Connect with us

Features

LTTE and Canadian complicity

Published

on

“Go back to Colombo… Genocide deniers, you are not welcome in Brampton, you are not welcome in Canada”- Patrick Brown, Mayor of Brampton, Ontario – Canada (May 2025)

Post 9/11 in 2001, a few nations including the UK, Australia and Malaysia, proscribed the LTTE as a terrorist organisation which led to the freezing of accounts, seizing of assets and banning of front-organisations. None of this occurred in Canada; where, like the EU, it was not until 2006 that the LTTE were proscribed, allowing it valuable time and space to organise and fundraise in the service of Prabahakaran’s continued wonton attacks on innocent civilians in Colombo and beyond.

Long before the attacks on the Twin Towers of 9/11/2001, a loosely connected group that would later become known as Al Qaeda, detonated a truck-bomb beneath the North Tower of the very same building in New York City, USA; that was in 1993. The event would catalyse a period of legal reform in the US to counteract transnational and international terrorism, leading to the 1997 designation of the LTTE in the US as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, along with the PKK and FARC; designated as such for global fundraising networks, deliberate targeting of civilians and international arms procurement activities.

Global Terrorism is now a subject of study on its own, popularised by the Al Qaeda brand, launched at the world in 2001; both a peak and a nadir for this particular type of international terrorism. In the post-9/11 period, it soon became apparent to western nations that such organisations were dependent on well-organised and coordinated efforts requiring global patronage, assets and financial accounts, patrons and middlemen, front-organisations.

Brampton is a Canadian city in the Province of Ontario, part of what’s called the Greater Toronto Area; the city has a total population of around 745,000. Its large Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora community made headlines with the unveiling of a Tamil Genocide Memorial on the 10th of May, 2025.

No major multilateral international organisation makes the claim of genocide against Sri Lanka. While the United Nations has documented evidence of human rights violations and war crimes committed by the Sri Lankan Armed Forces, there was no implication of genocide or ethnic cleansing.

There is no record of Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch accusing the Sri Lankan Government of either ethnic cleansing or genocide, despite a decades long discourse that is critical of operations by the Armed Forces.

Reckless Endangerment

Accusations of serious war crimes persist, such as the indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas and no-fire zones, targeting of hospitals and humanitarian facilities, denial of humanitarian assistance, extrajudicial killings and sexual violence, enforced disappearances and torture. Successive governments have rejected external or international investigative and judicial mechanisms, with the exception of the Yahapalanaya Government, which co-sponsored UNHRC Resolution 30/1 of 2015. It proposed the so-called ‘hybrid court’, with the participation of Commonwealth and other foreign judges, lawyers, prosecutors and investigators. This resolution had little support among the majority of the Sri Lankan population and that Government did not have the necessary political capital, leading to the abandoning of yet another ill-conceived and ill-considered instrument of reconciliation.

Successive Sri Lankan administrations have failed to:

= keep to its own commitments to multilateral organisations, whether related to reconciliation, justice or accountability and;

= seriously engage with the accusations in a manner that maintains the credibility of Sri Lanka’s institutions.

Ultimately, the inadequacy of engagement and failure to counter allegations in a substantive manner continue to compromise the image and integrity of Sri Lanka’s armed forces and cast aspersions on Sri Lankan society more broadly.

The LTTE’s use of human shields, of shooting and shelling from civilian areas including no-fire zones, has been documented by Human Rights Watch, the International Red Cross, and even by the UN Panel of Experts Report of 2011 (PoE). The character of guerrilla warfare; the difficulties in distinguishing combatants from civilians, are well understood dynamics of modern warfare involving non-State actors.

According to the PoE Report of 2011, between January and May of 2009, approximately 290,000 civilians fled the conflict zone and crossed over to government-controlled areas; many did so at great personal risk; there is documented evidence of the LTTE firing upon civilians fleeing the war zone. The PoE Report acknowledged the chaos and intensity of fighting: civilians intermingled with LTTE fighters in densely populated areas, noting the LTTE military strategy deliberately endangered the civilian population.

The OISL Report of 2015 and the PoE of 2011 acknowledge the battlefield complexities and dynamics of ‘fog of war’ and uncertainties within targeting decisions, most of which are de-emphasised by the mainstream discourse. There exists a substantive, intellectually honest and good-faith response to allegations and accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity but no Sri Lankan Government has engaged sufficiently with the discourse nor taken seriously the need for such engagement.

One Island, Two Nations?

It is important to note that the 2011 PoE Report, which generated many of the allegations against Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces, was not an official UN investigation and did not meet evidentiary standards of international law. Then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon even emphasised, “This report is not a fact-finding or criminal investigation. It represents a human rights inquiry and presents credible allegations which, if proven, would warrant further investigation”. Thus, the PoE was not a fact-finding body and had no mandate to apply evidentiary standards; essentially a compilation of allegations. There were no basic standards applied for corroboration of statements and allegations, no cross-examination of witnesses and much of the evidence was sealed for 20 years.

Post-war rehabilitation efforts and democratic participation in the immediate post-war period, the resettlement of some 300,000 Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) within 3 years, the development of infrastructure in previously war-torn areas of the country, are all dynamics that are ignored by the mainstream narrative. The restoration of voting rights in the North and East was significant; the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) contesting and winning political power at the Provincial Level was further evidence of the protection and promotion of political rights in a post-war scenario. It is still not too late for a Sri Lankan administration to launch a definitive defense of the integrity of Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces; it ought to consider Godfrey Gunatilleke’s ‘Third Narrative’ which draws from the Eastern Theatre of Eelam War IV to present a more nuanced understanding of operations undertaken by Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces.

The post-war North and East hold many social complexities, exacerbated by poverty and a lack of opportunity for economic advancement, compounded by militarisation of large areas, denial of civic rights such as the right to protest, a climate of intimidation by Police and security forces; a failure by the Government to find a middle ground that allows for a State sanctioned commemoration of fallen LTTE combatants that falls short of glorifying a Terrorist Organization. These complexities are compounded by the failure of successive governments to establish a meaningful framework for a permanent political solution that addresses devolution and self-determination; aided and abetted by the discourse of Tamil Nationalism that insists on an extra-constitutional ‘Federal’ solution.

Patrick

The Blind Eye and the Other Cheek

Canadian Governments, far from acknowledging and appreciating these nuances, seem to enable and promote a narrative that serves to further entrench rigid nationalist ideologies on both sides of the divide. Canada has in effect played into caricatures; that the Sri Lankan State, society, and culture are inherently exclusionary and even racist.

The fact that the Canadian Government boycotted the CHOGM (Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting) conference held in Colombo, in protest at the Government of Sri Lanka, was most disappointing given the Canadian role in extending and intensifying the war in Sri Lanka.

A 2006 Human Rights Watch report brought attention to the “intimidation, extortion and even violence” that Sri Lankan Tamils living in Canada were being subjected to in order to raise funds for LTTE operations in Sri Lanka. The report details the use of unlawful pressure against members of Tamil Communities; “One Toronto business owner said that after he refused to pay more than C$20,000, Tamil Tiger representatives made threats against his wife and children”. Author of the 45 page report, Jo Becker notes that “Many members of the diaspora actively support the Tamil Tigers; but the culture of fear is so strong that even Tamils who don’t, feel they have no choice but to give money.”

The report suggests that the LTTE pressures families for donations of between CN$ 2,500 to CN$ 5,000, “while some businesses have been asked for up to C$ 100,000”. Charity organisations, including the World Tamil Movement, British Tamil Association and the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization, were all part of the network of fundraising. These charities solicit funds for what they claim to be assistance to civilians affected by the war. However, investigations, including by Canadian intelligence agencies, found “that a significant amount of the funds raised were channeled to the LTTE for its military operations. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) concluded in 2000 that at least eight non-profit organisations and five companies were operating in Canada as fronts for the LTTE”; Canadian Authorities did little to stem the flow of funding to the LTTE war effort in Sri Lanka.

The Canadian offices of the World Tamil Movement (WTM) were raided and sealed off by authorities in 2006 and investigations by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) uncovered evidence linking WTM to the LTTE through receipts, donor-lists and pledge forms. According to Canadian court and government documents, the WTM alone was believed to have raised millions of dollars annually, a significant portion of which was allegedly funnelled to the LTTE to purchase weapons and fund military operations. The aforementioned Human Rights Watch report also notes that authorities often failed to intervene effectively when members of Tamil communities complained about threats and intimidation by these front-organisations.

Clean Your Room

Even as an advanced democracy, Canada has its own internal fissures related to autonomy for French-speaking provinces – Quebec Nationalism and even its own Federal/ Provincial tensions; a complicated colonial legacy. Canadian alliances with the United States in theatres of war around the world have caused significant death and destruction; a 40,000 strong Canadian deployment as part of the US war on terror in Afghanistan is notable. It is under-appreciated just how much damage was caused by Canada’s acquiescence to and implicit support for, organisations enabling the LTTE, despite decades worth of evidence for the LTTE’s forced conscription of Tamil youth, recruitment of child soldiers, indoctrination of members (including pregnant mothers) to martyrdom and attacks targeting of Sri Lankan civilians on public transport, worshipping at temples, working at offices.

Successive Canadian Governments have unabashedly propagated narratives of a Tamil Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing by Sri Lanka’s Armed Forces, despite the lack of consensus while disregarding Sri Lanka’s longstanding, albeit insufficient, engagement in international institutions.

Indeed, examples like the Tamil Genocide Monument in Brampton are detrimental to any project of national reconciliation, a discourse that only further alienates the prospects of genuine unity, even emboldening ultranationalist segments of the population in the process. Accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing alongside the demonisation of the State and by extension the people of Sri Lanka, paints a large swathe of the country as being racist, the Sinhala-Buddhist majority as explicitly nativist, exclusionary and innately supremacist; these are all unhelpful caricatures that do nothing but further divide an already divisive situation.

Canadian Governments have allowed the exploitation of its own democratic spaces for activities that supported, promoted and directly funded operations objectively terroristic in nature and continue to this day to allow for the large-scale veneration of the LTTE and its now-deceased leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran. These front organisations and activists have leveraged Canada’s liberal democratic protections; freedoms of speech, assembly, and association to organise, lobby and fundraise; to shield themselves under the rhetoric of human rights advocacy only to actively participate in perpetuating a conflict that claimed thousands of lives.

Canada, unlike the US or the UK, provided little if any material support to the Sri Lankan government during the roughly 30 years of conflict, while conversely, allowing significant and sustained material support to flow to the LTTE. This was largely to appease a small but highly organised and vocal segment of the Tamil-Canadian diaspora. In doing so, Canada not only failed to prevent the financing and promotion of a brutal terrorist movement but also allowed domestic block-vote politics to distort its foreign policy on a complex and sensitive conflict in a developing nation.

By Kusum Wijetilleke



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

The Ramadan War

Published

on

Benjamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump and Mojtaba Khamenei

A Strategic Assessment of a Conflict Still Unresolved

The Unites States of America and its ally, Israel attacked Iran on 28 February, or the 10th day of the month of Ramadan. More than a month of intense fighting has passed since, and the Ramadan War has settled into a grinding, attritional struggle that defies early declarations of victory. Despite sustained U.S. and Israeli air and naval bombardment, Iran remains standing, and continues to strike back with a level of resilience that has surprised many observers. The conflict has evolved into a contest of endurance, adaptation, and strategic innovation, with each side attempting to impose costs the other cannot bear.

Iran’s response to the overwhelming airpower of its adversaries has been both simple and devastatingly effective: saturate enemy defences with swarms of inexpensive drones and older ballistic missiles, forcing them to expend costly interceptors and reveal radar positions, and then follow up with salvos of its most advanced precisionguided missiles. This layered approach has inflicted severe physical damage on Israel and has shaken its national morale. The country has endured repeated missile barrages from Iran and rocket fire from Hezbollah, straining its airdefence network and pushing its civilian population to the limits of endurance.

The United States, meanwhile, has been forced to evacuate or reduce operations at several bases in the Gulf region due to persistent Iranian drone and missile attacks. For both the U.S. and Israel, the war has become a test of strategic credibility. For Iran, by contrast, victory is defined not by territorial gains or decisive battlefield outcomes, but by survival, and by continuing to impose costs on its adversaries.

The central strategic objective for the U.S. has now crystallised: reopening the Strait of Hormuz to secure global energy flows. Ironically, the Strait was open before the war began; it is the conflict itself that has rendered it effectively closed. Air and naval power alone cannot achieve this objective. The geography of the Strait, combined with Iran’s layered defences, means that any lasting solution will require ground forces, a reality that carries enormous risks.

U.S. Strategic Options

The United States faces five broad operational options, each with significant drawbacks.

1. Seizing Kharg Island

Kharg Island handles roughly 90% of Iran’s oil exports, making it an attractive target. However, it lies only a short distance from the Iranian mainland, where entrenched Iranian forces maintain dense networks of missile batteries, drones, artillery, and coastal defences. Any attempt to seize Kharg would require first neutralising or capturing the adjacent coastline, a costly amphibious and ground operation.

Even if successful, this would not reopen the Strait of Hormuz. It would merely deprive Iran of export capacity, which is not the primary U.S. objective. At least ostensibly not; there are those who argue that the U.S. simply wants to take over Iran’s petroleum (see below).

2. Forcing the Strait of Hormuz by Naval Power

Sending U.S. naval forces directly through the Strait is theoretically possible but operationally hazardous. Iran has mined all but a narrow channel hugging its own shoreline. That channel is covered by overlapping fields of antiship missiles, drones, artillery, and coastal radar. Clearing the mines would require prolonged operations under fire. Attempting to push through without clearing them would risk catastrophic losses.

3. Capturing Qeshm, Hengam, Larak, and Hormuz Islands

These islands dominate the Iranian side of the Strait and host radar, missile, and drone installations. Capturing them would degrade Iran’s ability to close the Strait, but the islands are heavily fortified, and the surrounding waters are mined. Amphibious assaults against defended islands are among the most difficult military operations. Even success would not guarantee the Strait’s longterm security unless the mainland launch sites were also neutralised.

4. Invading Southern Iraq and Crossing into Khuzestan

This option would involve U.S. forces advancing through southern Iraq, crossing the Shatt alArab waterway, and pushing into Iran’s Khuzestan province — home to most of Iran’s oilfields. The terrain is difficult: marshes, waterways, and narrow approaches. Iranian forces occupy the high ground overlooking the plains.

While this route would allow Saudi armoured forces to participate, it would also expose U.S. and allied logistics to attacks by Iraqi Shia militias, who have already demonstrated their willingness to target U.S. assets. The political and operational risks are immense.

5. Capturing Chabahar and Advancing Along the Coast

The most strategically promising — though still costly — option is seizing the port of Chabahar in southeastern Iran and advancing roughly 660 kilometres along the coast toward Bandar Abbas. This approach offers several advantages:

· Distance from Iran’s core population centres complicates Iranian logistics.

· Chabahar’s deepwater port (16m draught)

would provide a valuable logistics hub.

· U.S. carriers could remain at safer standoff distances

, supporting operations without entering the Strait.

· The coastal route allows naval gunfire and missile support

to assist advancing ground forces.

· Local Baluchi insurgents

could provide intelligence and limited support.

· Capturing Bandar Abbas would

outflank Iran’s island defences and effectively reopen the Strait.

This option is likely to form the backbone of any U.S. ground campaign, potentially supplemented by diversionary attacks by regional partners to stretch Iranian defences.

The Limits of U.S. Superiority

The United States retains overwhelming superiority in naval power and manned airpower. But whether this advantage translates into dominance in unmanned systems or ground combat is far from certain.

The 2003 invasion of Iraq is often cited as a model of U.S. military prowess, but the comparison is misleading. Iraq in 2003 had been crippled by a decade of sanctions. Its forces lacked modern mines, antitank missiles, and effective air defences. Tank crews had little training; some could not hit targets at pointblank range. RPG teams were similarly unprepared. The U.S. enjoyed numerical superiority in the theatre and total control of the air, allowing it to isolate Iraqi units and prevent reinforcement.

Even under those favourable conditions, Iraqi forces managed to delay the U.S. advance. At one point, forward U.S. units nearly ran out of ammunition and supplies, forcing the diversion of forces intended for the assault on Baghdad to secure the lines of communication.

Iran is not Iraq in 2003. Its armed forces and industrial base have adapted to nearly half a century of sanctions. It produces its own drones, missiles, artillery, and armoured vehicles. It has built extensive underground facilities, hardened command posts, and redundant communication networks.

Moreover, the battlefield itself has changed. The RussoUkrainian war demonstrated that deep armoured penetrations – once the hallmark of U.S. doctrine – are now extremely vulnerable to drones, loitering munitions, and precision artillery. The result has been a return to attritional warfare reminiscent of the First World War, with front lines stabilising into trench networks.

Yet, as in the First World War, stalemate has been broken not by massed assaults but by small, highly trained teams infiltrating thinly held lines, identifying targets, and guiding drones and artillery onto enemy positions deep in the rear. Iran has studied these lessons closely.

Mosaic Defence and Transformational Warfare

Iran’s military doctrine has evolved significantly over the past two decades. Its “mosaic defence” decentralises command and control, ensuring that even if senior leadership is targeted, local units can continue operating autonomously. This structure proved resilient during the initial waves of U.S. and Israeli strikes.

Iran has also absorbed lessons from U.S. “shock and awe” operations. The botched U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 exposed weaknesses in joint operations, prompting the development of “effectsbased operations,” “rapid dominance” and the broader concept of “transformational warfare.” These doctrines (better known colloquially as “Shock and Awe”), influenced by Liddell Hart and Sun Tzu, emphasised simultaneous strikes on strategic targets to paralyse the enemy’s decisionmaking.

While the U.S. struggled to apply these concepts effectively in Iraq and Iran, Tehran has adapted them for asymmetric use. Its drone and missile campaigns have targeted not only military assets but also economic infrastructure and psychological resilience. Israel’s economy and morale have been severely tested, and the United States finds itself entangled in a conflict that offers no easy exit.

Iran has also pursued a broader strategic objective: undermining the petrodollar system that underpins U.S. financial dominance. By disrupting energy flows and encouraging alternative trading mechanisms, Iran seeks to weaken the economic foundations of U.S. power.

Will the USA Achieve Its War Aims?

The United States’ core objective appears to be securing control over global energy flows by reopening the Strait of Hormuz and limiting China’s access to Middle Eastern oil before it can transition to alternative energy sources. Whether this objective is achievable remains uncertain.

A ground campaign would be long, costly, and politically fraught. Iran’s defences are deep, layered, and adaptive. Its drone and missile capabilities have already demonstrated their ability to impose significant costs on technologically superior adversaries. Regional allies are cautious, and global support for a prolonged conflict is limited.

The United States retains overwhelming military power, but power alone does not guarantee strategic success. Iran’s strategy is simple: survive, adapt, and continue imposing costs. In asymmetric conflicts, survival itself can constitute victory.

In Frank Herbert’s Dune, the protagonist, Paul Muad’dib says “he who can destroy a thing, controls a thing.” This is the essence of Iranian strategy – they have a stranglehold on petroleum supply, and can destroy the world economy. Trump has had to loosen sanctions on both Iran’s and Russia’s oil, simply to prevent economic collapse.

The Ramadan War has already reshaped regional dynamics. Whether it reshapes global power structures will depend on how the next phase unfolds, and whether the United States is willing to pay the price required to achieve its aims.

by Vinod Moonesinghe

Continue Reading

Features

Nayanandaya:A literary autopsy of Sri Lanka’s Middle Class

Published

on

“Nayanandaya,” meaning the enchantment of indebtedness, is Surath de Mel’s latest novel. True to his reputation as a maximalist writer, de Mel traverses the labyrinth of middle-class struggles; poverty, unemployment, the quest for education, through a father’s fragile dreams. The novel unfolds around Mahela, his son, his friendships, and the fragile relationships that keep him tethered to life.

“Happiness is not a destination; it is a journey. There are no shortcuts to it. At some point, the path you thought was right will be wrong. You have to make sacrifices for it.”

These words, uttered by the protagonist Mahela to his ten-year-old son, is the silent mantra of every middle-class parent. A common urban middle-class father’s yearning for his child to climb the ladder he himself could not ascend.

A Socio-Political Mirror

Sri Lanka’s middle class remains trapped in paradox. They are educated but underemployed, salaried but indebted, socially respected yet politically invisible. Structural inequalities, economic volatility and populist politics inclusively contribute to keep them “forever middle”.

Through protagonist Mahela, who is sometimes a graphic designer, sometimes a vendor and always a failure Surath de Mel sketches the deficiencies of an education system that does not nurture skills of the students. Sri Lanka boasts about high literacy rates, yet the economy cannot absorb the thousands of graduates produced into meaningful work. Underemployment becomes the inheritance of the middle class. With political connections often the stories can be transformed. De Mel pens it in dark humour to expose these truths:

“Some notorious writer once sneered in a newspaper, ‘Give your ass to the minister, and you’ll earn the right to keep it on a bigger chair.’ Countless people waiting in ministers’ offices, pressing

their backsides to seats, carrying the weight of their own lives.”

Childhood Trauma and Its Echoes

Surath de Mel frequently weaves psychoanalysis into his fiction. In Nayanandaya, he captures the lingering shadows of childhood trauma. Mahela, scarred by a loveless and fractured youth, suffers phobic anxiety and depression, apparently with a personality disorder as an adult. His confession at the psychologist reveals it out:

“Childhood? I didn’t have one. I was fifteen when I was born.”

Here, Mahela marks his true birth not at infancy, but at the death of his parents. This statement itself reveals the childhood trauma the protagonist had gone through and the reader can attribute his subsequent psychological struggles as the cause of it.

Surath de Mel

From a Lacanian perspective, trauma is not just something that happens to a child; it is a deep break in how the child understands the world, themselves, and others. Some experiences are too painful to be put into words. Lacan calls this the Real — what cannot be fully spoken or explained. This pain does not disappear but returns later in life as anxiety, fear, or obsessive compulsive disorder.

This trauma disturbs the child’s sense of self and their place in society. When language fails to make sense of loss, the mind creates fantasies to survive. These fantasies quietly shape adult desires, relationships, and choices.

In Nayanandaya, childhood trauma of the protagonist does not stay buried — it lives on, shaping the adulthood in unseen ways. In the narrative, Mahela’s struggles are not just personal failures but the result of a past that was never given words.

Tears of Fathers – Forgotten in Sri Lankan Literature

Sri Lankan literature has long been attentive to suffering — especially rural poverty, social injustice, and the silent endurance of women and single mothers. Countless novels, poems, and songs have given voice to maternal sacrifice, female resilience, and women’s oppression.

Yet, within this rich narratives, the quiet grief of the urban middle-class father remains mostly unseen. Rarely does fiction pause to examine the emotional lives of men who shoulder responsibility without language for their pain. These masculine tears are private, swallowed by routinely and masked by humour or silence. Definitely never granted literary space.

In Nayanandaya, Surath de Mel breaks this silence. Through Mahela, he lends voice to these overlooked men — fathers whose love is expressed through sacrifice rather than speech. However, de Mel does not romanticise the tears. Rather he humanises them. He allows their vulnerabilities, anxieties, and quiet despair to surface with honesty and compassion. In doing so, Nayanandaya fills a striking gap in Sri Lankan literature, reminding us that fathers, too, carry invisible wounds.

Literary value

With Nayanandaya, Surath de Mel reaches a new pinnacle in his literary craft. His language is dense yet lyrical, enriched with similes, metaphors, irony, and a full range of literary tools deployed with confidence and control.

One of the novel’s most touching narrative choices is the personification of Mahela’s son’s soft toy, Wonie. Through personified Wonie, de Mel captures the two most touching incidents in the entire novel . This simply reveals the author’s artistic maturity, transforming a simple object into a powerful emotional conduit that anchors the novel’s tenderness amidst its despair.

At a deeper symbolic level, Mahela himself can be read as more than an individual character, but a metaphor for Sri Lanka — a nation struggling under economic hardship, clinging to impractical dreams, witnessing the migration of its people, and drifting towards a slow, painful exhaustion. His personal failures could mirror the broader decay of social and economic structures. This symbolic reading lends Nayanandaya a haunting national resonance.

Today, many write and many publish, but only a few transform language into literature that lingers in the reader’s mind long after the final page. Surath de Mel belongs to that rare few. In a literary landscape crowded with voices, he remains devoted to art rather than popularity or trend. As a scholar of Sinhala language and literature, de Mel writes with intellectual depth, dark humour, and deep human empathy.

In conclusion, Nayanandaya is not merely a story; it is social commentary, psychoanalytic reflection, and tragic poetry woven into richly textured prose. With this novel — a masterful interlacing of love, debt, and fragile dreams — Surath de Mel engraves a distinctly Dostoevskian signature into Sinhala literature.

Reviewed by Dr. Charuni Kohombange

Continue Reading

Features

Domestic Energy Saving

Published

on

Around 40 percent of the annual energy we use is consumed in domestic activities. Energy is costly, and supply is not unlimited. Unfortunately, we realize the importance of energy – saving only during the time of a crisis.

If you adopt readily affordable energy-saving strategies, you will cut down your living expenditure substantially, relieving the energy burden of the nation. Here are some tips.

Cooking:

Cooking consumes a good portion of domestic energy demand and common practices, and negligence leads to 30 – 40 percent wastage. A simple experiment revealed that the energy expenditure in boiling an egg with the usual unnecessary excess water in an open pan is nearly 50 percent higher than boiling in a closed lid pan with the minimal amount of water. In an open pan, a large quantity of heat is lost via convection currents and expulsion of water vapor, carrying excessive amounts of heat energy (latent heat of vaporisation). Still, most of us boil potatoes for prolonged intervals of time in open receptacles, failing to realise that it is faster and more efficient to boil potatoes or any other food material in a closed pan. About 30 – 40 percent of domestic cooking energy requirements can be cut down by cooking in closed-lid pans. Furthermore, food cooked in closed pans is healthier because of less mixing with air that causes food oxidation. Fat oxidation generates toxic substances. In a closed- lid utensil (not tightly closed), food is covered with a blanket of water vapor at a positive pressure, preventing entry of air and therefore food oxidation.

Overcooking is another bad habit that not only wastes energy but also degrades the nutritional value of food.

Electric kettle:

For making morning or evening tea or preparing tea to serve a visitor. Do not pour an unnecessarily large quantity of water into the electric kettle. Note that the energy needed to make 10 cups of tea is ten times that of one cup.

Electric Ovens:

Avoid the use of electric ovens as far as possible. Remember that foods cooked at higher temperatures are generally unhealthy, and even carcinogens are formed when food is fried at higher temperatures in an oven. If ever you need to bake something in an oven, limit the number of times you open the door. Use smaller ovens adequate for the purpose and not larger ones just for fashion.

Refrigerators:

Refrigerators consume lots of energy. Do not use over-capacity refrigerators just for fashion. Every time you open the fridge, more electricity is used to reset the cooling temperature. Plan your access to the appliance accordingly. Check whether the doors are properly secured and there are no leakages. Keep the fridge in a cooler location, not hit by direct sunlight and away from warmer places in the kitchen. Remember that turning off the fridge frequently will not save energy, instead it draws more energy.

Use of gas burners:

Do not use oversized utensils. Keep the lid closed as far as possible to prevent the escape of heat. Remember that excessive amounts of heat energy are carried away by a large surface-area conducting utensil. Do not open the gas vent to allow the flame to flash outside the vessel. A flame not impinging on the pan would not heat it, and gas is wasted. Ensure that the flame is blue. Frequently check whether gas vents are clogged with rust and carbon. Frequently, cooking material in the pan drops into the gas vents, and salt there corrodes the gas vents. Cleaning and washing would be necessary. Do not prolong cooking, taking time to prepare ingredients and adding them to the pan intermittently. Add ingredients at once and before switching the burner. If the preparation of a dish is prolonged to slow the cooking, use earthenware pots rather than metallic ones. An earthenware pot, being thermally less conducting retain heat.

Firewood for cooking:

Do not attempt to eliminate the use of firewood in cooking. If you are living in a village area, the exclusive use of LPG gas is an unnecessary expenditure. Large smoke-free, efficient oven designs are now available. If you are compelled to use gas, keep the option of firewood ovens, especially for prolonged cooking. Admittedly, there are locations, especially in cities, where the use of firewood is unsuited.

Hot water showers:

Before installing hot water showers, reconsider whether they are really necessary in a hot tropical climate. Go for solar water heaters, although the installation cost is high. Instant water heaters consume much less electricity compared to geysers with water tanks. Now, cheap and safe instant water heaters are available.

Lighting:

Arrange and design your residence to optimise daytime illumination until late evening. If you are constructing a new house, take this issue into account. Use LED lamps, which provide the same illumination for 85 percent less energy. In study rooms and areas that require prolonged illumination, paint the walls white. Angle – poised LED lamps with very low voltage are available. Use them for reading and studies. Routinely clean the surfaces of all lamps. Dust deposition cuts off light.

Air conditioning and ventilation:

Air conditioning consumes prohibitively large quantities of electrical energy. You can avoid air conditioning by optimising ventilation. The principle is to have air entry points (windows) in the house near the ground level and exit points (vents or windows) near the roof. Ground level is cooler, and the region near the roof is warmer. Thus, a cool air current enters the house near the ground level and hot air is drawn by the vents near the roof. The region near the ground can be rendered cooler by planting trees. Architectural designs are available to optimise this effect. You can sense the direction of air motion by holding a thin strip of paper near the windows at the ground and near the roof level. In addition to ceiling fan, install exhaust fans in the upper points of the house to remove hot air and draw cooler air through windows near the ground. Reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the roof by shading with trees. There are techniques for increasing the reflectance of the roof with paints and other designs.

Transportation:

A good portion of your budget is drained by transportation. Irrespective of who you are, use public transport if convenient and available. As much as possible, use the telephone and email to get your things done. If the officers do not comply for no valid reason, complain. Plan your trips to the town to do several things at the same time. Whenever possible, plan to share transport. Buy energy – efficient small vehicles. Routinely examine your vehicle for energy efficiency, i.e. correct tire pressure etc.

Charge electric vehicles off peak hours. Slow charging reduces heat generation in the circuit, reducing energy loss.

Energy is costly and limited in supply. Everything you do consumes energy. Be energy conscious in all your deeds. That attitude will reduce your expenditure, lessen the environmental degradation and financial burden of the nation in importing fuel.

Educating the general public is the most effective way of implementing energy-saving strategies.

By Prof. Kirthi Tennakone
(kenna@yahoo.co.uk)

Continue Reading

Trending