Features
Modi’s April 5th Colombo Splash and Trump’s Tariff Turbulence – As Time goes by!
Prime Minister Modi is visiting Sri Lanka this weekend, from Friday, April 4th to Sunday, April 6th. This is Modi’s third official visit as Prime Minister, and the first since Anura Kumara Dissanayake became President and led the NPP to form a new government with a massive electoral victory. The official welcoming ceremony will be at the Independence Square on Saturday April 5th, 54 years to the day after the April 1971 insurrection launched by the JVP, the political progenitor of the present Sri Lankan government. Whether the historical irony of the occasion, if not the underlying coincidence, will be mentioned or memorialized at the official ceremony is unknown at the time of writing to meet the printer’s Friday evening deadline.
Anura Kumara Dissanayake was five years old in 1971 and, if my memory serves me well, Vasudeva Nanyakkara and Mahinda Rajapaksa might be the only living politicians from the 1971 parliament. They were both elected to parliament as young first time MPs in 1970. And quite by coincidence, there will be another wholly nostalgic gathering tomorrow in Colombo to remember Kumar David as comrade, professor and friend. In the 1970s, Vasudeva Nanayakkara, Wickramabahu Karunaratne and Kumar David were young LSSP Turks who were critical of both the JVP and the United Front Government of the SLFP, the LSSP and the Communist Party.
Vasudeva Nanayakkara has the singular distinction of being perhaps the only parliamentarian to be detained by the government both in 1971, in the wake of the first JVP insurrection, and after 1983 that ultimately precipitated the JVP’s second coming. In the now long historical perspective, the JVP campaigned for the United Front parties in the 1970 election and then took guns against them in 1971. The government’s ruthless put-down of the JVP in 1971 created a new template for state repression in Sri Lanka. And to round off the political circle, the 1971 repression helped the UNP to return to power in 1977, free the JVP leaders from jail, and then have its own violent tryst with the JVP in 1988/89. So, history repeated itself, but, pace Marx, both times as fake and both times as tragedy.
The LTTE added a third dimension to this otherwise two dimensional encounters, and by the time it was finished off in 2009, the JVP was emerging as parliamentary political force that at one time another formed governing alliances with the two SLFPs (first in its Horagolla version under Chandrika Kumaratunga and later in its Hambantota version under Mahinda Rajapaksa), as well as the UNP during its atrophying phase under Ranil Wickremesinghe. The Old Left itself, rather what was left of it, divided along the same three ways, and a cluster of them warmed up to JVP’s possibilities under Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his NPP umbrella. Kumar David himself became a prominent testifier for the new JVP/NPP possibilities using his weekly columns in the Sunday Island and the Colombo Telegraph to good effect. Indeed, in the last article he wrote before his passing, Kumar David congratulated Anura Kumara Dissanayake for his magnificent political achievement and expressed cautious optimism for the prospects under an NPP government.
Nostalgia aside, the serious political point here is that it would be a fool’s errand to trace the present JVP/NPP’s political lineage to the embryos of the 1971 or 1988/89 JVP. There is no unmutated political lineage in Sri Lanka. The political circumstances are also wholly different. The political reality over the last several decades has seen multiple scrambling of many eggs, including rotten eggs, to produce different governing omelettes at different times. The one that is obtaining now is a better product than most and one that is without the rotten eggs of the past. So, while there is historical irony in the NPP government’s April 5th official welcome to Prime Minister Modi, it would be incorrect and unproductive to read too much into it.
Trump’s Mad Old World
Far more than domestic realities, there is literally a world of difference in world politics between now and the 1970s. Donald Trump has seen to it this week with his globally sweeping reciprocal tariffs. He has put the planet’s trading system on edge, calling it America’s liberation day. He is not liberating anything, only reverting to the old ways of protectionism an in an insane manner. His forays are a belated assertion of outdated economic idiosyncrasies that he has been harbouring for all his pre-political life when no one took note of him politically speaking.
In the 1970s, Trump was a brash, young, New York upstart. And Modi in India was an RSS activist and made his first larger political mark in organizing protests against Indira Gandhi’s Emergency Rule. He was understudy to the flamboyant George Fernandes, later India’s foreign minister, and a socialist comrade of LSSP exiles in India who contributed their own mite to Mahatma Gandh’s mighty Quit India movement. Now Trump and Modi are at the pinnacles of national power in their respective countries. So is Anura Kumara Dissanayake, much younger and also far more composed and self-controlled.
Trump is unleashing disruption throughout the world, unilaterally upending the postwar world order that was set up under American leadership to oversee global trade and financial transactions. On balance, it has more than served its purpose of stabilizing world capitalism while releasing the human potential and resource endowments of many non-western countries, especially Asian countries, to emerge as robust economies and adding a long needed balance to the lopsided world economy hitherto dominated by the old industrial countries of the west. But these changes by themselves have not weakened the western economies and the European Union and most Americans other than Trump have to come to terms with them in a positive way.
Trump is abhorrent of these changes but not owing to any rational political reasons or objective economic considerations. Those who try to make sense of Trump’s erratic two months in office are beginning to see his obsessive egotistical compulsion to go down in history as America’s greatest president by simultaneously pursuing three unprecedented objectives: physically expand America’s boundaries – to wit his rantings over Panama, Greenland and Canada; make America great again by reverting to the 19th century mechanism of tariffs and dismantling the late 20th century framework of free trade; and by constantly musing about running for a third term in calculated disregard of the clear constitutional provision since 1947 limiting presidents only to two terms in office.
Underlying these pursuits are Trump’s crass racism, his lack of empathy for those who are structurally kept behind in the economy, and his envy towards those and against whom he measures himself and feels culturally inferior. The highs and lows of Trump’s universal tariff structure are reflective more of his biases than of any economic strategy. It is not by accident that Europe and Asia are set apart for special punishment, especially the ASEAN countries, and of course China. Putin’s Russia is not on the list.
At 44%, Sri Lanka is among the 15 worst hit countries in the world, and all of them are countries with small to medium size populations and at varying levels of economic development. At less than USD 3 billion, Sri Lanka’s share of US imports is less than 0.5%, but the US accounts for 23% of Sri Lanka’s exports – the single largest country share. The increased revenue to the US treasury from the increased tariffs on Sri Lankan goods would be less than a drop, while the consequences for Sri Lankan exports, especially the apparel sector, could be potentially disastrous. But there may not be a loss of market for apparel products in the US depending on their current price levels and consumer preferences.
The reciprocal tariff levels are generally 50% of what US has calculated to be the general tariff level against US imports by different countries. But this method of calculation has been criticized because it is based on trade deficit and is not a weighted average of tariffs on individual goods. There is madness even in the method of the Trump Administration. So, for Sri Lanka, the US reciprocal tariff of 44%, and it could be interpreted by a Trump official as generous 50% of the 88% tariff that Sri Lanka is unfairly applying to each imported good from the US. Never mind US imports to Sri Lanka amount to about USD 500 million. At the bottom end of the food chain, Sri Lanka apparently exploits America by a huge trade deficit! The same argument is writ across every country from Canada to China.
By these tokens, India has one of the lower reciprocal tariff levels at 27% in Asia and South Asia, while Bangladesh is slapped with 37% reciprocal tariff and Pakistan with 30%. More importantly, among the larger economies, India is taking a reportedly measured response to Trump’s tariffs as part of its preferred alignment with the Trump Administration. India appears to be keen on avoiding a confrontation with the US, while looking to expand its export mix to the US by taking advantage of the high tariffs imposed on other countries. For example, India is apparently looking to expand its export of electronic goods to US by taking advantage of the high 46% reciprocal tariffs applied to Vietnam which has a well established export sector in electronic goods.
To get back to where I started, Trump’s tariff turbulence bears a more crucial backdrop to Prime Minister Modi’s visit this weekend than the April 5th anniversary that falls on Saturday. Even the set agenda for talks between the Indian Prime Minister and Sri Lanka’s President could be overshadowed by Trump’s announcement of reciprocal tariffs. Not a single country is bent on retaliating to Trump’s tariffs for the sake of retaliation. Every country other than the US is keen to get rid of the tariffs, Trump willing.
The US accounts for 13% of global trade, and if the countries that account for 87% of world trade can deal only with the US without descending into tariff slaps between them, the US will be isolated, and Trump will have to face the wrath of the American consumers hit by rising import prices sooner than now expected. That would be the ultimate way out for the rest of the world from current American madness.
by Rajan Philips
Features
Addressing human rights needs multi-pronged approach
by Jehan Perera
The ongoing 63rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council, which runs from September 7 to October 7, 2026, in Geneva is important to Sri Lanka. Its outcome will send a signal to other international actors, including the European Union, as to whether Sri Lanka’s reform policy is on track. The written update on Sri Lanka, prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights under High Commissioner Volker Türk and presented by Deputy High Commissioner Nada Al-Nashif, has taken a more holistic approach to the government’s performance over the past year. It acknowledged the progress Sri Lanka has made under the NPP government in relation to accountability for financial fraud and other economic crimes. At the same time, the High Commissioner’s update made clear that progress in relation to economic crime cannot be equated with progress in relation to accountability for grave human rights violations committed during the armed conflict and in other periods of political violence.
The government may have felt sufficiently confident that its response to the High Commissioner’s update could be handled by its representative in Geneva and did not require the attendance of Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath. Sri Lanka’s representative Sumith Dassanayake called for a fundamental review of country-specific mandates within the UN Human Rights Council. Sri Lanka has been facing repeated scrutiny in the form of successive UNHRC resolutions from 2012 onwards. Ambassador Dassanayake argued that such mandates should not continue indefinitely and must be regularly assessed against measurable objectives and tangible outcomes. This may reflect confidence that its record of reform is beginning to receive recognition internationally. The reports and statements at the Human Rights Council acknowledged progress in the government’s efforts to address corruption and economic crime.
The government’s anti-corruption drive has included investigations into allegations involving individuals who held the highest political offices in the country. The arrest of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe in connection with alleged misuse of public funds, and the investigation into the controversial SriLankan Airlines Airbus transaction involving former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s son, are examples of the reach of these investigations. The arrest of SLPP National Organiser and Member of Parliament Namal Rajapaksa in connection with allegations relating to the Airbus purchase scandal has also demonstrated that the government is willing to pursue cases involving politically powerful figures.
Wide Range
The ongoing investigations appear to encompass a wide range of parliamentarians and government members, both past and present. They suggest that accountability for corruption is not being confined to lower-level officials or to individuals who lack political influence. This is precisely the kind of accountability that the public has long demanded and that previous governments have too often failed to deliver. The government is also reaching into the upper levels of the military hierarchies of the past. The case in which 11 young men, most of them Tamil, disappeared after being abducted in Colombo between 2008 and 2009 involved allegations that some families were asked to pay ransoms. The investigation into this case has reached senior military figures. The willingness to pursue such cases is important because it challenges the assumption that those who exercised power during the war are beyond the reach of the law. Such cases would provide a practical test of whether the government’s commitment to accountability for economic crimes is part of a broader commitment to the rule of law.
Success in prosecuting corruption cannot substitute for justice for those who were unlawfully killed, disappeared, tortured or otherwise victimised. The UN report noted that there had been no recognition or accountability for crimes under international law, gross human rights violations and serious violations of international humanitarian law committed by all parties during the war. The government has yet to establish a credible and effective process to address the many cases of enforced disappearance, extrajudicial killing, torture and other serious violations. The government needs to take the international commitments it has inherited on human rights issues seriously. It needs to adopt a multi-pronged approach and go beyond focusing primarily on financial and corruption-related accountability.
Need Action
As a member of the international community, Sri Lanka has a responsibility to abide by the commitments it has made. It cannot selectively uphold international obligations postponing those that are politically difficult. Also, as a small country, Sri Lanka has a self-interest in ensuring the survival of international law, which is all that it has to protect it from the depredations of the bigger international actors. The erosion of international law by powerful states makes it all the more important that smaller states uphold the principles on which the international system is based. Sri Lanka cannot credibly appeal to international law when it is threatened from outside while disregarding its own obligations within. Sri Lanka also needs to win the confidence of its own population that it is committed to justice and equality for all. Public opinion polls and community-level research have disclosed that ethnic and religious minorities are appreciative of the sense of greater security they enjoy under the present government from ethnic or religious extremists.
But a sense of security is not the same as the fulfilment of rights. As far as the Tamil people are concerned, the government has yet to deliver on several of its specific promises. These include the long-standing problems of missing persons, the release of political prisoners who have been members of Tamil militant organisations, and the return of land taken over for military purposes during the war. The issue of Buddhist statues and archaeological sites found on their properties which are then taken from their control continue to trouble them especially as they see no signs of resolution of those disputes. The issue of pastureland in the east of the country in Mylathamadu is particularly concerning to them as they see orders by successive presidents, both President Ranil Wickremesinghe and President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, being disregarded on the ground. The Mylathamadu pastureland dispute is where traditional Tamil dairy farmers have engaged in multi-year protests against the ongoing encroachment of their ancestral grazing lands by Sinhalese crop cultivators relocated under government development schemes.
The government’s failure to hold Provincial Council elections is particularly troubling. The provincial council system is the only one that can provide the Tamil people and other ethnic minorities the opportunity to wield political power and exercise a measure of self-determination in the areas in which they are the numerical majority. The continued postponement of Provincial Council elections therefore has consequences that go beyond an ordinary electoral delay. It deprives communities of an important constitutional avenue for democratic participation and power-sharing. The ethnic and religious minorities appreciate what the government is doing in the larger national interest, but they must not be made to feel that their special concerns are being ignored. The government cannot resolve Sri Lanka’s entire legacy of rights violations overnight. But it does need to demonstrate that it is willing to move forward on multiple fronts, not only on a few.
Features
The emptying university: why are academics leaving?
by Hasini Lecamwasam
Brain drain in Sri Lanka is at an all-time high. The latest Human Flight and Brain Drain Index for 2024 shows that we are 16th of 175 countries on this count, and first in South Asia. That this is a crisis goes without saying. Brain drain affects all sectors, and is a huge strain on the resources of a developing country. Particularly in Sri Lanka, where considerable public investment is made in the moulding of professionals through the system of free education, this amounts to transferring the resources of poorer countries to richer ones with top migration destinations. It is, therefore, important to consider the push and pull factors behind skilled outmigration, specifically from the public university system of Sri Lanka, a key focus of the Kuppi column.
From frustration to exit
Several bitter realities in our crumbling public university system act as push factors in the migration decisions of academics. Many essays on this column have, over several years, attempted to highlight numerous aspects of this erosion. Perhaps, primary among them is the lack of adequate funding, which has debilitating ramifications for the system: very little investment is made in the up-keep of infrastructure (and even less in its expansion), resulting in serious constraints in accommodating growing batches of students and the wellbeing of the staff (particularly in regional universities); research funding is negligible, severely curtailing academics’ ability to effectively discharge their primary duty of teaching which should ideally be informed by their research (and the research of others, access to which is also, unfortunately, mediated by funding); a funding crunch also means a slash in (or greater constraints on) recruitments, increasing the workloads of academics, currently in service, and eating into the quality of their teaching and research.
What recruitments are done frustrate those with any faith in merit. As many of our interventions in this column have shown, recruitment processes are characterised by archaic selection criteria that place very little weight on a candidate’s postgraduate growth and the advantages of interdisciplinary training. Added to this is the general preference for ‘culturally compliant’ candidates who would not rock the boat too much. The combined effect is that those with the capacity and spirit to try out innovations in education are discouraged from joining or staying on in the public university system. Some, or many, of them may instead seek appointments abroad.
A thread that binds all of these problems together is pervasive hierarchy which, again, many interventions on this column have sought to highlight. It is the interest in preserving hierarchy that leads to the preference for alumni in recruitment processes. Hierarchy within universities can be particularly frustrating for younger faculty and women, who typically have to bear the brunt of the workload of their senior, often male, colleagues. In a context of funding, and, therefore, recruitment, restrictions, this translates into a disproportionate burden being placed on junior (usually female) faculty, seriously hindering their prospects of growing into successful academics due to the time constraints within which they have to operate. Junior academics, therefore, are more likely to look to educational institutions abroad for what they hope would be a different work culture that respects them more.
Ideological ruses
On top of these structural frustrations are also the workings of neoliberal ideology. For one, the nature of relations between the global metropole and peripheral countries like Sri Lanka largely dictates what is desirable and what is not. The apparent lifestyles of Western countries – from food to clothing, housing, appliances, and so on – have continued to lure people from the periphery with the promise of a ‘better’ life, alongside better career advancement opportunities. This, of course, masks much of the struggle that goes on behind the scenes to survive in Western societies. For instance, in most cases highly attractive public infrastructure such as roads, public transport, clean air, quality control of food, and so on belie the astronomical privatised costs of healthcare and education. Health insurance is usually mandatory and steep in most high-income settings, while even subsidised education (for which eligibility criteria are strict) creates a serious dent in household earnings. Of course, the happy images of glossy trams and gleeful international travellers don’t convey this.
A second ideological ruse is the myth of greater opportunities and recognition abroad. While there is no denying that local skilled sectors – be it higher education, health, civil service, or private white-collar positions – are replete with issues that inhibit merit-based professional advancement, the notion that things are fundamentally different in Western countries stems from an uninformed optimism. As is now increasingly known and discussed, Western labour markets are notoriously racialised, and equivalent skills are rarely treated as such. Instead, it is usually demanded that skilled migrants clear certain formal examinations in their host countries. In fields like medicine, this is followed by an interview that may also be racially prejudiced. Once these initial steps are cleared, remuneration reverts to square one irrespective of experience accumulated abroad, not to mention the many subtle aggressions, rejections, and trials one has to go through in the negotiation of everyday life. In the many cases where professional qualifications are used as leverage for a move abroad, sights are set on a better future for one’s children, which again is informed by the misplaced faith in greater opportunities and a lack of awareness of the factors outlined above. Needless to say, in the global swing to the Right, things have become even more challenging. In such a context, considering the few rare cases where skilled migrants live extremely comfortable lives as the norm becomes a dangerous misconception.
The two ideological pull factors mentioned above are complemented by a push factor, which has to do with a highly classed understanding of what a white-collar professional is due in their society. Many of these aspirations are clearly articulated in academic trade union action demanding separate quotas for school entry, increased fuel allowances, winning back the presently stalled vehicle permit scheme, salary hikes, and so on. While working people have every right to agitate for better material conditions, insofar as it remains unconnected to a broader movement for improving the conditions of the lot of the working class, it remains self-serving and very much within the class logic of capitalist society. Since these demands are articulated as a means of maintaining distinction, it is clear that they are not envisaged as part of a class movement. The frustration of not having these needs for distinction satisfied may push some to seek greener pastures abroad, at least financially, (perhaps as a means of social mobility based on it), only to be disappointed on most occasions.
What is to be done?
Addressing the systemic push factors listed above requires, first and foremost, greater allocations for free public higher education. This would immediately translate into more recruitments and less work per academic, and better research and teaching in the long haul. An increase in funding would also ideally lead to greater infrastructural investments, especially including improving the living conditions of those who work in regional universities amid untold hardships. Next, fairer, more creative, and, therefore, more effective recruitment policies are badly needed to attract talented individuals to university positions. Rather than carving out a ‘special category’ for academics to achieve this purpose, which is informed by a classed logic, this needs to be done through fundamental reforms in recruitment processes. Third, a persistent attack on the entrenched hierarchy within universities through internal reform is much called for. Reforming recruitment practices will go a long way towards addressing this. Measures should also be taken to introduce more stringent policies against SGBV (not to mention ragging, even though it is not directly connected to brain drain). Such measures would create a safer, fairer, and more attractive workplace, which would give more reasons for people to stay.
On top of greater allocations, we also need a transformation of our aspirations themselves if this situation is to change. That necessitates a kind of education capable of questioning the ‘paradise’ conception of Western societies, and lays bare their colonial material and ideological dimensions, in both their historical and contemporary manifestations. These colonial understandings of the ‘good life’, moreover, have devastating ecological implications for the planet, not to mention social justice. An education with the ability to transform this mindset would hopefully prove to be more than a mere path to social mobility, rather being a tool of social emancipation that renders mobility moot.
(Hasini Lecamwasam is with the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya)
Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.
Features
Friends favourite Suzi Croner returns for Oktoberfest 2026
Charming audiences in Switzerland as Suzi Flückiger, Sri Lanka’s own Suzi Croner is coming home… for a very special occasion.
The bubbly former frontline vocalist of 90s band Friends will take the stage at a popular venue in Colombo for Oktoberfest 2026.
Known in Europe for her country and classic hits, Suzi has remained a much-loved name back home. This will be a rare chance for local fans to see her live and celebrate the voice behind so many Friends memories.
Oktoberfest 2026 in Colombo promises an evening of live music, traditional Bavarian food and beer, colourful dirndls and lederhosen, folk dancing, and plenty of community cheer.

Suzi Croner (Flückiger)
Against this lively backdrop, Suzi will take the stage for a special solo set, featuring her own pre-recorded music. She performed at the event last year too, as a solo artiste, but a German band providing the music.
This year, however she says, it’s a different scene.
“The novel attraction will be the dancers from Germany — all girls, clad in German outfits,” Suzi said. She added that the event will also highlight the activities generally connected with Oktoberfest, which should generate a lot of fun and excitement for those who join her in Colombo next month.
Suzi has become a much-in-demand artiste in Europe, and has even performed Down Under, in Melbourne.
In Switzerland, where she has been based for the past 42 years, she continues to charm audiences with country and classic hits, performing at private events and community nights across Europe.
“My weekends are generally loaded with my work as a singer,” she said. “And I also play tennis three times a week, because I need to keep fit to entertain my audience in an active way.”
Her repertoire is made up mainly of Swiss, German and English songs.
And true to form, Suzi loves springing surprises.
“So watch out when you join me at Oktoberfest 2026, in Colombo!” she said.
-
Sports4 days agoDDS set to lose Test captaincy
-
News4 days agoSri Lanka faces new grid challenge as rooftop solar surges: former CEB GM
-
Latest News4 days agoShafali, Deepti power India into sixth T20 Asia Cup final
-
Latest News3 days agoSri Lanka thwart Fatima Sana challenge to secure Asia Cup final spot
-
Opinion6 days agoNavigating Sri Lanka’s Israeli Dilemma
-
Features5 days agoLost for 90 years: Rare Goby resurfaces in Jaffna
-
News2 days agoGnanasara Thero absconding after SC ruling
-
News3 days agoAmmunition cache found in old Kandy bungalow
