Connect with us

Features

Steadying the ship at SLBC after 1977 UNP landslide

Published

on

The day after I assumed duties in my new post (as Chairman of the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation and Director General of Broadcasting), I had two unexpected visitors. The first was Mr. Festus Perera, who was now a Deputy Minister. I have already recounted my encounter with him during a flour shortage which occurred when I was Deputy Food Commissioner. He remembered this, and the object of his visit was to wish me well.

I was surprised that he had remembered this for nearly nine years. For a moment, I thought to myself that the same sound memory may have worked to my detriment if I had displeased him during that period. In fact, during a long career, I had worked with or dealt with hundreds of politicians, and I can assure any new entrant to the public service that all of them have long memories. This should not prevent them from doing what is right, which certainly includes refusing some of their requests. What is required is credibility and consistency in whatever you do.

The next visitor was even more unexpected. It was Mr. Gamini Dissanayake the new Minister of Lands and Irrigation and although youthful, a senior member of the UNP and a senior Minister. I really did not know him personally. There were just a few occasions, when I was Secretary to the Prime Minister when he had telephoned me on some matter or other and I had, as with anyone else, diligently done what I could.

Most people thought that Mr. Dissanayake had come to record a programme. This was not so. I was later to learn that he had come completely unannounced, catching everbody by surprise. He walked straight into my room. I was very touched by what he said. He stated that he had just taken oaths and was on his way to his Ministry. when he thought that first he should pay me a visit and see whether I had any problems. He did not even sit, and left reassured that I did not have any problems. To this day, I do not know what made him do this. But this proved to be the beginning of a developing relationship with him in the future.

By common consensus, the Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation and the Associated Newspapers of Ceylon or Lake House were expected to be the two most difficult places to control after a change of government. A breakdown of law, order and discipline was expected in both places, and in fact, both places began to live up to these expectations. Within the SLBC I was successful in controlling the situation and restoring peace and order within a few hours of my getting there. The fact that the Commander of the Navy thought it fit to provide me with a machine gun escort was proof enough of the general assessment of the turmoil there.

Unhappily at Lake House, the breakdown of order and the violence were not brought under control for a number of days. Many people were assaulted, some of them women, including the senior and respected journalist Mrs. Roshan Peiris, who had to be warded at Central Hospital, where I went to see her. It was she who had played the important role in trying to bring about a dialogue between the Federal Party and the Government. Paint was thrown at some employees of Lake House, whilst a few were tarred and feathered.

Trouble Shooting

At SLBC peace prevailed until the third day after I assumed duties. On the morning of that day members of the UNP Union, the JSS, came hurrying into my room. They stated that, so far, in accordance with my wishes and instructions they had refrained from doing anything untoward to any political opponent, although, according to them some of them had participated in harassing their members during the time their government was in power. But now, they complained of a serious act of provocation, where an officer of the Corporation, Raja Dharmapala, by name who had stood as an SLFP candidate at the elections and lost, had come in wearing a blue shirt, the party colours of the SLFP.

The JSS members informed me that the whole place was seething with anger and resentment and that any moment violence could break out, beginning with an assault on Dharmapala. This was indeed crass stupidity on the part of Dharmapala. He, more than any should have known the environment and the tense political relations within the SLBC. In the context of events, where he, a defeated candidate, had chosen to come in his party colours, when the Government had changed, not simply, but by obtaining over a five sixth majority in Parliament, was indeed a serious act of provocation.

This was not the time to dwell on the democratic rights of dress and concepts of individual freedoms. The whole place would have blown up, and hospitals, if not the morgue would have found more work. I had to act quickly. I told the JSS to somehow or other help to maintain the peace for half an hour. They left to try, still in anger. I immediately sent for Dharmapala, got him down to my room, and pitched into him.

I told him with what effort and with what difficulty, I had maintained the peace at SLBC, and how his stupidity was threatening to unravel everything. I ordered him to get out of the premises forthwith, and not to come back for a week. He apologized for causing me problems. I told him that my problems were nothing compared to his problems which were now imminent. He said he would leave at once. I told him that it was not that simple, and I had, in my view to first negotiate a safe passage for him. I kept him in my room, until I got the necessary assurances from the JSS. This was not simple, because at one stage promises were given, that he would not be assaulted physically, but some of them said that they could not guarantee that his shirt would not be torn. I had to patiently go on talking until ultimately I obtained a safe conduct for both the person and his shirt.

Discomfort

In those early days of a politically charged atmosphere, there were some issues that came up which caused me considerable discomfort. One such was the decision taken by the Ministry to interdict certain staff on grounds of engaging in political activity, when they were debarred from so doing, according to the rules. Some of the persons to be affected were well known, like the vocalist G.S.B. Ranee Perera, and Newton Gunaratne.

When I heard of this situation, I met the Minister and the Secretary, with the intention of exploring other avenues, and avoiding such a drastic measure. The SLBC was working normally and I did not think that wasting precious time on what may have happened in the past, when there was so much to be done in the future was a wise move. I could see that to an extent the Minister and the Secretary were also caught up in the general climate, and that this was not a measure that they had initiated entirely on their own.

Under the circumstances, after much discussion, the best that could be done was to convert the interdiction into compulsory leave, so that pending a final resolution, they at least got their salary. There was another thing I did. I did not want the letters of compulsory leave served on them as a routine matter by the Administration division. After all, they were our employees, and I felt that it was necessary for me to face them and talk to them personally, and do whatever I could to soften the blow. I spoke to them, advised them, hoped that matters could be sorted out soon, and assured them that I would do whatever was possible to close this chapter early. They thanked me. Some of them told me that they appreciated the fact that I had personally taken the trouble to speak to them which made them feel much better.

Meeting other trade unions

I met all the other trade unions one by one very early. One of the most professional was the Ceylon Mercantile Union (CMU). They were well prepared, spoke to the point and was ever alert to drive a hard bargain. At the same time, they did not quibble. For instance, they protested vehemently at what they referred to as a political transfer, where one of their members had been transferred from one division of the Corporation to another. They talked about injustice and political victimization.

I replied that it was indeed a politically directed transfer; but it entailed no demotion or hardship; and that such transfers had been kept down to a minimum. I then said “You and I have been born and bred in this country, we know the conditions here, and we are practical persons. Are you seriously telling me that in our context, that a government which had swept into power with over a five-sixths majority cannot order the transfer of an officer from one division to another in a public institution?”

They dropped the matter immediately. If an argument had force, they acknowledged it. The same could not be said of any other union. Others were efficient and effective in patches. With them, in many instances an effective argument evoked an emotional response. When they failed to maintain their line during rigorous examination of the merits, they changed track and resorted to emotional appeals and extraneous matters. But all in all most of them were good and well meaning people and I had no major problems with them.

The Board of Directors

The Board of Directors of the Corporation consisted of some interesting people such as Professor Tilak Ratnakara of the Economics Department of the University of Kelaniya and the Ven. Hettimulle Vajirabuddhi. Professor Ratnakara was regarded as an economic pundit of the UNP. He was a decent man but with a strain of idiosyncrasy. There were times he engaged in very fertile flights of fancy and one had to wait until they were exhausted. An interruption during this period led to ill temper. So one switched off and waited until the fuel was burned out.

At other moments, he could be very rational and constructive. Ven. Vajirabuddhi was dark, stocky and powerfully built. I had met him earlier and I have referred to this in an earlier chapter. He was also somewhat mercurial in temperament. He could be quite soft spoken one moment and explosive at another. The other members of the Board had legal and public service backgrounds and were steadier in temperament. One required considerable tact to steer the discussion and arrive at implementable decisions.

A visit to Mrs. Bandaranaike

Just as with the change of government in 1970, I could not take proper leave of my then Minister Mr. M.D. Banda, until much later, I was in the same predicament in relation to Mrs. Bandaranaike. Except for the hurried visit to Horagolla, which I have already referred to, I could not really talk to her. Therefore, one day, after I had settled down in Broadcasting, I told my Minister Mr. D.B. Wijetunge that I needed to go and see Mrs. Bandaranaike, since I had not been able to suitably bid farewell to her. Mr. Wijetunge, willingly gave me permission. Thereafter, I made an appointment and went with my wife to meet her at her residence in Rosmead Place. We were happy to see each other, after all the changes that had occurred. Mrs. Bandaranaike was relaxed and not pressed for time, and we talked for almost two hours. During the course of this conversation, she said that she had received a long personal letter from Mrs. Gandhi which she found greatly encouraging as well as consoling. She wanted me to see it and she went upstairs and fetched it.

The letter clearly showed how close, personal and mutually respectful the relationship between them was. The central portion of this long letter was Mrs. Gandhi’s prediction of the political harassment that Mrs. Bandaranaike would be subjected to and it was based very much on her own experience in India. The letter went beyond generalized prediction into specifics and described in some detail, the manner and mode of probable denigration and political attack.

At the same time, she counseled Mrs. Bandaranaike to remain unshaken, to ride the storm and to fight back. Apart from the intense personal concern displayed, the letter was a telling narration of the uglier side of South Asian politics, where to this day, one sees politics as a source of boosting personal egos and achieving personal and party advantages, rather than true disinterested national service. The fact that much happened, in exactly the way predicted by Mrs. Gandhi was an indication of the rooted deficiencies of our political society.

Attending to issues at the SLBC

I was Chairman and Director-General of Broadcasting only for a period of a little over four months, before I was reassigned. Therefore, a lengthy account of my stewardship in this post would not be necessary. I would however, like to briefly touch upon some salient issues. Firstly, on the management side, I found the organization to lack sufficient vigour. There had developed a looseness dangerously bordering on the careless.

For instance, a Sinhala news reader, who had to do the 6.30 a.m. news bulletin came late by about ten minutes, delaying the station opening, in spite of the fact that a car was sent to her residence to pick her up. She had to be sent on compulsory leave pending an inquiry. A large number of employees had got into the habit of aimlessly walking the corridors. That had to be stopped. There were employees playing carom in the canteen, during office hours. The carom boards had to be taken into custody and released only during the lunch hour and after 5 p.m.

Stern action was promised against anyone smelling of liquor. ‘The Directors of the divisions were enjoined to have a regular monthly meeting with their staff and the minutes of the meetings sent up to me. I met the Directors once a fortnight. I met the Trade Unions representing all parties and groups regularly. Through these meetings we were able to identify a long checklist of items that needed to be worked on and followed up. The list was then prioritized and specific time periods set for completion of action.

In some instances we later found, that implementation was on schedule, but the quality of the implementation poor. Quality checks were then installed. For some reason, the annual administration report of the Corporation had not been written for a number of years. Therefore, the reports and accounts had not been laid before Parliament. The rectification of this situation was begun. All in all, the entire administration and management of the institution had to be toned up and a degree of rigour injected into the system. This process was set in motion.

On the program and quality side too, a great deal of collaborative effort had to be put in. Here, unfortunately, we did not have a free hand. Politics came into contention. During the period of the previous government some radio artistes, especially singers had been sidelined allegedly on political grounds, Now with a five-sixths majority in Parliament they wanted to make up for lost time, and virtually demanded five-sixths of programs. The genre of many of them was Sinhala pop, and although I resisted consistently and continuously creating a serious imbalance in the Sinhala music programs, this happened. This initial surge could not be stopped, although towards my last month in office things were coming more into balance.

Among the varied programme activities, I was particularly interested in a program initiated by Mr. C. de S. Kulatillake on regional customs, dialects, and language peculiarities, including the Veddah language. We did not have television at this time and there was the danger, that with increased urbanization and migration, some of these linguistic and cultural aspects would be lost forever. I therefore, heavily backed Mr. Kulatilleke’s research and recordings and found ways and means of finding extra funds to sustain his program.

(Excerpted from In Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of MDD Pieris)



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Trump-Xi meet more about economics rather than politics

Published

on

President Donald Trump meets President Xi Jinping in Beijing: Mutually beneficial ties aimed at. (CNN)

The fact that some of the US’ topmost figures in business, such as Tesla chief Elon Musk and major US chipmaker Jensen Huang of NVIDIA fame, occupied as nearly a prominent a position as President Donald Trump at the recent ‘historic and landmark’ visit by the latter to China underscores the continuing vital importance of business in US-China ties. Business seemed to outweigh politics to a considerable degree in importance during the visit although the political dimension in US-China ties appeared to be more ‘headline grabbing’.

To be sure, the political dimension cannot be downplayed. For very good reason China could be seen as holding the power balance somewhat evenly between East and West. The international politics commentator couldn’t be seen as overstating the case if he takes the position that China could exercise substantial influence over the East currently; that is Russia and Iran, in the main. The latter powers hold the key in the Eastern hemisphere to shaping international politics in the direction of further war or of influencing it towards a measure of peace.

For example, time and again China has prevented the West from ‘having its own way’, so to speak, in the UN Security Council, for instance, in respect of the ongoing conflicts involving Russia and Iran, by way of abstaining from voting or by vetoing declarations that it sees as deleterious. That is, China has been what could be seen as a ‘moderating influence’ in international politics thus far. It has helped to keep the power balance somewhat intact between East and West.

At present a meet is ongoing between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. This happened almost immediately after the Trump visit. Apparently, Beijing is in an effort to project itself as treating the US and Russia even-handedly while underscoring that it is no ‘special friend’ of the US or the West.

This effort at adopting a non-partisan stance on contentious questions in international politics is also seen in Beijing’s policy position on the Hormuz tangle and issues growing out of it. The Chinese authorities are quoted as saying in this regard, for instance, that China is for ‘a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire in the Middle East’.

Such a position has the effect of enhancing the perception that China is even-handed in its handling of divisive foreign policy posers. It is not openly anti-West nor is it weighing in with Iran and other Eastern actors that are opposed to the West in the West Asian theatre. A ‘comprehensive and lasting ceasefire’ implies that a solution needs to be arrived at that would be seen as fair by all quarters concerned.

On the highly sensitive Taiwan issue, President Xi was comparatively forthright during the Trump visit, but here too it was plain to see that Beijing was not intent on introducing a jarring, discordant note into the ongoing, largely cordial discussions with Washington. On the Taiwan question President Xi was quoted saying: ‘If mishandled, the two nations could collide even come into conflict.’ In other words, the US was cautioned that China’s interests need to be always borne in mind in its handling of the Taiwan issue.

The cautioning had the desired result because Trump in turn had reportedly conveyed to Taiwan that the latter’s concerns on the matter of independence had to be handled discreetly. He had told Taiwan plainly not to declare ‘independence.’

Accordingly, neither the US nor China had said or done anything that would have made either party lose face during their interaction. Apparently, both sides were sensitive to each others’ larger or national interests. And the economic interests of both powers were foremost among the latter considerations.

There is no glossing over or ignoring economic interests in the furtherance of ties between states. They are primal shaping forces of foreign policies and the fact that ‘economics drives politics’ is most apparent in US-China ties. That is, economic survival is fundamental.

Among the more memorable quotes from President Xi during the interaction, which also included US business leaders, was the following: ‘China’s doors will be open wider’ and US firms would have ‘broader prospects in the Chinese market.’

Xi went on to say that the sides had agreed to a ‘new positioning for ties’ based on ‘constructive strategic stability’. The implication here is that both sides would do well not to undermine existing, mutually beneficial economic relations in view of the wider national interests of both powers that are served by a continuation of these economic ties. That is, the way forward, in the words of the Chinese authorities, is ‘win-win cooperation.’

It is the above pronouncements by the Chinese authorities that probably led President Trump to gush that the talks were ‘very successful’ and of ‘historic and landmark’ importance. Such sentiments should only be expected of a billionaire US President, bent on economic empire-building.

One of the most important deals that were put through reportedly during the interaction was a Chinese agreement to buy some 200 Boeing jets and a ‘potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes.’ However, details were not forthcoming on other business deals that may have been hatched.

Accordingly, from the viewpoint of the protagonists the talks went off well and the chances are that the sides would stand to gain substantially from unruffled future economic ties. However, there was no mention of whether the health of the world economy or the ongoing conflicts in West Asia were taken up for discussion.

Such neglect is regretful. Although the veritable economic power houses of the world, the US and China, are likely to thrive in the short and medium terms and their ruling strata could be expected to benefit enormously from these ongoing economic interactions the same could not be said of most of the rest of the world and its populations.

Needless to say, the ongoing oil and gas crisis, for instance, resulting from the conflict situation in West Asia, is taking a heavy toll on the majority of the world’s economies and the relevant publics. While no urgent intervention to ease the lot of the latter could be expected from the Trump administration there is much that China could do on this score.

China could use its good offices with the US to address the negative fallout on the poorer sections of the world from the present global economic crunch and urge the West to help in introducing systemic changes that could facilitate these positive outcomes. After all, China remains a socialist power.

Continue Reading

Features

The Quiet Shift: China as America’s “+1” in a Changing World Order

Published

on

Xi and Trump

“Everything ever said to me by any Chinese of any station during any visit was part of an intricate design”

— Henry Kissinger

That design may already be complete before this week’s , a meeting that could shape the future balance of global power.

The wind arrives quietly. By the time it is heard, history has already begun to turn. Across Asia, that wind is no longer distant. It carries with it the exhaustion of an old order and the uncertain birth of another. The question now is not whether the world will change. It is whether those who hold power possess the wisdom to guide that change toward something less violent than the century behind us.

Since 1945, the United States has carried the burden of a global order built with its Western allies. To its credit, the world avoided another direct world war between great powers. The conflicts remained contained in distant lands—proxy wars fought in the shadows of ideology, oil, and influence. From Latin America to Asia, the American century expanded not only through prosperity, but through intervention. Yet empires, even democratic ones, grow tired. Fatigue settles slowly into institutions, alliances, and public memory. The role of global policeman no longer inspires certainty in Washington as it once did.

The “rules-based order” now confronts its own contradiction: it was built to be universal, yet it often appeared selective. During my recent visit to , a young researcher asked me quietly, “Does the West itself still believe in the rules-based order?” The question lingered long after the conversation ended. The rising century demands a more inclusive architecture—one that recognises the reality of Asian power, especially China.

My three years of field research across South and Southeast Asia, documented in , revealed a transformation too significant to dismiss as temporary. China has moved beyond being merely a competitor to the United States. In trade, infrastructure, technology, cultural diplomacy, and economic influence, Beijing has established itself as what may be called the world’s “US +1.”

Great powers often search for such a partner. History shows this tendency clearly. When an empire becomes overextended—burdened by wars, alliances, sanctions, tariffs, and crises—it seeks another center of gravity to stabilize the system it can no longer manage alone. The United States today faces disorder stretching from Venezuela to Iran, from Ukraine to the unsettled Middle East. In this landscape, China emerges not simply as a rival, but as a state powerful enough to broker peace where Washington alone no longer can.

Drawing from the lessons of the Nixon–Mao era, warned that “” The United States and China are now engaged in a long-term economic, technological, political, and strategic competition. Managing that competition wisely may become the defining challenge of this century. In such a deeply polarized and unstable world, recognising China as a “US +1” partner is not surrender, but strategic realism.

Donald Trump understood this reality before boarding his flight to meet Xi Jinping. Their meeting inside Zhongnanhai—the guarded compound where China’s leadership governs—was never merely ceremonial. It symbolized a deeper recognition already acknowledged quietly within the itself: China is the nearest peer competitor the United States has ever confronted. Before departing Washington, Trump seemed to reassess not only China’s strength, but its unavoidable position as a “” shaping the future global balance.

Yet the significance of a Trump–Xi meeting extends beyond trade wars, tariffs, or diplomatic spectacle. It presents an opportunity to confront two crises shaping the century ahead: global energy insecurity and regional instability. Washington increasingly understands the limits of direct engagement with Tehran. Decades of pressure, sanctions, and confrontation have produced exhaustion rather than resolution. In that vacuum, Beijing now possesses leverage that Washington does not.

For China, this is an opportunity to evolve from a development partner into a security actor. Xi Jinping’s (GSI) was never designed merely as rhetoric. It was intended as the next phase of Chinese influence—transforming economic dependence into strategic trust. The geopolitical spillover from the Iranian conflict now offers Beijing a historic opening to project itself as a stabilising force in the region, not against the United States, but alongside it as a “US +1” partner.

If China succeeds in helping stabilise the Gulf and secure energy corridors vital to Asia, it will reshape perceptions of Chinese power globally. Beijing would no longer be seen only as the builder of ports, railways, and industrial zones, but as a guarantor of regional balance. This transition—from infrastructure diplomacy to security diplomacy—may become one of the defining geopolitical shifts of the coming decade.

Xi Jinping does not seek open confrontation. His strategy is older, more patient, and perhaps more formidable because of its restraint. Beijing speaks not of domination, but of a “,” advanced through three instruments of influence: the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). These are not slogans alone. Across Asia, many governments increasingly trust China as a development partner more than any other power.

India, despite its ambitions, has not matched this scale of regional penetration. In both ASEAN and South Asia, China’s economic gravity is felt more deeply. Ports, railways, technology networks, and financial dependency have altered the geopolitical map quietly, without the spectacle of war.

In , I compared three inward-looking national strategies shaping Asia today: Trump’s MAGA, Modi’s emerging economic nationalism , and Xi’s strategy. Among them, China has demonstrated the greatest structural resilience. Faced with American tariffs and decoupling pressures, Beijing diversified its supply chains across Central Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Rail corridors now connect Chinese industry to European markets through Eurasia. ASEAN has surpassed the United States as China’s largest trading partner, while the European Union follows closely behind. Exports to America have declined sharply, yet China continues to expand. Trump, once defined by confrontation, now arrives seeking a new “” with China—an acknowledgment that economic rivalry alone can no longer define the relationship between the world’s two largest powers.

Unlike Washington, which increasingly retreats from multilateral institutions, Beijing presents itself as the defender of multilateralism. Whether genuine or strategic matters less than perception. In geopolitics, perception often becomes reality.

What emerges, then, is not surrender between rivals, but interdependence between powers too large to isolate one another. The future may not belong to a bipolar Cold War, but to a reluctant coexistence. The United States now recognises that China possesses diversified markets and partnerships capable of reducing dependence on America. China, in turn, understands that its long march toward global primacy still requires strategic engagement with the United States.

This is where the true geopolitical shift begins.

Many analysts continue to frame China solely as a threat. Yet history rarely moves through absolutes. The next world order may not be built through confrontation alone, but through uneasy partnership. Artificial intelligence, technological supremacy, economic stability, and global governance now demand cooperation between Washington and Beijing, whether either side admits it publicly or not.

Trump will likely celebrate his personal relationship with Xi, presenting himself as the American leader capable of negotiating a “better deal” with China than his predecessors. But beneath the rhetoric lies something larger: the gradual acceptance of China’s indispensable role in shaping the future international order.

Even the question of war increasingly returns to Beijing. If Washington seeks an understanding with Tehran, China’s influence becomes unavoidable. Iran listens to Beijing in ways it no longer listens to the West. This alone signals how profoundly the balance of power has shifted. And Xi, careful as always, refuses to openly inherit the mantle of global leadership. He delays, softens, and obscures intention. It is part of a longer strategy: to rise without provoking the final resistance of a declining hegemon too early.

History rarely announces its turning point. Empires fade slowly, while new powers rise quietly beneath the noise of the old order. Washington still holds immense power, but Beijing increasingly holds the patience, reach, and strategic depth to shape what comes after.

The century ahead may not belong to one power alone, but to the uneasy balance between Washington and Beijing. And in that silence, a new world order is already taking shape.

By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

Continue Reading

Features

Egypt … here I come

Published

on

Chit-Chat Nethali Withanage

Three months ago, 19-year-old Nethali Withanage, with Brian Kerkoven as her mentor, walked the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week. On 06 June, she’ll walk for Sri Lanka in Hurghada, Egypt, as the country’s delegate to Top Model of the World 2026._

I caught up with Nethali as she prepares to fly out, this weekend, and here’s how our chit-chat went:

1. Tell me something about yourself?

I’m someone who blends creativity with ambition. I’ve always loved expressing myself, whether it’s through fashion, styling, or the way I present myself to the world. At the same time, I’m very driven and disciplined, especially when I was working, as a student counsellor, at Campus One, at a young age, where I’ve learned how to connect with people, understand them, and communicate with confidence. I believe I’m still evolving, and that’s what excites me the most … becoming better every single day.

2. What made you decide to be a model?

Modelling felt natural to me because it combines everything I love – fashion, confidence, and storytelling without words. I realised that modelling isn’t just about appearance, it’s about presence and how you carry your energy. I wanted to be part of an industry where I could express different sides of myself, while inspiring others to feel confident in their own skin.

3. What sets you apart from other models?

I would say my ability to connect. Whether it’s with the camera, a brand, or an audience, I bring authenticity. I also have a strong background in communication and sales, which gives me an edge in understanding how to represent a brand, not just wear it. I don’t want to just model clothes, I want to bring them to life.

4. What clothing do you prefer to model?

I enjoy modelling versatile styles, but I’m especially drawn to elegant and expressive fashion pieces that tells a story. I love looks that allow me to embody confidence and femininity, whether it’s a structured outfit or something soft and flowing.

5. What is the most important aspect of modelling?

Confidence combined with professionalism. Confidence allows you to own the moment, but professionalism ensures that you respect the work, the team, and the brand you represent. Both are equally important.

6. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?

I would say I’m learning to trust myself more and not overthink. I’ve realised that growth comes from embracing who you are, not constantly trying to change it. So instead of changing something, I’m focused on becoming more confident in my own voice.

7. School?

I did my O/Ls at Seventh Day Adventist High School Kandana, and, while at school, I was actively involved in creative activities. I enjoyed participating in English Day events that allowed me to express myself and interact with others. Those experiences helped me build confidence, teamwork, and communication skills, which continue to shape who I am today.

8. Happiest moment?

One of my happiest moments is realising how far I’ve come from being unsure of myself to stepping into opportunities, like modelling, and representing myself with confidence. That feeling of growth is something I truly value, and also a dream come true!

9. Your idea of perfect happiness?

Perfect happiness for me is peace of mind, being surrounded by people I love, doing what I’m passionate about, and feeling proud of who I am becoming.

10. Your ideal guy?

My ideal partner is someone who is respectful, supportive, and confident in himself. Someone who values growth, understands my ambitions, and encourages me to be the best version of myself.

11. Which living person do you most admire?

I admire strong, self-made individuals who have built their identity through hard work and resilience. People who stay true to themselves, despite challenges, inspire me, because they show that success is not just about talent, but also about strength and consistency.

12. Your most treasured possession?

My most treasured possession is my confidence. It’s something I’ve built over time, and it allows me to face challenges, take opportunities, and believe in myself, even when things are uncertain.

13. If you were marooned on a desert island, who would you like as your companion?

I would choose someone who is calm, positive, and resourceful, someone who can turn a difficult situation into an adventure. The right mindset matters more than anything.

14. Your most embarrassing moment?

I’m 19 and still haven’t faced any most embarrassing moment. But I would say I’ve had small moments where things didn’t go as planned, but I’ve learned to laugh at myself. Those moments remind me that perfection isn’t necessary; confidence is about how you recover, not how you avoid mistakes.

15. Done anything daring?

Pursuing modelling and stepping into competitions is something I consider daring. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to grow, both personally and professionally.

16. Your ideal vacation?

My ideal vacation would be somewhere peaceful, yet beautiful, like a beach destination where I can relax, reflect, and reconnect with myself, while enjoying nature.

17. What kind of music are you into?

I choose music that matches my mood at that time, whether it’s calm and relaxing or energetic and uplifting. Music is something that helps me express emotions and stay inspired.

18. Favourite radio station?

Usually I don’t listen to radio stations but whenever I get into a car I would search for Yes FM because it has a refined balance of contemporary hits and timeless music. I appreciate how it maintains a vibrant yet sophisticated energy, keeping listeners engaged while creating a consistently uplifting atmosphere. It’s something I enjoy because it adds a sense of positivity and elegance to my day.

19. Favourite TV station?

At the moment, I don’t have a television at home, but growing up, my favourite TV station was ‘Nickelodeon’. I genuinely loved the shows and series it aired; they were fun, creative, and full of personality. It was something I always looked forward to, and those memories still bring a sense of joy and nostalgia, whenever I think about it.

20. Any major plans for the future?

My future plans are to grow in the modelling industry, work with international brands, build a strong personal brand and finish completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Studies. At the same time, I want to explore my creative side further, especially in fashion and business, so I can create something of my own one day.

Continue Reading

Trending