Connect with us

Features

From Villain to Unsung Hero

Published

on

One winter morning in 1998, as a part of the SIA crew while planning a departure from Kimpo (Gimpo) International Airport Seoul South Korea, in our Airbus A 340 aircraft, we realised that it had snowed all night and the runway surface was ‘contaminated’ with melting snow (Slush). We had been told time and time again by the performance experts that a depth of snow, slush or standing water more than 3mm (1/8th of an inch), the proverbial SriLankan Baas’s ‘Noola’, on more than 25% of the Runway, it is considered to be contaminated. The Kimpo Airport Authorities hadn’t cleaned the runway surface like in most other airports.

A contaminated runway poses a whole host of problems for pilots attempting to take-off. Because of the natural resistance of the water, snow or both on the runway in varying degrees and depths, the acceleration to the take-off speed becomes slow as the wheels have to displace the contaminants using up a greater amount of runway length than on an uncontaminated (dry) runway. This leaves less runway length available for the aircraft to stop, if for some unforeseen reason the pilots need to abandon the take-off. Then stopping becomes a problem as the tyres may skid or aquaplane, making the wheel brakes ineffective with a good chance of over running the runway length available.

In this day and age, to reduce the thermal and mechanical stresses to the jet aircraft engines it was recommended by the manufacturer that pilots use a reduced thrust setting on uncontaminated (dry) runways, for take-off.  Therefore, it was mandated that on a contaminated runway, full thrust is used to enable the aircraft to accelerate quicker to the speed (V1) at which the Captain will have to decide whether he will stop or go. Every type of aircraft is tested in snow, slush or standing water, the spray patterns studied and a set of lower V1 speeds for slush operations are available for different take-off weights in graphs or in tabulated form for quick reference.  At V1 speed, if the Captain decides to continue the take-off it becomes a ‘non-event’. However, if he decides to stop for any reason, it becomes regimented and exiting as he has got to announce to the First Officer that he is discontinuing the take-off, apply brakes, close the engine Throttles, keep the aircraft straight on the centre line (that may not be visible), deploy spoilers and Reverse Thrust bringing the aircraft to a stop and cancelling Reverse and spoilers at the appropriate time. The non-flying pilot notes the air speed at which the Captain rejected and announces to the Control Tower that they have abandoned the take-off and then monitors the deceleration, providing a back up to the Captain’s actions. These are standard Operating Procedures (SOP’S) evolve through the years. Noting the speed at which they rejected the take-off is necessary when it comes to brake cooling time after rejecting a take-off. The brakes in the old days became white hot with its use at high speed. With the use of Carbon brakes and integral cooling fans the problem is resolved to a large extent. 

In the present day in all the modern airliners braking is done automatically using ‘Auto Brakes’ with anti- skid devices operating and this exercise (Rejected Take off) is practiced in the Simulator every six months as a team exercise under the supervision of a Flight Instructor. As a further consideration, the manufacturer Boeing’s analysis of all the past rejected take-off accidents have also shown that if the Captain was two seconds too slow in rejecting the take-off at the decision speed of V1, the aircraft will exit the runway at the other end at 60kt! So, their recommendation was to be ‘go minded’ at V1 and not attempt to stop. The reader will agree that a lot of things happening and judgemental considerations going through the Captain’s mind simultaneously while on the take-off run.(what if)

Usually on take-off on an uncontaminated runway it was a legal requirement to be at a height of 35 feet over the end of the runway. On a contaminated runway the aircraft is allowed to clear the end at 15 feet to accommodate the loss of performance. In addition to all this, in jet aircraft, it is recommended to have the continuous ignition ‘on’ to ensure that the engines do not flameout (fail) due to slush ingestion by the engine intakes. Fortunately, it wasn’t snowing that day in Kimpo and therefore did not pose a problem with ice on the wings which would have created another problem for us as the wings are meant to be clean on take-off. These Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are all contained in the Flight Manual of any particular type of aircraft and expected to be read and understood by its Crew.

That morning the take-off at Kimpo went off like clockwork. As everything appeared to be normal there was no need to abandon the take-off and after getting airborne, we had to concentrate on other important things like a sharp turn left before reaching the DMZ (De Militarised Zone) and avoiding overflying the South Korean President’s Palace which was a known prohibited area. They would fire two tracer shells. If no action was taken to change course and avoid, they will attempt to shoot you out of the skies, passengers or no passengers!

All in all, tackling a contaminated runway in modern times became a ‘piece of cake’ if one knew what to do. These procedures were not promulgated overnight. They were the result of ‘blood sweat and tears’ through the years. The story below is a good example.

In 1949 there was an accidental overrun of the runway of a Trans Canada Airlines (TCA) aircraft in Vancouver, Canada. The Investigators declared that the probable cause was the presence of slush (melting snow) on the runway preventing acceleration to the required speed for take-off. This observation was intimated to many airlines including British European Airlines (BEA) authorities who had not taken any cognizance and duly filed the letter without advising their operating crews of such possibilities.

Nine years later, on 6th Feb 1958, Capt James Thain and Capt Kenneth Rayment were operating a BEA charter flight from Belgrade Yugoslavia to London with the Manchester United Football Team and some well-known sports writers as their passengers. Both pilots were good friends and had served in the RAF together during WWII. Usually there would have been a regular First officer but since both captains had common interests like poultry farming, they had requested to operate together. The young Manchester United team known as ‘Busby Babes’ were well on their way to be European Cup Champions. Since the Airspeed Ambassador ‘Elizabethan’ aircraft did not have sufficient range to fly direct to London, they needed to do a Technical (refuelling) stop in Munich, Germany. The flight was uneventful till they reached Munich.

The Runway was contaminated with melting snow in Munich. Light snow was falling on the wings. Due to the fact that anti-ice heaters were used on the descent into Munich Airport, Capt. Thain decided not to get the wings cleaned. It was a judgment call.

After refuelling the crew attempted to take-off twice, but had to discontinue due to an engine malfunction. Then they taxied back to the ramp for a consultation with the Ground Engineer, after which the two captains decided to open power slowly to fix the engine problem which was known to occur in Munich which was over 1700 feet above mean sea level. On the third attempt the power was opened slowly and that involved a longer take off run which took the aircraft to a more contaminated unused part of the runway which actually made the aircraft lose speed from 117 knots to 105 knots and never accelerated to flying speed. Capt Thain was looking inside the cockpit and carefully ‘nursing’ the engines and monitoring the speed while Captain Rayment was handling the controls. When he looked outside the runway end was closing in quickly and it was too late. He opened throttles to the maximum. The wheels never left the ground because it didn’t have flying speed. The aircraft over ran and crashed through a fence, hit a tree and a house and burst into flames. The crash killed 23 out of the 44 passengers and crew on board, critically injuring Capt Kenneth Rayment, He passed away a few days later, leaving Capt Thain to carry the blame alone. With that, destroying the chances of Manchester United being European champions.

The German Accident investigator Capt. Hans J Reichel and his team arrived from Brunswick, West Germany, ill-equipped, about six hours later. By this time the weather had worsened and it was night time. He had to borrow lighting equipment from the BBC photo crew present at the site, He had been a pilot both in the Luftwaffe and Lufthansa the German Airline. The first thing he did was to check for wing ice and found a six-hour build-up of snow and declared that there was ice on the wings before take-off. No proper measurements of the depth of the slush were done on the runway at Munich. A parallel UK investigation was also launched. The formal accident inquiry commenced on 29th Apri’58 and was protracted and didn’t consider the effect of slush at all. The ‘Brits’ virtually fell in line with their German counterparts. The Final Accident Report came out on 9th March 1959, (More than a year after the crash), blaming the ice build-up on the wings and Capt Thain’s failure to de-ice.

It saidL:

“Apart from the ice, we couldn’t find any other reason which could have contributed to the air crash “

Capt Thain’s licence was suspended and he reverted to full time poultry farming while relentlessly working with the British Air Line Pilots Association (BALPA) to obtain more research data on the effects of slush on Take-off performance.

In 1961 Capt. Thain was fired from his job of BEA for allowing Capt Rayment to sit in the Left hand seat while he as designated Captain on the roster sat on the Right hand seat. The Captain on the roster should have sat on the Left hand seat and thus it was purported that he had violated the existing BEA Flight Crew Standing Orders which in itself a relatively minor matter. Looking back, it probably was just an excuse to shed him as this WWII veteran and BEA Captain ended up being an embarrassment to the Airline. There was no doubt about his ‘unquestionable ability’ up to that time of the accident.  In the eyes of the general public and Football fans he was considered a villain.

If the German Accident Investigators blamed the Slush on the Runway for the overrun then the Munich Airport Authorities would have to take the rap for not cleaning the runway surface. It was rather obvious that like in most accidents it is convenient and emotionally satisfying to blame an individual and not the system that gave rise to the unsafe situation. Capt. Thain did not give up trying to clear his name. He was determined to find out the real cause of the accident. He appealed.

Seven months after the crash in September 1958 the FAA started conducting practical tests on the impact of slush on aircraft acceleration for take-off. Although there was new scientific evidence available, the Germans were not keen on reopening the case and Capt. Thain was languishing in guilt. Capt. Thain kept the pressure on. Eventually in 1967 Prime Minister Harold Wilson mentioned publicly, that Capt. Thain was a “victim of injustices.” Soon after (1968) the British were also conducting experiments with slush on the runway at Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) in Bedford in shallow ponds of standing water, using Canberra, Viscount and Ambassador Aircraft. The significant adverse effects of slush on the Runway were confirmed.

Finally, Capt. Thain’s persistence paid off and his plight was mentioned in Parliament and the British Authorities agreed to review the investigation and found that the German investigation was incomplete. The Investigators had not interviewed many witnesses including the Air Traffic Controllers and those who reached the wreck first and could have given evidence to say that there was no ice on the wings immediately before the crash. It seemed that witnesses had been selectively interviewed to fit the ‘probable cause’.

Eleven long years after the crash in March 1969 Capt. James Thain was finally exonerated, but died soon afterwards of a heart attack at a relatively young age of 54, due to trauma and stress. This prompted one of the ‘wags’ in the BALPA to declare that “If the crash doesn’t kill you, the inquiry will” 

Capt. James Thain with his determination to find the real culprit of the Munich accident made taking off in slush safer for airline pilots, by triggering off research on both sides of the Atlantic that evolved into SOP’s which allowed us to take off safely from Kimpo that wintry morning.

In his own words, to his daughter, “The difference between the possible and impossible is merely a measure of man’s determination”

To me, Capt. James Thain was an unsung hero whose great determination to prove his innocence made flying safer for the future air travellers.

 



Features

Science and diplomacy in a changing world

Published

on

Two editors: Dr. Palitha Kohona (L) and Prof. Ranjith Senaratne

Today marks a truly historic and momentous occasion in the realm of transdisciplinary diplomacy in our country. We gather here with a twofold purpose of profound national and global significance: the establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum, and the launch of the volume Science Diplomacy: National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World.

This volume brings together valuable and timely contributions from internationally renowned experts representing all key regions of the world — North America, Latin America, Europe, Africa, West Asia, South Asia, and Oceania. It reflects a rich diversity of perspectives, experiences, and insights that speak to the increasingly interconnected nature of science, policy, and diplomacy in our rapidly transforming world.

I am deeply heartened — and indeed humbled — by the presence of such a distinguished constellation of leaders, professionals, intellectuals, scholars, and luminaries from diverse domains, including international relations, science and technology, higher education, and governance. It is rare to witness such an extraordinary and diverse assembly of intellectual, professional, and academic excellence under one roof. Your presence affirms the importance of the cause we serve and the promise of the path we are charting together. Your support, encouragement, and engagement give life, purpose, and direction to this vital endeavour.

As Chief Editor of this volume, it is both a great honour and a profound responsibility to extend a warm and heartfelt welcome to all our distinguished guests and invitees. I am conscious that this august gathering is not assembled to listen to a lengthy welcome address, but rather to engage with the substantive proceedings of this event, enriched by five eminent personalities, four distinguished speakers, and an able and competent moderator — all of whom possess exceptional mastery of the subject. I shall therefore be brief.

Among us today are former and current Ministers and people’s representatives, members of the diplomatic corps, Secretaries to Ministries, distinguished panelists, valued contributors to the volume, Vice-Chancellors, Members of the Board of Management and Academic Affairs Board of the BCIS, Heads of institutions, professors, senior government officials, professionals, journalists, and many others — too numerous to acknowledge individually, yet each of you is most warmly welcomed. I receive you all, whether present in person or online, with the utmost warmth, respect, and appreciation.

The panel discussion constitutes the pièce de résistance of this event. We are deeply honoured to be joined by four eminent personalities:

Her Excellency Siri Walt, Ambassador of Switzerland to Sri Lanka;

Professor Pierre-Bruno Ruffini, former Chair of the EU Science Diplomacy Alliance; and former Ambassadors Mr. Bernard Goonatilleke and Dr. Palitha Kohona — all of whom bring exceptional depth of experience and insight to this important subject.

Their discussion will be guided by our distinguished moderator, Mr. Naushard Cader, a truly cosmopolitan personality, widely respected for his breadth of knowledge and his keen understanding of global affairs and science diplomacy. I extend to all our speakers and our moderator a very warm welcome and my sincere appreciation for their willingness to share their wisdom with us this evening.

Allow me, however, to place this event in perspective.

We gather this evening not merely to introduce a book, nor solely to inaugurate a forum, but to reflect together on an idea whose time has unquestionably arrived.

We meet at a moment of profound global transition and conflict. The international landscape is marked by turbulence, uncertainty, and rapid transformation. The world is shifting from a relatively stable post–Cold War configuration toward an increasingly multipolar order. While multipolarity carries the promise of greater balance and strategic autonomy, it also brings intensified competition among major powers, fluid alliances, and growing unpredictability.

At the same time, the rules-based international order — which for decades provided smaller nations with a measure of predictability and protection — is under visible strain and threat. Institutions are contested. Norms are challenged. Economic interdependence deepens even as geopolitical fragmentation intensifies. Supply and value chains now account for nearly seventy percent of global trade, binding nations in complex webs of mutual dependence. Yet such interdependence has not prevented trade wars, sanctions regimes, technological decoupling, and regional conflicts.

For small and economically vulnerable states, this evolving environment is especially daunting. When global rules weaken, asymmetries of power become more pronounced. Bilateral negotiations between unequal partners can leave smaller nations disadvantaged. Without adequate legal, geological, scientific, technological, and diplomatic expertise, such states may struggle to safeguard their long-term national interests and sovereignty. Vulnerability, in the absence of knowledge and capacity, risks translating into marginalisation.

Overlaying this geopolitical transformation is a constellation of interconnected global challenges. Climate change is no longer a distant projection; it is a lived reality. Sea levels are rising. Extreme weather events are intensifying. Food, water, and energy security remain fragile. Pandemics have exposed vulnerabilities in global health systems. Cyber threats transcend borders. Environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, and marine pollution threaten livelihoods and ecosystems alike.

These challenges are systemic and transboundary. Almost every major issue — whether global, regional, or national in scale — involves science and technology, either in understanding root causes or in devising effective solutions.

Traditional diplomacy, while indispensable, is no longer sufficient on its own. The defining issues of our time are not purely political or military; they are scientific, technological, environmental, and societal. They demand evidence-based policymaking, interdisciplinary collaboration, and sustained transnational cooperation.

It is within this context that science diplomacy emerges — not as an academic abstraction, but as a strategic necessity.

Nowhere are these realities more visible than in the Indian Ocean.

Unlike the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans, which possess longstanding institutional architectures and extensive scientific mapping, the Indian Ocean remains comparatively underexplored and under-institutionalised. Covering roughly one-fifth of the world’s oceanic expanse, it carries a substantial share of global energy shipments and maritime trade. Its seabed resources — including critical and rare-earth minerals — remain only partially surveyed. Many of its coastal and island nations are developing economies with limited scientific and technological capacity to explore, monitor, and sustainably manage these resources.

The Indian Ocean is unique. It is bordered predominantly by developing and emerging states. It hosts remarkable cultural, religious, and political diversity. It is home to some of the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities. Increasingly, it has become a central theatre of global strategic competition, viewed by some nations through distinct geostrategic lenses.

This maritime space is simultaneously a lifeline and a fault line. It sustains global commerce and local livelihoods. Yet it is also a theatre where geopolitical interests intersect — sometimes converge, sometimes collide.

At the heart of this ocean lies Sri Lanka.

Geographically, our island sits astride one of the busiest East–West shipping routes in the world. Historically, Sri Lanka has been a hub of commercial, cultural, and intellectual exchange. Today, that strategic location presents both opportunity and responsibility.

Sri Lanka’s history, enriched by iconic figures such as Dr. Gamini Corea, Hon.

Lakshman Kadirgamar, Judge Christopher Weeramantry, Dr. Neville Kanakaratne and Dr. Jayantha Dhanapala, stands as a powerful testament to our long-standing contributions to global diplomacy and international governance. Our nation provided leadership within the Non-Aligned Movement, positioning itself as a bridge between civilizations at a time of deep ideological division. We also made history by producing the world’s first woman Prime Minister, affirming our commitment to political progress and inclusive governance.

Today, we are called upon once again to build upon this distinguished legacy — by championing regional unity, promoting sustainable development, and addressing critical contemporary challenges such as climate change, maritime security, and environmental sustainability.

We must navigate complex geopolitical currents while safeguarding sovereignty and strengthening economic resilience. We face vulnerabilities common to island and littoral states: climate change, coastal erosion, marine pollution, and supply chain disruptions. Our development aspirations must be balanced with environmental stewardship and maritime security considerations.

Yet within these challenges lies profound opportunity.

Sri Lanka can position itself as a regional convener — a hub for ocean science, climate research, marine biodiversity studies, disaster risk reduction, and blue economy innovation. Through platforms such as BIMSTEC, the Indian Ocean Rim Association, and SAARC, we can advance cooperative marine research, harmonise environmental standards, strengthen early warning systems, and promote sustainable maritime governance grounded in international law.

But to do so effectively, we must invest in knowledge — and in the diplomacy of knowledge.

Science diplomacy operates along three mutually reinforcing dimensions:

First, science in diplomacy — where scientific evidence informs foreign policy decisions.

Second, diplomacy for science — where diplomatic engagement enables international research collaboration and shared infrastructure.

Third, science for diplomacy — where scientific cooperation itself becomes a bridge for confidence-building, even when political relations are strained.

Importantly, science diplomacy extends beyond the natural sciences. The humanities and social sciences are equally vital. Technology must be guided by ethics. Data must be interpreted within cultural contexts. Policy must consider equity and justice. Diplomats of the future must be fluent not only in international law and negotiation, but also in scientific literacy and interdisciplinary thinking.

In a fragmented world, science offers a neutral vocabulary. It encourages transparency, peer review, and open data. It shifts discourse from rhetoric to evidence. It fosters long-term thinking in political environments often dominated by short-term calculations.

For small and vulnerable nations, science diplomacy is empowerment. It strengthens capacity. It enhances credibility. It enables engagement with larger powers on firmer ground — armed not merely with moral argument, but with data, research, and technical expertise.

The book we launch today reflects a diversity of experience and insight. It is intentionally transdisciplinary because the problems we face are transdisciplinary. It is intentionally global because no region can address these challenges in isolation.

In Sri Lanka, science diplomacy remains at a formative stage. The establishment of the Science Diplomacy Forum signals our determination to move beyond dialogue toward sustained institutional engagement. It envisions training programmes for diplomats and scientists, embedding scientific advisory mechanisms within governance structures, and building networks among universities, research institutes, industry, and policymakers. It seeks to cultivate a new generation equipped to navigate the interface between knowledge and negotiation.

We aspire for the Science Diplomacy Forum to be transformative — a true game changer.

Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen,

We live in an era of mounting uncertainty — but also of extraordinary human ingenuity. The same interconnectedness that transmits crises also enables collaboration. The same technologies that disrupt can also heal and transform.

Change is inevitable. The deeper question is whether we will shape that change cooperatively, constructively, and inclusively.

For Sri Lanka, for the Indian Ocean region, and for the broader global community, science diplomacy offers a pathway beyond zero-sum thinking. It channels competition into collaboration around shared public goods. It aligns national interest with regional stability. It transforms vulnerability into resilience through knowledge.

Let this book be not merely a publication, but a platform for sustained reflection and action.

Let the Science Diplomacy Forum be not merely an institution, but a living bridge between evidence and policy, between research and responsibility, between nations and neighbours.

Let Sri Lanka reaffirm its role as a bridge — not a battleground — in the Indian Ocean.

In a world where rules may falter, let evidence guide us.

In a world where tensions may rise, let dialogue endure.

In a world of turbulence, let science diplomacy be our compass — guiding us toward peace, stability, dignity, and shared prosperity.

Welcome Address and Opening Remarks made by Emeritus Prof. Ranjith Senaratne
Former General President,
Sri Lanka Association for the Advancement of Science recently on the occasion of the Founding of the Science Diplomacy Forum and the Launch of the Book Science Diplomacy:
National, Regional and Global Approaches in a Changing World

Continue Reading

Features

Be a woman who re-designs life!

Published

on

From one day of celebration to 364 days of transformation

The international women’s day was just celebrated all over the world. I saw many organiations share their slogans, and organize panel discussions, presentations, and exhibitions to support women empowerment. Slogans, themes, colors play vivid and vociferous role across the world, commemorating the international women’s day.

Alas, the colors are faded, slogans are weaned, themes are forgotten, over the next 364 days, pushing UN Chapter on Women’s Rights come up with more illustrious themes and slogans.

From Bread and Peace to Rights and Action

According to the recorded history, the Women’s day first introduced on 28th February 1909 in America, raising a voice of women against poor working conditions and poor pay in garment factories. This took a more revolutionary form in 1917 in Russia against World War I, where a mass of women protested under the theme of “Bread and Peace”.

Starting from basic needs such as bread and peace, the International Women’s Day theme has evolved towards freedom and independence, justice and inclusion.

Over the years, the rise of feminism brought cultural refinements and highlighted women’s rights. Looking back the historical evolution of women’s role, we see that matrimony has faded and patriarchy evolved with religious and geopolitical forces intertwined with the social expectation. The importance and respect for women, given in the ancient civilisations, diminished with medieval civilization, and subsequent colonisation. The rise of patriarchy domesticated women as homemakers, at the same time prompting their voices to rise for dignity and equitable treatment.

Rise of Feminism

In a typical Western-household of 20th century, husband was the bread winner of the family and the wife managed household affairs. In this era, women’s affairs were restricted to daily chores, creating a boundary wall restricting their access to corporate jobs, free voices. Betty Friedman was a remarkable lady who observed the domestic suffering of women and challenged ‘feminine mystique’ through her 1963 book. She disclosed the feminine mystique, which celebrated women as good housewives, and the belief that women could find satisfaction from domestic chores, home making, marriage, raising children, cooking, washing and taking care of husband’s needs. Betty disclosed that the unhappiness and boredom experienced by the domesticized women, and their inability to live up to the feminist mystique defined by the male dominant society had no name and difficult to express in words. Betty’s claim was supported by the theories of Abraham Maslow, who introduced motivation to grow along the hierarchy of needs. Betty, declared that feminine mystique denies basic growth needs of women, where their desires limited to shelter, food, safety and love only.

In this era women’s jobs were confined preeminently to teaching, and caregiving. STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and medicine were dominated by males, leaving less space for women. As you may have heard in the medieval era women who practiced medicine were branded as ‘witches’ and many were burned alive rooting out the knowledge and courage of women. Women who practiced and taught science and astronomy, were also branded for witch craft and condemned to death. The social pressure suppressed women confining them to domestic chores. In the industrial era women were hired for factory work under low wages and less facilities. In this period Women’s organisations were gathered demanding freedom and justice for women, calling for equal opportunities and rights enjoy their male counterparts. The evolution of women’s movements culminated in 1975, where the first International Women’s Day was commemorated on 8th March 1975.

Celebration and Contradiction

Since 1975, women were celebrated for a day in every year across the globe, with various themes and color codes to showcase the world that all women have rights and demanding fair treatment. The theme colors of International Women’s day are Purple, Green and White.

Purple stands for justice, dignity, and loyalty to the cause.

Green for hope and growth.

White for purity and unity.

In 1996, the International Women’s Day declared a theme to embrace, which is; “Celebrating the Past, Planning for the Future.” In the year 2023, the theme was ‘Embrace Equity’, which evolved to ‘Inspire inclusion’ in 2024, and the year 2025 theme was ‘Accelerate Action’. In 2026, there are three themes; 1. Give to Gain, 2. Balance the Scales, 3. Rights. Justice. Action.

Fragmented Focus Diminishes Values

Multiple themes and competing messages can unintentionally dilute momentum. Unity is not uniformity, but coherence matters; shared direction makes shared progress possible. Emerging three themes to celebrate international women’s day in 2026, implicate lack of solidarity, and unity among women’s organizations to share a common theme. Inclusion, equity and accelerated action have not yet achieved by the women globally, neither locally, nor in small communities. We are bound to question whether the women stay true to the meanings of theme colors that represent womanhood.

Thus, isn’t it vital to explore what goes wrong with our themes and slogans on this Women’s day, before setting foot without solid foundation for what we claim for? Or is it only a day that dawn women’s organisations to gather women in elite society, or identified group of women to enjoy a cup of tea over futuristic speeches of identical society, which treat women with high respect and equity?

One thing we must understand is the world is evolving, so does the roles, rights, and actions of women. Although, women shouted and pleaded for opportunities to enter male dominate world of work, today in many countries including Sri Lanka, women occupies majority of administrative positions and clerical level jobs. Even, the labour positions, dominated by males, are now occupied by the females in many sectors. However, women still bear the traditional homemaker role as well, while juggling with work, and studies to sustain jobs and promotions. This modern day scenario has made women more prone to chronic stress related deceases. The break of rest, too rigid demands coming from work and family, their own desires to move up the corporate ladder, outsmart neighbourers, and craving to make their children better than the others have made women’s lives miserable and breaching the themes and slogans that cater to the women’s prosperity.

Today’s environment has resulted many women to abandon dignity, purity, and hope, overlook unity and justice. If you see social media contents shared by women, you may not be surprised by my statements. The dignity, purity and hope for betterment of women is vanishing on screen. Young girls’ addiction to drugs, liquor and tobacco, sexual misbehaviour, and rising school-aged pregnancies are critical concerns that women’s movements must pay attention today.

What We Must Demand Now: Right Education and Just Acts

Women’s day slogans need a shift. Rather than demanding equal rights as men, we must demand right education for women and girls. We shall not stop at demanding justice as given to the men, but shout and make women and girls aware of ‘Just Acts’, and encourage them to act justly, for themselves, without exposing them to be victims of social media, and ill temptations.

Digital lives of women and girls can amplify comparison, quick outrage, and performative ideals. For girls and women, this can mean unrealistic bodies, curated success, and unsafe online spaces. What we need isn’t more judgment; it’s digital literacy, psychological safety, reproductive health awareness, and robust support systems, so women can flourish on and off‑line. We must educate women and nourish and foster the moral values among women and girls to stay pure in thoughts and actions, we must empower women and girls to keep hope and grow continuously. We must share a culture of inclusion among women to enhance solidarity and stay true to unified action for the betterment of women, and the society.

Women as Creators and Modifiers of the World

The history of International Women’s Day is a call for rights and justice. Today, the next horizon is to build cultures at home, at work, and society. Women are the creators and modifiers of the world. They are to add color to lives of those around them. In fact, WOMEN, do not need to call for justice, rights and action. WOMEN, need to call the hidden power, strength and courage within them and create a world that assures every being in it receives justice, and enjoys rights.

Thus, whether themes multiply or fade, the test is not in the rally or the ribbon, it is in the 364 days after. The colours may be vivid on stage, yet the colors are faded in practice if we do not live them. Let us re‑design life with dignity, unity, courage, and continuous growth. Let us educate, include, and act justly. Let us awaken strength within, so that every woman, every girl, and every community can thrive by being a Woman Who Re‑designs Life!

(The author is a senior education administrator, researcher,

management consultant and a lecturer.)

By Dr. Chani Imbulgoda
cv5imbulgoda@gmail.com)

Continue Reading

Features

Illegal solar push ravages Hambantota elephant habitat: Environmentalist warns of deepening crisis

Published

on

Land earmarked for the project

A large-scale move to establish solar power plants in Hambantota has triggered a major environmental and social crisis, with more than 1,000 acres of forest—identified as critical elephant habitat—cleared in violation of the law, environmental activist Sajeewa Chamikara said.

Chamikara, speaking on behalf of the Movement for Land and Agricultural Reform, said that 17 companies have already begun clearing forest land along the boundaries of the Hambantota Elephant Management Reserve. The affected areas include Sanakku Gala, Orukemgala and Kapapu Wewa, which are known to be key elephant habitats and long-used movement corridors.

He said that what is taking place cannot be described as development, but rather as a large-scale destruction of natural ecosystems carried out under the cover of renewable energy expansion.

According to Chamikara, the clearing of forests has been carried out using heavy machinery, while large sections have also been deliberately set on fire to prepare the land for solar installations. He said that electric fences have been erected across wide stretches of land, effectively blocking elephant movement and fragmenting their natural habitat.

“These forests are not empty lands. They are part of a living system that supports wildlife and nearby communities. Once destroyed, they cannot be easily restored,” he said.

The projects in question include a 50 megawatt solar development undertaken by five companies and a larger 150 megawatt project implemented by 12 companies. The larger project is reported to be valued at around 150 million US dollars.

Chamikara stressed that these projects are being carried out in a coordinated manner and involve extensive land clearing on a scale that raises serious environmental concerns.

He further alleged that certain companies had paid about Rs. 14 million to secure support and move ahead with the projects. He said this points to a troubling failure of oversight by state institutions that are expected to protect forests and wildlife habitats.

“This is not only an environmental issue. It is also a serious governance issue. The institutions responsible for protecting these lands have failed in their duty,” he said.

Chamikara pointed out that under the National Environmental Act, any project of this scale must receive prior approval through a proper Environmental Impact Assessment process.

He said that clearing forest land before obtaining such approval is a direct violation of the law.

He added that legal requirements relating to archaeological assessments had also been ignored. Under existing regulations, large-scale land clearing requires prior evaluation to ensure that sites of historical or cultural value are not damaged.

“The law is very clear. You cannot go ahead with projects of this nature without proper approval. What we are seeing is a complete disregard for legal procedure,” Chamikara said.

The environmental impact of these activities is already becoming visible. With their natural habitats destroyed, elephants are increasingly moving into nearby villages in search of food and shelter. This has led to a sharp rise in human-elephant conflict in several areas.

Areas such as Mayurapura, Gonnooruwa, Meegahajandura and Thanamalvila have reported increasing encounters between humans and elephants. According to Chamikara, more than 5,000 farming families in these areas are now facing growing threats to their safety and livelihoods.

 

He warned that farmers are being forced to abandon their lands due to repeated elephant intrusions, while incidents involving damage to crops and property are rising. There have also been increasing reports of injuries and deaths among both humans and elephants.

“This is turning into a serious social and economic problem. When farmers cannot cultivate their lands, it affects food production, income and rural stability,” he said.

Chamikara also raised concerns about the broader environmental consequences of clearing forests for solar power projects. While renewable energy is promoted as a solution to reduce carbon emissions, he said that destroying forests undermines that goal.

“Forests play a key role in absorbing carbon dioxide. When you clear and burn them, you are increasing emissions, not reducing them. That defeats the purpose of promoting solar energy,” he explained.

He added that large-scale deforestation in dry zone areas such as Hambantota could also affect local weather patterns and reduce rainfall, which would have further negative impacts on agriculture and water resources.

Chamikara called for a shift in policy, urging authorities to focus on more sustainable approaches to solar power development. He said that rooftop solar systems on homes, public buildings and commercial establishments should be given priority, as they do not require clearing large areas of land.

He also recommended that solar projects be located on degraded or abandoned lands, such as areas affected by past mining or other low-value lands, rather than forests or productive agricultural areas.

“Renewable energy development must be done in a way that does not destroy the environment. There are better options available if there is proper planning,” he said.

Chamikara urged the Central Environmental Authority and the Department of Wildlife Conservation to take immediate action to stop ongoing land clearing and investigate the projects. He stressed that all activities carried out without proper approval should be halted until legal requirements are met.

He warned that failure to act now would lead to long-term environmental damage that could not be reversed.

“If this continues, we will lose not only forests and wildlife, but also the balance between people and nature that supports rural life. The consequences will be felt for generations,” he said.

The situation in Hambantota is fast emerging as a critical test of whether development goals can be balanced with environmental protection. As pressure grows, the response of authorities in the coming weeks is likely to determine whether the damage can still be contained or whether it will continue to spread unchecked.

By Ifham Nizam

Continue Reading

Trending