestrated, with the CIA as the principal architect. History provides the blueprint: under Mohammad-Reza Shah Pahlavi, Kurdish uprisings were manipulated, never supported out of sympathy. They were instruments of leverage against Iraq, a way to weaken a rival while projecting influence beyond Iran’s borders. Colonel Isa Pejman, Iranian military intelligence officer who played a role in Kurdish affairs, recalled proposing support for a military insurgency in Iraq, only for the Shah to respond coldly: “[Mustafa] Barzani killed my Army soldiers… please forget it. The zeitgeist and regional context have been completely transformed.” The Kurds were pawns, but pawns with strategic weight. Pejman later noted: “When the Shah wrote on the back of the letter ‘Accepted’ to General Pakravan, I felt I was the true leader of the Kurdish movement.” The seeds planted then are now being activated under new, technologically empowered auspices.

Iran’s geographic vulnerabilities make this possible. The Shah understood the trap: a vast territory with porous borders, squeezed by Soviet pressure from the north and radical Arab states from the west. “We are in a really terrible situation since Moscow’s twin pincers coming down through Kabul and Baghdad surround us,” he warned Asadollah Alam. From Soviet support for the Mahabad Republic to Barzani’s dream of a unified Kurdistan, Tehran knew an autonomous Kurdish bloc could destabilize both Iraq and Iran. “Since the formation of the Soviet-backed Mahabad Republic, the Shah had been considerably worried about the Kurdish threat,” a US assessment concluded.

Today, the Kurds’ significance is operational, not symbolic. The CIA’s recent rescue of a downed F-15 airman using Ghost Murmur, a quantum magnetometry system, demonstrated the reach of technology in intelligence operations. The airman survived two days on Iranian soil before extraction. This was not a simple rescue; it was proof that highly mobile, technologically augmented operations can penetrate Iranian territory with surgical precision. The same logic applies to insurgency preparation: when individuals can be tracked through electromagnetic signatures, AI-enhanced surveillance, and drones, proxy forces can be armed, guided, and coordinated with unprecedented efficiency. The Kurds are no longer pawns—they are a living network capable of fracturing Iranian cohesion while providing deniability to foreign powers.

Iran’s engagement with Iraqi Kurds was always containment, not empowerment. The Shah’s goal was never Kurdish independence. “We do not approve an independent [Iraqi] Kurdistan,” he stated explicitly. Yet their utility as instruments of regional strategy was undeniable. The CIA’s revival of these networks continues a long-standing pattern: insurgent groups integrated into the wider calculus of international power. Israel, Iran, and the Kurds formed a triangular strategic relationship that terrified Baghdad. “For Baghdad, an Iranian-Israeli-Kurdish triangular alliance was an existential threat,” contemporary reports noted. This is the template for modern manipulation: a networked insurgency, externally supported, capable of destabilizing regimes from within while giving foreign powers plausible deniability.

Iran today faces fragility. Years of sanctions, repression, and targeted strikes have weakened educational and scientific hubs; Sharif University in Tehran, one of the country’s leading scientific centres, was bombed. Leaders, scholars, and innovators have been eliminated. Military readiness is compromised. Generations-long setbacks leave Iran exposed. Against this backdrop, a Kurdish insurgency armed with drones, AI-supported surveillance, and precision munitions could do more than disrupt—it could fracture the state internally. The current ten-day ceasefire is a mirage; the next wave of revolt is already being orchestrated.

CIA involvement is deliberate. Operations are coordinated with allied intelligence agencies, leveraging Kurdish grievances, mobility, and ethnolinguistic networks. The Kurds’ spread across Iran, Iraq, Turkey, and Syria provides operational depth—allowing insurgents to strike, vanish, and regroup with impunity. Barzani understood leverage decades ago: “We could be useful to the United States… Look at our strategic location on the flank of any possible Soviet advance into the Middle East.” Today, the calculation is inverted: Kurds are no longer instruments against Baghdad; they are potential disruptors inside Tehran itself.

Technology is central. Ghost Murmur’s ability to detect a single heartbeat remotely exemplifies how intelligence can underpin insurgent networks. Drones, satellite communications, AI predictive modeling, and battlefield sensors create an infrastructure that can transform a dispersed Kurdish insurgency into a high-precision operation. Iran can no longer rely on fortifications or loyalty alone; the external environment has been recalibrated by technology.

History provides the roadmap. The Shah’s betrayal of Barzani after the 1975 Algiers Agreement demonstrated that external actors can manipulate both Iranian ambitions and Kurdish loyalties. “The Shah sold out the Kurds,” Yitzhak Rabin told Kissinger. “We could not station our troops there and keep fighting forever,” the Shah explained to Alam. The Kurds are a pivot, not a cause. Networks once acting under Tehran’s influence are now being repurposed against it.

The insurgency exploits societal fissures. Kurdish discontent in Iran, suppressed for decades, provides fertile ground. Historical betrayal fuels modern narratives: “Barzani claimed that ‘Isa Pejman sold us out to the Shah and the Shah sold us out to the US.’” Intelligence agencies weaponize these grievances, pairing them with training, technological augmentation, and covert support.

Geopolitically, the stakes are immense. The Shah’s defensive-offensive doctrine projected Iranian influence outward to neutralize threats. Today, the logic is inverted: the same networks used to contain Iraq are being readied to contain Iran. A technologically augmented Kurdish insurgency, covertly backed, could achieve in months what decades of sanctions, diplomacy, or repression have failed to accomplish.

The operation will be asymmetric, high-tech, and dispersed. UAVs, quantum-enhanced surveillance, encrypted communications, and AI-directed logistics will dominate. Conventional Iranian forces are vulnerable to this type of warfare. As Pejman reflected decades ago, “Our Army was fighting there, rather than the Kurds who were harshly defeated… How could we keep such a place?” Today, the challenge is magnified by intelligence superiority on the insurgents’ side.

This is not a temporary flare-up. The CIA and its allies are constructing a generational network of influence. Experience from Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon proves these networks endure once operationalised. The Shah recognized this: “Iran’s non-state foreign policy under the Shah’s reign left a lasting legacy for the post-Revolution era.” Today, those instruments are being remade as vectors of foreign influence inside Iran.

The future is stark. Iran faces not simply external threats, but a carefully engineered insurgency exploiting historical grievances, technological superiority, and precise intelligence. The Kurds are central. History, technology, and geopolitical calculation converge to create a transformative threat. Tehran’s miscalculations, betrayals, and suppressed grievances now form the lattice for this insurgency. The Kurds are positioned not just as an ethnic minority, but as a vector of international strategy—Tehran may be powerless to stop it.

Iran’s containment strategies have been weaponized, fused with technology, and inverted against it. The ghosts of Barzani’s Peshmerga, the shadows of Algiers, and the Shah’s strategic vision now converge with Ghost Murmur, drones, and AI. Tehran faces a paradox: the instruments it once controlled are now calibrated to undermine its authority. The next Kurdish revolt will not only fight in the mountains but in the electromagnetic shadows where intelligence operates, consequences are lethal, and visibility is scarce.

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa