Features
Middle East Imbroglio: Two Wars Fifty Years Apart
by Rajan Philips
Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israeli academic, Oxford historian, and Foreign Minister of Israel in Ehud Barak’s government, has provided one of the more even handed assessments of the current situation in Israel. In an opinion piece, published in Canada’s Globe and Mail, and entitled, “The destructive hubris of Benjamin Netanyahu,” Dr. Ben-Ami writes that “Mr. Netanyahu’s hubris met its nemesis in the form of Hamas’s brutality.” One cannot separate Mr. Netanyahu’s self-serving intransigence towards the Palestinians throughout his time in office as Prime Minister, from the biggest attack on Israel in 50 years that was launched by Hamas last Saturday, October 7. It was a day after the 50th anniversary of the 1973 war against Isarel that was started with some surprise by Egypt and Syria.
There are comparisons being made between the two clashes 50 years apart. Comparisons range from historical symbolism to contextual differences to geopolitical fallouts. John Rapley, Political Economist, Cambridge, has noted that while the 1973 war transformed the global economy by creating the petroleum crisis, the current war is unlikely to have similarly far reaching impacts. The embargo on oil shipment (from the Middle East to the US), imposed by the Arab countries in retaliation to US support of Israel, argues Prof. Rapley, set off a series of events that changed the world economic order.
While the end of the Bretton Wood system of fixed exchange rates had already begun, the petroleum crisis accelerated the end of postwar prosperity in the west, triggered the new phenomenon of stagflation, and led to the start of the war on inflation by Central Banks. The world economy is now different, far more widespread and diverse, and far less dependent on oil.
The current skirmish will have its economic fallout with oil price increases but nowhere near the crisis of the 1970s, unless the situation escalates into a full-scale conflict between Israel and Iran. While Iran is widely suspected in the west to be the hidden hand behind Hamas’s incursion into Israel, there is also general acknowledgment that there is no evidence of Iran’s involvement. And the US that has already declared its solidarity with Israel and is escalating its aircraft carrier presence in the region while sending ammunition to Israel, will also likely be a deterrent against any regional escalation of the crisis.
Aftermaths of 1973
The west’s declining dependence on Middle Eastern oil may also have been a factor in the Palestinian problem becoming a lesser concern in the foreign policy considerations of the west in general, and particularly in the US. But there have been other and more significant developments that have pushed the Palestinian question to the back-burner. The experience of the 1973 war led to Israel and Arab countries working towards bilateral rapprochements and the pursuit of a parallel peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. The linkage between Palestinian liberation and Arab leadership was beginning to get attenuated, if not totally severed.
The 1978/79 Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, although controversial and divisive, significantly changed the course of Middle Eastern politics. The Oslo Peace Accords of 1993 and 1995 between Israel and the Palestinians were another landmark achievement even though they were frustrated from reaching the elusive final settlement. Even the gains of the Peace Accords, the establishment of the Palestinian National Authority and limited Palestinian self-government in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip were frustrated from reaching their full potentials.
There was also opposition to the Oslo Accords among both the Palestinians and the Israelis. The redoubtable Ishrak Rabin, the Israeli Prime Minister who signed the Oslo Accords with PLO’s Yasser Arafat, paid with his life for pursuing peace, gunned down by a right-wing lunatic. From a Palestinian standpoint, the great Edward Said pungently described the Oslo Accords as “Palestinian Versailles.”
The disagreements over the Peace Accords gave the new Palestinian militants, especially Hamas, considerable advantage over the old Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), which came to be identified as a corrupt and upstart establishment. On the Israeli side, the right-wing forces were on the ascent and during Benjamin Netanyahu’s long spell as Prime Minister, even the paltry Oslo gains were not only stymied, but also reversed.
The unfolding tragedy was given a farcical fillip when Donald Trump became US President while Netanyahu was at the height of his powers as Israeli Prime Minister. Between them, they ignored the Palestinians, symbolically and substantively, and set about cultivating bilateral agreements between Arab countries and Israel for ultimately profiting business interests.
The famous or infamous Abraham Accords, usually credited to Donald Trump and his son-in-law Jarred Kushner, became the new framework for Arab-Israeli normalization while excluding the Palestinians. In September 2020, two months before Trump’s defeat by Joe Biden in the US presidential elections, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain became the first Arab countries to formally recognize Israel’s sovereignty and open diplomatic relations with the Jewish state. Morocco and Sudan followed while Trump was still in office after the defeat and was busy plotting the January 6 uprising.
Warnings Ignored
The new Biden Administration continued the initiative, but chose to jettison the title “Abraham Accords” and use “normalization agreements” instead. The State Department also made it clear that Arab-Israeli normalization is “not a substitute for Israeli-Palestinian peace,” and expressed the hope that the new normalization agreements will “contribute to tangible progress towards the goal of advancing a negotiated peace between Israelis and Palestinians.” But all hopes were dashed when Netanyahu returned as Prime Minister in December 2022 (after being out of office from June 2021) and cobbled together the most right-wing and incompetent government in Israel’s history.
Netanyahu’s return to power has been possible only because of the concessions he made to right-wing fringe parties, and satisfying his new coalition partners has come at the heavy price of alienating the Palestinians and aggravating their conditions in the West Bank and in Gaza. In addition to allowing Jewish takeover of Palestinian lands and the spread of illegal Jewish settlements, the Netanyahu government also provoked the Palestinians by infringing sacred Muslim areas within Jerusalem.
All the while, Mr. Netanyahu was trying to expand the Abraham Accords with far flung countries like Indonesia, Niger, Mauritania, and Somalia, in addition to finalizing the more prized normalization with Saudi Arabia next door. And he kept ignoring warnings from the Americans and Saudis, even when they came jointly from Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farham.
In June of this year, the US Secretary of State travelled to Saudi Arabia for bilateral discussions on what a New York Times report called a “smorgasbord of issues: Iran, Sudan, the Islamic State, regional infrastructure, clean energy and the potential normalization of Saudi-Israel relations.” The larger purpose, of course, was to stem Saudi Arabia from tilting too much towards China and Russia.
Later in June, Mr. Blinken and Prince Farham participated at a Council on Foreign Relations event in New York. As reported by CNN, both men stressed that the expansion of Arab Israeli normalization will not be possible in a climate of rising Israeli-Palestinian tensions. Mr. Blinken said that he had raised this issue in conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Foreign Minister Eli Cohen. For his part, the Saudi Foreign Minister added that while normalization would in the broader interest of the region, the benefits would be limited if the challenge of “finding a pathway to peace for the Palestinian people” were not addressed at the same time.
Whether these warnings were not strong enough, or whether the Netanyahu government would not have heeded them anyway, no one foresaw that they would come true so quickly and with such ferocity. The Netanyahu government is already under fire for the massive intelligence failure that left the government and the military totally clueless about what Hamas must have been planning for quite some time and what it would all of a sudden unleash.
The circumstances of Netanyahu’s return to power and his efforts to muzzle the judiciary have divided the country through the middle, and the attack on Israel by Hamas may have unified the country behind its now beleaguered Prime Minister. The government has formally declared war on Hamas, and has promised to take “significant military steps” to destroy the “military and governing capabilities” of Hamas, which according to Mr. Netanyahu will prevent Hamas from “threatening Israelis for many years.”
The punishment of Hamas will continue until there is nothing left to punish, or the punishment extends too long and leads to too much suffering to test the sensibilities of proportionality. Whether Hamas deserves the punishment it is getting is a moot question because deserving has nothing to do with this. It was going to get punished anyway, and Hamas would have had no illusions about escaping punishment when it embarked on its biggest and most horrific incursion in its 45 year history.
Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government will have their own problems. Their governing mandate will now be limited to punishing Hamas. Beyond that, they will be under intense scrutiny for any and all of their actions. That in itself could be an opening for a new phase in the tortuous history of Israeli-Palestinian relations.
World Reactions
According to an analysis of “International Reactions to the Hamas Attack on Israel,” undertaken by researchers at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (see map on this page), about 100 countries have reacted to the unfolding situation in Israel and in Gaza. Forty four countries are said to have condemned Hamas, while most of the Arab countries have blamed Israel for the attacks. Most of Africa has not expressed a public position, while China and a number of ASEAN countries in Asia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, Russia in Eastern Europe, South Africa, and Mexico and Chile in the Americas, are condemning all violence.
India has joined the ranks of the west supporting Israel, along with Brazil and Argentina, exposing new cleavages among the BRICS countries. Of the original BRICS members, Brazil and India are supporting Israel, while Russia, China and South Africa are grouped against all violence. As the Washington Institute’s map shows, world reactions are literally all over the map, and there is no single group of countries that can claim to speak for the ‘world,’ let alone act on behalf of the world.
The west’s rhetoric of speaking for the world is practically limited to NATO countries, which are now more than occasionally joined by India as part of its ‘all-aligned’ approach to international affairs. The expression of solidarity with Israel is meaningless in practical terms because there is no country threatening war against Israel, and there is no country that can stop Israel from pulverizing Gaza (40 km by 10 km land-strip habitat for two million Palestinians) for the sake of punishing Hamas.
Features
The challenge of being positive about SAARC
It was a few years back that a former President of Sri Lanka took it on himself to pronounce SAARC ‘dead’. Since then there have been other sections of Sri Lankan opinion that have joined the critics of SAARC and taken the solemn stance that SAARC has indeed died what may be called a natural death.
Their fatalism is understandable. SAARC has failed to meet at heads of government or state level for the past several years to take the SAARC process notably forward. Regional cooperation has more or less been only an appealing idea. No substantive concrete projects have taken off to make the idea a hard reality. ‘Inner paralysis’ seems to be SAARC’s lot. Hence the fatalism in these circles.
However, being one of the worst cash-strapped regions of the world and a teemingly populated one with people virtually left to their devices, what choices do the ‘SAARC Eight’ have other than to try their best to band together and continue with their cooperation efforts, however small they may be?
There is no escaping the mounting debt trap for many of these countries and bankrupt Sri Lanka is a glaring example, but ‘throwing in the towel’ and abandoning themselves entirely to the diktats of the strongest economies and their agencies will prove a ‘living death’ for many countries in the SAARC fold.
The gains may be meagre but giving-up on SAARC cooperation in full would prove self-defeating for the organization and South Asia. Right now, the collective intention ought to be to salvage what the region could from the tenuous cooperative efforts. Moreover, such initiatives could go some distance to generate a degree of goodwill among the Eight and help in sustaining a dialogue process.
Given this backdrop it proved ‘a stich in time’ for the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, to recently host the SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar to a round table discussion on the unifying potential of SAARC and its future possibilities, besides other related issue areas.
Held on June 24th and moderated by RCSS Executive Director and former ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the forum brought together a vibrant, wide ranging audience comprising academicians, diplomats, senior public servants, civil society activists and many others. Following the presentation by Ambassador Golam Sarwar titled, ‘Reigniting SAARC: Achievements, Challenges and the Way Ahead’, a lively Q&A followed.
The above forum could be described as an act of lighting the proverbial ‘candle’ rather than ‘cursing the darkness.’ It surely is a ‘darkness’ that could be seen as daunting considering that the region’s pivotal powers, India and Pakistan, are failing to act in a spirit of accord but are engaged in bitter finger-pointing on a number of questions of vital importance to SAARC.
On the other hand, what is the rest of the region doing to bring the above sides together? It is disappointing that to date the rest of SAARC has failed to launch a major diplomatic drive to bring peace between the feuding regional heavyweights. It needs to act without delay and establish its earnestness and this effort would need to prove SAARC’s staying power in the unfolding months and even years.
In assessing SAARC’s seeming failure local opinion in particular has failed to factor in what could be described as weak leadership. Since Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh, the founding father of SAARC, the region has failed to produce a visionary leader who could advance the SAARC cause with charisma and drive.
Among other reasons, weak leadership accounts considerably for the faltering and stuttering status, as it were, of SAARC. Badly needed are leaders who could go the extra mile, think less of narrow national interests and work diligently towards the collective well being of the region but SAARC’s millions of ordinary people have been made to wait in vain for leaders of such stature. Instead, they have been burdened with politicians who seem to be relishing the apparently moribund state of SAARC.
Looking back, it could be said that it was the dynamic leadership factor that led to the launching of the Non-Aligned Movement and for its sustenance for a few decades. True, it could be seen in some quarters that NAM is no more, but as in the case of SAARC, the former too has been unfortunate to be burdened over the years with politicians who lack the vision and drive to unflaggingly advance the fortunes of the South. NAM and SAARC lack the dynamism and vision of leaders of the stature of Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, to give them the required guidance and intellectual depth.
The reasons are complex for there not being among us currently political leaders with the vision and the steadfast commitment to advance the legitimate interests of the South. However, it could be stated with conviction that the majority of Southern leaders have too easily caved in to the demands of the global North and its financial agencies.
These leaders have failed to see, for instance, that the largely market economy oriented Northern governments would not view with favour a centrist economic model that attaches priority to the interests of the dis-empowered publics of the South. This realization ought to have dawned on the current government in Sri Lanka, for instance, some while ago but it has no choice but to abide by IMF dictates since economic survival at present is unthinkable without the latter’s succour.
Accordingly for SAARC this should be the time for some soul-searching. Priority needs to be attached to ending the feuding between India and Pakistan since at present the material fortunes of the region hinge largely on these regional giants giving peaceful relations among them a try. This is no easy challenge to meet but some daring, visionary diplomacy needs to take hold among the rest of SAARC.
There is some sense in SAARC bringing the peoples of the region together through programs that address their best collective interests. A meeting of minds among SAARC nations could enable SAARC and its agencies to build a region-wide people’s movement for progressive political and economic change that could in turn lead to the region’s political leaders sensitizing themselves more to the neglected needs of their publics.
However, the time is ‘now’ for the initiation of these progressive changes and the voice of SAARC well wishers would need to drown out those of their critics.
Features
OPA seminar examines Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, resilience and growth pathways
A seminar, “Sri Lanka’s Economic Crossroads: Navigating Recovery, Resilience and Growth” was recently held by the Organisation of Professional Associations of Sri Lanka (OPA) at the OPA Auditorium, bringing together economists, OPA members, and professionals from diverse fields for an insightful discussion on Sri Lanka’s economic recovery and future growth prospects.
The event was held under the patronage of Jayantha Gallehewa, President of the OPA, and was jointly organised by the National Issues Committee (NIC) and the Seminars, Workshops and Programmes Committee of the OPA. The event reaffirmed the organisation’s commitment to advancing professional excellence, fostering insightful intellectual engagement, facilitating interdisciplinary knowledge exchange and creating a constructive platform for informed dialogue on issues of national importance.
The panel of speakers comprised Dr. Harsha Aturupane, Lead Economist and Programme Leader for Human Development at the World Bank for Sri Lanka and the Maldives; Dr. Achinthya Koswatta, Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Open University of Sri Lanka, and Anushan Kapilan, Lead Economist at Verité Research.
In his welcome address, the President of the OPA emphasised that Sri Lanka was at a critical juncture in its economic recovery journey where sustained reforms, effective implementation, and collective national commitment are essential to achieving long-term stability, resilience and inclusive growth. He noted that the country had experienced one of the most severe economic crises in its history with the economy contracting by 7.8 percent in 2022 and a further 11.5 percent in 2023, resulting in significant economic and social challenges.
Delivering his introductory remarks Bhanu Wijeyaratne, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the National Issues Committee, underscored the need to move beyond short-term economic stabilisation towards a comprehensive agenda of structural transformation. He observed that the economic crisis had revealed deep-rooted weaknesses within the economy, including persistent fiscal pressures, rising public debt, foreign exchange limitations, and insufficient diversification of the export base. He stressed that addressing these challenges through strategic reforms, institutional strengthening and long-term economic planning would be essential to establishing a more resilient and competitive economy.
While acknowledging recent positive developments, including improved inflation management, tourism recovery and signs of economic stabilisation, Wijeyaratne stressed the need to advance reforms aimed at strengthening fiscal discipline, enhancing productivity, improving competitiveness, developing human capital and reinforcing governance and institutional effectiveness.
He further highlighted the important role of professionals, businesses, academia and other stakeholders in contributing to evidence-based dialogue and supporting Sri Lanka’s journey towards a resilient, inclusive and sustainable economic future.
Delivering the keynote presentation, Dr. Harsha Aturupane provided a comprehensive assessment of Sri Lanka’s economic prospects within the broader context of global economic transformation. He argued that Sri Lanka functioned as a small open economy whose performance is significantly influenced by developments in the global marketplace. External factors could not be controlled, and the country must strengthen its domestic capacity and resilience to respond effectively to international economic shifts, he noted.
Tracing the evolution of global economic systems, Dr. Aturupane highlighted the transition from ideological divisions between state-controlled and market-oriented economies towards increasingly pragmatic approaches focused on growth, competitiveness and development. He noted that Sri Lanka’s own economic journey reflects a similar evolution, with contemporary policy debates now centred on practical solutions for sustainable economic progress.
The presentation also examined the transformative impact of globalisation. Dr. Aturupane observed that global economic integration had enabled several East Asian economies, including South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong, to achieve remarkable economic advancement through export-led growth strategies. Sri Lanka similarly benefited from this process through the expansion of its apparel industry and increased integration into global value chains.
Turning to Sri Lanka’s recovery programme, Dr. Aturupane emphasised that the ongoing stabilisation process should be viewed as a national programme supported by the International Monetary Fund rather than solely as an IMF initiative. He observed that strong worker remittances, improved tourism earnings, enhanced government revenue mobilisation and prudent import management have contributed significantly to economic stabilisation.
Despite this progress, he cautioned that rebuilding foreign exchange reserves and meeting future debt obligations remain major challenges. He underscored the need to strengthen export performance, attract investment and generate sustainable foreign exchange earnings to ensure long-term economic resilience.
The discussion also focused on monetary stability, inflation management and exchange-rate policy. Dr. Aturupane stressed that maintaining price stability was fundamental to sustainable growth and household welfare, while sound monetary policy remains essential for preserving economic confidence.
Looking beyond stabilisation, he argued that Sri Lanka must transition towards a broader economic transformation agenda. Sustainable growth, he noted, will depend on expanding productive capacity through investment, technological advancement, innovation, skills development and structural reforms.
Among the key constraints identified was the high cost of energy, which continues to affect competitiveness and investment attractiveness. Dr. Aturupane emphasised the importance of improving efficiency and affordability within the energy sector to enhance Sri Lanka’s business environment.
He further highlighted the social dimensions of the crisis, noting the rise in poverty and economic vulnerability among households. Strengthening social protection systems and ensuring inclusive growth, he argued, must remain central components of the national development agenda.
Another critical challenge identified was Sri Lanka’s demographic transition. With an ageing population, outward migration and evolving labour market dynamics, the country is increasingly confronting labour shortages in several sectors. Dr. Aturupane suggested that greater automation, increased labour-force participation and strategic workforce planning would be necessary to address these emerging realities.
Concluding his presentation, he emphasised the need to improve governance, strengthen institutions, enhance competitiveness and create an enabling environment for private sector investment. Sri Lanka’s future success, he noted, will depend on its ability to move decisively beyond crisis management towards a development model founded on resilience, innovation, productivity and inclusive growth.
Dr. Achinthya Koswatta reiterated the importance of policy consistency and predictability in fostering investment and industrial development. She observed that frequent policy changes create uncertainty and discourage long-term investment decisions, whereas stable and coherent policy frameworks build confidence and support sustainable economic transformation.
Meanwhile, Anushan Kapilan highlighted the substantial progress achieved in restoring macroeconomic stability following the recent crisis. He noted significant improvements in fiscal performance, including increased government revenue, reduced reliance on debt financing and a historically low fiscal deficit.
He further observed that public debt levels are declining faster than anticipated, economic growth has exceeded expectations and inflation has been brought under control more rapidly than forecast. Nevertheless, he cautioned that the recovery remains uneven, particularly within the industrial sector and that many households have yet to experience a meaningful improvement in living standards.
The seminar was expertly coordinated by Eng. Chamil Edirimuni, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the Seminars, Workshops and Programmes Committee, while the technical moderation and interactive discussion session were facilitated by Bhanu Wijeyaratne, Vice President of the OPA and Chairman of the National Issues Committee.
The event was attended by Tisara De Silva, President-Elect of the OPA, Eng. Ravi Rupasinghe, General Secretary, Past Presidents, members of the Executive Council, representatives of the General Forum and professionals representing a wide range of disciplines.
The seminar concluded with a vibrant exchange of ideas and perspectives, reaffirming the importance of evidence-based policy dialogue, institutional collaboration and collective national commitment in advancing Sri Lanka’s economic recovery, resilience and sustainable growth.
Features
Her roots run deep in Sri Lanka
Yes, for UK-based presenter and artiste Samantha Kay, home is where the heart – and the roots – are. And her roots run deep in Sri Lanka.
In an exclusive interview with The Island, Samantha says “I’m proud to be Sri Lankan. My mum is from Kandy and my dad is from Colombo, so Sri Lanka has always held a very special place in my heart.
“Whenever I visit Sri Lanka, I love spending time on the beautiful south coast, especially Hikkaduwa and Mirissa. It’s somewhere I always feel connected to my roots and completely at peace.”
Now living in Bournemouth, on the south coast of England, where, she says, she is lucky to be close to some of the UK’s most beautiful beaches, including the iconic Sandbanks, Samantha has built a career that refuses to fit into one box.
She is a radio presenter, podcast host, singer-songwriter, personal trainer and life coach.
“I genuinely love the variety because every role allows me to connect with people and, hopefully, make a positive difference in someone’s day.”
Of course, music has taken her far.
One of her proudest achievements, she says, was releasing a song with 90s music icon Angie Brown, which reached No. 9 in the UK Club Charts.
She also reached the final stages of The X Factor and performed at Wembley Stadium in front of thousands.
Beyond music, Samantha competed in bikini bodybuilding across the UK, winning several titles. “It taught me discipline, resilience and self-belief,” she recalls.
Today, her focus is on radio, podcasting and coaching women. Her podcast encourages people to live life on their own terms rather than feeling pressured to follow society’s expectations.
Says Samantha: “Whether someone is single, changing careers, travelling solo or simply trying to find their purpose, I want them to know that it’s never too late to create a life that feels authentic. If you’ve ever felt like you don’t fit into the box, maybe you were never meant to.”
Samantha Kay also spent a year in Dubai, performing at five-star hotels, including FIVE, and coaching at the iconic outdoor gym on Palm Jumeirah.
“I taught strength and conditioning classes, and hosted wellness retreats, combining my passion for music, health and inspiring others.”
However, with family matters calling her back to the UK, she made the choice to return. “Family comes first,” she says.
Looking ahead, Samantha plans to grow her radio and podcast work, release more music, and expand her wellness retreats.
“My biggest passion is helping people, especially women, build confidence and believe in themselves,” she says.
“Wherever my career takes me, I hope to continue inspiring others to live with courage, kindness and authenticity, while never forgetting my Sri Lankan roots.”
-
News7 days agoHerath warns prospective migrant workers not to get fleeced by racketeers
-
Features5 days agoPrison riots and politics: NPP’s biggest challenge and Sri Lanka’s biggest opportunity
-
Editorial6 days agoWhat’s the world coming to?
-
Foreign News7 days agoTensions erupt in Indian state after 11-year-old raped and murdered
-
Features7 days agoDevanesan Annan – in Memoriam
-
Editorial7 days agoPunishment in hellholes
-
Features2 days agoDirty Money
-
Editorial5 days agoMuch ado about crime: Fish or cut bait
