Connect with us

Midweek Review

Lanka exposed on eve of Geneva sessions for being taken for a USD 6.5mn ride in trying to influence US

Published

on

By Shamindra Ferdinando

 

One-time Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations at Geneva Tamara Kunanayakam says the country has no other option, but to oppose the Core Group’s Resolution by calling for a vote when it is tabled at the 46th session of the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC).

The Core Group, led by the UK, includes Germany, Canada, North Macedonia, Montenegro and Malawi. Kunanayakam, who served in Geneva (2011-2013) emphasized: “If the Resolution is adopted with Sri Lanka accepting, either directly by co-sponsoring or indirectly by not calling for a vote, it will reinstate the notorious HRC Resolution 30/1. By doing so, Sri Lanka will validate its underlying logic that legitimizes the use of illegal unilateral coercive measures against sovereign states; undermine Sri Lanka’s own sovereignty and the UN Charter-based multilateral order, guarantor of that sovereignty; deprive our allies in the Global South of the opportunity to express their views on a precedent-setting resolution that threatens their own sovereignty; and, isolate Sri Lanka, making it more vulnerable than it already is to foreign intervention and aggression. And that will only benefit Washington’s global ambitions for a unilateral world order under US hegemony.”

The then UNP-led coalition co-sponsored the Resolution on Oct 1, 2015. The then Sri Lanka’s PR there Ravinatha Aryasinha was ordered by Colombo to accept the Resolution on Sri Lanka’s behalf after he initially raised objections to it.

Kunanayakam, who had been Sri Lanka’s top envoy in Havana (2009-2011) asserted: “In fact, under today’s conditions, such a resolution will be worse than the 2015 resolution which could easily be dismissed on the basis that the then Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera had acted without authorization and there had been widespread opposition within the country, especially from political parties. This time, it will be interpreted as there having been not only an international consensus, but a national consensus, with the added argument that the Government in place was elected with a near two-thirds majority.”

The foreign affairs analyst was responding to the writer’s query as to what should be Sri Lanka’s response? And how could the country avoid a vote on the Core Group’s resolution?

 

UK succeeds US

The UK took command of the Core Group in the wake of the US quitting the UNHRC alleging the Geneva body was a cesspool of political bias. Having succeeded the US, the UK, prodded on by an influential Tamil group of Sri Lanka origin, has mounted a despicable political project meant to humiliate post-war Sri Lanka. The failure on Sri Lanka’s part to counter Western propaganda facilitated their operation. The current administration is no exception. Sri Lanka pathetically failed to exploit disclosures made by Western ‘sources’ since the successful conclusion of the conflict in May 2009 to the chagrin of the oft repeated Western refrain that the Sri Lankan security forces were incapable of crushing the almost invincible military machine of the LTTE. Sri Lanka’s pitiable handling of the Geneva affair certainly made the British project easier.

Sri Lanka should be eternally grateful to Lord Naseby for exposing the British project. The Conservative Party member recently revealed how the British conveniently suppressed information which might have helped the UNHRC to establish the truth. The UK withheld information in spite of it being a member of the 47-nation UNHRC. The availability of such information was made known to the world on Oct 12, 2017 thanks to Lord Naseby.

A parliamentary query raised by Lord Naseby recently revealed the suppression of diplomatic cables from the UK High Commission in Colombo in 2009. If revealed, the cables could have disputed the very basis of the unsubstantiated war crimes allegations leading to Sri Lanka co-sponsoring the 2015 Geneva Resolution against itself.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on Feb 16 answered Lord Naseby’s written parliamentary question, tabled on Feb 4.

Question:

Lord Naseby asked the government whether the UK supplied to the UN Human Rights Council any (1) censored, and (2) uncensored, copies of dispatches written by Lieutenant Colonel Anthony Gash, the former Defence Attaché of the British High Commission in Sri Lanka about events in that country between 1 January and 18 May 2009, relating to the civil war.

Answer:

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon said that the UK Government had not received any request from the UN Human Rights Council for copies of dispatches written by the former Defence Attaché at the British High Commission in Sri Lanka, Lieutenant Colonel Gash, about events in Sri Lanka related to the civil war, and had not provided any.

 

British duplicity

Appearing on ‘Face the Nation’ anchored by Shameer Rasooldeen on Feb 15, defence analyst and lecturer Nilanthan Niruthan explained the British duplicity in handling accountability issues. Responding to Rasooldeen, Niruthan didn’t mince his words when explained the rule of law meant that those responsible for crimes should be promptly and fairly prosecuted. Yet the UK government, while seeking to punish the Sri Lanka military, was pushing for a new law – the Overseas Operations Bill – that would make it nearly impossible to prosecute British soldiers for torture and other war crimes committed overseas, Niruthan said. The British actions showed contempt for the rule of law, violation of the UK’s international commitments to prosecute the worst crimes, and risks creating impunity for grave abuse, the programme was told.

The writer on Monday (22) sought a further clarification from Chennai, born Niruthan as regards the British position to the accountability issues. “The British position,” Niruthan, whose parents fled the Jaffna peninsula sometime after the 1983 anti-Tamil riots, said: “… is like a rat accusing a squirrel of being a pest. The UK has been found responsible for systematic war crimes by the ICC prosecutor but the court could not proceed because the UK refused to cooperate with any further investigations. Worse, the UK is now working on a law that will make its own soldiers immune to the very same international prosecutions they are trying to push against the Sri Lankan military. The fact that they are leading the charge against Sri Lanka is evidence of how hypocritical and corrupt the system is. There is a difference between justice and politics. The UK sponsoring the resolution makes it undeniable that all this is much more about politics than anything related to justice. I hope Sri Lankans of all communities are paying attention to these double standards.”

Niruthan contributes to ‘The Journal of Military Operations and Small Wars’ as well as Asia-Pacific magazine called ‘The Diplomat’. Questioning the response of some countries with vested interests to terrorism and post-conflict Sri Lanka, Niruthan referred to the assassination of his grandfather Rajasundaram Vaithalingam, of Vaddukottai, Jaffna by the TELO (Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization). At the time of Vaithalingam’s assassination in 1985, he had been the SLFP organizer for Jaffna.

Western powers turned a blind eye to Indian intervention causing mayhem here in the 80s. India sponsored terrorist groups, including the TELO, engaged in terrorist acts with impunity. They created an environment conducive for the deployment of the Indian Army here (July 1987-March 1990). India lost nearly 1,500 officers and men during the IPKF (Indian Peace Keeping Force) deployment. Nearly 3,000 others received injuries and the rest is history.

Today India represents the UNHRC. Foreign Secretary retired Admiral Prof. Jayanath Colombage on Feb 19 revealed to Hiru TV Sri Lanka’s request to Indian PM Narendra Modi’s backing at the UNHRC. India never bothered at least to apologize for causing massive death and destruction in Sri Lanka though New Delhi from time to time reminded Colombo of its obligations towards the Tamil community.

 

Indian role in bringing war to an end

Ironically, we have to acknowledge the support provided by India during the Eelam War IV (August 2006-May 2009) as it became patently unable to stomach Tiger insolence to its former patron, for turning its guns on the IPKF and especially after the assassination of its ex-Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi. It would be pertinent to underscore what one-time Indian High Commissioner J, N. Dixit stated in 2004. Dixit, in his memoirs, ‘Makers of India’s Foreign Policy,’ says that he preferred to call India’s interference in Sri Lanka during 1980-1990 period as ‘Indian involvement.’ Dixit asserted that the decision to give active support to Sri Lankan Tamil militants could be considered one of the two major foreign policy blunders made by the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. But Dixit strongly defended the Prime Minister’s action, while asserting Gandhi couldn’t have afforded the emergence of Tamil separatism in India by refusing to support the aspirations of Sri Lankan Tamils [Chapter 6:An Indo-centric Practitioner of Realpolitik-Makers of India’s Foreign Policy].

Dixit failed to explain how the Prime Minister hoped to achieve her twin objectives by recruiting, training, arming and deploying thousands of Sri Lankan Tamil youth. India also helped Sri Lankan terrorists establish contact with international terrorist groups.

Indian action caused irrevocable damage to Indo-Lanka relations. The Maldives, too, suffered due to Indian intervention in Sri Lanka. Dixit totally ignored the Maldivian factor, though Indian trained PLOTE (People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam) was responsible for a coup attempt in the Maldives in Nov. 1988. India had to send in troops to thwart sea borne Sri Lankan terrorists, who mounted the attack on Male. The UNHRC (previously Commission) or Western powers never showed any interest in the suffering of the northern public until the Sri Lankan military eradicated the LTTE.

However, the war could never have been brought to a successful conclusion without New Delhi’s backing. Sri Lanka also needs to understand the US-Japan-India-Australia axis to meet the growing Chinese challenge as it walks a diplomatic tightrope against the backdrop of Colombo’s continuing dependence on Beijing. The Western moves in Geneva, in a way, reflect their overall strategy to undermine China.

Since the end of the conflict in May 2009, the Western powers pushed hard for an accountability process that enabled them to bring Sri Lanka under their domination. They exploited a joint statement issued in the wake of UNSG Ban Ki moon’s visit to Colombo to initiate a direct intimidation process that kicked off with the accusation of killing 40,000 civilians on the Vanni east front by a virtual kangaroo court handpicked by the UNSG and called the Panel of Experts, whose findings neither could be questioned nor can the accusers be cross examined at least for two decades or more. (Report of the Secretary General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka released on March 31, 2011).

 

Gathering evidence the UN way

In the absence of a steady stream of complaints, the Centre for War Victims and Human Rights launched an online campaign to gather war crimes complaints. The petition was launched about a week before the expiry of the first deadline (Dec 15, 2010). The deadline was subsequently extended to Dec 31, 2010. The organizers posted a detailed communication from the Secretariat to PoE/PoE on a website named ‘Stop Sri Lanka State Terrorism’, obviously giving away the ultimate aim of the project. Interestingly, those who had complained cannot be examined in view of a confidentiality clause that prevented scrutiny of such for a period of 20 years (from March 2011 to March 2031). What is really surprising is that Sri Lanka never challenged the confidentiality clause. Sri Lanka owed an explanation why it continuously failed to take up contentious matters, such as the confidentiality clause or wartime US Defence Advisor Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith’s defence of the Sri Lankan military at the first post-war defence seminar conducted in 2011. Let me reproduce verbatim what the US official said. Smith was responding to Maj. Gen. (retd) Ashok Mehta (IPKF) who queried about the alleged battlefield executions. Query directed to the then Maj. Gen. Shavendra Silva, No 2 in New York was answered by the American.

This is what the American had to say: “Hello, may I say something to a couple of questions raised. I’ve been the Defense Ataché here, at the US Embassy, since June 2008. Regarding the various versions of events that came out in the final hours and days of the conflict – from what I was privileged to hear and to see, the offers to surrender that, I am aware of, seemed to come from the mouthpieces of the LTTE – Nadesan, KP – people who weren’t and never had really demonstrated any control over the leadership or the combat power of the LTTE.

“So their offers were a bit suspect anyway, and they tended to vary in content, hour by hour, day by day. I think we need to examine the credibility of those offers before we leap to conclusions that such offers were in fact real.

“And I think the same is true for the version of events. It’s not so uncommon in combat operations, in the fog of war, as we all get our reports second, third and fourth hand from various commanders, at various levels, that the stories don’t seem to all quite match up.

“But, I can say that the version presented here so far in this is what I heard as I was here during that time. And I think I better leave it at that before I get into trouble. “

The US State Department disassociated itself from Lt. Col. Smith’s statement. State Department’s Deputy Spokesman Mark C. Toner responded to questions raised on the basis of The Island report.

QUESTION:

I have one on Sri Lanka. The senior Defense Attaché at the U.S. Mission in Sri Lanka went public in the newspapers (inaudible) that he questioned the credibility of surrender offers made by senior LTTE leaders who was the head of the (inaudible) last year. Does this reflect any change in the U.S. position on the war crime victims?

TONER:

Right. You’re talking about remarks that were made at a conference in Colombo?

QUESTION:

Yes. Yeah.

TONER:

Well, just to clarify, the U.S. did decline invitations to participate in that conference as either a conference speaker or panelist. My understanding is that the Defence Attaché was there as an observer and a note taker. His comments reflected his personal opinions. There’s no change in the policy of the United States, and his remarks do not reflect any change in our policy.

QUESTION:

So that was a personal opinion?

TONER:

Personal opinion. The United States – and just to reiterate that policy – remains deeply concerned by the allegations in the panel of experts report, and we’re committed to seeing a credible accounting of and accountability for violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. And we believe that the Sri Lankan Government must act quickly and credibly to address these allegations.

QUESTION:

Who was the attaché?

TONER:

I don’t have his name.

QUESTION:

Is he still the attaché? (Laughter.) Was there any discussion —?

TONER:

I believe he’s still there, but I’ll try to get an update.

Smith’s statement contradicted the very basis of the war crimes allegations. For a decade, Sri Lanka conveniently failed to exploit US statements whereas resolutions were moved in Geneva on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations. Resolutions were passed against Sri Lanka in 2012, 2013 and 2014 before the US backed change of the Rajapaksa administration that paved the way for the US to move the 2015 resolution. Sri Lanka never took any notice of the US State Department declaration that the US spent USD 585 mn to restore democracy in Myanmar, Nigeria and Sri Lanka. If just one third of that amount had been allocated for the Sri Lanka project in addition to funds made available by the USAID in 2015, who were the recipients? The Geneva project can never be really examined without studying the US political designs here. Backing of General Fonseka and Maithripala Sirisena at 2010 and 2015 presidential polls exposed the US strategy. Wikileaks proved that.

 

Zuberi affair

The writer had an opportunity to discuss the accountability issue on ‘Sirasa’ ‘Pathikada’ anchored by Asoka Dias. The programme aired live, hours before Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena addressed the 46th sessions of the UNHRC, dealing with the failure on the part of successive governments to respond properly to the Western strategy. The squandering of a staggering USD 6.5 mn in 2014 for a harebrained project to prevent the US pushing Sri Lanka on the human rights front captured front-page attention of some print media a few days before the beginning of the Geneva sessions. The absence of overall strategy, too, was highlighted with scheduling of Pakistan PM Imran Khan’s visit to Colombo amidst Geneva sessions and ongoing controversy of cremation of Muslim victims of Covid-19. But, the cancellation of Khan’s address to Parliament on the alleged fears of him raising the Kashmir issue after making a grand announcement underscored the pathetic state of affairs.

American of Indian and Pakistani origin Imaad Zuberi, who had donated heavily to Democrats before former President Donald J. Trump’s election, pleaded guilty to charges related to a $900,000 donation to Trump’s inaugural committee, the US media reported last week. Having promised to save Sri Lanka for a sum of USD 8.5 mn, Zuberi received USD 6.5 mn in a deal negotiated through the Sri Lanka Embassy in Washington. In the following year, the US not only played a key role in the change of government in Colombo, it got the UNP-SLFP administration to co-sponsor a Resolution against Sri Lanka’s wartime political leadership and the military.

In 2019 New York Times quoted Zuberi as having said: “To open doors, I have to donate. It’s just a fact of life.”

The smooth operator had donated heavily to Democrats, including committees supporting President Barack Obama and then Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, before abruptly switching allegiance to Republicans in the wake of Trump’s victory.

The Yahapalana government never made a genuine effort to probe the controversial deal with the American. Investigations revealed that the political agent who had received a 12-year jail term spent vast amounts of Sri Lankan taxpayers’ money to sustain his luxurious lifestyle. Those who had benefited at the expense of Sri Lanka perhaps will never be punished though the military is in the dock. US declaration of Army Chief Gen. Shavendra Silva a persona non grata in the US is a case in point. The same fate befell Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka and Maj. Gen. Chagie Gallage.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Midweek Review

Staying relevant in a changing media landscape

Published

on

Samita Prakash / Ashok Malik / Marya Shakil

The sinking of an Iranian frigate in India’s backyard, closer to Sri Lanka’s southern coast, in early March this year, a few days after the eruption of war after the unprovoked Israeli-US attack on Iran, posed quite a significant challenge for India and Sri Lanka. They grappled with the escalating situation. No one wanted to blame the US for the death of over 100 unarmed Iranian Navy personnel.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Reference was made at the Media Fest 2026 to the false claim regarding the resignation of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at the height of protests in Colombo, in July, 2022, to highlight the failure on the part of the non-traditional media to report the developing situation accurately.

The fictitious claim received the attention during the second session of Media Fest 2026, organised by the Sri Lanka-India Media Friendship Association (SLIMFA) on 11 July, 2026, at the Taj Samudra. The panel consisted of Ashok Malik, Nisthar Cassim (President, SLIMFA), Vimukthi Karunarathne, Jamila Hussain and Robert Anthony. It was moderated by Kalani Kumarasinghe.

The panel paid attention to the challenge the traditional media, particularly the print, faced in covering the well-orchestrated campaign, especially with foreign inputs to oust President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Essentially, the finger was pointed at the non-traditional media for being inaccurate, hasty and irresponsible. Reference was also made to the recent Negombo Prison riot, that claimed the lives of 31, to stress the importance of the traditional media as the preferred or truthful news provider.

The stimulating discussion took place after Malik, the former policy advisor/additional secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs of India, dealt with holistic media strategy. Malik, who had been a frequent visitor to Colombo over the years, had served the Ministry of External Affairs during the violent crisis in Colombo. Malik had been with the Ministry from October 2019 to August 2022, the month Wickremesinghe received the parliamentary backing to succeed forcefully ousted Gotabaya Rajapaksa through extra parliamentary means.

The SLIMFA was inaugurated in May 2024 under the patronage of the Indian High Commission. The first ever Media Fest was held also at the Taj Samudra over a period of two days, in April, 2025. Indian High Commissioner in Colombo, Santosh Jha, was present throughout the programme held on 11 July. This year’s focus was on the theme ‘Staying Relevant in a Changing World.’

The two other sessions were addressed by Editor Asian News International, Ms. Smita Prakash, and Managing Editor, India Today Ms Marya Shakil. They dealt with trust, truth and the battle for credibility and the shifting of the audience, respectively. Their perspectives facilitated an exciting dialogue with the panelists and members of the audience making useful contributions.

Passing reference was made to the West Asia conflict that disrupted global energy markets in March, following the unprovoked Israeli-US attack on Iran, as well as the conclusion of Sri Lanka’s successful war against separatist terrorist, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), in May, 2009. Prakash found fault with the Western media coverage of India while Indika Sakalasooriya, Communications Manager at SLYCAN Trust, emphasised that in spite of accusations directed at others, there had been occasions traditional media, too, could be faulted for deceiving the world.

Sakalasooriya cited the high profile accusations directed at Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, by the Western media, regarding their purported Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) project to justify the March 2003 invasion of that country. The US-led coalition caused massive destruction. The Western powers hanged Hussein after what amounted to a kangaroo court trial.

It would have been better if Sakalasooriya mentioned how the US propagated lies to build a case against Iraq, particularly against the backdrop of false accusations that have surfaced directed at Iran to justify the Febuary 28, 2026, unprovoked attack on that nation with a proud history.

In a speech in Cincinnati, Ohio, on 7 October, 2002, US President George W. Bush confidently declared that Iraq “possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.”

The US President then vowed that Hussein had to be stopped. “The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons,” international news agencies quoted President Bush as having said.

The truth is that the mainstream media, whatever the accusations directed at social media platforms now, then played ball with respective governments in support of their narrow political-military-economic objectives as always. The British and US media, however much they publicly proclaim to be independent, then blindly propagated the lie that Iraq posed an immediate threat to them and, therefore, had to be dealt with.

Perhaps none of those in the relevant panel moderated, by Chief Executive Officer of Advocata Institute, Dhananath Fernando, remembered how Ranil Wickremesinghe, in his capacity as Prime Minister, justified the US invasion. Addressing the UN General Assembly in September, 2003, well over a year after the US failure to find evidence of the WMD project, Wickremesinghe described the US as a reluctant ‘world policeman’ forced to intervene in Iraq due to the failure on the part of the US to deal with Iraq.

Reportage of July 2022 events

An intense social media campaign backed the violent protest campaign here against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Then US Ambassador Julie Chung issued several statements on Twitter (now X) warning the government and the military against using force to bring protests to an end. Interested parties exploited her interventions to intensify pressure on the government. The situation eventually turned so bad, Chung had to finally warn the public that accounts impersonating her were spreading misinformation and fake tweets. The US Embassy here, on multiple occasions, urged the public to verify information on the official US Embassy and verified X accounts. But during that chaotic period, the public was so drunk on misinformation, weren’t bothered at all regarding the accuracy and the vast majority was not interested in verifying statements.

The reference to false claims about Wickremesinghe’s resignation, during the panel discussion, should have attracted comments and observations for obvious reasons. Both the US and India have been accused of backing the operation that compelled President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to leave office.

President Wickremesinghe, in June, 2024, claimed that pressure was brought on him to resign in the immediate aftermath of protesters setting ablaze his Kollupitiya private residence on 9 July, 2022. The declaration was made at a function in London to mark the 40th anniversary of the International Democrats Union (IDU).

Prof. Sunanda Maddumabandara, who served as the Senior Advisor (Media) to President Ranil Wickremesinghe (July 2022 to September 2024) in late 2025 declared that the then Indian High Commissioner in Colombo, Gopal Baglay, asked Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to take over as the interim president. Maddumabandara contradicted previous claims that it was US Ambassador Chung who intervened on behalf of the regime change project. Prof. Maddumabandara’s revelations in “Aragalaye Balaya” (The Power of the Aragalaya) launched in the presence of both Wickremesinghe and Abeywardena didn’t receive the media attention. Interestingly both traditional and non-traditional media conveniently ignored the author’s claim. Abeywardena remained silent though he must have told the author what transpired between him and Baglay, now New Delhi’s High Commissioner in Australia.

Those who constantly targeted Chung over her support to the anti-Gotabaya Rajapaksa campaign turned a blind eye to Prof. Maddumabandara’s shocking disclosure. The author quoted Abeywardena as having revealed that Baglay promised to bring the blockade on the Speaker’s official residence to an immediate end if he agreed to accept the Presidency. But, Wickremesinghe had strenuously refused to step down though, following a meeting chaired by Abeywardena, a section of the media reported that he would resign.

Sri Lanka lacked the political will to inquire into external interventions that led to the fall of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government. Abeywardena, who revealed direct intervention and how intense pressure was brought on him, did absolutely nothing to activate an investigation. Wickremesinghe, who succeeded Gotabaya Rajapaksa in July, 2022, refrained from launching an inquiry. Having fully backed the campaign against Rajapaksa, Wickremesinghe ended up in the President’s Office. Therefore, his decision to keep quiet is understandable.

The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government terminated a case filed by SLPP parliamentarians against the failure on the part of the government to protect their property.

The JVP-led NPP that won both the presidential and unbeatable 2/3 majority at the parliamentary elections, in 2024, simply forgot the case of foreign interventions. Since the change of government in September, 2024, Sri Lanka has entered into new partnerships with India and the US. The public is totally in the dark as to what they are.

The finalisation of seven MoUs between India and Sri Lanka, in April, 2025, and the subsequent sale of controlling stake in the strategic Colombo Dockyard Limited (CDL) to Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited, affiliated with the Indian Defence Ministry, raised the Indo-Lanka relations to a higher level. The inclusion of a MoU on Defence underscored the bilateral relationship, while India stepped-up assistance to the Sri Lankan military. The recent donation of military stores, estimated to be worth USD 5.5 mn in support of the 1,000-plus Lankan contingent for Haiti, deployment under UN command, as authoritative sources confirmed recently, that agreements in their entirety could not be disclosed under any circumstances thereby underscoring India’s status. The reference was clearly aimed at the controversy that the seven MoUs, including the one on defence, hadn’t been revealed to the public, and the Parliament, too, remained in the dark.

India paid USD 52.96 mn for Japan’s Onomichi Dockyard, previously the majority owner of the Colombo Dockyard.

Terrorists/gunmen

Altogether there were three panels moderated by Dilrukshi Handuneththi, Kalani Kumarasinghe and Dhananath Fernando and some of the panelists questioned the way Western media covered major events. One pointed out how the Indian media couldn’t immediately report the assassination of Indian Premier India Gandhi on 31 October, 1984, as they couldn’t do so until the President made an official statement regarding the killing of a sitting PM, whereas the Western media didn’t have such obstacles.

The despicable western media practice of describing terrorists as gunmen and militants were also mentioned. Unfortunately, no one bothered to remind the audience of the India-led terrorist project that destroyed Sri Lanka, caused the deaths of nearly 1,500 Indian soldiers and her son Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister, as well. The writer, at one point, felt the need to remind the gathering of the need to discuss issues in Sri Lanka context.

Ms Smita Prakash, in her thought-provoking address, discussed the challenge the mainstream Indian media faced in reporting ‘Operation Sindoor’ following the terrorist attack on Pahalgam on 22 April, 2025. India directly blamed Pakistan and launched large-scale offensive action on 7 May. The gathering was told that similar challenges were experienced in covering the unprecedented war between Israel-US combine against Iran this year.

When the new West Asia war erupted, India found the situation quite embarrassing, particularly against the backdrop of Prime Minister Narendra Modi visiting Tel Aviv, just days before the attack on Tehran. India remained silent for several days before Foreign Secretary, Vikram Misri, on 5 March, signed the condolence book at the Iranian Embassy, in Delhi, on behalf of the Government of India. Misri offered condolences on the death of the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Over a week later India had no option but to get in touch with the Iranian leadership to secure energy supplies amidst turmoil over disruption of services. The Indian media coverage of the West Asia war obviously took into consideration the developing situation at home as the Modi government carefully navigated the crisis situation. Towards the end of the major confrontations before Iran and US agreed on a ceasefire, the US attacked three vessels crewed by Indians in the Hormuz strait.

Both traditional and non-traditional media have to deal with social media platforms where users can post messages, images and videos. US President Donald Trump shared posts on his social media platform Truth Social on a regular basis that made all other media irrelevant. The impact of the US President’s posts made a huge impact during the West Asia war as he continuously bypassed all official channels to go directly to the people. His regular posts caused uncertainty, increased tensions and undermined efforts to deal with the developing situations, sensibly.

Following recent exchanges and Iranian vows to avenge the death of their Supreme leader, President Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social account:”1,000 missiles are locked and loaded and aimed at the Islamic Republic of Iran, with thousands more to immediately follow, should the Iranian government act on its threat.” He then signed off the post with the phrase “praise be to Allah”, which he also did in a post threatening Iran last April.

Perhaps, SLIMFA-arranged discussions should have paid attention to the impact of social media platforms in the hands of world leaders and governments. All countries (governments), regardless of their size and influence, use social media to advance their agenda. There is no need for breaking news on television channels or news flash in print media as they can directly go to the public.

The unprecedented transformation of the media landscape, in the wake of proliferation of social media with both governments as well as big business at the receiving end, sometimes. Platforms have emerged as central hubs for global news. The reportage of the West Asia war, as well as other developments at global level, proved the advent of social media and the dependence of major news agencies on social media platforms.

The Western media coverage of the Russia-Ukraine war repeatedly exposed their bias. The UK’s BBC declined to visit the site of a Ukrainian drone attack on a student dormitory in Starobelsk in the Lugansk Republic, in May this year. The CNN, too, declared its inability to join the visit arranged by Russia. One need not be an expert to understand their response as the world knows the Ukraine is being used by Western powers for war with Russia, a claim not denied by them.

Drop in voter enthusiasm

Top award-winning journalist Marya Shakil explained the devastating impact of the smartphone on the Indian electorate.

Recalling her coverage of elections in the Uttar Pradesh, in 2017, the two-time recipient of the prestigious Ramnath Goenka Award for Politics and Government asserted that the younger generation, now addicted to smartphones, may not be interested in politics. Shakil based her claim largely on a boy she found aimlessly scrolling near a political rally and covering election in Bihar last year.

Having displaced a range of figures to prove the continuing decline in the traditional media, Shakil engaged the audience in an exciting conversation that underscored the responsibility on the part of the traditional media to address the issues at hand and face challenges. She reiterated that regardless of expansion and massive profits accrued by non-traditional media, including influencers, at the expense of the traditional media, the latter still remained trustworthy.

Shakil’s assertion regarding declining voter interest, as shown by that boy she ran into during Uttar Pradesh polls coverage. must be examined taking into how smartphones can be a destructive tool. During the discussions, references were made to the violent overthrow of governments in Pakistan (April, 2022), Bangladesh (August, 2024) and Nepal (September, 2025) though Sri Lanka (July, 2024) was not mentioned in that particular context. However, Jamila Hussain referred to the challenging task of covering the campaign against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.

In those externally backed protest operations against democratically elected governments, sections of the media, both traditional (print/electronic) and non-traditional, played significant roles. Sri Lanka is not an exception. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa didn’t realise what was going on until it was too late. If not for the intervention made by the Navy at the 11th hour, the President and the First Lady could have been trapped at the President’s House when protesters took control of it.

It would be pertinent to mention what Indian National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajith Doval said about the overthrow of governments. Speaking at the Sardar Patel Memorial Lecture, in New Delhi, on 31 October, 2025, Doval attributed recent political instability and “non-constitutional regime changes” in neighbouring countries to deficiencies in governance.

Declaring that the quality of governance is the fundamental determinant of political stability, Doval, who held at influential post since 2014, when the BJP formed government, stressed: “The rise and fall of empires, monarchies, oligarchies, aristocracies, or democracies is, in essence, a history of their governance.”

Commenting on political upheavals in the region, Doval declared: “In the recent cases of regime change through non-constitutional methods in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and others, these were actually cases of bad governance. And that is how governance matters.” Is it his opinion that it is India’s sole right to decide what is good governance and bad governance in the region?

Doval’s opinion cannot be examined without taking into consideration their partnership with the US as well as joint US-Japan-India-Australia (Quad) response to the Chinese challenge. Years ago, Gotabaya Rajapaksa disclosed how Doval demanded the cancellation of all major Chinese projects here, including the handing over of the Hambantota Port to China on a 99-year-lease and the Colombo Port City project.

Although India failed to disrupt major Chinese projects here, New Delhi has consolidated its position in Sri Lanka. Taking control of the CDL, as well as the inauguration of the Colombo West International Terminal (CWIT), in April, 2025, boosted their position here. The consortium operating the $800 million CWITT includes India’s Adani Ports & SEZ Ltd, John Keels and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA).

The irony is that the JVP, once opposed to everything and anything connected to Delhi, has ended up in a cozy relationship with Modi’s India and got close to the US in a manner that no one believed possible a decade ago.

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Remote health monitoring: A practical digital solution for dengue burden

Published

on

Sri Lanka is once again facing a significant dengue challenge. With rising numbers of suspected and confirmed cases reported across the country, especially during the rainy season, dengue has become not only a public health concern but also a major pressure point for the hospital system. In many affected districts, outpatient departments, emergency treatment units and medical wards are crowded with patients who need assessment, blood investigations and close observation.

Dengue is a disease that can change rapidly. A patient who appears stable in the early days of fever may enter a critical stage within a short period. This is why doctors are cautious, and why many patients are advised to return repeatedly for review. However, in a lower-middle-income country such as Sri Lanka, where public hospitals already function with limited beds, staff shortages and high patient loads, depending only on hospital-based care during an outbreak is not sustainable.

As a specialist in Health Informatics, I believe Sri Lanka needs a practical remote health monitoring system to support dengue care. Such a system can help identify patients who truly need admission, while safely monitoring stable patients at home. This will reduce unnecessary hospital overcrowding and allow hospital resources to be used for patients who are seriously ill.

Not every patient diagnosed with dengue needs immediate admission. Some patients are clinically stable but still require close monitoring, especially during the critical phase of the illness. At present, many such patients are sent home with advice to return if they develop warning symptoms. While this is clinically reasonable, it places a heavy responsibility on families, and danger signs may be missed or recognized late.

A remote monitoring system can close this gap. Once a patient is diagnosed with dengue at a hospital, clinic or laboratory, the patient can be registered into a digital platform. Basic details such as age, day of fever, symptoms, risk factors, etc can be entered. Based on this information, patients can be categorized into low-risk, moderate-risk or high-risk groups according to national clinical guidance.

Patients who are suitable for home care can then be followed up through structured phone calls, SMS, WhatsApp-based forms or a simple mobile application. They or their caregivers can report temperature, pulse, blood pressure if available, vomiting, abdominal pain, dizziness, bleeding symptoms, urine output, fluid intake, and general well-being.

These data can be monitored by a dedicated panel of doctors through a centralized digital dashboard, allowing timely clinical review and appropriate decision-making. Such a system is not intended to replace existing clinical care, but to strengthen the health system by supporting early identification of at-risk patients, improving follow-up, and reducing the unnecessary burden on already crowded hospitals.

Depending on the severity, the patient can be advised to visit the nearest hospital, referred to the area Medical Officer of Health, or connected to an ambulance service. This creates a safer pathway from home to hospital before the condition becomes critical.

The same system can also be used for patients discharged from the hospital. A few days of remote follow-up after discharge can provide reassurance, detect late complications, and reduce unnecessary readmissions.

Sri Lanka already has a strong public health network, including hospitals, MOH offices, public health inspectors and dengue control units. What is needed now is better digital coordination. A low-cost, well-designed remote monitoring system can connect patients, doctors, hospitals and emergency services in a timely manner.

Dengue prevention will always depend on mosquito control, clean environments and community participation. But during an outbreak, timely information can save lives. Remote health monitoring offers Sri Lanka a practical way to protect patients, reduce hospital pressure and deliver the right care at the right time.


by Dr. Harsha Jayakody

Board-certified specialist in Health Informatics
MBBS (Sri Lanka), MBA in Health Admin (Malaysia), MSc in Biomedical Informatics (Sri Lanka), MD in Health Informatics (Sri Lanka)

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

The sordid tale of theft and tragedy at Finance Ministry

Published

on

The latest deplorable revelations in the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) report ‘The Fraud Linked to Cybercrime in the US Dollar 2.5 Million Debt Repayment to Australia’, presented to parliament on July 10th tells a tale of irresponsibility, incompetence and disregard for the most important of tasks that are bestowed on a Ministry that is of paramount importance to a country striving to come out of a serious economic crisis.

Every new crisis adds a burden on the backs of the innocent citizens paying for the sins of those who caused it. This time, as in other times, the crisis was caused by those who sit high above the citizenry, governing the country or running its affairs; by those who perpetrated the fraud deliberately, and no less by those who enabled it through incompetence, inattention and perhaps ignorance.

The incredible ease with which the shameful theft of 2.5 million US Dollars occurred in the Ministry of Finance reveals that this theft was facilitated by a series of lapses by those in charge of its processes, as COPF discovered, and was most certainly avoidable.

Ten fraudulent transactions had been allowed to pass through the precincts of the Finance Ministry and the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, before it was discovered that they were the unwitting pawns in a straightforward cybercrime. Two institutions that ordinary citizens hold in high trust and esteem had their pockets picked in broad daylight.

Transition Errors

This whole unsavoury affair starts with a transition.

In order to better manage foreign debt, the government, “in keeping with international standards”, decided to institute a new unit to take care of all things to do with foreign debt within the Ministry of Finance. It is called the Public Debt Management Office (PMOD). It took away those duties from the Central Bank (CBSL), which handled the tasks earlier.

COPF says that “the fraud linked to cybercrime under consideration happened within this process.” It certainly did.

The process of transition from CBSL to PMOD had holes the size of 2.5 million US dollars. And the irresponsible handling of this transition has so far led to the death of a young bureaucrat, so let’s not treat this casually or lightly. Those who undertook to oversee this process to a successful finish must surely examine their own part in this tragic story.

Non-Actions Have Consequences

The transition took 18 months. November 2024 to March 2026. Long enough to ensure that the CBSL had passed on its processes, training and experience to a new team at the PMOD to a satisfactory standard.

One wouldn’t think that an old and respected institution with what we assume were its tested systems and processes, passing on its expertise to a brand-new unit specifically set up to deal with an important set of tasks, would get it wrong. But it did.

COPF was not happy:

*  The Committee found no document that provided a detailed guideline or terms of reference for this complex, multifaceted transition process involving multiple institutions.

*  There are no KPIs available to judge whether the transition was completed in an adequate manner.

*  Even the guidelines that govern the operations of the PDMO were only published on 19 September 2025, 10 months after the establishment of the office.

*  The MoU between the CBSL and PDMO on their areas of collaboration was only signed on 9 March 2026, almost at the end of the official transition period.

It looks like there was inadequate planning from the very start. Every mistake, every slipshod move, every skipping of essential steps in the process, is what the citizen ends up paying for, and even dying for.

The COPF report shows a 4-step CBSL process through which debt repayments transit, from receiving and checking invoices to confirming payment details through to the final payment.

Each is carried out by a separate section.

Each stage is part of an internal controls system, where important checks are carried out to prevent errors and/or fraud.

After the transition to PDMO, there seems to have been a serious lack of internal controls with the checks necessary to prevent fraud.

The COPF specifically faults the PDMO for not securing its IT infrastructure:

*  PDMO’s outdated IT system which “left it at complete risk of cyberattacks”.

*  Shortfalls in IT infrastructure and cybersecurity measures at the MoF, including the ERD, were highlighted in a comprehensive audit carried out by KPMG…in December 2024.

*  Fraud linked to cybercrime in question commenced in mid-November 2025, only a month after the server system stopped receiving Microsoft security updates.

Early Warnings

The COPF report highlights the fact that early in January 2026 a cybersecurity threat was discovered during a debt repayment to be made to the Export-Import (EXIM) Bank of India:

“When CBSL attempted to make payment to the account details provided by the PDMO, with JP Morgan as intermediary, the payment was rejected by JPMorgan’s Global Fraud Prevention Operations team. Contact was made by PDMO officials with an EXIM Bank of India team, allowing the MoF to confirm that fraudulent payment instructions had been provided.”

The details of the attempted fraud are an exact copy of the one that succeeded later with the Australian payment, which failed in the case of India:

“Payment was then made to the correct account, verified through communication with the EXIM Bank of India. This suspicious activity was reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and SL-CERT on 9th January 2026. The ERD IT Officer’s complaint to SL-CERT mentioned that the suspected fraudulent email address used the domain eximbenkindia.in (while the correct domain appears to be eximbankindia.in).”

This was not the end of it. There was more!

When the cybersecurity threat regarding the Indian payment was reported to the Secretary of the Treasury triggering an investigation by the Director General of the ERD, a veritable treasure trove of fraudulent emails was discovered:

“Payment instructions received via email for several other due payments, including for payments to the United Kingdom (USD 1,294,605.99), Germany (EUR 4,059,987.81) and Belgium (EUR 60,974.88) were further identified as fraudulent.”

What would have happened if not for the JP Morgan team in India? Would these also have gone through, to a thieving scammer? In the event, the report says:

“UK was suspended immediately. Communications initiated by the suspicious party were identified and investigative authorities were alerted. The payment related to Belgium was made to the correct account.”

That’s two saved. What happened to the German payment of Euro 4,059,987.81? Did we pay it to a scammer?

So, it is in the process of verifying these fraudulent payment details that the Ministry of Finance was “alerted on 23rd March 2026 to communications from Export Finance Australia of non-receipt of debt repayments due in previous months.”

The report reproduces the email exchanges on the same set of Australian invoices from 3 different email addresses:

*  @exportfinance.gov.au

*  @exportfinance-au.com

*  @exportfinanceau.com

The communications from these different email accounts were on-going from October 2025, but the fraud was discovered only in March 2026. By then the damage was done. Payments had already been made to the fraudulent account.

This is especially worrying because the COPF report says that after the debt restructure in October 2025, “The MoF officials said in Committee that the existing account details for Export Finance Australia repayments had not been changed in the revised agreement.”

The COPF makes the important observation that the system of internal controls at the MoF are grossly inadequate, citing one example:

“The final payment authorisation within MoF has historically been done by a Director with authority over the Debt Servicing function, at ERD and now PDMO, without any verification process by more senior officials, highlighting weak internal controls.”

The report lists some measures that have been taken by the MoF to prevent any recurrence. However, they add:

“These measures pertain to establishing and strengthening internal controls and ensuring basic cybersecurity within the Ministry of Finance. They should have been in place as a baseline…”

Me Sir? No Sir, Not I Sir!

The views expressed by both the MoF and the CBSL as to who was responsible for these blunders make interesting reading because they reveal more about them than they realize.

COPF says that at the 8th June discussions:

“The Ministry of Finance was of the view that the CBSL should have been more vigilant and taken proactive measures…CBSL was of the view that there was no legal responsibility under the FTRA for its role as banker to the government.”

The practiced passing of the buck between these two institutions is unsavoury, if revealing. Shouldn’t they have carried out an immediate review of their own conduct to discover where each might have failed, individually and together?

The AG has concurred with the CBSL in its view regarding CBSL’s legal responsibility. However, since CBSL had been doing the job until now, had undertaken the training of the new team and transition of the processes, they had a professional responsibility to ensure that adequate systems were in place to mitigate the risks that they, rather than a brand-new team, were far more experienced at identifying.

Isn’t it fair and reasonable to expect that the CBSL would regard it as their responsibility to give adequate training which includes the right internal controls and monitoring, and to see the process through to implementation to their total satisfaction?

As for the MoF, COPF says:

“The MoF was of the view that during the period in which the PDMO officials created the SSIs for the repayments on fraudulent invoices in November 2025, PDD-CBSL officials continued to oversee the process.”

Why did the MoF think they were ready to takeover from the CBSL and run the show, when they admitted to COPF that “PDMO staff did not have a proper understanding of international fund transfer processes and AML concerns, which limited their ability to act upon limited information provided by CBSL staff on such matters.” Shouldn’t they have dealt with this before they went ‘live’, as it were?

It gets even more alarming when the CBSL tells COPF that

* “internal controls within the MoF for payment verification are dysfunctional”

* “CBSL cannot ensure verification through its payments process, acknowledging that even the CBSL PDD would have failed to prevent a fraud linked to cybercrime in such a scenario.”

What were the Ministers doing, while their systems got so dysfunctional that according to CBSL, a fraud couldn’t have been prevented?

What happened in this inadequately conceived and planned transition resulted in more than a substantial financial loss. The MoF suspended 4 officials pending investigations into the fraud. One of those officials, Ranga Rajapaksa, an Assistant Director of the External Resources Department (ERD) was found dead on April 30, 2026, at his residence in Kuliyapitiya. A post-mortem ruled the death a suicide.

[Sanja de Silva Jayatilleka was a member of the team that transitioned GlaxoSmithKline UK’s Financial Services from Britain to India, overseeing the training, testing, final transitioning and post-transition support of the Compliance and Control function.]

by Sanja de Silva Jayatilleka

Continue Reading

Trending