Midweek Review

GR’s ouster: Another narrative

Published

3 years ago

2023/05/17

Sahan Weerasooriya

Dilith Jayaweera

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Derana Chief Dilith Jayaweera says the Port City Colombo could have given Sri Lankan economy the turbo boost it required but, unfortunately, the powers that be failed to handle it properly though the country accepted the modern concept. The mega project was in line with contemporary global economy, therefore Sri Lanka’s move received global recognition, Jayaweera said, calling it a progressive economic decision.

But Sri Lanka missed the opportunity for want of a cohesive strategy as well as destructive party politics that dealt a severe blow to the flagship Chinese project, the top entrepreneur who does not shy away from speaking the truth, he said.

Jayaweera questioned the failure on the part of Sri Lanka to properly manage the Chinese flagship project, with national interest at heart, and burying petty party divisions, for the country’s sake. China launched the project in late 2014 as the country was heading for early presidential elections.

Having sabotaged the project, the then Yahapalana administration (2015-2019) went to the extent of ridiculing even the concept, thereby undermining a mega investment that could have laid the foundation to give a turbo boost to the country’s image, as well as its economy.

Their utterly irresponsible actions caused rapid erosion of investors’ confidence in the project, Jayaweera declared, and the decision to revisit a project, launched by the previous government, caused chaos. “Calls for renegotiation of the agreement resulted in inordinate delay in the implementation and the loss of investors,” Jayaweera said, declaring that the Colombo Port City was yet to receive a significant investment, since those deliberate interruptions. The Yahapalana action tainted the project as corrupt and denied investors’ confidence, hence the difficulties in attracting funds. Let me stress: “Sri Lanka couldn’t attract large scale investments because we ruined the project.”

Jayaweera said so, in an interview with The Island, at his posh office at T. B. Jayah Mawatha, a few days ago. The controversial businessman, widely believed to be one of the close associates of ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, discussed a spate of issues, ranging from the formation of ‘Aramuna’ meant to strengthen the business environment with the focus on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), collapse of the national economy, foreign relations and interventions, as well as the hand of a jealous Rajapaksa family, in the ruination of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, elected with an overwhelming majority of 6.9 mn votes.

BR-Dilith meet

Asked about course correction, attempted by him in 2021, as the country was heading rapidly towards economic catastrophe, Jayaweera said that he discussed the issue at hand with the then Finance Minister, Basil Rajapaksa, right there. Jayaweera said: “The Minister couldn’t comprehend the crisis, regardless of my efforts. In fact, Basil Rajapaksa took things lightly, very lightly. Perhaps, the Minister simply didn’t know the situation he was dealing with and the implications, in case the Rajapaksa government failed to address the growing cash flow problem.”

So was Basil part of the grand conspiracy to topple that government by playing dumb at such a crucial juncture?

Basil Rajapaksa was sworn in as the Finance Minister, on July 08, 2021, at the Presidential Secretariat. It was soon after his second entry to Parliament, on the National List, though the circumstances were vastly different.

The Rajapaksas amended the Constitution to accommodate the US, Sri Lanka dual citizen in Parliament in spite of strong opposition from a section of the ruling party. Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wimal Weerawansa, Udaya Gammanpila and Gevindu Cumaratunga opposed the move. Their concerns were disregarded.

Asked what really had prompted Basil Rajapaksa to visit his spacious office, furnished much better than ministerial offices, Jayaweera explained how the President arranged for the meeting after he brought the impending crisis to the notice of the head of State. Jayaweera strongly maintained that those who had been around the President deliberately furnished him with utterly wrong estimates pertaining to the economic status. “There is absolutely no ambiguity regarding their despicable strategy. As a result of a spate of uninformed and hasty decisions, the country ended up bankrupt and at the mercy of the International Monetary Fund (IMF),” Jayaweera said.

Commenting on Opposition accusations that the government intended to launch a domestic debt restructuring process, having repeatedly assured the people it would not do so, Jayaweera pointed out that this was to be done at the behest of the IMF. Debt restructuring was certainly not a national requirement at the moment though the issue at hand is why Sri Lanka shouldn’t subject itself to a domestic debt restructuring if the country expected relief from bilateral and multilateral creditors.

IMF bailout package not a panacea

for all our ills

Jayaweera accepted the writer’s suggestion that a domestic debt restructuring was a fair condition laid down by the IMF to provide the USD 2.9 bn bailout package, to be made available over a period of four years. Sri Lanka received the first tranche of the package at the end of the third week of March this year.

Jayaweera stressed that the country, as a whole, should deliberate whether debt restructuring should take place at the IMF’s directive or in line with Sri Lanka’s overall response to the current economic challenges. The media and business tycoon underscored the responsibility on the part of the government, and all other stakeholders, to examine the impact of such an exercise on the economy with the focus on the money market and the banking sector. The stakeholders should be sensitive to the developments, in case a far reaching debt restructuring process was undertaken, Jayaweera said, calling for a dialogue on the contentious and possible consensus without imposing debt restructuring as a prerequisite.

Asked to compare the latest IMF bailout package and the 16 previous ones that Sri Lanka obtained from it, Jayaweera said those engaged in talks with the lending body as well as other creditors, should be extra cautious as the country was now in the worst possible situation. “On all previous occasions when we sought IMF interventions, the economy was in a much better condition. We were in a much more comfortable environment then. But we are in the worst possible situation, today.”

Jayaweera stressed the responsibility on the part of the government to be vigilant in ongoing talks with lending bodies and other creditors. The businessman quite rightly asserted that the country was in such a precarious situation and therefore it could become vulnerable to various machinations.

During the nearly 90-minute long interview, Jayaweera was not interrupted by calls on his hand phone or the intercom, though a smartly dressed woman brought a tall glass of iced tea for the writer. Sipping the delicious iced tea, with a straw, the writer asked whether President Gotabaya Rakapaksa inadvertently did something good by refusing to seek IMF intervention in 2020. Otherwise, the country would have obtained more loans to settle debt and interest and continued the farce, perhaps for another decade, and placed the economy in an even far worse situation, Jayaweera was told.

A smiling Derana Chief responded that perhaps the President’s intention was good though he was ill-informed of how to implement it. The self-made tycoon pointed out the failure on the part of the then administration have alternative arrangements, in place, to do away with the IMF assistance. The need to meet recurrent expenditure couldn’t have been ignored under any circumstances, Jayaweera said, squarely blaming the then Secretary to the President Dr. Punchi Banda Jayasundera, and Basil Rajapaksa, for the crisis. The duo had been so reckless in taking far-reaching decisions, Jayaweera said, claiming that he didn’t believe even a small vendor would have been so irresponsible. Jayaweera cited a highly controversial Cabinet decision to do away with a spate of taxes at the first meeting of the Cabinet-of-Ministers, in the last week of Nov, 2019, less than two weeks after the last presidential election. So it looks as if the die had already been cast to doom the Presidency of Gotabaya Rajapaksa from the word go.

The government never made contingency plans to recover the losses caused by that fateful decision. The Treasury is believed to have lost as much as Rs 600 billion per year due to the abolition of taxes.

Rating agencies deliver knockout blow

Jayaweera explained how international rating agencies downgraded the country due to the significant loss of income. Once rating agencies recognized a country as a badly managed economy, that economy rapidly lost opportunity to raise loans at reasonable interest rates, Jayaweera said, emphasizing that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa shouldn’t be faulted for believing that Sri Lanka could stop taking further loans. Jayaweera again stressed that Dr. PBJ and Basil Rajapaksa should accept the responsibility for their failure to manage the economy. Instead of taking remedial measures, the government challenged those rating agencies, he said.

When the writer pointed out that Basil Rajapaksa re-entered Parliament only in the first week of July 2021, Jayaweera hit back: “That was how you viewed the situation. But what really happened? Soon after Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory, Basil Rajapaksa and the clan appointed Dr. PBJ as the President’s Secretary. That was done to take over the management of the economy. In spite of Basil Rajapaksa not being a lawmaker at that time, he received the appointment as somebody who managed the economy from behind the scene. And Dr. PBJ, though only the Secretary to the President, got the de-facto control of the economy.”

We don’t for a moment question the capabilities of Dr. PBJ, the former Central Banker had been seconded to the Finance Ministry, even before the time R. Paskaralingam (Pandora Papers’ fame) was the Treasury Secretary in the Premadasa regime because of his capabilities and served virtually under all regimes before and thereafter as far as we can recall. Dr. PBJ also scored big by managing the economy deftly especially during the last phase of the war as Treasury Secretary and thereafter. But the question is did he double as an “economic hitman” as alleged by some.

Jayaweera accepted the writer’s suggestion that it would be better to assert that grouping took control of the economy than blaming an individual. Jayaweera alleged that the group took advantage of the then Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, who also served as the Finance Minister (Nov. 2019 to July 2021) as he was not in good health. Jayaweera explained how interested parties exploited the much deteriorated health of the former President, particularly periodic loss of memory. “I had no option but to take up this issue with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The President accepted the ugly truth.”

Jayaweera said that he sought a meeting with President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to discuss the forex crisis, about 20 months ago. Having explained the looming crisis on the basis of the widening gap between government income and expenditure,

Jayaweera had got involved in an argument with President Gotabaya over the latter’s accusation that the Derana Chief misinterpreted facts as he was in dispute with Dr. PBJ. “I denied that allegation, insisting that my assessment was entirely based on official figures, also made available to the President. The President regretted the situation but scolded me. But, three or four days later, the President called me again for a meeting. I was provided with a cash flow statement. I quickly pointed out how unrealistic the income column was.”

The President’s economic team quite conveniently failed to explain the impact of rising crude oil prices at that time. That lot provided the President with unsubstantiated and unrealistic figures therefore the decisions taken on such advice caused the crisis, Jayaweera said, referring to the silly bloated assessment of USD 6 bn from tourism, whereas we know not even one bn USD income was realistic, after the Easter carnage, followed by the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic.

Jayaweera said that he contacted the President again as he couldn’t bear the impending catastrophe. Jayaweera recalled how President Gotabaya Rajapaksa suggested that he discuss the situation with Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa and the meeting took place at the very place where we met last week.

Basil Rajapaksa’s simple dismissive reaction had caused fear and anxiety in the Derana Chief, especially pertaining to the direction of the national economy, Jayaweera said, adding that over dinner, too, he tried to convince the Finance Minister of the threat due to the frightening cash flow problem.

Jayaweera quoted Basil Rajapaksa as having declared that the public wouldn’t come to the streets to protest scarcity in goods though they demonstrate against high cost of living. “I suggested that fuel consumption should be cut by 50 percent. The need for a realistic pricing formula was also suggested. But, the Minister simply dismissed my suggestions. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa himself told me Basil Rajapaksa and Dr. PBJ managed the economy. Therefore, they couldn’t absolve themselves of the responsibility for the current crisis.”

Jayaweera didn’t mince his words when he alleged that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s first major fault was accepting the family nominee Dr. PBJ as the Presidential Secretary. The President did so in spite of knowing it would be the end of his presidency, Jayaweera said.

Aramuna

vision

In this context, ‘Aramuna’ that had been established years before the public protest campaign against the Rajapaksa administration, in March 2022, was making representations on behalf of the affected communities, Jayaweera said. When queried about the recent declaration in Jaffna that they should pursue talks with banks as a group to secure much needed relief, Jayaweera explained the discussions they had with top level management of state and private banks. “We are trying to obtain as much relief as possible. But, overwhelming challenges cannot be surmounted without political will,” Jayaweera said. The outspoken ‘Aramuna’ initiator found fault with the government for shrinking the economy. That was disastrous, Jayaweera said, comparing the current situation with that of a gravely ill person deprived of medicine.

Citing the deterioration in the construction industry as a case in point (From 10 percent of the GDP to just one percent), Jayaweera said that import restrictions badly affected the export sector for want of intermediary goods. Volatile foreign currency market undermined all sectors as they found it difficult to furnish a proper quotation.

Acknowledging that certain restrictions were necessary, Jayaweera, however ,insisted that it was the responsibility of the government to properly manage the crisis by ensuring the sectors which contributed to the growth of the GDP received the support they deserved.

Jayaweera emphasized that one of their key missions was to motivate what he called human capital. If human capital lost confidence a country could face catastrophic consequences, he said, pointing out that professionals and others alike wanted to migrate in the absence of a proper strategy. Obviously, they felt concerned and not sure whether the country could overcome the unprecedented mess, Jayaweera said.

“In response to the challenge, we intended to promote entrepreneurship among the population. But, it would be important at least now to recognize the shortcomings, failures, mismanagement and unproductive investments by way of loans,” he said.

Jayaweera explained how unbridled use of loans for consumption and not sufficient returns for investments contributed to the current mess while flaying the powers that be for failing to adopt course correction even after the declaration of bankruptcy.

Responding to another query, Jayaweera said that the latest IMF intervention, too, hadn’t been sought in line with strategy to uplift the country but simply as a reaction to the crisis. He declared that nothing had changed as the existing political party apparatus continued to do the same.

Jayaweera denied any similarity whatsoever between ‘Aramuna’ and Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ‘Viyathmaga’ while insisting the former didn’t promote political strategy at all. Pointing out that at the time they established ‘Aramuna’, four years ago, it didn’t have a political outlook, Jayaweera explained in response to the current challenges, the outfit now operated on the premise that the issues at hand couldn’t be addressed without a ‘political solution.’

Asked whether ‘Aramuna’ would take a stand at the next national level election, particularly against the backdrop of the UNP propagating the possibility of presidential election before Local Government polls, the maverick businessman said that on the basis of a set of minimum conditions, meant to overcome national challenges, they would push for a consensus with most suitable party/alliance.

Need for infallible systems

Pointing out that the country suffered for want of infallible systems and recklessly having faith in people, Jayaweera was asked whether he believed in systems or politicians. This was raised on the basis of accommodating businessman Dhammika Perera on the SLPP National List, in early June 2022, and Ranil Wickremesinghe receiving appointment as President after entering Parliament on the National List, though rejected by the Colombo electorate. Jayaweera declared: “We need a system not a system change. We are in such an unstable situation, unless remedial measures were taken the country can be shut down overnight. That is the reality,” he said emphatically.

Jayaweera strongly denied the query whether he in any way influenced and benefited from the utterly reckless tax cut announced in Nov. 2019. “How could I benefit when that idiotic decision ruined our economy. What is the point in my enterprises receiving some benefits against the backdrop of economic annihilation? That decision cannot be justified under any circumstances,” Jayaweera said.

The Derana top honcho quoted the then Inland Revenue Chief having told him that there was no basis for assertion such tax cuts could trigger significant economic growth.

Jayaweera questioned the rationality in pushing for a new Anti-Terrorism law to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) at a time the government should fully concentrate on economic recovery programme. An irate Jayaweera said that the new anti-Terrorism law should be at the bottom of the list of priorities.

Commenting on the leasing of Hambantota port to China for a period of 99 years in 2017, during the Yahapalana administration, for USD 1.2 bn, Jayaweera said that shouldn’t have happened, under any circumstances.

The deal deprived Sri Lanka of its most strategic asset but USD 1.2 bn received was not even used to settle the loans procured from China for the building of the harbour.

Asked whether he supported constitutional restrictions imposed on the number of ministers (30) and non-cabinet ministers (40), Jayaweera ridiculed the concept. Such constitutional interventions had been made in response to a greedy political party system. The number of ministers should be entirely based on the requirement of the government of the day and certainly not to appease greedy lawmakers, Jayaweera said, asserting that the country could manage with a much smaller Cabinet if appointments were on a scientific basis. Jayaweera also dismissed the much-touted National Government concept, too, as a mechanism to appease a far larger number lawmakers by appointing an extra-large Cabinet.

The outspoken businessman, who does not fear to call a spade a spade, asserted that print, electronic and social media would have to re-examine overall strategy as their impact on the electorate, particularly the floating vote,would be much less in the developing political-economic-crisis. It would be a grave mistake to believe the electorate could be exploited the way they did before the 2022 explosion.

The indefinite postponement of Local Government polls has deprived the JVP of an opportunity to improve its vote. Pointing out that the JVP, at the moment had just three percent of the vote, Jayaweera said that even if it doubled that it wouldn’t make a big difference. But with the relatively improved ground conditions, the JVP couldn’t sustain its strategy, Jayaweera said.

The JVP based its campaign on the allegation that the economy collapsed due to Rajapaksa corruption. Against the erosion of JVP’s new support base, UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe has emerged stronger and acceptable to a section of the electorate, he observed.

Finally, The Island raised two vital questions (i) who would be the two major opposing parties at the next presidential or parliamentary polls and (ii) what should be our foreign policy whether to stand with China and Russia or Quad comprising the US, Japan, Australia and India.

Jayaweera asserted that the electorate would look at the two major alliances on the basis of their economic programmes. The better grouping would win but the electorate wouldn’t ignore the nationalistic views and those who voted for Gotabaya Rajapaksa at the last presidential election as a group remained a force to be reckoned with, Jayaweera said. In the current context, President Wickremesinghe could lead one alliance and the other spearheaded by the SJB. But, both camps essentially follow the same strategies pertaining to the economy et al. The issue at hand is whether President Wickremesinghe could follow the identical strategy while receiving the backing of the ‘Pohottuwa’ vote that represented the interests of what he called ‘jahikathwa’ kandawura.

Jayaweera warned the powers that be against taking sides in the continuing US-China battle. Stressing the pivotal importance in our relations with New Delhi, Sri Lanka couldn’t afford to pursue foreign policy strategy at China’s expense, Jayaweera said. The success of Sri Lanka’s short-medium and long term recovery depends on how the country manages foreign relations. Asked whether he backed signing of MCC and SOFA against the backdrop of entering into ACSA with the US in August 2017, Jayaweera said that as he said before there is no ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer to that query, too. “We as a modern nation it is important for us to get into bilateral agreements. We need to evaluate the pros and cons of them along with a comprehensive country strategy and then decide.”

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Aragalaya: GR blames CIA in Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s explosive narrative

Published

6 days ago

2026/02/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

Asanga

Did CIA chief William Burns visit Colombo in Feb 2023? Sri Lanka and the US refrained from formally confirming the visit. The Opposition sought confirmation of the then CIA Chief’s visit to Colombo in terms of the Right to Information Act but the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government sidestepped the query. A former Republican congressman from Texas and Director of National Intelligence (2020–2021) John Ratcliffe succeeded Burns in late January 2025.

On the sheer weight of new evidence presented by Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s ‘Winds of Change’, readers can get a clear picture of the forces that overthrew President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2022.

Even five years after the political upheaval, widely dubbed ‘Aragalaya,’ controversy surrounds the high-profile operation that forced wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa to literally run for his dear life.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa, formerly of the Army but a novice to party politics, comfortably won the 2019 November presidential election against the backdrop of the Easter Sunday carnage that caused uncertainty and suspicions among communities. The economic crisis, also clandestinely engineered from abroad, firstly by crippling vital worker remittances from abroad, almost from the onset of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency, overwhelmed the government and created the environment conducive for external intervention. Could it have been avoided if the government, that enjoyed a near two-thirds majority in Parliament, sought the help of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)?

The costly and well-funded book project, undertaken at the time Abeyagoonasekera was working on a governance diagnostic report for the IMF, in the wake of the change of government in Sri Lanka, meticulously examined the former Lieutenant Colonel’s ouster, taking into consideration regional as well as global developments. Abeyagoonasekera dealt efficiently and furiously with rapidly changing situations and developments before the unprecedented 03 January, 2026, US raid on Venezuela.

Lt. Col. (retd) Gotabaya Rajapaksa, for some unexplainable reason and a considerable time after the events, has chosen to blame his ouster on the United States. We cannot blame him either, by the way we have seen how other regime changes had been engineered, in our region, by Washington, since and before Gotabaya’s ouster. The accusation is extraordinary as Gotabaya Rajapaksa in his memoirs ‘The conspiracy to oust me from presidency’ refrained from naming the primary conspirator, though he clearly alluded to an international conspiracy.

April 8, 2019 meeting

Launched in March 2024, in the run-up to the presidential election that brought Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) to power, almost in a dream ride, if not for the intervening outside evil actors, ‘The conspiracy to oust me from presidency’ discussed the international conspiracy, but conveniently failed to name the primary conspirator. What made the former President speak so candidly with Abeyagoonasekera, the founding Director-General of the national security think tank, the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka (INSS), under the Ministry of Defence, from 2016 to 2020?

Abeyagoonasekera also served as Executive Director at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute (LKI), under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2011–2015), during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s second term as the President. The author, both precisely and furiously, dealt with issues. Readers may find very interesting quotes and they do give a feeling of the author’s general hostility towards the US, India, as well as to the US-India marriage of convenience. Those who sense so may end up thinking ‘Change of Winds’ being supportive of the Chinese strategy. Among the highly sensitive quotes that underlined the Indian approach were attributed to Indian Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra. The author quoted Mitra as having declared: “We need the MRCC centre [Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre], and you cannot give it to another nation.” As pointed out by the author, it was not a request but an order given to Sri Lanka on 8 April, 2019, meant to prevent Sri Lanka from even considering a competing proposal from China. Against that background, the author, who had been present at that meeting at which the Sri Lanka delegation was led by then Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, questioned the failure on the part of the delegations to take up the Easter Sunday attacks. Terrorists struck two weeks later. Implications were telling.

That particular quote reveals the circumstances India and the US operated here. No wonder the incumbent government does not want to discuss the secret defence MoUs it has entered into with India and the US as they would clearly reveal the sellout of our interests.

The following line says a lot about the circumstances under which Gotabaya Rajapaksa was removed: “In Singapore, a senior journalist recounted how Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s resignation was scripted, under duress, at a hotel, facilitated by a foreign motorcade.”

In the first Chapter that incisively dealt with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the author was so lucky to secure an explosive quote from the ousted leader in an exclusive, hitherto unreported, interview in June 2024, a few months after the launch of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s memoirs. The ex-President hadn’t minced his words when he alleged that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) orchestrated his removal. He also claimed that he had been under US surveillance throughout his presidency.

The ousted leader has confidently cleared India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) of complicity in the operation. What made him call Indian National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval ‘a good man,’ in response to Abeyagoonasekera’s pointed query. Abeyagoonasekera quoted Gotabaya Rajapaksa as having said: “… he would never do such things.” The ex-President must have some reason to call Doval a good friend, regardless of intense pressure exerted on him and the Mahinda Rajapaksa government by the Indians to do away with large scale Chinese-funded projects. (Doval in late October last year declared “poor governance” was the reason behind uprisings that led to change of governments in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka over the period of past three-and-a-half years. The media quoted Doval as having said, during a function in New Delhi, that democracy and non-institutional methods of regime change in countries, such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal, created their own set of problems. That was the first time a senior Indian government official made remarks on Nepal’s government change, followed by the Gen Z uprising in early September, 2025.)

Gotabaya Rajapaksa also cleared the Chinese of seeking to oust him. It would be pertinent to mention that China reacted sternly when at the onset of the Gotabaya presidency, the President suggested the need to re-negotiate the Hambantota Port deal.

During the treacherous ‘Yahapalana’ administration (2015 to 2019) Gotabaya Rajapaksa told me how Doval had pressed him to halt not only the Colombo Port City project but to take back Hambantota Port as well. By then, the Chinese had twisted the arms of the Yahapalana leaders Mairthpala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe and secured the Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease in a one-sided USD 1.2 bn deal. The Colombo Port City project, that had been halted by the Yahapalana government, too, was resumed possibly under Chinese threat or for some money incentive.

Once Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, declared, at a hastily arranged media briefing at Sri Lanka Foundation (SLF), that Sri Lanka would be relentlessly targeted as long as the Chinese held the Hambantota Port. The writer was present at that media briefing.

Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said so in the aftermath of the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, while disclosing his abortive bid to convince the Yahapalana government to abrogate the Hambantota Port deal. Did the parliamentarian know something we were not aware of? The author’s assessment, regarding the Easter Sunday attacks, based on interviews with Chinese officials and scholars, is frightening and an acknowledgement of a possible Western role in Sri Lanka’s destabilisation plot.

The ousted leader, in his lengthy interview with Abeyagoonasekera, made some attention-grabbing comments on the then US Ambassador here, Julie Chung. The ex-President questioned a particular aspect of Chung’s conduct during the protest campaign but his decision not to reveal it all in his memoirs is a mystery. Perhaps, one of the most thought-provoking queries raised by Abeyagoonasekera is the rationale in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s claim that he didn’t want to suppress the protest campaign by using force against the backdrop of his own declaration that the CIA orchestrated the project.

Author’s foray into parliamentary politics

Gotabaya

For those genuinely interested in post-Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga developments, pertaining to international relations and geopolitics, may peruse ‘Winds of Change’ as the third of a trilogy. ‘Sri Lanka at Crossroads’ (2019) dealt with the Mahinda Rajapaksa period and ‘Conundrum of an Island’ (2021) discussed the treacherous Sirisena–Wickremesinghe alliance. The third in the series examined the end of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna’s (SLPP) President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s rule and the rise of Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) whom the author described as a Marxist, though this writer is of the view the JVP and NPP leader AKD is not so. AKD has clearly aligned his administration with US-India while trying to sustain existing relationship with China.

Among Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s other books were ‘Towards a Better World Order’ (2015) and ‘Teardrop Diplomacy: China’s Sri Lanka Foray’ (2023, Bloomsbury).

Had Abeyagoonasekera succeeded in his bid to launch a political career in 2015, the trilogy on Sri Lanka may not have materialised. Abeyagoonasekera contested the Gampaha district at the August 2015 parliamentary election on the UNP ticket but failed to garner sufficient preferences to secure a place in Parliament. That dealt a devastating setback to Abeyagoonasekera’s political ambitions, but the Wickremesinghe-Sirisena administration created the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka (INSS), under the Ministry of Defence, for him. Abeyagoonasekera received the appointment as the founding Director-General of the national security think tank, from 2016 to 2020.

Several persons dealt with ‘Aragalaya’ (the late Prof. Nalin de Silva used to call it (Paragalaya) before Abeyagoonasekera though none of them examined the regional and global contexts so deeply, taking into consideration the relevant developments. Having read Wimal Weerawansa’s (Nine: The hidden story), Sena Thoradeniya’s (Galle Face Protest; Systems Change or Anarchy?). Mahinda Siriwardena’s (Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival – Reflection on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery) and Prof. Sunanda Maddumabandara’s (Aragalaye Balaya), the writer is of the opinion Abeyagoonasekera dealt with the period in question as an incisive insider.

Abeyagoonasekera, as a person who left the country, under duress, in 2021, painted a frightening picture of a country with a small and vulnerable economy trapped in major global rivalries. The former government servant attributed his self–imposed exile to two issues.

The first was the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage. Why did the Wickremesinghe-Sirisena government ignore the warning issued by Abeyagoonasekera, in his capacity as DG INSS, in respect of the Easter Sunday bombing campaign? There is absolutely no ambiguity at all in his claim. Abeyagoonasekera insists that he alerted the government four months before the National Thowheed Jamath (NTJ) bombers struck. The bottom line is that Abeyagoonasekera had issued the warning several weeks before India did but those at the helm of that inept administration chose to turn a blind eye.

The second was the impending economic crisis that engulfed the country in 2022. Abeyagoonasekera is deeply bitter about his arrest on 21 July, 2024, at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) over an alleged IRD –related offence as reported at that time, especially because he was returning home to visit his sick mother.

Asanga’s father Ossie, a member of Parliament and controversial figure, was killed in an LTTE suicide attack at Thotalanga in late Oct. 1994. The Chairman and leader of Sri Lanka Mahajana Pakshaya had been on stage with then UNP presidential election candidate Gamini Dissanayake when the woman suicide cadre blasted herself. The assassination was meant to ensure Kumaratunga’s victory. The LTTE probably felt that it could manipulate Kumaratunga than the experienced Dissanayake who may have had reached some sort of consensus with New Delhi on how to deal with the LTTE.

Let me reproduce a question posed to Asanga Abeyagoonasekera and his response in ‘Winds of Change’ as some may believe that the author is holding something back. “Didn’t they listen?” a US intelligence officer had asked me incredulously after the bombings. Years later, during my role as a technical advisor for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) amid Sri Lanka’s collapse, the question resurfaced: “How did you foresee the collapse of a powerful regime with a majority in parliament?” My answer remained the same—patterns. Rigorously gathered data and relentless analysis reveal the arcs of history before they unfold.

Perhaps, readers may find what former cashiered Flying Officer Keerthi Ratnayake had to say about ‘Aragalaya’ and related developments (https://island.lk/ex-slaf-officer-sheds-light-on-developments-leading-to-aragalaya/)

Bombshell claim

Essentially, Abeyagoonasekera, on the basis of his exclusive and lengthy interview with former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, confirmed what Wimal Weerawansa and Sena Thoradeniya alleged that the US spearheaded the operation.

But Prof. Maddumabandara, a confidant of first post-Aragalaya President Ranil Wickremesinghe has bared the direct Indian involvement in the regime change operation. In spite of Gotabaya Rajapaksa confidently clearing Indian NSA Doval of complicity in his ouster, Prof. Maddumabandara is on record as having said that the then Indian High Commissioner here Gopal Baglay put pressure on Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to take over the government for an interim period. (https://island.lk/dovals-questionable-regional-stock-taking/)

Obviously, the US and India worked together on the Sri Lanka regime change operation. That is the undeniable truth. India wanted to thwart Wickremesinghe receiving the presidency by bringing in Speaker Abeywardena. That move went awry in spite of some sections of both Buddhist and Catholic clergy throwing their weight behind New Delhi.

The 2022 violent regime change operation cannot be discussed without taking into consideration the US-led project that also involved the UNP, JVP and TNA to engineer retired General Sarath Fonseka’s victory at the 2010 presidential election and their backing for turncoat Maithripala Sirisena at the 2015 presidential election.

The section, titled ‘Echoes of Crisis from Sri Lanka to Bangladesh: South Asia’s Struggle in a Polycrisis’, is riveting and underscores the complexity of the situation and fragility of governments. Executive power and undisputable majorities in Parliament seems irrelevant as external powers intervene thereby making the electoral system redundant.

Having meticulously compared the overthrowing of Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Bangladesh’s Premier Sheikh Hasina, the author condemned them for their alleged failures and brutality. Abeyagoonasekera stated: “When the military sides with the protesters, as it did in Sri Lanka and now in Bangladesh, it reveals the rulers’ vulnerabilities.” The author unmercifully chided the former President for seeking refuge in the West while alleging direct CIA role in his ouster. But that may have spared his life. Had he sought a lifeline from the Chinese so late the situation could have taken a turn for worse.

The comment that had been attributed to Gotabaya Rajapaksa seemed to belittle Ranil Wickremesinghe who accepted the challenge of becoming the Premier in May 2022 and then chosen by the ruling SLPP to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term. Ranil was definitely seen as an opportunistic vulture who backed ‘Aragalaya’ without any qualms till he saw an opening for himself out of the chaos.

On Wickremesinghe’s path

Abeyagoonasekera discussed the joint US-Indian strategy pertaining to Sri Lanka. Whatever the National People’s Power (NPP) and its President say, the current dispensation is continuing Wickremesinghe’s policy as pointed out by the author. In fact, this government appears to be ready even to go beyond Wickremesinghe’s understanding with New Delhi. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on defence and the selling of the controlling interests of the Colombo Dockyard Limited (CDL) to India, mid last year, must have surprised even those who always pushed for enhanced relations at all levels.

The economic collapse that resulted in political upheaval has given New Delhi the perfect opportunity to consolidate its position here. Uncomplimentary comments on current Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha in ‘Winds of Change’ have to be discussed, paying attention to Sri Lanka’s growing dependence and alleged clandestine activities of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). Abeyagoonasekera seemed to have no qualms in referring to RAW’s hand in 2019 Easter Sunday carnage.

Overall ‘Winds of Change’ encourages, inspires and confirms suspicions about US and Indian intelligence services and underscores the responsibility of those in power to be extra cautious. But, in the case of smaller and weaker economies, such as Sri Lanka still struggling to overcome the economic crisis, there seems to be no solution. Not only India and the US, the Chinese, too, pursue their agenda here unimpeded. Utilisation of political parties, represented in Parliament, selected individuals, and media, in the Chinese efforts, are obvious. Once parliamentarian Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe raised the Chinese interventions in Sri Lanka. He questioned the Parliament receiving about 240 personal laptops for all parliamentarians and top officials. The then UNPer told the writer his decision not to accept the laptop paid for by China. Perhaps, he is the only Sri Lankan politician to have written a strongly worded letter to Chinese leader Xi warning against high profile Chinese strategy.

Winds of Change
is available at
Vijitha Yapa and Sarasavi

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

Beginning of another ‘White Supremacist’ World Order?

Published

6 days ago

2026/02/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

Donald Trump’s complete lack of intelligence, empathy and common sense have become more apparent during the current term of his presidency. Ordinarily, a country’s wish to self-destruct as the United States seemingly does at present, and as the violence against US citizens and immigrants alike at the hands of federal authorities have shown in Minnesota, can be callously considered the business of that country. If the Trumpian imbecility was unfolding in Sri Lanka, anywhere else in South Asia or some other country of the purported Third World, the so-called World Order, led by the United States, would be preaching to us the values of democracy and human rights. But what happens when the actions of a powerful country, such as the United States, engulfs in the ensuing flames the rest of us? Trump and his madness then necessarily become our business, too, because combined with the military and economic power of the United States and its government’s proven lack of empathy for its own people, and the rest of the world, is quite literally a matter of global survival. Besides, one of the ‘positive’ outcomes of the Trumpian madness, as a friend observed recently, is that “he has single-handedly exposed and destroyed the fiction of ‘Western Civilisation’, including the pretenses of Europe.”

It is in this context that the speech delivered by the Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, at the World Economic Forum, in Davos, on 20 January, 2026, deserves attention. It was an elegant speech, a slap in the face of Trump and his policies, the articulation of the need for global directional change, all in one. But, pertinently, it was also a speech that did not clearly accept responsibility for the current world (dis)order which Carney says needs to change. The reality of that need, however, was overly reemphasised by Trump himself during his meandering, arrogant and incohesive speech delivered a day later, spanning over one hour.

My interest is in what Carney did not specifically say in his speech: who would constitute the new world order, who would be its leaders and why should we believe it would be any different from the present one?

Speaking in French, Carney observed that he was talking about “a rupture in the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a harsh reality, where geopolitics, where the large, main power, geopolitics, is submitted to no limits, no constraints.” He was, of course, responding to the vulgar script for global domination put in place by the Trumpian United States, given Trump’s declared interest in seeing Canada as part of the United States, his avarice for Greenland, not to mention his already concluded grab for Venezuelan oil. But within this scenario, bound by ‘no limits’ and ‘no constraints’ he was also talking of Russia and China albeit in a coded language.

He reiterated, “that the other countries, especially intermediate powers like Canada, are not powerless. They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states. The power of the less power starts with honesty.”

Who could disagree with Carney? His words are a refreshing whiff of fresh air in the intellectual wasteland that is the Trumpian Oval Office and the current world order it prevails over. But where has been the ‘honesty’ of the less powerful in the specific situation where he equates Canada itself within this spectrum? He tells us that “the rules-based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.”

That is stating the obvious. We have known this for decades by experience. Long before Canada’s relative silence with regard to Trump’s and US’ facilitation of the assault on Palestine and the massacre of its people, and the US President’s economic grab in Venezuela and the kidnapping of that country’s President and his wife, Canada’s own chorus in the world order that Carney now critiques has been embellished by silence or – even worse – by chords written by the global dominance orchestra of the United States.

He says the fading of the rules-based order has occurred because of the “strong tendency for countries to go along, to get along, to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.” Canada fits this description better than most other nations I can think of. But would Canada, along with other nations among the silent majority within the ‘intermediate powers’ take the responsibility for the mess in the world precisely that silence has directly led to creating? Who will pay for the pain many nations have endured in the prevailing world order? Will Canada lead the way in the new world order in doing this?

Carney further articulates that “for decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.”

But this is not true, is it? Countries like Canada prospered not merely because of the stability of rules of the world order, but because they opted for silence when they should not have. The rupture and the chaos in the world order Carney now critiques and is insanely led by Trump today is not merely the latter’s creation. It has been co-authored for decades by countries such as Canada, France, the United Kingdom to mention just a few who also regularly chant the twin-mantras of human rights and democracy. Trump is merely the latest and the most vocal proponent of the nastiness of that World Order.

It is not that Carney is unaware of this unpleasant reality. He accepts that “the story of the international rules-based order was partially false, that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.”

While Canada seems to be coming to terms with this reality only now, countries like Sri Lanka and others in similarly disempowered positions in this world order have experienced this for decades, because, as I have outlined earlier, Canada et al have been complicit sustainers of the now demonised and demonic world order.

It is not that I disagree with the basic description Carney has painted of the status of the world. But from personal experience and from the perspective of a citizen from a powerless country, I simply do not trust those who preach ‘the gospel of the good’ not as a matter of principle, but only when the going gets tough for them.

At this rather late stage, Carney says, Canada is “amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture.” Unfortunately, we, the people of countries who had to dance to the tunes of the world order led by the First World, have heard it for years, with no one listening to us when our discomforts were articulated. Now, Carney wants ‘middle powers’ or ‘intermediate powers’ within which he also locates Canada, “to live the truth?” For him, the truth means “naming reality” as it exists; “acting consistently” towards all in the world; “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” and “building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored.” This appears to be the operational mantra for the new world order he is envisioning in which he sees Canada as a legitimate leader merely due to its late wakeup call.

He goes on to give a list of things Canada has done locally and globally and concludes by saying, “we have a recognition of what’s happening and a determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.” He goes on to say Canada also has “the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home and to act together.” He notes this is “Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently, and it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.” Quite simply, this a leadership pitch for a new world order with Canada at its helm.

Without being overly cynical, this sounds very familiar, not too dissimilar to what USAID and Voice of America preached to the world; not too dissimilar to what the propaganda arms of the Soviet Union and the Chinese Communist Party used to preach in our own languages when we were growing up. It is difficult to buy this argument and accept Canadian and middle country leadership for the new world order when they have been consistently part of the problem of the old one and its excuses for institutionalised double standards practiced by international organisations such as the likes of the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other hegemonic entities that have catered to the whims of that world order.

As far as Canada is concerned, it is evident that it has suddenly woken up only due to an existential threat at home projected from across its southern border and Trump’s threats against the Danish territory of Greenland. When Gaza was battered, and Venezuela was raped, there was no audible clarion call. Therefore, there is no real desire for democracy or human rights in its true form, but a convenient and strategic interest in creating a new ‘white supremacist’ world order in the same persona as before, but this time led by a new white warrior instead. The rest of us would be mere followers, nodding our heads as expected as was the case before.

As the 20th century American standup comedian Lenny Bruce once said, “never trust a preacher with more than two suits.” Mr. Carney, Canada along with the so-called middle powers and the lapsed colonialists have way more than two suits, and we have seen them all.