Midweek Review

Predicament of war-winning Sri Lanka military

Published

4 years ago

2022/01/5

Sahan Weerasooriya

Maj. Gen. Udaya Perera

By Shamindra Ferdinando

In spite of issuing a five-year multiple visa to retired Maj. Gen. Udaya Perera in Aug 2019, the US, in early Dec, 2021, barred him from entering the country. The US ordered Singapore Airlines not to permit the Gajaba Regiment veteran to board the Singapore-bound flight, from where he, his wife and a son were to continue their journey to the USA. Maj. Gen. Perera, who had retired in 2017 after having served the Army for 36 years, suddenly found himself categorised among war criminals. One-time Sri Lanka’s Deputy High Commissioner in Malaysia (2009-2011) Maj. Gen. Perera was about to board the flight (Colombo/Singapore/Los Angeles) with the final destination being California, to see his granddaughter. However his wife and son departed as planned, whereas the ex-top combat officer of the famed Gajaba regiment had to return home dejected at having been humiliated at the country’s main international airport by such crass behaviour of the self-appointed world policeman. We could forgive such behaviour as a mistake if it came from a country that has clean hands, but certainly not from one that has shed so much innocent blood around the world and continue to do so at will.

The highly embarrassing snub, in full view of the public, of Maj. Gen.Perera, who had received his Master’s Degree from the prestigious US Army War College, a couple of years after the successful conclusion of the war, didn’t attract the attention it deserved. The government and the Opposition conveniently refrained from at least issuing a statement as regards the development. Perhaps they felt there was no point in trying to complain against two members of the self-appointed international community, as the US and Australia imposed similar travel restrictions earlier on Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka, General Shavendra Silva and Maj. Gen. Chagie Gallage et al over unsubstantiated war crimes accusations and they, too, were left unanswered.

Maj Gen Perera received the prestigious United States Army War College Alumni Award for his academic performances and in recognition of his services as the International Fellows Class President at the US Army War College and is a lifetime member of the US Army War College Alumni Foundation.

During his tenure as the Deputy HC in Malaysia, Maj. Gen. Perera played a significant role in the extradition of Kumaran Pathmanathan alias ‘KP.’ It would be pertinent to mention that the Eelam War IV time Director Operations, received the diplomatic appointment in April 2009, a few weeks before the military eradicated the top LTTE leadership.

The incident involving Maj. Gen. Perera that happened on the night of Dec 5 at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) remained under wraps till Dec 26. Perhaps the incident could have gone unreported at all if not for some concerned party bringing it to the notice of The Island. But the issue failed to attract sufficient interest of the print and electronic media, including social media.

Need for US clarification

The Foreign Ministry should seek an explanation from the US Embassy, in Colombo, as regards the punitive measures taken against Maj. Gen. Perera. Only the US can explain why Maj. Gen. Perera, now a top employee of a prominent private sector enterprise, did during the Eelam War IV to be categorised as a war criminal. Eyebrows have been raised over the ex-officer’s predicament as he hadn’t been assigned to fighting formations on the Northern front (2007-2009) or involved in the Eastern campaign (2006-2007) or commanded the divisions after the war. Australia found fault with Maj. Gen. Gallage for commanding the 59 Division after the conclusion of the war.

What did the US find unacceptable about Maj. Gen. Perera’s conduct after the issuance of five-year multiple visa in August 2019? The US has issued the visa over two years after his retirement and eight years following the end of the war. Maybe, the US wants to expand the proscribed list as part of its overall strategy to intensify pressure on Sri Lanka to bring it to its knees for daring to get financial and other assistance from China that has helped us in numerous ways in the past, especially when the West attempted to throttle us on the military front by putting an arms embargo.

No doubt India, too, helped us at crucial times, but as we have said before what Beijing did by helping us to defeat the LTTE in actual fact was a favour done to Delhi because initially the ultimate goal of the Eelam project was the breakup of India, but with the collapse of the Soviet Union the equation changed with America also wanting to have a solid friend for Tel Aviv in India for increasingly arrogant and unpopular Israel among a sea of Arab masses.

The Foreign Ministry should be mindful of the growing threat posed by the continuing Geneva agenda meant to weaken the country. Over two years after the last presidential election that brought wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa into power in Nov 2019, the incumbent dispensation is yet to properly address the accountability issues. Sri Lanka’s pathetic response has facilitated the despicable Geneva agenda intended to weaken the Sri Lankan State.

May be it is time that we raised such issues as justice for victims of West in places like, for example, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Palestine, etc., especially due to false flag operations like the one staged on entirely staged weapons of mass destruction that supposedly Saddam Hussein had. Then what about justice for victims of hundreds if not thousands of hell fire missiles that rained death and destruction on innocent wedding parties, funeral processions, etc., in those countries, in the guise of killing terrorists. Where are you UNHRC?

The political leadership needs to realize that humiliation of the military is part of the Western strategy. That is the undeniable truth. Geneva wants to tarnish the image of those who spearheaded the actual military campaign against the LTTE, service commanders and selected senior as well as junior security forces officers.

Both Canada and Italy snubbed Sri Lanka over the latter’s proposal to name retired Air Force Commander Air Marshal Sumangala Dias as High Commissioner. Regardless of AM’s clean war record, Canada rejected him. Having allowed the LTTE rump a free hand over a period of time and undermined the war-winning Sri Lanka at every turn, the Canadian rejection of AM Dias was meant to degrade the country.

Human rights crusader Canada, member of the Sri Lanka Core Group in Geneva recently attracted massive media attention following the shocking revelation of how thousands of indigenous children perished in government-run schools. These schools were meant to erode indigenous culture, language and family and community ties. Politically motivated racial project was notorious for the neglect and abuse of the children compelled to attend them. Thousands of Indigenous children died therein and had been interned in unmarked graves on grounds of such schools among other places, obviously hoping such dastardly deeds would never come to light.

An utterly contemptible Canadian decision to back Tamil Diaspora propaganda pertaining to genocide in Lanka by way of a Private Member Bill 104 on ‘Tamil Genocide Education Week’ in the Ontario Legislative Assembly should be examined against the backdrop of Ottawa’s rejection of AM Dias. Instead, Canada swiftly accepted prominent civil society activist Harsha Kumara Navaratne as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner. The writer recently dealt with the Navaratne’s appointment in an article titled ‘From meeting Pottu, Balraj and Soosai to being Sri Lanka’s top envoy in Canada’ in the Dec 22, 2021 issue of The Island.

Foreign Ministry bid to save precious dollars

Cash-strapped Sri Lanka on Dec 27, 2021, announced a long overdue decision to close down some missions. Declaring that the Sri Lanka High Commission in Abuja, Nigeria, the Consulate General of Sri Lanka in Frankfurt, Germany; and the Consulate General of Sri Lanka in Nicosia, Cyprus, would be closed down with effect from 31 December 2021, the Foreign Ministry announced that the Cabinet of Ministers approved the move. The Foreign Ministry asserted that foreign reserves could be saved by minimising expenditure on the maintenance of diplomatic missions. Perhaps, the Cabinet of Ministers should have considered closing down many more missions than those at Abuja, Frankfurt and Nicosia.

Over the years, Sri Lankan missions overseas have become a haven for political appointees. We also wonder whether many of our serving diplomats are rendering a worthy service to the country. Some of them have joined the service through the backdoor, thanks to influence. We can recall how our top career diplomat, in a leading capital in the East, gave a talk to a group of leading businessman in that country’s capital in the presence of our then Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar and repeatedly referred to the construction of the second RUNAWAY at BIA with valuable assistance from that country. At that moment we ourselves felt like running away from there!

Successive governments have shamelessly utilised diplomatic missions to accommodate associates, friends as well as some former parliamentarians. The incumbent dispensation is no exception.

The Parliamentary High Posts Committee, whoever chairs it, follows political directives. There cannot be a better example than the yahapalana administration granting an ambassadorial position to businessman A.S.P. Liyanage. The self-serving cunning businessman, who merely pretended to play the part of a stooge to those in power and served twice as head of mission, contested the presidential election on more than one occasion and at the last parliamentary election appeared on the Colombo District UNP list. Liyanage was on the same list with UNP Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe and its Assistant Leader Ravi Karunanayake at the disastrous August 2020 parliamentary election that reduced the former governing party to just one National List slot. Liyanage was so influential he received appointment as Sri Lanka top envoy in Nigeria during the previous Rajapaksa administration. President Maithripala Sirisena then made him Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Qatar.

Controversy over Embraer Legacy 600 jet

About a week before the New Year, an unexpected controversy erupted over Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, accompanied by wife, Shiranthi, and other members of the family, utilising a private jet to visit the famous hill shrine of Lord Venkateswara in Andhra Pradesh’s Tirumala where they offered prayers. Social media was dominated, their two-day visit. Rajapaksa visited the temple in February 2020, less than three months after the last presidential election, when a special puja was performed at the Devasthanam on the first anniversary of his current term.

Contradicting statements relating to the visit (departure Dec 23 morning and return De 24 evening) resulted in speculation that Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in Uganda Velupillai Kananathan provided the Embraer Legacy 600 jet. Velupillai Kananathan had been among Premier Rajapaksa’s entourage and was pictured holding his hand as they walked away from the aircraft in question having landed at Renigunta airport in Andra Pradesh. Kananathan had moved to Uganda way back in 1987 and established therein before receiving the appointment as High Commissioner in 2013. Velupillai Kananathan has received the top posting back after the last presidential election.

Social media alleged that Velupillai Kananathan had been with the LTTE though well informed Tamil Diaspora as well as former intelligence officers emphasised there was absolutely no involvement with the terrorist organisation. Studied at S. Thomas College, Mount Lavinia, Velupillai Kananathan had been involved in the hospitality trade, having first served the Hatton National Bank.

The Divaina quoted Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa as having said that it was a private visit with no expenditure of public funds. The Premier’s Media Secretary Rohan Weliwita, too, declared that public funds hadn’t been utilised and expenses borne by the Premier himself. However, Pohottuwa lawmaker Milan Jayatilleke is on record as having said that a powerful Indian businessman provided the jet for the pilgrimage and the cost borne by the Indian. The lawmaker defended the Thirupathi visit in the wake of some sections of the Opposition accusing Premier Rajapaksa of squandering public funds at a time the country was reeling from severe economic difficulties. The controversy has taken a new turn after Premier Rajapaksa’s Chief of Staff Yoshitha Rajapaksa’s declaration that a friend of his father provided the jet though he didn’t know the identity of the benefactor.

Who owns the super luxury aircraft, believed to be registered in Europe? The Opposition is likely to pursue the jet story. In the January 02, 2022 edition of ‘Annida’, Aruna Jayawardena dealt with the issue at hand, comprehensively. The writer questioned the ownership of the super luxury aircraft against the backdrop of continuing controversy over High Commissioner Velupillai Kananathan’s role in the whole affair. The writer questioned the appropriateness of the Premier accepting such an expensive freebie. The government should set the record straight.

Paying homage to Tirupathi

Many Sri Lankan politicians annually visit Tirumalar. Mahinda Rajapaksa, Maithripala and Ranil Wickremasinghe are among them. Sirisena accompanied by wife, Jayanthi Pushpakumari and other family members prayed at Tirumalar on April 17, 2019, four days before the Easter Sunday carnage. Sirisena has been accused of leaving for Tirumalar and from there flying to Singapore on the second leg of a private visit, in spite of specific Indian intelligence warning of impending terrorist attack. Sirisena, who also served as the Defence Minister at that time paid a very heavy price for neglecting the Indian intelligence warnings pertaining to the National Thowheed Jamaat (NTJ) plot, though he has repeatedly claimed he was not aware.

The Foreign Ministry plays a vital role in the overall national defence. The Foreign Ministry should play a leading role in national defence. One cannot easily forget how that Ministry has been used over the years to appease foreign powers or provide employment opportunities to those the government wanted to get rid of. Disgraced IGP Pujitha Jayasundera’s claim is a case in point that he was offered a diplomatic positing if he accepted the responsibility for 2019 Easter carnage cannot be ignored. Jayasundera, indicted before the three-judge bench of the Colombo High Court Trial at Bar hearing the Easter Sunday carnage is on record as having said that the then President Maithripala Sisisena offered him the diplomatic posting.

In the case of the treacherous 2015 Geneva resolution, the Foreign Ministry at the behest of political directive betrayed the country’s war-wining armed forces. The late Mangala Samaraweera served as the Foreign Minister at that time. Following the Geneva betrayal, President Sirisena, in consultations with Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, brought in Ravi Karanunayake as the Foreign Minister. Samaraweera received the finance portfolio. The late minister handled the finance portfolio quite well with government revenue topping Rs 1,900 bn mark on two consecutive years.

In spite of the change, the Foreign Ministry didn’t change its line. The Foreign Ministry quite unashamedly allowed Western embassies to exploit the so-called Mannar mass graves. Those responsible turned a blind eye to foreign diplomats propagating the lie that Army during the Vanni offensive killed and buried hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilians. The despicable project continued until a US lab declared the skeleton remains belonged to the colonial era. Based on unsubstantiated claims made by Colombo-based Western embassies, the Human Rights Chief Michelle Bachelet blamed the Sri Lankan military for mass graves. Even after the Geneva project went awry, the Foreign Ministry lacked the will to at least refer to the extremely unfair position taken by the former Chilean UNHRC President in her capacity as the global human rights chief.

The Foreign Ministry showed its true colours when The Island sought the government response to the disclosure made by Lord Naseby in the House of Lords in Oct 2017. The Foreign Ministry simply rejected Lord Naseby’s intervention. The disclosure unsettled the then government. The then Foreign Ministry spokesperson, an experienced career diplomat, ridiculed Lord Naseby’s statement. The official wouldn’t have done so without consulting the higher-ups. The yahapalana Foreign Ministry would have probably remained quiet if The Island didn’t raise the issue. For want of a Foreign Ministry response to Lord Naseby’s very important statement, even a week after it was made, the writer, on Oct 20, 2017, sought an explanation from the Foreign Ministry.

The Foreign Ministry response really disappointed a vast majority of people, who expected the government to use the House of Lords disclosure to counter lies that had been propagated by various interested parties. Instead of taking advantage of Lord Naseby’s statement, the Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mahishini Colonne declared: “The Government of Sri Lanka remains committed to the national processes, aimed at realizing the vision of a reconciled, stable, peaceful and prosperous nation. Engaging in arguments and debates in the international domain over the number of civilians who may have died at a particular time in the country will not help resolve any issues, in a meaningful manner, locally, except a feel good factor for a few individuals who may think that they have won a debate or scored points over someone or the other.”

Two years later, Tilak Marapana, PC, in his capacity as the Foreign Minister made reference to Lord Naseby’s disclosure when he addressed the Geneva sessions. One-time Attorney General Marapana, who succeeded disgraced Ravi Karunanayake as Foreign Minister in the wake of explosive revelations in the Presidential Treasury Bond Commission, emphasized the importance of Lord Naseby’s disclosure based on wartime Colombo based UK Defence Advisor Lt. Col. Anthony’s Gash dispatches to London. But, his government refrained from pursuing the matter. The current dispensation, too, never officially submitted British records to Geneva though during the tenure of Prof. G.L. Peiris’ predecessor, Dinesh Gunawardena, the Foreign Ministry did raise the issue with the British. The UK continues to suppress wartime dispatches from Sri Lanka. In fact, Sri Lanka never pursued the declaration made by wartime US Defence Attaché Lt. Col. Lawrence Smith in 2011. Basically, both British and American embassy officials said the same. They denied the Sri Lankan military perpetrated war crimes. Their statements/declarations should be examined against the backdrop of the US and the UK pursuing an anti-Sri Lanka agenda.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

NPP drowning in sea of scams

Published

3 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Outgoing Treasury Chief Mahinda Siriwardena congratulates his successor Harshana Suriyapperuma in late June 2025 at the Finance Ministry

The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among

different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.

Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.

There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.

The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.

Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.

Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.

The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.

First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.

If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.

Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.

Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.

Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.

Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.

The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.

The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.

The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.

Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.

NPP on back foot

The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.

The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.

Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.

That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.

Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.

When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.

Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.

NDB fraud

Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.

The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).

The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.

The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.

Midweek Review

Is language social or psychological phenomenon?

Published

3 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.

Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.

Adoption of different culture

Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.

An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.

Linguistics and philosophy of language

It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.

It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.

Plato’s theory

J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?

How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.

Perceptions

The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.

How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.

For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.

Social or psychological phenomenon

The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.

After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?

by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London