Midweek Review

Should Sri Lanka Neglect Latin America and the Caribbean?

Published

5 years ago

2020/08/19

By Dayantha Laksiri Mendis

Dayantha Laksiri Mendis was the former Director of the Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies (BCIS). He was also Ambassador to Austria and Permanent Representative to the UN in Vienna. He has worked and travelled extensively in Latin America and the Caribbean region as UN and Commonwealth Legal Expert/Adviser. At present, he is the Honorary Consul for the Republic of Guyana in South America. Latin America and the Caribbean is a neglected area in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy-making, academic research, and scholarship. The broad focus of this article is to give an overview of Latin America and the Caribbean. The narrow focus is to ascertain as to how Sri Lanka could improve relations with this region in a beneficial manner. This approach would be more relevant than a mere description of Latin America and the Caribbean, since Sri Lanka has recently decided to establish closer relations with this region for a variety of reasons.

First of all, it is useful to define the terms ‘Latin America’ and ‘the Caribbean.’ The term ‘Latin’ refers to those persons who speak the Spanish language, and thus the term ‘Latin’ refers to the Spanish speaking states in the Americas. The Caribbean has a different definition. It refers to independent and dependent territories in the Caribbean Sea. The independent states belonged to several ex-colonial powers such as Britain, France, and the Netherlands. These island states are also called the West Indies. However, in recent terms, with the birth of the Association of the Caribbean States (1994), the term ‘Caribbean’ is re-defined to include those countries which are abutting the Caribbean Sea in South America and Central America, in the same way as states belonging to the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORAC) are determined.

Overview

A short overview by reference to the geography, history, and culture is necessary to understand the major issues confronting this region, before we consider their relevance to Sri Lanka.

Geographically the Latin American states spread from Mexico in North America to Argentina in South America. The land area exceeds 7.9 million square miles, and equals the landmass of Europe, and the US combined. In distance, it covers roughly an area from London to Cape Town. It is quicker to fly from Rio de Janeiro to Johannesburg than from Mexico City to Buenos Aires. This would demonstrate that Latin America and the Caribbean constitute a vast area.

It is important to note that Brazil is bigger than India in size, and Amazonia is the largest repository of biodiversity and constitutes the world’s largest ‘sink’ for carbon dioxide (CO2). The Galapagos is an off-shore island of Ecuador, where Charles Darwin wrote his famous book on The Origins of the Species to dispute the birth of homo sapiens to the horror of theologists.

Latin America can be further classified into several sub-regions such as the Andean States, Central American States, and Rio de la Plata. Similarly, the Caribbean can also be classified into Eastern, Western, Northern, and Southern Caribbean States. Eastern Caribbean is further classified into Windward and Leeward Islands. The Caribbean is now one of the most beautiful, up-market and popular tourist destinations in the world, with a galaxy of off-shore financial centres.

Historically, it must be emphasised that Latin American and the Caribbean civilisations were in existence before the arrival of Christopher Columbus to the New World over 500 years ago. In fact, the Mayans in Belize, Aztecs in Mexico, and the Incas in Peru had sophisticated civilisations. It is, therefore, a myth to say that Christopher Columbus “discovered” the Latin America and the Caribbean as if these civilisations and states were not in existence in the early 16th century. Since the conquest of these areas by the Spanish conquistadors and other colonial powers, the whole face of Latin America and the Caribbean changed rapidly. Approximately 14 million slaves from Africa, and later indentured labour from India, were shipped to this region for sugar and coffee plantation, and the original inhabitants of this region were decimated by the European powers, through the colonisation of the New World.

This region has contributed to the international community in literature, art, music, and sports in a substantial manner. In the arts—the famous Pablo Casals, Pablo Neruda, and the artist Pablo Picasso lived in Latin America. They have also produced a number of Nobel Prize winners. In sports, the West Indies, the former British Colonies in the Caribbean Sea dominated the game of cricket. Both Argentina and Brazil dominated the soccer scene. In music, the Latin American rhythms such as the Tango, Bossanova, Cha-cha-cha, Rhumba, and many other rhythms are popular in many parts of the world. The Calypso and Reggae rhythms, as well as the wonderful sonorities of the Caribbean Steel Drums, are taught and played in many Western capitals for the listening pleasure of millions of people throughout the world.

Relations with the US

This region cannot be fully understood without reference to the US. Since the promulgation of the Monroe Doctrine (1823), the US excluded any extra-hemispheric rivals from this region. It has followed a ‘hegemonic’ policy in the region in the Cold War period and interceded in the internal affairs of those states. It has sent troops to Dominican Republic, Panama, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Grenada in the recent past.

In the landmark Paramilitary Activities Case in 1986 (Nicaragua v. the US) the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held the mining of the Nicaraguan harbours and support to the Contras by the US was contrary to international law. The US continues to hold a tough stance on Cuba. It has passed the Helms-Burton Act to prevent other states from doing business with Cuba in regards to expropriated property4. However, at present, the most sensitive factor in US-Latin relations is the drug problem. The US holds a very strong position with regard to the extradition of traffickers. Nonetheless, the US is the driving force behind the economic expansion of this region through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), and several aid programmes.

Major Issues

It is important to understand the major issues confronting this region, and how the region has dealt with these issues are of relevance to Sri Lanka. Firstly, the question of promoting economic development is of paramount importance. The debt crisis in Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s has created difficulties for this region and will continue into the new millennium. The Latin American debt crisis arose because this region was unable to pay their debts which they borrowed from foreign banks. As this crisis began to grow, countries like Argentina and Brazil were really affected as they had to pay at least 50% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in servicing the debt. The Baker Plan (1986) and Brady Plan (1989) ameliorated this situation but the debt crisis still continues to be a major problem in this region5.

Another important issue is the shift from dictatorship to democracy. In most Latin American countries, there are no tin-pot dictators. Most have gone back to multi-party democracy through Presidential systems or the Westminster model.

Under Carlos Menon, Argentina has reverted to a Presidential system of government. Chile, Nicaragua and Panama have now established a democratic system of government. In most Latin American countries, democracy is the order of the day and dictatorships have taken a back-seat.

Finally, the viability of mini-states in the Caribbean is another major issue on the international agenda. After COVID, the mini-states are likely to suffer tremendously in the global economy. Previously, the Banana Issue has created huge trade disputes between the US and the European Union in regard to its preferential treatment. The viability of these states has been taken up at several Commonwealth Summits. A recent report on vulnerability by consultative groups of the Commonwealth Secretariat suggests many recommendations to overcome these difficulties.

Can we benefit from this region?

Sri Lanka can benefit a great deal from this region. The language barrier, lack of diplomatic representation, and geographic distance elude us from benefiting from this region in the following spheres.

Firstly, Latin America has taken a lead role in creating a ‘new platform’ to deal with the questions of globalisation and liberalisation of trade in a more effective manner at international fora. Jorge Castaneda’s initiative Alternativa Lationamericana provides a Latin answer to neo-liberalism. This initiative is of significant value to South Asia, and in particular to Sri Lanka, as we share similarities with this region

Secondly, the Caribbean experiment with off-shore financial services is relevant to Sri Lanka at this moment. It is indeed a success story. The Caribbean off-shore companies and banks have attracted high net worth individuals and corporate clients. It has created new employment opportunities and numerous benefits to a large number of Caribbean citizens. It is an experiment which can be copied easily, and therefore it has some value in making Sri Lanka an off-shore financial centre (OFC) in South Asia. If Sri Lanka can be developed as an OFC to India and other Asian states in the same way as Mauritius is to India, we can expect some offshore banks and trusts and offshore companies to establish offices in Sri Lanka to do business with other Asian giants especially in providing insurance and syndicated loans.

Thirdly, if Sri Lanka were to encounter difficulties of importing oil from the middle east countries, we may have to import oil from Latin America and Caribbean and our good relations with this region can help Sri Lanka to rely on them in a crisis situation. The Republic of Guyana is now emerging as a new oil producing country in this region.

Improving relations with this region

This is a neglected area in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy-making. Successive governments have failed to establish closer relations with this region. In this regard careful cost-benefit analysis should be undertaken in foreign policy making

Sri Lanka cannot afford to neglect this region since it provides a veritable avenue for export for manufactured goods, tea, coconut, cinnamon, and rubber products to Latin America, and precious stones especially to the Caribbean destinations, since these island states attract up-market tourist trade, through a network of cruise ships. India dominates the gem trade in the Eastern and Southern Caribbean. St. Maarten and Aruba are havens for gems and jewellery businesses and provide an avenue to market these products to high net-worth individuals. We have a comparative advantage in certain goods and services, too numerous to mention in specific terms in this short article. Hence, the selection of the appropriate countries for trade and diplomatic representation and penetration is of crucial importance.

It is also important to have closer relations, since any Sri Lankan who is vying for an international position in the future has very little chance to succeed without the support of this region. Almost, two decades ago, Judge Professor Christy Weeramantry, who was not a traditional diplomat, knew this too well in his election to the ICJ and worked extremely hard through expatriate Sri Lankans to win their support. On my invitation, he attended the Caribbean Heads of State Meeting in St. Kitts and Nevis and was able to form links with several Heads of State.

It is axiomatic that Sri Lankas relations cannot improve without adequate diplomatic and trade representations. It is unfortunate we have Ambassadors in Brazil and in Cuba and the Honorary Consuls in some Latin American and Caribbean countries. Cuban representation is for political rather than economic reasons, but this Embassy can be upgraded with proper accreditation to establish better relations with the neighbouring English-speaking Caribbean countries in the region. In the long run, Cuba might be the number one tourist destination for North American tourists, and therefore we must get prepared to build good economic relations with Cuba, as the sale point for some of our goods to the tourists who may arrive from North America. It is unclear as to why the Caribbean states are served from the Sri Lankan Embassy in Washington DC and New York and not from Havana, Cuba—the heart of the Caribbean.

Recently, Sri Lanka obtained Observer status in the Organization of American States (OAS). It is a step in the right direction. It is also useful for Sri Lanka to join the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS) at least as an observer to improve relations with small island states in the Caribbean.

It is impossible to improve relations with this region without a good knowledge and understanding of Latin America and the Caribbean. Sri Lanka needs to send ambassadors who can speak the language and understand the culture of Latin America and the Caribbean to maximise the benefits and good relations with this region

All News Advertisement

Features

Handunnetti and Colonial Shackles of English in Sri Lanka

Published

6 days ago

2025/12/10

Thilina Walpola

Handunetti at the World Economic Forum

“My tongue in English chains.
I return, after a generation, to you.
I am at the end
of my Dravidic tether
hunger for you unassuaged
I falter, stumble.”
– Indian poet R. Parthasarathy

When Minister Sunil Handunnetti addressed the World Economic Forum’s ‘Is Asia’s Century at Risk?’ discussion as part of the Annual Meeting of the New Champions 2025 in June 2025, I listened carefully both to him and the questions that were posed to him by the moderator. The subsequent trolling and extremely negative reactions to his use of English were so distasteful that I opted not to comment on it at the time. The noise that followed also meant that a meaningful conversation based on that event on the utility of learning a powerful global language and how our politics on the global stage might be carried out more successfully in that language was lost on our people and pundits, barring a few commentaries.

Now Handunnetti has reopened the conversation, this time in Sri Lanka’s parliament in November 2025, on the utility of mastering English particularly for young entrepreneurs. In his intervention, he also makes a plea not to mock his struggle at learning English given that he comes from a background which lacked the privilege to master the language in his youth. His clear intervention makes much sense.

The same ilk that ridiculed him when he spoke at WEF is laughing at him yet again on his pronunciation, incomplete sentences, claiming that he is bringing shame to the country and so on and so forth. As usual, such loud, politically motivated and retrograde critics miss the larger picture. Many of these people are also among those who cannot hold a conversation in any of the globally accepted versions of English. Moreover, their conceit about the so-called ‘correct’ use of English seems to suggest the existence of an ideal English type when it comes to pronunciation and basic articulation. I thought of writing this commentary now in a situation when the minister himself is asking for help ‘in finding a solution’ in his parliamentary speech even though his government is not known to be amenable to critical reflection from anyone who is not a party member.

The remarks at the WEF and in Sri Lanka’s parliament are very different at a fundamental level, although both are worthy of consideration – within the realm of rationality, not in the depths of vulgar emotion and political mudslinging.

The problem with Handunnetti’s remarks at WEF was not his accent or pronunciation. After all, whatever he said could be clearly understood if listened to carefully. In that sense, his use of English fulfilled one of the most fundamental roles of language – that of communication. Its lack of finesse, as a result of the speaker being someone who does not use the language professionally or personally on a regular basis, is only natural and cannot be held against him. This said, there are many issues that his remarks flagged that were mostly drowned out by the noise of his critics.

Given that Handunnetti’s communication was clear, it also showed much that was not meant to be exposed. He simply did not respond to the questions that were posed to him. More bluntly, a Sinhala speaker can describe the intervention as yanne koheda, malle pol , which literally means, when asked ‘Where are you going?’, the answer is ‘There are coconuts in the bag’.

He spoke from a prepared text which his staff must have put together for him. However, it was far off the mark from the questions that were being directly posed to him. The issue here is that his staff appears to have not had any coordination with the forum organisers to ascertain and decide on the nature of questions that would be posed to the Minister for which answers could have been provided based on both global conditions, local situations and government policy. After all, this is a senior minister of an independent country and he has the right to know and control, when possible, what he is dealing with in an international forum.

This manner of working is fairly routine in such international fora. On the one hand, it is extremely unfortunate that his staff did not do the required homework and obviously the minister himself did not follow up, demonstrating negligence, a want for common sense, preparedness and experience among all concerned. On the other hand, the government needs to have a policy on who it sends to such events. For instance, should a minister attend a certain event, or should the government be represented by an official or consultant who can speak not only fluently, but also with authority on the subject matter. That is, such speakers need to be very familiar with the global issues concerned and not mere political rhetoric aimed at local audiences.

Other than Handunnetti, I have seen, heard and also heard of how poorly our politicians, political appointees and even officials perform at international meetings (some of which are closed door) bringing ridicule and disastrous consequences to the country. None of them are, however, held responsible.

Such reflective considerations are simple yet essential and pragmatic policy matters on how the government should work in these conditions. If this had been undertaken, the WEF event might have been better handled with better global press for the government. Nevertheless, this was not only a matter of English. For one thing, Handunnetti and his staff could have requested for the availability of simultaneous translation from Sinhala to English for which pre-knowledge of questions would have been useful. This is all too common too. At the UN General Assembly in September, President Dissanayake spoke in Sinhala and made a decent presentation.

The pertinent question is this; had Handunetti had the option of talking in Sinhala, would the interaction have been any better? That is extremely doubtful, barring the fluency of language use. This is because Handunnetti, like most other politicians past and present, are good at rhetoric but not convincing where substance is concerned, particularly when it comes to global issues. It is for this reason that such leaders need competent staff and consultants, and not mere party loyalists and yes men, which is an unfortunate situation that has engulfed the whole government.

What about the speech in parliament? Again, as in the WEF event, his presentation was crystal clear and, in this instance, contextually sensible. But he did not have to make that speech in English at all when decent simultaneous translation services were available. In so far as content was concerned, he made a sound argument considering local conditions which he knows well. The minister’s argument is about the need to ensure that young entrepreneurs be taught English so that they can deal with the world and bring investments into the country, among other things. This should actually be the norm, not only for young entrepreneurs, but for all who are interested in widening their employment and investment opportunities beyond this country and in accessing knowledge for which Sinhala and Tamil alone do not suffice.

As far as I am concerned, Handunetti’s argument is important because in parliament, it can be construed as a policy prerogative. Significantly, he asked the Minister of Education to make this possible in the educational reforms that the government is contemplating.

He went further, appealing to his detractors not to mock his struggle in learning English, and instead to become part of the solution. However, in my opinion, there is no need for the Minister to carry this chip on his shoulder. Why should the minister concern himself with being mocked for poor use of English? But there is a gap that his plea should have also addressed. What prevented him from mastering English in his youth goes far deeper than the lack of a privileged upbringing.

The fact of the matter is, the facilities that were available in schools and universities to learn English were not taken seriously and were often looked down upon as kaduwa by the political spectrum he represents and nationalist elements for whom the utilitarian value of English was not self-evident. I say this with responsibility because this was a considerable part of the reality in my time as an undergraduate and also throughout the time I taught in Sri Lanka.

Much earlier in my youth, swayed by the rhetoric of Sinhala language nationalism, my own mastery of English was also delayed even though my background is vastly different from the minister. I too was mocked, when two important schools in Kandy – Trinity College and St. Anthony’s College – refused to accept me to Grade 1 as my English was wanting. This was nearly 20 years after independence. I, however, opted to move on from the blatant discrimination, and mastered the language, although I probably had better opportunities and saw the world through a vastly different lens than the minister. If the minister’s commitment was also based on these social and political realities and the role people like him had played in negating our English language training particularly in universities, his plea would have sounded far more genuine.

If both these remarks and the contexts in which they were made say something about the way we can use English in our country, it is this: On one hand, the government needs to make sure it has a pragmatic policy in place when it sends representatives to international events which takes into account both a person’s language skills and his breadth of knowledge of the subject matter. On the other hand, it needs to find a way to ensure that English is taught to everyone successfully from kindergarten to university as a tool for inclusion, knowledge and communication and not a weapon of exclusion as is often the case.

This can only bear fruit if the failures, lapses and strengths of the country’s English language teaching efforts are taken into cognizance. Lamentably, division and discrimination are still the main emotional considerations on which English is being popularly used as the trolls of the minister’s English usage have shown. It is indeed regrettable that their small-mindedness prevents them from realizing that the Brits have long lost their long undisputed ownership over the English language along with the Empire itself. It is no longer in the hands of the colonial masters. So why allow it to be wielded by a privileged few mired in misplaced notions of elitism?

Features

Finally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight

Published

6 days ago

2025/12/10

Thilina Walpola

Clandestine visit to Speaker’s residence:

Finally, former Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena has set the record straight with regard to a controversial but never properly investigated bid to swear in him as interim President. Abeywardena has disclosed the circumstances leading to the proposal made by external powers on the morning of 13 July, 2022, amidst a large scale staged protest outside the Speaker’s official residence, situated close to Parliament.

Lastly, the former parliamentarian has revealed that it was then Indian High Commissioner, in Colombo, Gopal Baglay (May 2022 to December 2023) who asked him to accept the presidency immediately. Professor Sunanda Maddumabandara, who served as Senior Advisor (media) to President Ranil Wickremesinghe (July 2022 to September 2024), disclosed Baglay’s direct intervention in his latest work, titled ‘Aragalaye Balaya’ (Power of Aragalaya).

Prof. Maddumabandara quoted Abeywardena as having received a startling assurance that if he agreed to accept the country’s leadership, the situation would be brought under control, within 45 minutes. Baglay had assured Abeywardena that there is absolutely no harm in him succeeding President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in view of the developing situation.

The author told the writer that only a person who had direct control over the violent protest campaign could have given such an assurance at a time when the whole country was in a flux.

One-time Vice Chancellor of the Kelaniya University, Prof. Maddumabandara, launched ‘Aragalaye Balaya’ at the Sri Lanka Foundation on 20 November. In spite of an invitation extended to former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the ousted leader hadn’t attended the event, though UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe was there. Maybe Gotabaya felt the futility of trying to expose the truth against evil forces ranged against them, who still continue to control the despicable agenda.

Obviously, the author has received the blessings of Abeywardena and Wickremesinghe to disclose a key aspect in the overall project that exploited the growing resentment of the people to engineer change of Sri Lankan leadership.

The declaration of Baglay’s intervention has contradicted claims by National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa (Nine: The hidden story) and award-winning writer Sena Thoradeniya (Galle Face Protest: System change for anarchy) alleged that US Ambassador Julie Chung made that scandalous proposal to Speaker Abeywardena. Weerawansa and Thoradeniya launched their books on 25 April and 05 July, 2023, at the Sri Lanka Foundation and the National Library and Documentation Services Board, Independence Square, respectively. Both slipped in accusing Ambassador Chung of making an abortive bid to replace Gotabaya Rajapaksa with Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena.

Ambassador Chung categorically denied Weerawansa’s allegation soon after the launch of ‘Nine: The hidden story’ but stopped short of indicating that the proposal was made by someone else. Chung had no option but to keep quiet as she couldn’t, in response to Weerawansa’s claim, have disclosed Baglay’s intervention, under any circumstances, as India was then a full collaborator with Western designs here for its share of spoils. Weerawansa, Thoradeniya and Maddumabandara agree that Aragalaya had been a joint US-Indian project and it couldn’t have succeeded without their intervention. Let me reproduce the US Ambassador’s response to Weerawansa, who, at the time of the launch, served as an SLPP lawmaker, having contested the 2020 August parliamentary election on the SLPP ticket.

“I am disappointed that an MP has made baseless allegations and spread outright lies in a book that should be labelled ‘fiction’. For 75 years, the US [and Sri Lanka] have shared commitments to democracy, sovereignty, and prosperity – a partnership and future we continue to build together,” Chung tweeted Wednesday 26 April, evening, 24 hours after Weerawansa’s book launch.

Interestingly, Gotabaya Rajapaksa has been silent on the issue in his memoirs ‘The Conspiracy to oust me from Presidency,’ launched on 07 March, 2024.

What must be noted is that our fake Marxists, now entrenched in power, were all part and parcel of Aragalaya.

A clandestine meeting

Abeywardena should receive the appreciation of all for refusing to accept the offer made by Baglay, on behalf of India and the US. He had the courage to tell Baglay that he couldn’t accept the presidency as such a move violated the Constitution. In our post-independence history, no other politician received such an offer from foreign powers. When Baglay stepped up pressure, Abeywardena explained that he wouldn’t change his decision.

Maddumabandara, based on the observations made by Abeywardena, referred to the Indian High Commissioner entering the Speaker’s Official residence, unannounced, at a time protesters blocked the road leading to the compound. The author raised the possibility of Baglay having been in direct touch with those spearheading the high profile political project.

Clearly Abeywardena hadn’t held back anything. The former Speaker appeared to have responded to those who found fault with him for not responding to allegations, directed at him, by revealing everything to Maddumabandara, whom he described in his address, at the book launch, as a friend for over five decades.

At the time, soon after Baglay’s departure from the Speaker’s official residence, alleged co-conspirators Ven. Omalpe Sobitha, accompanied by Senior Professor of the Sinhala Faculty at the Colombo University, Ven. Agalakada Sirisumana, health sector trade union leader Ravi Kumudesh, and several Catholic priests, arrived at the Speaker’s residence where they repeated the Indian High Commissioner’s offer. Abeywardena repeated his previous response despite Sobitha Thera acting in a threatening manner towards him to accept their dirty offer. Shouldn’t they all be investigated in line with a comprehensive probe?

Ex-President Wickremesinghe with a copy of Aragalaye Balaya he received from its author, Prof. Professor Sunanda Maddumabandara, at the Sri Lanka Foundation recently (pic by Nishan S Priyantha)

On the basis of what Abeywardena had disclosed to him, Maddumabanadara also questioned the circumstances of the deployment of the elite Special Task Force (STF) contingent at the compound. The author asked whether that deployment, without the knowledge of the Speaker, took place with the intervention of Baglay.

Aragalaye Balaya

is a must read for those who are genuinely interested in knowing the unvarnished truth. Whatever the deficiencies and inadequacies on the part of the Gotabaya Rajapaksa administration, external powers had engineered a change of government. The writer discussed the issues that had been raised by Prof. Maddumabandara and, in response to one specific query, the author asserted that in spite of India offering support to Gotabaya Rajapaksa earlier to get Ranil Wickremesinghe elected as the President by Parliament to succeed him , the latter didn’t agree with the move. Then both the US and India agreed to bring in the Speaker as the Head of State, at least for an interim period.

If Speaker Abeywardena accepted the offer made by India, on behalf of those backing the dastardly US backed project, the country could have experienced far reaching changes and the last presidential election may not have been held in September, 2004.

After the conclusion of his extraordinary assignment in Colombo, Baglay received appointment as New Delhi’s HC in Canberra. Before Colombo, Baglay served in Indian missions in Ukraine, Russia, the United Kingdom, Nepal and Pakistan (as Deputy High Commissioner).

Baglay served in New Delhi, in the office of the Prime Minister of India, and in the Ministry of External Affairs as its spokesperson, and in various other positions related to India’s ties with her neighbours, Europe and multilateral organisations.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to examine who deceived Weerawansa and Thoradeniya who identified US Ambassador Chung as the secret visitor to the Speaker’s residence. Her high-profile role in support of the project throughout the period 31 March to end of July, 2022, obviously made her an attractive target but the fact remains it was Baglay who brought pressure on the then Speaker. Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena’s clarification has given a new twist to “Aragalaya’ and India’s diabolical role.

Absence of investigations

Sri Lanka never really wanted to probe the foreign backed political plot to seize power by extra-parliamentary means. Although some incidents had been investigated, the powers that be ensured that the overall project remained uninvestigated. In fact, Baglay’s name was never mentioned regarding the developments, directly or indirectly, linked to the devious political project. If not for Prof. Maddumabandara taking trouble to deal with the contentious issue of regime change, Baglay’s role may never have come to light. Ambassador Chung would have remained the target of all those who found fault with US interventions. Let me be clear, the revelation of Baglay’s clandestine meeting with the Speaker didn’t dilute the role played by the US in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s removal.

If Prof. Maddumabandara propagated lies, both the author and Abeywardana should be appropriately dealt with. Aragalaye Balaya failed to receive the desired or anticipated public attention. Those who issue media statements at the drop of a hat conveniently refrained from commenting on the Indian role. Even Abeywardena remained silent though he could have at least set the record straight after Ambassador Chung was accused of secretly meeting the Speaker. Abeywardena could have leaked the information through media close to him. Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe, too, could have done the same but all decided against revealing the truth.

A proper investigation should cover the period beginning with the declaration made by Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government, in April 2022, regarding the unilateral decision to suspend debt repayment. But attention should be paid to the failure on the part of the government to decide against seeking assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to overcome the crisis. Those who pushed Gotabaya Rajapaksa to adopt, what they called, a domestic solution to the crisis created the environment for the ultimate collapse that paved the way for external interventions. Quite large and generous Indian assistance provided to Sri Lanka at that time should be examined against the backdrop of a larger frightening picture. In other words, India was literally running with the sheep while hunting with the hounds. Whatever the criticism directed at India over its role in regime change operation, prompt, massive and unprecedented post-Cyclone Ditwah assistance, provided by New Delhi, saved Sri Lanka. Rapid Indian response made a huge impact on Sri Lanka’s overall response after having failed to act on a specific 12 November weather alert.

It would be pertinent to mention that all governments, and the useless Parliament, never wanted the public to know the truth regarding regime change project. Prof. Maddumabandara discussed the role played by vital sections of the armed forces, lawyers and the media in the overall project that facilitated external operations to force Gotabaya Rajapaksa out of office. The author failed to question Wickremesinghe’s failure to launch a comprehensive investigation, with the backing of the SLPP, immediately after he received appointment as the President. There seems to be a tacit understanding between Wickremesinghe and the SLPP that elected him as the President not to initiate an investigation. Ideally, political parties represented in Parliament should have formed a Special Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to investigate the developments during 2019 to the end of 2022. Those who had moved court against the destruction of their property, during the May 2022 violence directed at the SLPP, quietly withdrew that case on the promise of a fresh comprehensive investigation. This assurance given by the Wickremesinghe government was meant to bring an end to the judicial process.

When the writer raised the need to investigate external interventions, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL) sidestepped the issue. Shame on the so-called independent commission, which shows it is anything but independent.

Sumanthiran’s proposal

Since the eradication of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May 2009, the now defunct Tamil National Alliance’s (TNA) priority had been convincing successive governments to withdraw the armed forces/ substantially reduce their strength in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. The Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK)-led TNA, as well as other Tamil political parties, Western powers, civil society, Tamil groups, based overseas, wanted the armed forces out of the N and E regions.

Abeywardena also revealed how the then ITAK lawmaker, M.A. Sumanthiran, during a tense meeting chaired by him, in Parliament, also on 13 July, 2022, proposed the withdrawal of the armed forces from the N and E for redeployment in Colombo. The author, without hesitation, alleged that the lawmaker was taking advantage of the situation to achieve their longstanding wish. The then Speaker also disclosed that Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella and other party leaders leaving the meeting as soon as the armed forces reported the protesters smashing the first line of defence established to protect the Parliament. However, leaders of minority parties had remained unruffled as the situation continued to deteriorate and external powers stepped up efforts to get rid of both Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Ranil Wickremesinghe to pave the way for an administration loyal and subservient to them. Foreign powers seemed to have been convinced that Speaker Abeywardena was the best person to run the country, the way they wanted, or till the Aragalaya mob captured the House.

The Author referred to the role played by the media, including social media platforms, to promote Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s successor. Maddumamabandara referred to the Hindustan Times coverage to emphasise the despicable role played by a section of the media to manipulate the rapid developments that were taking place. The author also dealt with the role played by the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) in the project with the focus on how that party intensified its actions immediately after Gotabaya Rajapaksa stepped down.

Disputed assessment

The Author identified Ministers Bimal Rathnayaka, Sunil Handunetti and K.D. Lal Kantha as the persons who spearheaded the JVP bid to seize control of Parliament. Maddumabanda unflinchingly compared the operation, mounted against Gotabaya Rajapaksa, with the regime change operations carried out in Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Ukraine. Asserting that governments loyal to the US-led Western block had been installed in those countries, the author seemed to have wrongly assumed that external powers failed to succeed in Sri Lanka (pages 109 and 110). That assertion is utterly wrong. Perhaps, the author for some unexplained reasons accepted what took place here. Nothing can be further from the truth than the regime change operation failed (page 110) due to the actions of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Mahinda Yapa Abeywardana and Ranil Wickremesinghe. In case, the author goes for a second print, he should seriously consider making appropriate corrections as the current dispensation pursues an agenda in consultation with the US and India.

The signing of seven Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) with India, including one on defence, and growing political-defence-economic ties with the US, have underscored that the JVP-led National People’s Power (NPP) may not have been the first choice of the US-India combine but it is certainly acceptable to them now.

The bottom line is that a democratically elected President, and government, had been ousted through unconstitutional means and Sri Lanka meekly accepted that situation without protest. In retrospect, the political party system here has been subverted and changed to such an extent, irreparable damage has been caused to public confidence. External powers have proved that Sri Lanka can be influenced at every level, without exception, and the 2022 ‘Aragalaya’ is a case in point. The country is in such a pathetic state, political parties represented in Parliament and those waiting for an opportunity to enter the House somehow at any cost remain vulnerable to external designs and influence.

Cyclone Ditwah has worsened the situation. The country has been further weakened with no hope of early recovery. Although the death toll is much smaller compared to that of the 2004 tsunami, economic devastation is massive and possibly irreversible and irreparable.

By Shamindra Ferdinando