Features
Independence, the first cabinet and Prime Minister DS Senanayake
PM held a tight leash and once threatened to resign if the ministers didn’t change their minds
(Excerpted from the Memoirs of a Cabinet Secretary by BP Peiris)
Cabinet Government was established with the promulgation of the new constitution. Sir Henry Monck-Mason Moore, Governor, who had been appointed Governor-General, called on D.S. Senanayake to form a Government. He formed a cabinet of 14 consisting of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, Sir Oliver Goonetilleke, George E. De Silva, J. L. Kotelawala, J. R. Jayewardene, L. A. Rajapakse, R. S. S. Gunawardena, Dudley Senanayake, C. Suntharalingam, T. B. Jayah, E. A Nugawela, A. Ratnayake and C. Sittampalam.
The first meeting was held on October 8, 1947, in the Cabinet Room, said to be one of the most beautiful in the whole of the Commonwealth. The only door leading to the room was closely barred. Police officers kept guard at the entrances leading to the Prime Minister’s Office and the Senate to prevent unauthorized persons from entering the building.
At this meeting, the Ministers, the Secretary and the Assistant took an oath of secrecy, which was an adaptation of the Privy Councillor’s oath but which had no statutory force. This was considered necessary by D.S. as the decisions of the Board of Ministers in the days of the State Council reached in the morning, regularly appeared in the late editions of the evening newspapers the same day.
In the absence of the Secretary, I had no power to administer the oath and, on two occasions, Ministers had to suffer the indignity of having to be taken round by me before a Justice of the Peace. D.S. therefore had me appointed a Justice of the Peace for the Judicial District of Colombo ex officio while holding the post of Assistant Secretary.
The oath of secrecy, however, did not prevent the leakage of Cabinet news to the Press. The same thing probably happens in other countries. Ministers like to be on the good side of the Press and oblige pressmen with news now and then. Eric Linklater, in his novel ‘The Impregnable Women’ puts these words into the mouth of Lord Pippin, the Prime Minister:
“The Cabinet puts an unbreakable seal upon the mouths of its members, and no one, for any purpose whatsoever, may take private advantage of what he learns in the sanctitude of our joint deliberations. This rule is inviolable, and like all rules, it is violated quite frequently.”
Except on one occasion when he had to see his doctor, D.S. was never late for a meeting and he insisted on other Ministers being punctual. All the Ministers complied with this request except S.W.R.D. who was invariably more than one hour late and who, on arrival, would greet the Prime Minister with a “Good morning, D.S.,” when every other Minister addressed him as “Sir” and inquire what business the Cabinet had transacted in his absence. The ground had then to be gone over again for his benefit and D.S. resented the waste of time but seemed unable to remedy it.
In the Chair, D.S. was firm and would not allow a Minister to raise a matter which was not on the Agenda unless the circumstances were exceptional. When a Minister attempted to raise a matter orally, he would say he knew nothing about it and ask a Cabinet Paper be submitted.
After the first meeting, the Prime Minister entertained the Ministers and the Secretaries to lunch in the Senate. It is strange that his first meeting and his last should have ended with a Cabinet lunch in the Senate.
D.S. was not a scholar; he had not been to a university and had no academic degree. He was an agriculturist and a gentleman-farmer and loved the land. He told me that he had planted his coconut land, probably at Botale, with his own hands and was very proud of it. But he had also been brought up early in the school of politics and was a master of political strategy which was the result of experience. There was no hypocrisy about him. In fact, it might be said that his want of hypocrisy was his greatest liability.
He was able, with that experience of his, to seize the core of the matter under discussion and throw away the non-essential covering. Often, when a Minister was arguing a Cabinet paper and taking more time than he thought was necessary, he would say “But actually, as a matter of fact, isn’t this the point?” The matter would then be settled in a few minutes. In this way, he used, very often, to clear the entire agenda. Of D.S. it can be said, “I come not, friends, to steal your hearts away: I am no orator, as Brutus is, but as you know me all, a plain blunt man…”
There was an occasion where the Cabinet decided that the price of a certain article should be increased by two cents. The Minister concerned was reluctant to carry this decision into effect but was bound by the rule of collective responsibility. He went back to his office and increased the price by one and a half cents. D.S. was angry when I brought the matter to his notice. The Minister was angry with me for having brought the matter to the Prime Minister’s notice. The Minister was ordered to carry out the Cabinet decision. I was directed to inform all Ministers that, if they were unable to carry out a Cabinet decision, they should bring the matter again before the Cabinet instead of acting on their own.
It was clear that we were not experienced in the theory and technique of Government by collective responsibility. One Minister told the Cabinet, after a decision had been reached, that he had to put it to his constituents! D.S. was working hard at this time to establish certain traditions and conventions. Heads of Departments were asking for copies of Cabinet papers to which they were not entitled. The Legal Draftsman was being asked to draft Bills by individual Ministers before the policy involved in the Bill had been approved collectively.
D.S. consulted me and laid down a few rules for the guidance of Ministers. The Legal Draftsman was not to undertake the drafting of a Bill’ until he had been informed by the Cabinet Secretariat that the proposal had the approval of the Cabinet. No paper was to be placed on the Agenda unless it had been in the hands of Ministers for three clear days before the meeting. These might be considered to be matters of detail; but D.S. was convinced that it was only by setting the details and straightening things out that the Ministers could be made to function as a collective body. In this, I think he succeeded to a large extent. There were occasional lapses.
D.S. was keen on granting trade union rights to public servants and introducing Whitley Councils. He was of the view that public servants of all classes should be given the right to form associations without any official interference, supervision or control. An exception was made in the case of the Police Force, the Prisons staff and the Agricultural Corps. He also insisted that the office bearers of a trade union of public servants should be public servants who are members of that union, and that a union should not have the right to have a political object or to make political levy. He refused to give trade unions the right of affiliation. Most of our troubles today seem to arise from the fact that trade unions are headed and controlled by political leaders who are not public servants and are not in the ‘trade’.
Before the Government took over, there had been a strike among certain sections of public servants who had been interdicted and against whom charges had been framed. D.S. agreed to make a statement in Parliament that this matter, at no time, came within the purview of his Government, that any proceedings that were being taken were merely a continuation of disciplinary action originated prior to his assumption of office and that it would not be proper for his Government to interfere with the continuance of the proceedings by the duly constituted authorities.
D.S.’s first rub was with the Public Service Commission. The Government had imported from abroad an officer called Paget as it was assumed that he had no connection with Ceylon and could be trusted to act absolutely independently and impartially. Paget assumed office as Chairman of the Commission. It was then found that he was a brother-in-law of Lanktree, a member of the Civil Service.
Paget construed the Constitution very strictly. He would have no interference by the Ministers in regard to appointments. On the other hand, Ministers found that they were unable to work with some of the Heads of Departments foisted on them by Paget. D.S., with his horse sense sent for Paget and, with some plain speaking, arrived at a workable compromise.
After the promulgation of the new Constitution, D.S. was in constant communication with the United Kingdom regarding the grant of full Dominion Status to Ceylon. This meant the removal of the reserved powers vested in the Governor under the earlier Order in Council. He informed the Ministers that the Imperial Government was willing to accede to Ceylon’s request but that, before this could be done, it would be necessary to pass a Bill in the Imperial Parliament conferring fully responsible status on Ceylon within the British Commonwealth.
It was possible that this Bill would become law before the next session of the Ceylon Parliament. Before the Bill was introduced in the Imperial Parliament, it was necessary that Ceylon should sign certain agreements with the United Kingdom. These were accordingly signed. In the External Affairs Agreement, Ceylon agreed to adopt and follow the resolutions of past Imperial Conferences. Was it intended by this, Ministers asked, to impose on this Government, a higher obligation in respect of such resolutions than existed in the case of any one of the other Dominions?
The Prime Minister stated that was clearly not the intention. The Agreements were to continue in force only as long as the two Governments considered them to be of mutual benefit, and it was implied that the Government could denounce the Agreements, in whole or in part, if the need arose. The Prime Minister was authorized to sign the Agreements on behalf of the Government.
Five documents were necessary to confer Dominion status on Ceylon:
1. A Ceylon Independence Act passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom to confer on the Ceylon Parliament full legislative powers, and to deprive the United Kingdom of responsibility for the Government of Ceylon.
2. An Order in Council to remove the limitations on self-government in the Ceylon Constitution,
3. An External Affairs Agreement to provide for certain matters relating to external affairs.
4. A Defence Agreement of such a nature that the necessary measures could be taken for the defence of Ceylon.
5. A Public Officers’ Agreement transferring to the Ceylon Government the responsibilities hitherto vested in the Government of the United Kingdom in relation to public officers.
The three Agreements were signed in Colombo on November 11, 1947, by the Governor-General, on behalf of the Government of the United Kingdom, and by the Prime Minister of behalf of the Government of Ceylon. The Ceylon Independence Act, passed by the United Kingdom Parliament, received the Royal Assent on December 10,1947. On December 19,1947 His Majesty approved the Ceylon Independence (Commencement) Order in Council and the Ceylon Independence Order in Council.
D.S. was a very happy man; his labours had succeeded, but they had to wait for official information that the documents had received Royal Approval. D.S. was waiting at Queen’s House for the news which was late. When it finally came on the ticker, he was so elated, he broke all his rules and opened a few bottles of champagne at his house “Woodlands.” The Cabinet approved the following resolution to be moved in Parliament : This House rejoices that after many years of subjection to foreign rule, the struggle of the people of Ceylon for freedom has culminated in the attainment of independence.
The first Parliament of Independent Ceylon was opened on February 10, 1948, by His Royal Highness the Duke of Gloucester. The Speech from the Throne was drafted by T. D. Perera. The Duke began:
“By a Royal Commission issued by His Majesty the King, I have been commanded to visit this Island, and on behalf of His Majesty, to declare the causes of opening a new session of the Parliament of Ceylon, the first session under her new status of Independence. It is a matter of considerable gratification to me that I have been chosen to convey to you His Majesty’s Most Gracious Speech from the Throne to both Houses of Parliament of Ceylon which is as following.” (I need not here reproduce the entire speech from the Throne to both Houses of Parliament of Ceylon which is set out in other official documents.)
The first paragraph read: “I regret that it has not been possible for me to address you in person on this occasion which marks an event of the greatest importance in the history of this country. After a period of nearly a century and a half, during which the status of Ceylon was that of a Colony in My Empire, she now takes her place as a free and independent member of the British Commonwealth of Nations.”
The Duke, though dressed in white uniform, was obviously in distress owing to the tropical heat. His uniform did not have any pockets and his handkerchief, neatly folded, wis carried by the Duchess. On the dais were Their Royal Highnesses and D. S. and Mrs Senanayake. Several times during the Speech, the Duke had to turn round to his wife for the loan of his handkerchief to mop his brow.
By the end of 1948, three Ministers had been replaced. Sir Oliver Goonetilleke had been appointed as our High Commissioner in London and was succeeded by E. A. P. Wijeratne. George E. de Silva’s portfolio had been taken over by C. Sittampalam and A. E. Goonesinha had joined the Cabinet as Minister without Portfolio. G. G. Ponnambalam later took on the Ministry of Industries. H. W. Amarasuriya had become Minister of Commerce and Trade in place of C. Suntharalingam.
Suntharalingam had been consistently opposing, in Cabinet certain proposals relating to persons of Indian descent resident in Ceylon, a problem now known as the Indo-Ceylon problem. He was the sole dissentient, and, on the final decision, asked that his dissent be recorded in the minutes. In drafting the minutes I made no reference to the dissent. When the minutes came up for confirmation at the next meeting, he pointed out the omission and asked that the error be rectified.
I anticipated that he would raise this point, and was armed with the necessary books. I quoted authority to show that a dissent was not recorded in Cabinet minutes in view of the doctrine of collective responsibility.
That once a decision had been reached, a Minister’s duty was to support it, both in Parliament as well as on the public platforms, and that if he found himself unable to do so, his clear duty was to resign. Suntharalingam inquired what I was reading from and when he was told that it was “Jennings on Cabinet Government”, said that the authority was completely outdated. D.S. preferred to follow Jennings and the dissent was not recorded.
Shortly afterwards, this matter came up in the House of Representatives. I had taken no interest in the proceedings of the House. One evening, my telephone rang and when I inquired who was speaking, there was no answer.
All that the voice said was “I want you to look up your books and draft a strong letter dismissing my Minister. See me at Temple Trees tomorrow morning at eight.” I did not know what had happened or who the Minister was. I had to get this information from the Clerk to the House.
He said that when this question came for voting, Suntharalingam left the Chamber. The Prime Minister had thought that he had gone to the lavatory but was informed that during the time that the division was being taken, Suntharalingam was in the lobby. With the strongly worded draft and a stenographer, I saw the Prime Minister the next day at the appointed time. He was in his bath and apologized for his delay of ten minutes..
He was never known to have kept a public servant waiting. He read the letter very carefully and said that the wording was far too strong. He then signed an amended draft. “Sun”, as everybody called him, left the Cabinet shortly afterwards. He was amazing at any problem involving mathematics. On the China Rice-Rubber contract, for example, he would, like his colleague, Sittampalam, work out, without paper or pencil, the total cost of so many thousand tons at pounds sterling 71/2d per ton. He was a very intellectual man, and his departure from the Cabinet was a great loss.
The Cabinet was once discussing one of D.S.’s own Cabinet Papers and, during the discussion, it was found that nearly every Minister was opposed to his proposal. He was very annoyed. It was the first and the only time that a vote has been taken in Cabinet, and the voting in a Cabinet of fourteen was thirteen against, with the Prime Minister for. He pushed his heavy satinwood chair back, rose, and said that he would adjourn the meeting for the next day for further consideration; if the Ministers remained of the same view, he would hand in his resignation. On the next day, the thirteen Ministers were in complete agreement with the Prime Minister!
Features
Dilemmas of ‘hurting economies’ – the case of Sri Lanka
Maldives President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu was in Sri Lanka recently on what was apparently a goodwill visit and this event, no doubt, bodes very well for Maldives-Sri Lanka relations. Besides, the visit would go some distance in strengthening Sri Lanka’s claims to Non-Alignment.
However, the commentator on regional politics could be accused of simplistic thinking if he/she glosses over or ignores the regional politics nuances or undertones of the Maldivian President’s visit. In Sri Lanka we currently have a government which is eager to solidify its bridges, so to speak, with China and which, given the chance, would be courting increasingly close relations with Russia. In other words, the NPP government is likely to see itself as a ‘natural ally’ of the East and would prefer to distance itself to the extent possible from the West, if that is a realistic proposition.
Given the foregoing backdrop, it would be in some of the NPP regime’s best interests to be on cordial terms with the Maldives which is a close ally of China in the South Asian region. However, the NPP government, given the utter financial helplessness of Sri Lanka, cannot afford to distance itself politically and diplomatically from India and the West. Sheer economic necessity compels Sri Lanka to adopt this foreign policy stance. In other words, the latter has no choice but to be ‘Non-Aligned.’
This columnist was led to the above observations on listening to a lucid and comprehensive presentation titled, ‘A Global Economy in the Shadow of the Iran War and implications for Sri Lanka’s debt recovery’, by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja, Visiting Senior Fellow, ODI Global London, at the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo on May 4th. The forum, RCSS Strategic Dialogue – 4, was moderated and presided over by RCSS Executive Director Ambassador (retd) Ravinatha Aryasinha.
The forum brought together a wide cross section of society, including diplomatic personnel, academicians, public and private sector personalities and the media. After the presentation a very lively and informative Q&A followed.
Ambassador Aryasinha at the outset set an appropriate backdrop to the presentation and discussion by stressing ‘the increasing interconnectedness of geopolitical and economic developments, noting how disruptions in the Middle East could have significant ramifications for global markets, trade flows, energy prices and broader economic stability, including Sri Lanka.’
Indeed, there are occurring currently very disruptive economic and material consequences for the world from ‘the Iran War’, and with US-Iran hostilities spiraling in West Asia it may not be wrong to surmise that the worst could be yet to come, unless a peace process materializes in earnest.
Meanwhile, ‘hurting countries’ such as Sri Lanka would need to summon their best economic management capabilities to remain materially and economically afloat. ‘Economic transformation’ is what is urgently needed and not mere management and some of the insights thrown up by Dr. Ganeshan Wignaraja should have the local polity thinking.
There was the following observation, for instance: ‘Sri Lanka has achieved remarkable cyclical stabilization but faces critical challenges in transitioning to transformative growth, with 2027-2028 debt repayments looming and only $5.4 billion usable reserves.’
Needless to say, the path ahead to ‘transformative growth’ for Sri Lanka is strewn with multiple challenges and meeting them effectively is of the first importance. Sri Lanka must soldier on towards even a semblance of development in the short and medium terms and such initiatives cannot be separated from its foreign policy choices since the country’s economic partners and their growth prowess have a close bearing on the country’s material fortunes.
As mentioned, Sri Lanka will be compelled to be ‘a friend of all countries and an enemy of none’ going forward but it cannot afford to be seen as cultivating China as a close growth partner at the expense of India and other major economies of the region.
This is primarily because while India is remaining a major economic power, the current West Asian crisis notwithstanding, China’s economy is being seen as ‘slowing’. Dr. Wignaraja singled out the following in the main as the factors causing this slow-down: a bursting property bubble, increasing state regulation, and weakening investor confidence. Besides, the speaker sees production cycles moving away from China and India replacing China and Hong Kong as ‘manufacturing hubs’.
Accordingly, the NPP regime in Sri Lanka would need to craft its regional policy in particular with the utmost far-sightedness. It will need to have close economic links with all the growth centres that matter.
On the question of authentic economic transformation, the following observations of Dr. Wignaraja on Sri Lanka’s economy are of the first importance as well: ‘Foreign reserves are now at $ 5.4 billion, the cost of living is high, an estimated 20 per cent of the population lives below the poverty line of $ 3.65 per day, the recent cyber security breach at the Treasury would affect some 10 payments.’ These factors were termed ‘critical vulnerabilities’.
It is difficult to conceive of an economic transformation worthy of the phrase minus a steady economic empowerment of the populace. The above data point to the considerable magnitude of the local poverty problem. Right now, the disruptive effects of the West Asian crisis render swift poverty alleviation a most difficult proposition.
One possible way out of the present economic debacle is the forging of a national consensus by the present government on all outstanding problems that have been bedeviling the country’s advancement. That is, there needs to be a meeting of minds across current political divides. Considering the present inflammatory political polarities in Sri Lanka this would prove an insurmountable challenge.
Unfortunately, conscience-filled and civic minded sections in Sri Lanka have chosen to be laid back rather than seize the initiative, come centre stage and impress on politicians the need for enlightened governance and progressive change. There needs to be a historic coming together of the right thinking to ensure that the best interests of the people and of the people only are served by governments. In the absence of such a process, might would be projected as right and brute force would come to increasingly rule politics and society.
Features
Australia funds project to restore climate-resilient vegetable livelihoods in cyclone-affected highlands
The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Lands and Irrigation, the Government of Australia, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have launched of a AUD 2 million (USD 1.4 million) recovery initiative to restore and transform vegetable production systems in the cyclone-affected districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla.
The FAO said yesterday (5) that the agreement was formalized through the signing of the grant agreement by Matthew Duckworth, Australian High Commissioner to Sri Lanka, and Vimlendra Sharan, FAO Representative for Sri Lanka and the Maldives, alongside the signing of the project document by D. P. Wickramasinghe, Secretary of Agriculture.
Cyclone Ditwah, which struck Sri Lanka in November 2025, caused widespread devastation across the country, severely disrupting agricultural production systems and livelihoods. The highland districts of Nuwara Eliya and Badulla, key suppliers of vegetables such as beans, carrots, leeks, cabbage, tomato and potato, were among the hardest hit, with thousands of smallholder farmers losing crops, seed stocks, and productive assets.
This 12-month initiative aims torestore and strengthen climate-resilient vegetable production systems, with a strong focus on empowering women farmers and supporting persons with disabilities. The project will directly benefit more than 2,400 smallholder farmers, through improved seed and seedling production systems, small machinery, training, and market linkages while indirectly supporting thousands more.
“This initiative is an important step not only in restoring what was lost, but in building a more resilient and self-reliant agricultural sector,” said Minister Lal Kantha. “By strengthening local seed systems and supporting smallholder farmers, particularly women and vulnerable groups, we are investing in the long-term sustainability of Sri Lanka’s food systems.”
“Australia stands alongside Sri Lanka in its ongoing recovery from Cyclone Ditwah,” said High Commissioner Duckworth. “Australia is a steadfast partner in the agriculture sector with its importance for food security, rural development and climate resilience. By focusing on climate smart practices, farmer-led solutions and inclusive economic opportunities, this project will deliver meaningful and lasting benefits to affected communities.
The project will prioritize the restoration of farmer-led seed systems for beans and potatoes, support the re-establishment of both open-field and protected cultivation systems and women led seedling supply nurseries while empowering all farmers with Climate-Smart Good Agricultural Practices (CSGAP) with small scale machinery and input support.
A key feature of the initiative is the establishment of six accessible and inclusive nurseries in Nuwara Eliya and Badulla. These nurseries will serve as sustainable agri-based enterprises, producing high-quality vegetable seedlings while creating new income opportunities and strengthening local input supply chains.
By combining recovery support with long-term resilience measures, the project will help stabilize vegetable production, improve household food security and nutrition, and reduce reliance on imported seeds.
Features
War on Iran may hasten unraveling of New World Order
It took several decades for the US to realise it was losing the war in Vietnam. It took a bit shorter time in Afghanistan. And what is happening in the countries the US and Israel intervened and broke up? The US has been asked to leave Iraq. Syria is talking to Russia about establishing military bases, President al-Sharaa met with Vladimir Putin in Moscow to discuss the project, which is vital for Russian power projection in the Middle East. Libya has been divided into two competing administrative units with the Eastern section actively engaged with Russia in defence matters. The Sudanese government has finalised a 25-year deal to allow a Russian naval facility in the Red Sea in exchange for weapons, including anti-aircraft systems. On the Eastern side of the Red Sea, Yemen remains divided, with the main power center, the Houthis maintaining a staunchly anti-US, anti-Israel stance, while the internationally recognised government remains in exile.
When the Iranian Foreign Minister recently undertook a tour of Pakistan, Oman and Russia, the US wanted to meet him and got ready to send its negotiators Vice President J. D. Vance and his team to Pakistan, but Iranian FM snubbed them and left Pakistan, saying Iran did not want to talk to the US while a blockade of their ports were in place. The Iranian FM met President Putin, who congratulated Iran for courageously defending their country and then phoned US President Trump and told him further attacks on Iran would not be acceptable. During this conversation on April 27, 2026, Putin reportedly warned Trump that further U.S. or Israeli attacks on Iran would have dangerous consequences, according to Al Jazeera). Such a sequence of events would not have been possible in the unipolar world we had in the past.
Furthermore, the damage that Iran has inflicted on the US and Israel in this war would have been unimaginable in the late 20th Century and early 21st Century. Sixteen US military bases spread across Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan and Oman have been either destroyed or severely damaged. Advanced surveillance aircraft and radar systems worth more than $ 2.8 bn were destroyed. This had a far-reaching effect on the war as the US could not use these bases in the war against Iran and also in the defence of its allies in the Gulf.
The attacks on Israel have been equally damaging. In Central Israel and Tel Aviv area multiple attacks targeted military and intelligence assets, resulting in massive damage. Iranian missiles hit the Haifa oil refinery, causing a shutdown, and hit residential buildings, leading to injuries and structural damage. Residential and commercial areas were damaged in Bat Yam and Petah Tikva with significant casualties and destruction. Attacks in Dimona and Arad targeted the Negev Nuclear Research Center, with casualties reported in both towns. The Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba was hit in a strike. The strategic port and naval base in Eilat were targeted. In Rishon LeZion suburban residential areas suffered extensive damage.
Usually, Israel makes short work of its many enemies in the region, for example it took just six days to defeat the combined military of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in 1967 and grab their land as well. Hamas, Fatah and Palestinians would suffer ignominious defeats if they dare challenge Israel. However, the recent war against Hamas, following a daring wide scale invasion into Israel by Hamas in October 2023, went on for more than two years with no conclusive victory for Israel.
These significant massive military setbacks suffered by the combined forces of the US and Israel have been made possible by the unprecedented advancement in military technology achieved mainly by China and to a degree by Russia as well. Iran has been able to develop ballistic missile systems that could penetrate the “iron dome” that Israel boasted, with technological assistance from China and North Korea. Iran’s drones are very cheap yet very effective, requiring interceptors worth millions of dollars to counter them, thus making it much more costly for the US to fight this war than it is for Iran.
Further, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthies in Yemen and Hamas in Palestine are well equipped with advanced missiles and drones. Hezbollah has been able to destroy about hundred Israel tanks and stop their advance. According to Larry Johnson, former CIA intelligence analyst, Israel soldiers are much war weary and mentally affected and are being withdrawn. Netanyahu’s 40 year dream of a “Greater Israel” is telling on the poor soldiers.
If a person like Barack Obama had been the US President instead of the hyper egoistic, blustering, intellectually barren Trump, things may have been different. An attempt would have been made to reconcile with the fact that the world is changing, instead of trying to stop it and make “America Great Again”. Perhaps, it could be said that Trump is facilitating the emergence of the new world order by enabling the US citizens to see the reality, the futility of war and the fact that Israel is a liability because the US is fighting its war. Further, the war has enabled Iran to assert its place in the region and negotiate from a position of strength.
Perhaps, Israeli people may realise that the Palestine problem cannot be solved by militarily occupying their land, and that in a changing world a “Greater Israel” is a “pie in the sky”. They may have to agree to a two-state solution. US support may not always be forthcoming, certainly not at the level that Trump could extend, as this war is very unpopular and expensive. The other very significant fact is that Israeli settlers in the occupied lands feel insecure and one in three wants to leave and the numbers may grow when Palestinians and their sympathisers grow in strength in the new world order.
Moreover, the war on Iran has afforded China the opportunity to demonstrate with authority the fact that it stands for universal peace and does not tolerate illegal wars. Its message to the US conveyed its world view and its desire for peace in no uncertain terms. Trump cannot afford to disregard the Chinese position on the war on the eve of his visit to that country which may decide on future trade between the two countries as the US depends on China for several essential materials like rare earth minerals. Furthermore, China has shown that peace could be achieved by developing the economies of the underdeveloped countries irrespective of their alliances. It helps Iran as well as Saudi Arabia and try to build bridges between these foes. It welcomes Trump in the coming weeks and hopes to strengthen ties between the two countries despite the weaknesses of the latter.
Another important factor is the gradual decline of the critical value of the petro-dollar. Following the end of the gold standard in 1971, the US struck deals with Saudi Arabia and other OPEC nations (around 1974) to price oil exclusively in USD in exchange for military protection and arms sales. Dollars earned by selling oil came to be known as petro-dollar. Oil producers, holding large dollar surpluses, reinvest these funds in the US Treasury securities, real estate, and financial assets ensuring the recycling of petro-dollars. The system ensures a consistent global demand for US dollars, which helps fund the US budget deficit and maintains the currency’s dominance.
However, the petro-dollar system is on the decline and there are two main reasons for this, firstly the gradual rise of the new world order with organisations like BRICS, making a concerted effort to extricate from the dollar dominance by developing alternate currencies and methods to bypass the dollar. Secondly, the need felt by most countries to develop alternative energy sources to replace enormously harmful fossil fuel would eventually result in a decline in the demand for it and consequently the effectiveness of the petro-dollar. China is leading the world in both these endeavours; depolarisation process and renewable energy production. The war on Iran seems to have hastened the process of depolarisation as Iran insists that it will sell its oil for yuan only.
These revolutionary changes in the aftermath of the Iran war have their undeniable implications for the Global South, where more than 60% of the poor live.
by N. A. de S. Amaratunga
-
News3 days agoCJ urged to inquire into AKD’s remarks on May 25 court verdict
-
News7 days ago“Three-in-one blood pressure pill can significantly reduce risk of recurrent strokes”
-
News4 days agoUSD 3.7 bn H’tota refinery: China won’t launch project without bigger local market share
-
News19 hours agoMIT expert warns of catastrophic consequences of USD 2.5 mn Treasury heist
-
News7 days agoAlarm raised over plan to share Lanka’s biometric data with blacklisted Indian firm
-
News5 days agoEaster Sunday Case: Ex-SIS Chief concealed intel, former Defence Secy tells court
-
News6 days agoTen corruption cases set for court in May, verdict ordered in one case – President
-
News7 days agoUSD 2.5 mn fraud probe: Interdicted MoF official found dead at home
