Connect with us

Opinion

Seventy years ago: Great August hartal

Published

on

A scene during 1953 hartal

REAR VISION

By Jayantha Somasundaram

The Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) founded in 1935 contested the following year’s State Council election and returned two out of the fifty elected members in the legislature. However, the Party’s horizon was extra-parliamentary; its focus being organising workers into unions and leading the unions not merely towards economic and workplace goals, but also towards the political objective of the revolutionary transformation of society.

During the Second World War which commenced in 1939, and which for then-Ceylon reached a climax with the Japanese attack on Colombo and Trincomalee in April 1942, the LSSP was banned, its leaders like N. M. Perera, Philip Gunawardena and Colvin R. De Silva were jailed, and the Party was driven underground by the island’s British rulers.

When the War ended in 1945, the wartime economic boom which had enabled Colombo to accumulate a healthy sterling balance through exports also came to an end. The result was strikes which broke out in October 1946, organised by the no longer proscribed LSSP (Socialist Party), and the newly formed Communist Party (CP). This wave of strikes covered the Public Service, the Mercantile Sector and the Plantations, a successful general strike which secured higher minimum wages, medical leave entitlements and paid-recreation leave among other benefits for wage earners.

In 1947 another round of strikes occurred, again involving workers in different sectors of employment. The leadership was provided once again by the LSSP through its trade unions the Ceylon Federation of Labour and the CP’s Ceylon Trade Union Federation. The Ceylonese Board of Ministers headed by D. S. Senanayake took a hard line and “passed repressive legislation which included the use of the military against the strikers,” wrote US Professor Patrick Peebles in The History of Sri Lanka and “(N. M.) Perera was arrested.” Government forces opened fire in Kolonnawa where they killed Kandaswamy, a protesting government clerk.

General Election 1952

Despite this unrest among urban workers, the General Elections held in May 1952 saw the United National Party (UNP) under Dudley Senanayake win a landslide victory of 54 seats (out of 95 elected members in parliament). The Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) got nine seats, the LSSP nine, the CP four, the Tamil Congress four and the Federal Party two. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, leader of the SLFP became Leader of the Opposition in Parliament.

However, not unlike the present, between 1951 and 1953 the island’s economy continued to decline as export earnings fell while living costs spiralled. Consequently, from late 1952 there was once again unrest among wage earners, workplace slowdowns, labour strikes and hunger strikes.

Further, in a response with a familiar ring, an International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank) mission which visited Ceylon in 1951, in its report the following year noting that welfare expenditure accounted for a third of government spending, recommended that such welfare spending  be pruned. Consequently the Central Bank proposed to the Government an increase in the price of staples like rice, wheat flour and sugar, an end to the free midday meal for school children and a hike in postal rates, bus and train fares. Cutbacks which the Dudley Senanayake Government implemented in 1953.

The attack on living standards prompted many around the country to stage local protests, but the Government refused to back down, and the protests not only snowballed but became more organised. As events unfolded the LSSP took the initiative to convene a meeting of the Island’s major trade unions and together they decided on a single day of mass protest to demonstrate to the Government the depth of peoples’ anger and despair. Three opposition parties, the LSSP, the CP and the Federal Party (FP), closed ranks and called upon the people to stage an Island-wide anti-Government protest on Tuesday 12th August 1952. This decision was proclaimed at a public gathering in Colombo on 23rd July. The Opposition called for the 12th to be a day of mourning, the hoisting of black flags and a boycott of workplaces, shops, offices and schools; a single day of protest.

Northern Province Joins

In the meantime the tempo of protests and agitation continued, its reach extending with each passing day. “For the first time Tamil workers in the Northern Province joined their comrades in other parts of the country in the demonstrations and decided to take part in the proposed one day-protest,” wrote Political Science Professor Ranjith Amarasinghe. There were protests in front of rice stores and the home of a government minister. These were merely a dress rehearsal for the 12th. Amarasinghe went on, “action such as parading the troops in the streets or the refusal to negotiate only helped to antagonise the workers further and the strikes continued in the urban industrial and plantation sectors.”

At midnight 11th August the Hartal began at the Railway’s Ratmalana Workshop where workers downed tools and effectively brought the facility to a standstill. By dawn on the 12th the transport strike showed itself to be totally effective such that even those who did not join the Hartal could not travel to work. From its Colombo epicentre the Hartal fanned out along the western coastal arteries across the populous Western and Southern Provinces, and then into the population centres in the interior of the country. Public anger was manifested in blocked roads which became impassable for traffic, the felling of telephone poles and the torching of buses cutting communication and transport.

The Hartal now took on a life of its own, no longer being led or limited by party or union leaders and no longer adhering to the planned one day protest. The opposition leadership issued a statement reminding people that it was a one-day protest; this call for restraint would be repeated in the days to come. The people had taken control and the reins of the movement were no longer in the hands of either the political or union leadership. In fact what was envisaged as an urban workers protest broke these bounds and quickly became as much, if not more, the Hartal of Rural Sri Lanka.

Colvin R. de Silva described the Hartal as “the first occasion in the whole history of Ceylon (where) the masses revolted against the domination of the Ceylonese capitalist. This was also the first mass revolt that marked the worker-peasant alliance, the social instrument of the national liberation of Ceylon.”

State of Emergency

The Hartal was the most widespread, popular, militant, peoples’ protest in a century. In fact, it took on a momentum of its own, and an intensity that the leadership of the LSSP, CP and FP had not envisaged. Up until last year’s Aragalaya, it was the most potent act of protest, defiance and direct action on the part of people for radical economic and political change.

 “The Hartal started as a strike but grew into something more, perhaps not a revolutionary upsurge as described by the Sama Samajists, but the first post-Independent movement of mass power in action,” wrote historian Nira Wickramasinghe in Sri Lanka in the Modern Age.

Initially in certain areas, the Police confidently coped on their own. In Maradana for example, Deputy Inspector General Gabriel Rockwood even declined the offer of military assistance. But as the Hartal persisted, and in the face of island-wide strikes, agitation and sabotage, a State of Emergency was declared and the Army was called out to support the Police.

The Ceylon Light Infantry’s B Company under Major Maurice Jayaweera, was deployed in Moratuwa while C Company, under Major Roy Jayatillake, was deployed in Colombo. An artillery detachment, under Colonel Derek de Saram, cleared the High Level Road which passed through the Kelani Valley, a Left stronghold. Colonel Anton Muttukumaru Acting Commander of the Ceylon Army had to resort to the use of recruits in order to provide personnel to quell the Hartal.

The Hartal was most effective and mobilised its largest protesters in the Western, Southern and Northern Provinces. Completely unprepared for the Hartal’s wildfire spread and impact, the Government panicked; opposition party offices were raided and the presses where their bulletins and other publications were printed were sealed. A minimum of ten people, perhaps twelve, were killed, hundreds injured and thousands arrested.

The Government declared a State of Emergency for the first time since the violence of 1915, and ordered a curfew. It then went on to craft a conspiracy theory to explain the inexplicable events that had occurred. The Senanayake Administration produced a document claiming to have been found in the Communist Party’s Kandy Branch office which referred to an ‘army of liberation for the Central Province.’

Only Parliament

Parliament remained the only arena where the Opposition could respond publicly to the developing situation in the country. On 17 August Parliamentarian Pieter Keuneman who was also General Secretary of the Communist Party accused the Government of having “no justification whatsoever for the terrorism it has unleashed against the people of Ceylon who demand food at a price which they can afford…I accuse the Government of declaring a State of Emergency…to cover up their bankruptcy and panic by giving the armed forces legal power to join the police in shooting down people.”

“The Hartal broke the myth of the omnipotence of the UNP and gave the masses a new confidence in their own strength,” wrote Leslie Goonawardene, General Secretary of the LSSP.

When the Aragalaya reached its climax last year the ruling family had to take refuge in Navy bases and on a Naval vessel to escape the peoples’ wrath; at the height of the Hartal recalls LSSP General Secretary Tissa Vitarana in Groundviews two years ago, the Dudley Senanayake Cabinet were forced “to have an emergency meeting of the Cabinet in a British warship in the Colombo Harbour.”

Like the Aragalaya seven decades later, the Hartal shook the ruling party and its leadership to its very core. It resulted in the resignation of Prime Minister Dudley Senanayake in October 1953 and his stepping out of politics; just as its progeny, the Aragalaya of 2022 resulted in the fall from power of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Sovereignty without Governance is a hollow shield

Published

on

Globalisation exposes weakness and failed governance; and invites intervention – A message to all inept governments everywhere

The government of Burkina Faso has shattered the illusion of party politics, dissolving every political party in the nation. Its justification is blunt: parties divide the people, fracture sovereignty, and allow corrupt elites to hijack the sacred powers that belong to the citizenry.

This is not an aberration. It is the recurring disease of fragile states. Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, Venezuela, Sri Lanka—their governments collapse under the weight of incompetence, leaving their people abandoned and their sovereignty hollow. These failed states do not merely fail themselves; they burden the world. Their chaos spills across borders, draining the strength of nations that still stand.

Globalisation does not forgive weakness. It exposes it. And as global opinion hardens, a new world order is taking shape—one that no longer tolerates decay. The moment of rupture came when US President Donald Trump seized Nicolás Maduro from his Venezuelan hideout and dragged him to face justice in America.

Predictably, the chorus of populists cried “oil!” They shouted about imperialism while ignoring the rot of Maduro’s failed government and his collapse in legitimacy. But the truth is unavoidable: if Venezuela had been competently governed, Trump would never have had the opening to topple its leadership. Weakness invited conquest. Failure opened the door.

Singapore offers the perfect counterexample. It is perhaps the best-governed nation on earth, and for that reason it is untouchable. Strong governance is the only true shield of sovereignty. Without it, sovereignty is a brittle shell, a flag waving over ruins.

Trump’s precedent will echo across continents. China, Russia, India—regional powers are watching, calculating, preparing. The message is unmistakable: Sovereignty is conditional. It is not guaranteed by history or by law. It is guaranteed only by strength, by competence, by the will to govern effectively.

This is the revolutionary truth: nations that fail to govern themselves will be governed by others. The age of excuses is over. The age of accountability has begun. Weak governments will fall. Strong governments will endure. And the people, sovereign and indivisible, will demand leaders who can protect their destiny—or see them replaced by those who can.

By Brigadier (Rtd) Ranjan de Silva
rpcdesilva@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

CORRECTION

Published

on

In the article, “Let My Country Awake…” published yesterday, it was erroneously said that Sri Lanka was celebrating 77 years of Independence. It should be corrected as 78 years of Independence. The error is regretted.

Continue Reading

Opinion

“Let My Country Awake …”

Published

on

Where the mind is without fear, and the head is held high;

Where knowledge is free;

Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;

Where words come out from the depth of truth;

Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;

Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;

Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action

Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

– Rabindranath Tagore, Gitanjali, 35

As Sri Lanka marks seventy-seven years of independence, this moment demands more than flags, ceremonies, or familiar slogans. It demands memory, honesty, and moral courage. Once spoken of with affection and hope as Mother Lanka, the nation today increasingly resembles a wounded child—carried again and again across fragile hanging bridges, suspended between survival and collapse. This image is not new to our cultural consciousness. Long before today’s crises, Sri Lankans encountered it through literature and radio, most memorably in Henry Jayasena’s Hunuwataye Kathawa (1967), the Sinhala radio drama adaptation of Bertolt Brecht’s The Caucasian Chalk Circle, written during World War II (WWII), broadcast by Radio Ceylon and later staged across the island. Heard in village homes and city neighborhoods, the story quietly shaped a moral imagination we now seem to have forgotten.

In Hunuwataye Kathawa, a child is placed at the center of a chalk circle, claimed by two women. One is Natella, the biological mother who abandons the child during a moment of danger and later returns—not out of love, but driven by entitlement, inheritance, and power. The other is Grusha, a poor servant who risks everything to protect the child, feeding her, carrying her across perilous terrain, and choosing care over comfort. When ordered by the judge to pull the child out of the circle, Grusha refuses. She would rather let go than injure the child. Justice, the story teaches, belongs not to those who claim ownership most loudly, but to those who practice responsibility and restraint. For generations of Sri Lankans, this lesson entered the heart not through policy or economics, but through art.

Beneath Sri Lanka’s recurring failures lies a deeper wound: collective forgetfulness. It is indeed incredible how a nation colonised by foreign powers for over four centuries, battered by people’s insurrections and national struggles ever since, divided by a 30-year-long ethnic war, shaken by a Tsunami, inflamed by Easter Bombings 2019, hit by Covid-19 shutdown, and bankrupt by economic crisis, just to mention a few before the devastating Cyclone Ditwah that rocked the entire nation not many weeks ago, could be so forgetful of its tragedies. This insight was articulated with striking clarity by Dr. Arvind Subramanian, the former Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India, speaking at an event organised by The Examiner in Colombo on Jan 21, 2026. Subramanian observed the nation’s troubling tendency to forget its own history—its tragedies, hard-earned lessons, and warnings—and to embrace uncritically whatever is new in a pattern-line manner. This historical amnesia traps Sri Lanka in vicious cycles of debt, dependency, and unscientific thinking. When memory fails, every crisis feels unprecedented; when learning fails, every mistake is repeated.

Consequently, after seventy-eight years of independence from the last colonial rule, Sri Lanka still stands inside that chalk circle. Mother Lanka, once admired for free education, public health, and social mobility, has over the decades been reduced to a wounded child carried across unstable political, economic, and environmental bridges. Different governments, armed with different ideologies and promises, have taken turns holding her. Some carried her carefully; others dropped her midway; still others claimed her loudly while burdening her with unsustainable debt, weakened institutions, superstitious demeanors, and short-term fixes that mortgaged the future. This mother-made-child nation was perpetually oscillating between collapse and recovery. Yet instead of healing her wounds, with every passing Independence Day, we repeatedly celebrated and argued over who owned her.

This long post-independence journey reveals two recurring patterns. There have been many Natella-like approaches—entitlement without responsibility, nationalism without sacrifice, populism without prudence. These abandon the child in moments of crisis, only to return when power, contracts, or prestige are at stake. Alongside them, however, there have also been Grusha-like moments—imperfect, painful, often unpopular, yet rooted in reform, discipline, and care. These moments prioritise institutions over personalities, education over spectacle, sustainability over extraction, science over superstitions, and responsibility over applause. They are the moments that keep the child alive. The thorough cleaning that the whole nation recently experienced with Cyclone Ditwah also reminds us, among many other lessons, about the power and the need of these Grusha-like moments. It reminds us that the real celebration of freedom requires not slogans but breaking free from Natella-like approaches and, after the immersion that she just experienced, that it is only possible in and through at least three kinds of voluntary and ongoing immersions (3P Immersions)—disciplines that reshape not only policy but also personal and national character—Immersion of Poverty, Immersion of Plurality, and Immersion of Prudence.

The immersion of poverty, both spiritual and material, is deeply rooted in Buddhist teaching of tanhaā and āśā—the restless craving for more than one truly needs or can sustain. It is that which enables us to be constantly mindful of ourselves, not only who we really were, who we actually are, and what we continue to become, but also what we are really in need of. Nationally speaking, it involves acknowledging the country’s geopolitical placement, the strengths of its proud history and civilisation, and the limitations of its repeated struggles and political dismay. While material realism, when faced honestly, disciplines excess and teaches gratitude for what we already have, the immersion in poverty should remind us about how greed can lead to corruption and about the illusion that fulfillment lies in accumulation. A nation that does not discern its desires with its own resources and real capacity—human, historical, cultural, and environmental—will always mortgage its future to satisfy temporary cravings. We must ask ourselves honestly: how different are we today from the colonial era, when our decisions were shaped by external powers, if we remain bound by foreign debts, external models, and a forgetting of our own identity?

The immersion of plurality should not be understood as a slogan, but as a lived ethic. Sri Lanka’s diversity of language, religion, culture, geography, and memory is not the problem; it is the unfinished promise. Sinhala and Tamil, Muslim and Burgher, Buddhist, Hindu, Christian, and Muslim, village and city, coast and hill—all belong to the child in the chalk circle. While Natella-like politics weaponise difference and division, pulling the child apart to claim possession, Grusha-like care holds plurality together, recognising that it is the unity in diversity that sustains, protects, and frees the child, carrying it safely home. Freedom figures like Siddi Lebbe, Veera Puran Appu, Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan, Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam, C. W. W. Kannangara, T. B. Jayah, Anagarika Dharmapala, and D. S. Senanayake emerged from different faiths, languages, and regions, yet shared a common ethic: the country mattered more than self, party, or community. They were not perfect, but they were Grusha-like—unwilling to pull the child apart to prove ownership, willing instead to carry her patiently across danger.

Grusha-like care, therefore, holds plurality together, recognizing that no single group can carry the country alone. Rather, it is plurality which is the ground of freedom from coercion, selective justice, and hostage-taking—whether by professions, ideologies, or institutions that prioritize self-interest over the common good. It also demands freedom from resistance to positive change, especially when that resistance is motivated by private gain rather than the common welfare. A plural society asks: Does this serve the nation, or merely my group, my party, my advantage?

The immersion in prudence is perhaps the rarest and most neglected virtue. Prudence calls us to move from myth to science, from avidyā to vidyā, from superstition to evidence. Recent floods and landslides were not merely natural disasters; they were moral warnings. Thy painfully revealed what happens when desire overrides restraint, when planning ignores science, when land is abused, when short-term gain overrides long-term responsibility, and when development forgets sustainability. Freedom from disaster is inseparable from freedom from ignorance. Prudence teaches us to listen actively, speak intentionally, plan with evidence, build with environmental awareness, and govern with foresight. Prudence is not only about grand reforms; it is also very much about our everyday civic behaviour, such as how we treat Mother Earth and shared spaces.

For example, freedom from spitting on the ground, freedom from littering public places, and freedom from leaving behind what we refuse to clean or return. These are not small matters; they are indicators of whether people see the nation as a common home or as a place to be used and discarded. These are only a handful of many instances where we need to hear what JFK (John F. Kennedy) asked the Americans in 1961: “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country”. The WWII-devastated Japan’s development is not built merely on technology, but on discipline, as systems like 5S cultivate order, responsibility, and respect for shared space. Clean Sri Lanka and the proposed Education Reforms 2026 can become transformative moments—but only if truth replaces pretense, cooperation replaces cynicism, and ownership replaces vengeful rhetoric. Prudence allows a nation to appreciate its ownness—its history, institutions, cultural resources, and the agendas for the common good—without rejecting learning from the world. Without prudence, novelty becomes addiction, and reform becomes fashion.

Before the history repeats itself for another 77 years, either as a series of tragedy or comedy, it is important, therefore, to recognise that freedom from debt, disaster, and dependency (national or personal) is impossible without all three types of immersions working together—poverty of desire, plurality of belonging, and prudence of action. Initiatives such as education reform and Clean Sri Lanka offer genuine opportunities, but only if we cooperate, think long-term, and resist turning reform into another slogan. This raises an uncomfortable question: Do we truly want to be free? Or are we content to remain in the same rut, so long as ignorance is preserved, education is left unreformed, and distractions are supplied by a handful of greedy politicians—their vengeful rhetoric, their allies, lopsided media, and mushrooming content creators—while the powerful continue to benefit from it all? Freedom is demanding. It asks for memory, restraint, cooperation, and courage. Dependency, by contrast, is easy.

Therefore, the question before us is not who shouts the loudest, who claims patriotism most aggressively, or who promises instant miracles. It is who remembers, who renounces, who embraces plurality, and who acts with prudence as her stewards and not owners. When are we going to immerse ourselves in these three immersions and be free? After Rabindranath Tagore’s poem, W. D. Amaradeva once sang, “Patu adahasnam paurinen lokaya kabaliwalata nobedi, jnanaya iwahal we… Ehew nidahase swarga rajyataṭ, mage dæśaya avadi karanu mena, Piyanani…“— Where knowledge keeps the world from being divided by the walls of narrow thoughts… Into that heaven of freedom, Father, let my country awake. How many poems, how many Amaradevas, how many freedom speeches, how many religious sermons, how many inundations, and how many struggles must come and go before we awaken to that truth and let Mother Lanka be out of that vicious pattern or circle of collapse and recovery—whole, healed, and free?

By Dr. Rashmi M. Fernando, S.J.
Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rashmi.Fernando@lmu.edu | https://orcid.org/0009-0006-3310-721X

Continue Reading

Trending