Features
My early days in Parliament and the buildup to my quitting the UNP
Another area in which I intervened was in debates regarding communications, particularly about new technologies. Leftists, especially Vasudeva Nanayakkara, constantly complained about the presence of transmitters of Voice of America and Deutsche Welle-the German radio station. I knew that with the coming of Geo-stationary satellites land based transmitters were out of date and that all the denunciations made by leftists were based on out of date information. Sure enough these transmitters are now obsolete and with their disuse have deprived the SLBC of much needed rental income.
There is an advantage that accrues to the Opposition speaker which is not usually captured in text books on Parliamentary procedure. He is free to criticize by hitting all around the wicket since he is not responsible to implement the ideas that he advocates on the floor of the House. On the other hand a government spokesman is bound by the need to be practical as he is really addressing the executive which is represented by the relevant Minister.
If he is really keen he can even take the matter up in the inner councils of his party at group meetings. Thus often he has to stick to the party playbook while he is on his feet in the House. My speeches were welcomed by even the opposite side and I had notes sent to me [a parliamentary practice] by Deputy Speaker Anil Moonesinghe at the conclusion of a speech. Neelan Tiruchelvam would invariably meet me after my speech with an encouraging comment. He and I jointly sponsored a motion calling for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi who was at that time languishing under house arrest in Myanmar. Several “nationalist” MPs asked me to withdraw my sponsorship of the motion saying that she was a “Christian” plant of the west, but I refused.
The best compliment I received was from Priyanganie Wijesekere, the Secretary General of Parliament, who in a newspaper interview stated that I was one of the best speakers in Parliament of her time. For a Parliamentary newcomer who had to fight hard to get speaking time this was a rare compliment indeed.
Another episode which deserves to be recorded is the clash I had with Hameed at a group meeting regarding proposals for the devolution of power. CBK had set up a committee to examine this issue and Ranil had appointed Hameed to represent the UNP.
These meetings were dragging on but we as MPs were not aware of what was going on between the two parties. Information was leaked to us that important issues such as demarcation of seats on an ethnic basis was advocated without any reference to us MPs. I was concerned since Harispattuwa was a two member constituency and gerrymandering in favour of a minority would badly affect the interests of the majority of voters there.
At the previous delimitation, electorates had been carved out giving a greater weightage to a minority community. I raised this matter in the group and a commotion resulted. My demand was that Hameed should brief us about his ongoing talks. The majority of the members were shocked by this challenge to the party Chairman (Hameed at that time) but WJM Lokubandara supported me strongly. At this stage Hameed threw a tantrum and threatened to resign from the committee. I stuck to my guns and finally it was decided that we should have a discussion on the party’s stance. The political columns in the weeklies reported this contretemps and Hameed stopped talking to me.
Fratricidal war
Whatever may have been the plans of CBK and her government the ethnic conflict became the major issue which had to be resolved before a new economic programme could be implemented in a coordinated way. It was the “elephant in the room” which was intruding into all the other actions of the new regime. It was also having a debilitating effect on the government because the otherwise united and victorious leadership of the PA came to be divided on the issue of how to deal with the LTTE. While Chandrika and her close followers were, as typified in the “Sudu Nelum” movement, looking for a negotiated settlement, hardliners like Ratnasiri (Wickremanayake) and several SLFP stalwarts were for a military response.
But the problem was that the resources necessary for a military response were not available. Consequently the security forces were subjected to a series of setbacks. The LTTE had used the space provided by President Premadasa’s dispatch of the IPKF back to India and the CBK truce to consolidate its position and especially extend its underground network. They launched murderous attacks on railway stations, public places, Buddhist centres, politicians of every race and finally even on the Central Bank in the heart of Colombo.
Every effort to reach out to the LTTE was thwarted and even the few credible Tamil leaders like Neelan Tiruchelvam were murdered in cold blood. Neelan’s death was a great blow to me because we had been friends for a long time and I had worked for a brief period at the International Cetre for Ethnic Studies (ICES) he founded. In his last telephone call to a friend he had referred to me as a possible interlocutor to bring the southern parties together for a negotiated settlement. Less than an hour afterwards he was dead – a victim of an LTTE suicide bomber.
This was particularly poignant for me since a few days before his death he, R. Sampanthan and I had been chatting in the Parliament lobby after they had been warned of a possible attempt on their lives. They were quite upset and Sam kept away from public view for some time. Neelan had arranged to be in Harvard for a few months and had been only a few days away from his departure to Boston. It was a depressing time and a brave group of friends assembled in Kanatte to bid him farewell in spite of bomb threats.
Savitri Goonesekere made an eloquent address which caught well the admiration we had for Neelan and our sense of loss at that time. Neelan’s death was another reason for me to think of the need for all of us to get together to address this vital issue. It was way too big for us to be playing Parliamentary games when the country was on the brink of disintegration. I made up my mind to respond to CBK’s call for a joint national effort superseding petty party politics. At the same time the UNP leadership was being very petty indeed in blocking every governmental initiative at achieving a consensus on the ethnic front.
Overtures
Thanks to our constant tours abroad many friendships had been forged between MPs from the two sides of the Parliamentary divide. Even in Parliament we could meet freely and go to the extent of grousing about our own party in confidence. In any Parliament there are so many issues – some important but mostly trivial – which leads to the formation of cliques, interest groups and friendships which are keenly watched by the respective whips and the party leaders. However they are usually restricted to one’s own party and do not cross cut party lines.
The lobbies are so designed that there is no free flow among all the MPs. The ruling party MPs hang out in the lobby on their side of the chamber while the Opposition occupies their own lobby with doors leading to the Opposition benches in the chamber. There is some interaction in the dining room but most MPs tend to sit with their friends for meals while MPs of splinter parties invariably sit together as if they would be compromised if they “dine with the enemy”.
I spoke to GL Peiris, Mangala Samaraweera and CV “Puggy” Gooneratne about my disenchantment with the leadership of the UNP and its obstructionist policies. They all had a direct line to CBK and were enthusiastic about a possible crossover especially because both sides were now preparing for the forthcoming Presidential election of December 2000 which promised to be a hard fought one. CBK whom I knew from my CCS days and also as a friend of her husband Vijaya Kumaratunga, gave the green light and a meeting with her was arranged at “Visumpaya” which at that time was the official residence of GL.
I knew that she had consulted my friend Anuruddha Ratwatte who had veto powers about party developments in Kandy district. He was always unsure about his position as a vote winner. He was at daggers drawn with Lakshman Kiriella and had only a joking relationship with DM Jayaratne who always deferred to him in party matters. Only in my case did he exceptionally agree to expand the number of SLFP MPs in the district by accepting me into the SLFP fold.
Even then he was wary about appointing me as the organizer for Galagedera since his acolyte and election agent named Samarakone had been appointed to that position to consolidate Ratwatte’s electoral chances. Instead he suggested that I accept the post of organizer of Kandy electorate. Kandy is the smallest electorate in Kandy district and was a UNP stronghold with its preponderance of minority votes. However I agreed knowing full well that my organisation in Galagedera and Harispattuwa was strong and capable enough to deliver sufficient votes under the PR system to send me to Parliament even if I could not win the Kandy seat which was a UNP “pocket borough”.
Rukman
But I had in the meanwhile to coordinate the group that was willing to cross over to the government. I can now reveal that our group was greatly encouraged by the support extended by Rukman Senanayake who had actually set the ball rolling in his discussions with us. Till the last moment when he unexpectedly decided to abandon us and remain in the UNP, he was virtually the leader of our group.
He had been sidelined by JRJ and had fared badly as the leader of his own political party which had challenged JRJ. He had rejoined the UNP but was cold shouldered by his kinsman Ranil. At this stage we received a shot in the arm when EIle Gunawansa Thero who had been a supporter of Gamini and a critic of Ranil, decided to join us and allow us the use of his temple in Colombo 7 as our base. He knew us “conspirators” well and had been busy earlier trying to promote Susil (Moonesinghe) as a candidate for the forthcoming Presidential election.
Once Susil threw in his lot with us Elle Gunawansa promoted the conspiracy and virtually became its “spiritual guide”. Clearly the bandwagon was rolling and many UNP dissidents promised to come over after the first wave of crossovers. Among them were Harold Herat, Mervyn Silva,Vincent Perera, Harindra Corea, Walgamage and Rohan Abeygunasekara. Later we persuaded Ronnie de Mel Also to leave the UNP and join CBK.
All this was conveyed to Mangala Samaraweera who kept CBK informed. He entertained our group for drinks at his house in Paget Road perhaps to assess for himself the depth of our commitment, for our group consisted of many “grandees” of the UNP. With a Presidential election looming shortly this was a good break for the incumbent President who then personally got involved with the nitty gritty of the “cross over”. She had to be sure because in politics there are many developments which seem promising but trend to fizzle out at the last minute thereby leaving the host wondering why he or she got into this mess in the first place. In the meanwhile we raised an issue I had taken up internally with the UNP leadership by publicly supporting a call for a joint effort to solve the national question by forming a “national government”. This cry which has I wen launched by CBK, received much attention from the media.
At the same time there were UNPers like Hameed and Tissa Attanayake, whose ambitions were thwarted by my entry to Kandy politics and who were egging on Ranil and Gamini Athukorale to take action against me. I had a “mole” close to Athukorale who informed me about his attempts as party secretary to sideline me. He was trying to take revenge on Gamini Dissanayake’s memory and on Wickreme Weerasooria by penalizing me.
It was a fluid situation and I believe that Ranil thought that he could some how placate me in view of the long standing friendship I had with him and his family. In fact he told me that his mother had inquired about this controversy thereby emphasizing the strong personal links that I had with him and his father Esmond. Ranil had been my guest in Paris as a Minister and at a party meeting he referred to the dinner I offered him in the posh Hotel Voltaire in the left Bank in Paris and a visit to a naughty night club “Deux Boule” with its cabaret which usually held Sri Lankan visitors spell bound.
He had instructed his close advisor and my friend Milinda Moragoda to meet me and iron out any differences. He fixed a luncheon meeting at the Japanese restaurant in the Hilton Hotel. Milinda was accompanied by Ranasinghe, his factotum who had been assigned to be an aide to Ranil. Earlier Ranasinghe had worked with the DUNF and knew me quite well. I realized that he had been brought along as a witness.
He told me that Ranil had no problem about the others leaving the party but was concerned about my decision to abandon him. He also told me that Ranil was aware of the machinations of Tissa Attanayake and Hameed and that he did not approve of it. I spoke candidly to Milinda about the shabby treatment meted out to me and the genuine need to have a national government to meet the fast deteriorating ethnic situation. In any case I was not alone in this attempt and we had gone too far to change our minds.
He must have reported all this because Ranil called me after a meeting at Sirikotha and said that he had to go by seniority and that he proposed to remedy the situation soon and that he had assigned me the portfolio of Power and Energy in his “shadow cabinet”. We parted amicably enough but that was my last visit to Sirikotha and the end of transactions with Ranil as my political leader. He made a last ditch attempt by drafting DB Wijetunga to urge me to remain. But I genuinely felt that I would be more at home with the culture of the PA than the UNP at that juncture.
I realized that the UNP propaganda machine would now be targeting our group after a pro UNP journalist who was close to Ranil told me that he had been pulled up for publishing an interview with me in his weekly review of political news. A contingent of journalists like Victor Ivan, Varuna Karunatilleke, Lasantha Wickrematunge and Upul Joseph Fernando who in their animosity to CBK were rooting for Ranil to win the forthcoming election, began to publish articles critical of the move to promote the concept of a national government.
Shan Wickremesinghe’s TNL station was constantly criticizing our move. At the same time Sirisena Cooray who was my friend met me several times and requested me to give up the idea of leaving the UNP and to join him in setting up a group which would fight internally for reform. I knew that this was an impossibility. All executive power had been vested in the party leader after the Kataragama convention of the UNP. Sirisena Cooray faded away from active politics after that though we did meet from time to time in his Lake Drive house to talk about the good old days. Since my daughter Varuni lived next door to him at Lake Drive we kept in touch till he sold his property and moved on to Australia.
It was not difficult for us to counter attack with our concept of a “national government”. The state media were all on our side. I met the Mahanayakas of Malwatta and Asgiriya who endorsed the idea of unity. The Mahanayake of Malwatte, Rambukwelle Vipassi was very close to me. He immediately endorsed my views in an interview which became the main headline of Sinhala newspapers. The influential Asgiriya priest Warakawe told the press that “Sarath Amunugama will never take a decision which is detrimental to national interests”. I then met the former President Wijetunga who also endorsed my stand leading to another banner headline.
We were winning the media war when members of the public began to write to the newspapers supporting us. Gamini Fonseka also gave an interview in support and UNP leaders then issued a directive that its members should not contact the media without permission from Sirikotha, which was a sure sign that they were getting worried about losing the media war. I gave a public lecture at the Fort YMBA advocating a national government. The impending split was front page political news. The “face off” in the UNP could no longer be hidden. It was time for action.
(Excerpted from Volume 3 of the Sarath Amunugama autobiography) ✍️
Features
True Santa & Fake Santa in the US. NPP underwhelmed by Square-toed Critics
A telling Christmas cartoon in a Canadian newspaper (The Globe and Mail) shows the American Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents apprehending and attacking Santa Claus as he lands in the US presumably without a visa. For their part, ICE agents have gone a step worse and got one of their men to be a fake Santa, with an ICE logo, in an advertisement that promises US immigrants a payment of $3,000 and free flight ‘home’ for Christmas if they would voluntarily turn themselves in. The overexcited and out-of-depth Department of Homeland Secretary Kristi Noam has added her two cents: “Illegal aliens should take advantage of this gift and self-deport.”
That is Trump’s America and it is at terrible odds with the historical image of America that the first American Pope in Vatican devoutly cherishes and is unabashedly defending. Paraphrasing the gospel of Matthew, the Pope had pointedly admonished, “Jesus says very clearly, at the end of the world, we’re going to be asked, ‘How did you receive the foreigner?” The American Bishops followed suit and in a rare rebuke of the Administration, have expressed their “concern for the evolving situation impacting immigrants in the United States”.
But not all American Catholics are with the Pope and their Bishops. Sixty percent of white American Catholics are said to be in favour of Trump’s vicious crackdown on immigrants. They and their voluble intelligentsia are a bulwark of Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) bandwagon. Five of the nine Supreme Court judges are conservative white Catholics. They are aided and abetted by Clarence Thomas, the lone male African-American and conservative judge on the bench. The six judges, ignoring the dissenting liberal judges, have been giving judicial cover to practically all of Trump’s controversial second term initiatives.
The new bullhorn foreign policy towards Europe is the speciality of Vice President JD Vance, a late convert to Catholicism and married to a Hindu Indo-American. The oversight of Central and South America is the responsibility America’s new neocons, the Cuban neocons, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Catholic Cuban American with a ton of chips on his shoulders. Trump used to deride him as “little Marco.” Marco Rubio wants the US to browbeat Venezuela and use it as an example to other Latin American countries.
But Trump’s support is falling and almost all of his new initiatives are beginning to unravel even before he has finished the first year of his second term. Even among Catholics who are 20% of the population numbering 50 million, the 60% support of white American Catholics is negated by the opposition of 70% Hispanics to Trump’s deportation program even though Trump made significant inroad among Hispanics in the 2024 election. Among all Americans Trump has a negative approval rating with nearly 60% of Americans dissatisfied with his policies and performance across the board.
At 79, Trump is beginning to walk and talk like Biden when the latter was in office as the oldest American President. Trump is not losing his grip on power but he cannot keep tab on his zealous acolytes as they rush to further their own agendas on immigration, controlling Latin America and jettisoning Europe. It is the economy that is his business. It is literally so insofar as his family is enabled to make as much hay as they can before the curtain crashes. And the country’s economy will be his Achilles Heel just as it was for Biden. Trump will be considerably deflated should the Supreme Court rule against him on the constitutionality of his idiosyncratic tariff scheme. On the other hand, if the Court’s conservative judges were to rule in his favour it will do lasting damage to their already tattered credibility.
Regardless, the Trump presidency is not going to end all of a sudden like in so many other countries including Sri Lanka in 2022. The built in inertia of the US system will provide for the Trump presidency to peter out and for the country to take an even longer time to be rid of the damages he has done to the institutions and to restore them slowly. In the meantime, one would hope that the carnage in Ukraine will be soon brought to an end. And, as Pope Leo XIV said in his Christmas homily, the people “in the tents in Gaza, exposed for weeks to rain, wind and cold, ” should be soon helped out of the “rubble and open wounds.”
While it is too soon to speculate about post-Trump America, Trump’s impact on the American political system over the last 10 (to be 15) years in politics is obvious. First, he was able to instigate a critical mass of people into believing that the mainstream political discourse is a fake enterprise. That was his route to victory in 2016 and much of his first term was about consolidating the belief of his followers that everyone who was opposing him were fake and un-American. He took the next step and made them believe that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him by the political establishment and was given to Joe Biden. The Trump’s playbook is being adapted by like-minded leaders in other countries to score their own political victories. Accusations of fake news, allegations of stolen elections, and widespread disinformation – i.e. intentionally spreading incorrect information – have now become the stock of politics in a number of countries. Sri Lanka is not one of them but it does manifest symptoms of this new malaise.
The NPP and its Square-toed Critics
Allegations of election fraud have always been a fact of political life Sri Lanka. A sizeable forensic industry grew out of petitioning courts to challenge the results of individual constituency elections based on allegations of fraud and corruption. The two old Left Parties would have none of it and would accept the results of the election based on the official counts. They never challenged the results of any election that was lost by any of its candidates. When the Left was shut out of parliament in 1977, NM Perera wrote for the LSSP that the Party had been shut of the legislature twice in its history. First, from the State Council by colonial Order in Council, and in 1977 by the people themselves. It fought the colonial expulsion but accepted the verdict of the people.
Allegations of foreign interference are also not new. The Left had its routine rhetorical flights to warn of the circumambient presence of imperialism. The UNP countered with homemade stories of Chinese spies. But the first serious questioning of an election result and the accusation of foreign interference came after the 2015 presidential election that saw the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa when he tried to win an illegitimate third term in office. It was also the first defeat of a sitting president. The first reaction was to blame Tamil treachery. The second was to blame the long hand from New Delhi. Neither took serious traction but they created a local genre of political punditry that keeps itself busy.
The Rajapaksas have grown out of it. Their elders have no time for it and their next generation is desperate about finding a future foothold. But their loyal pundits keep churning. The latest addition to this genre of commentary is the finally revealed revelation about the supposedly sensational proposition made by former Indian High Commissioner Gopal Baglay to former Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, on the morning of that fatefully eventful day of 13 July 2022, that Mr. Abeywardena should immediately become Sri Lanka’s new President.
Obviously, this meeting would have taken place after Gotabaya Rajapaksa had fled the country in the wee hours of that same morning. But what is not clear is whether GR’s letter of resignation was already official and whether GR’s appointment of Ranil Wickremesinghe as Acting President had already come into effect. Mr. Wickremesinghe himself has revealed the circumstances of his taking oath as president after GR’s fleeing – that the oath was taken in secrecy in a Colombo Temple – in an interview with former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, after a meeting of the International Democracy Union (IDU) in London. The UNP is an IDU member and Harper its Chairman.
There is no reason to question the veracity of Speaker Abeywardena’s account of his meeting with the then Indian High Commissioner, in the Speaker’s parliamentary office. But what is amusing is the use of this single data point of a meeting between the High Commissioner and the Speaker – to draw a line of conclusion in two directions: (1) a causal line going backward to suggest that the entire Aragalaya phenomenon was potentially orchestrated by India and America; and (2) a consequential line going forward to the election of the NPP government with the assertion that the new government came into office after displacing Gotabaya Rajapaksa to serve Sri Lanka’s two masters – India and the US. The people of Sri Lanka are reduced to doormats in this political theatre and their votes were political counterfeits to elect a government of fake Marxists. Even Trump would be impressed by this creativity.
As amusements go, this genre of political punditry is fully supplemented by the NPP’s current critics and quondam comrades from the bookish left (as Philip Gunawardena used to scoff). They take NPP to task for any and all of its actions and non-actions – from its apparent ambivalence towards Israel to its alleged foot dragging on the Prevention of Terrorism Act, not to mention its similarly alleged kneeling before the IMF.
The criticisms themselves are not inaccurate, but their tone and timing do not appear to be intended for any positive outcome. They are also esoteric and out of place in a situation when the country has been ravaged by a torrential cyclone. I will conclude by paraphrasing a witty response to a recent online critique of the NPP on the PTA matter: in blaming the NPP government for not repealing all the bad laws enacted by every previous government, are we not forgetting that the NPP is the only government that is – not only against making use of bad laws enacted by others, but also against enacting any new bad law of its own.
by Rajan Philips ✍️
Features
2025: The Year We Let It Happen
“I was saved by God to make America great again,” Donald Trump said, a line that circulated widely during his political comeback rallies. “The golden age of America begins right now,” Trump declared as he was inaugurated for a second term on 20 January 2025, marking a major shift in US politics with consequences likely to extend across generations. Trump’s appeal lay not in moderation but in confrontation, rooted in the assertion that democracy works best when it produces winners unencumbered by restraint. He rewarded many who delivered him power, while leaders in other democracies often spent their mandates managing survival and retreating from pledges once deemed non-negotiable. The old Marxian line about history repeating itself as tragedy and farce felt newly apt as elections continued to produce both at once.
While deteriorating democratic systems grappled with their contradictions, quasi-democratic and openly authoritarian administrations pursued power with less ceremony. Beijing tightened its hold over Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong while projecting its global power with mixed success, and Moscow prosecuted its war in Ukraine with brutal persistence, accepting sanctions and isolation as the cost of imperial memory. The EU’s plan to use frozen Russian funds for Kyiv stalled and was replaced by a €90 billion loan package, which will cost taxpayers around €3 billion annually in interest. Pyongyang continued its missile testing, while its state-linked hackers reportedly stole an estimated $2.02 billion in cryptocurrency in 2025 alone. Tehran, for its part, passed another turbulent year, marked by a 12-day military confrontation with Israel in June 2025 that inflicted significant damage on both countries. Power in these systems remained centralized and unapologetic, justified by security and sustained by fear.
Across the globe, 2025 witnessed a wave of Gen Z-led protests that challenged authority and disrupted the social order in ways reminiscent of the Arab Spring, yet carried their own perils. From climate strikes in London and Berlin to anti-corruption demonstrations in São Paulo, Mexico City, Dhaka, and Kathmandu, young activists confronted entrenched elites with unprecedented energy and digital coordination. In Morocco, Madagascar, Tunisia, Indonesia, and the Philippines, student-led and youth-driven uprisings rattled governments, while in the United States, marches over climate action and student debt repeatedly clashed with authorities.
Even in authoritarian countries such as Iran, Vietnam, and, to some extent, Thailand, clandestine movements mobilized online and in the streets, forcing concessions while provoking brutal crackdowns. Yet these eruptions of youthful revolt, as electrifying as they were, revealed a dangerous pattern: like the Arab Spring, the protests often destabilized societies without delivering durable reform, leaving governments weakened, institutions strained, and political vacuums that could be exploited by opportunistic elites. The Gen Z moment in 2025 was a showcase of idealism and impatience, but also a warning that the seductive energy of revolt can become the architect of new disorder and unfulfilled promise. The question remains: who will have the last laugh?
The dissonance between public display and private conclave became starkly visible in Beijing in September 2025 during the 80th-anniversary commemorations of the end of the Second World War. State television followed Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin as they approached the parade ground, and microphones accidentally left live picked up a fragment of conversation that ricocheted around the world. According to reports, Putin’s interpreter was heard saying, “Human organs can be continuously transplanted. The longer you live, the younger you become,” to which Xi replied, “Some predict that in this century humans may live to 150 years old.”
The Kremlin later confirmed the exchange, insisting it was a casual discussion about medical advances, not a policy statement. Yet the symbolism was hard to miss: two leaders whose authority rests on longevity speculating, however lightly, about defeating mortality itself. In a century marked by demographic decline in both Russia and China, the fantasy of extended life carried political weight.
That moment intersected with a broader obsession that cut across systems: the promise and threat of artificial intelligence. Governments unable to agree on climate targets found common urgency in machine learning, particularly its military and medical applications. The United States National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence warned in 2021 that AI would “accelerate the speed of warfare beyond human comprehension”. By 2025, the Pentagon had embedded AI across military operations, deploying commercial models and prioritizing generative tools to maintain America’s technological edge.
Project Stargate, a high-profile initiative with commitments from OpenAI, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, and SoftBank, was said to involve hundreds of billions of dollars in public-private investment to expand AI infrastructure and research across sectors. In parallel, China’s state and corporate ecosystems together channeled tens of billions into AI development, sustaining the world’s second-largest cluster of AI firms and an expanding suite of generative tools. Critical minerals remained a strategic fulcrum, with China controlling more than 90 per cent of global rare-earth processing capacity and wielding that dominance as leverage over technology and defence supply chains.
Space in 2025 saw competition in orbit intensify rather than abate. The number of active satellites in low Earth orbit surpassed 9,350, led by SpaceX’s Starlink constellation, which accounts for the largest share of operational spacecraft. The Space Development Agency awarded US$3.5 billion in contracts for 72 new infrared tracking satellites to strengthen missile-warning and defence architecture. China’s on-orbit presence also expanded markedly in 2025, with Beijing conducting a record number of launches and placing hundreds of satellites into space to advance communications and surveillance networks, including early deployments for its ambitious Guowang low Earth orbit mega constellation. Close encounters between Chinese, Russian, and Western satellites exposed weak space-traffic coordination, with orbit increasingly framed in martial rather than peaceful terms.
On the ground, the uglier side of power refused to remain hidden. In the United States, the Epstein Files Transparency Act compelled the Department of Justice to disclose federal records by mid-December, but heavy redactions and omissions drew bipartisan criticism from lawmakers who argued the release undermined the law’s intent and shielded powerful individuals. Thousands of pages referenced disturbing allegations and reinforced a widely held sense that wealth and influence can insulate the well-connected from scrutiny or accountability. Elsewhere, established democracies continued to confront systemic failures: France grappled with unresolved clerical abuse scandals; Britain faced renewed criticism over policing gaps in handling grooming gangs; and India’s chronic under-reporting of sexual violence remained a persistent human rights concern.
Meanwhile, the language of peace was deployed with similar cynicism. Trump repeatedly suggested he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, citing what he described as a series of peace initiatives in which he claimed to have played a decisive role. These included the Abraham Accords of 2020, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, and the 2025 United States-brokered ceasefire in Gaza, under which all remaining living Israeli hostages held by Hamas were released and hostilities were paused through a phased arrangement.
Trump further asserted that his administration had “settled” or eased a widening range of conflicts, pointing to diplomatic efforts aimed at initiating talks towards a negotiated end to the Russia–Ukraine war, although substantive peace terms remain elusive and negotiations continue amid resistance from Kyiv, Moscow, and key European Union states. He also publicly referenced conflicts or diplomatic tracks involving India and Pakistan; Thailand and Cambodia; Kosovo and Serbia; the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda; Israel and Iran; Egypt and Ethiopia; and Armenia and Azerbaijan as evidence of his claimed peacemaking credentials, despite the absence of durable or comprehensive peace settlements in any of these cases.
Trump did not receive the Nobel Prize, whose awards have often favoured aspiration over results. Instead, it went to María Corina Machado, a Venezuelan opposition leader who told me in 2020 that “a mafia group has destroyed my beloved nation, Venezuela”, and whom Washington now treats as a key ally. Meanwhile, the United States has reportedly sought to seize another oil tanker linked to Caracas while pursuing an alleged drug cartel, amid claims that the Secretary of War ordered forces to “kill them all”. At the same time, Latin America has seen a significant rise in right-wing politics, with Argentina’s Javier Milei consolidating power, Chile electing far-right leader José Antonio Kast, and conservative presidents such as Daniel Noboa in Ecuador and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador gaining influence amid broader regional shifts to the right.
Africa was not immune to global disorder. In Sudan, a brutal civil war between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and rival factions continued throughout 2025, marked by repeated mass atrocities, including ongoing killings around El Fasher in North Darfur that left tens of thousands dead and displaced millions, making it one of the world’s most devastating humanitarian crises. The United Nations and humanitarian agencies reported widespread executions, sexual violence, and attacks on civilians and health facilities. Meanwhile, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, fighting between the Congolese army and the Rwanda-linked M23 rebel group forced thousands to flee, with more than 84,000 refugees crossing into neighbouring Burundi in 2025.
Nigeria’s security situation also deteriorated, with jihadist factions, including Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province, expanding operations and causing civilian casualties and displacement. Across West Africa, political realignment followed coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, which jointly withdrew from ECOWAS and formed the Alliance of Sahel States, commonly dubbed the “African NATO”. The bloc has announced plans to establish a shared central bank and investment fund aimed at economic autonomy and reducing reliance on traditional financial systems, but it remains too early to assess its capacity to curb the continent’s growing Islamic extremism and militant gangs.
Through all this, inequality hardened. The latest World Inequality Report 2026 showed that the richest 0.001 per cent of adults — fewer than 60,000 individuals — now control three times more wealth than the poorest half of the global population combined, while the richest 10 per cent own around three-quarters of global wealth. While leaders speculated about extended lifespans and investors poured money into longevity start-ups, life expectancy stagnated or fell in several countries: in the United States it remained lower than a decade earlier, and in parts of sub-Saharan Africa gains were erased by conflict and weak health systems.
Orwell’s line continues to resonate, even at the risk of banality: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” The events of this year have not disproved it; they have updated it with satellites, algorithms, and offshore accounts. Power now moves faster and hides better, but it still feeds on the same asymmetries. As another year closes, the temptation is to wish for renewal without reckoning. That wish has become a luxury. The facts are stubborn: inequality widens, wars persist, technology accelerates without consensus, and leaders speak of salvation while tolerating cruelty. New Year greetings sound hollow against that record, but perhaps honesty is a start. The age we are entering will not be golden by proclamation; it will be judged, as ever, by who is allowed to live with dignity — and who is told, politely or otherwise, to wait. To the New Year — hopefully wiser.
by Nilantha Ilangamuwa ✍️
Features
After Christmas Day
We are in this period – the days immediately following Christmas – December 25. The intense religious and festive two days are over, but just as the festive season precedes Christmas Day, it follows it too, notwithstanding the day that marks the beginning of the new year.
Christmas is significant, I need not even mention, as the celebration of Jesus Christ’s birth in Bethlehem in a manger as there was no room at the inn. It however symbolizes God‘s love and salvation for his ‘children’. People make merry with traditional gift giving (custom from the three kings), carols, bright lights concentrated in indoor fir trees and general goodwill epitomized by jolly old Santa. It is also a time of spiritual reflection on God’s love of people by his giving his son to their will.
The day after Christmas – 26 December – is also a day marked in the calendar of the festive season. Named Boxing Day, it too is a holiday of fun. Originally a day of generosity and giving gifts to those in need, it has evolved to become a part of Christmas festivities. It originated in the UK and is observed by several Commonwealth countries, including Ceylon.
It is concurrent with the Christian festival of Saint Stephen’s Day, which in many European countries is considered the second day of Christmas. It honours St. Stephen who was the first Christian martyr who was stoned to death for his faith. More commonly, it is called Boxing Day, also known as Offering Day, for giving servants and the needy gifts and financial help. The term boxing comes from the noun boxes, because alms were collected in boxes placed in Churches and opened for distribution on the day after Christmas. This day is first mentioned in the Oxford English Dictionary on 1743.
The Twelve Days of Christmas follow the 25th and make up the Christmas Season. It marks the days the kings of Orienta –Magi – took to visit the infant Jesus with gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense, symbolizing Christ’s royalty, future suffering and divinity/ priesthood respectively.
The “Twelve days of Christmas” we know as a Christmas carol or children’s nursery rhyme which is cumulative with each verse built on the previous verse. Content of the verses is what the lover gives his /her true love on each of twelve days beginning with Christmas day, so it ends on January 6, which marks the end of the Xmas season. The carol was first published in England in the late 18th century. The best known version is that of Frederic Austen who wrote his rhymes in 1909.
“On the first day of Christmas my true love sent to me
A partridge in a pear tree.
On the second day of Christmas my true love sent to me
Two turtle doves
And a partridge in a pear tree.”
And so on with three hens, four calling birds; five gold rings, six geese a-laying, seven swans a-swimming, eight maids a-milking, nine ladies dancing, ten lords a-leaping, eleven pipers piping, twelve drummers drumming. But the most important fact is that each animal or human represents a Christian object or key tenet of the faith, serving as a religious tool where each gift depicts a religious concept.
For instance, it is believed the partridge symbolizes Jesus and two turtle doves represent the Old and New Testaments. Doves are symbols of truth and peace, once again reinforcing the tie to Christ and Christmas. Reference is also made to the Ten Commandments, the 12 Apostles and the Creed. However, this is a popular theory and not a historic fact with some believing it is a love song pure and simple.
And so 2025 draws to an end. One cannot but throw one’s thoughts back to when one was an eager beaver child. Buddhist though I was, I attended a Christian school from Baby Class and was very influenced by the Christian faith. In fact, an older sister was so indoctrinated she wanted to convert to Christianity. Our Methodist missionary school did not encourage conversions.
Mother was unaware of this great attraction; her emphasis was on an English education for her children,. But being so drawn to the Christian religion with all its celebration and merriment was no surprise, added to the fact that Vesak was such a solemn occasion with sil redi restraint and the death of the Buddha too commemorated.
It is a very heartening fact that in this country Buddhists too join in the pleasures of Christmas. Many go for Midnight Mass on 24th because of religiously mixed marriages or merely to enjoy that experience too. Our family, when the children were young, invariably celebrated with the traditional XMas tree in the house with my husband taking great pleasure in buying a branch of a cypress tree sold in Colombo, and decorating it. We often spent the holiday in Bandarawela and so Christmas became extra special with the strong smell of the tree branch bought indoors. Santa visited my young one for long years; he being a strong believer in the delightful myth.
Delightful memories are made of these…
I wish everyone a wonderful Christmas. Let’s substitute the sorrows and despair of the aftermath of the cyclone and give ourselves, all Sri Lankans, a break and renew our togetherness and one-ness as a nation of decent people..
-
News6 days agoMembers of Lankan Community in Washington D.C. donates to ‘Rebuilding Sri Lanka’ Flood Relief Fund
-
News4 days agoBritish MP calls on Foreign Secretary to expand sanction package against ‘Sri Lankan war criminals’
-
News7 days agoAir quality deteriorating in Sri Lanka
-
News7 days agoCardinal urges govt. not to weaken key socio-cultural institutions
-
Features6 days agoGeneral education reforms: What about language and ethnicity?
-
Opinion7 days agoRanwala crash: Govt. lays bare its true face
-
News6 days agoSuspension of Indian drug part of cover-up by NMRA: Academy of Health Professionals
-
News7 days agoCID probes unauthorised access to PNB’s vessel monitoring system


