Features
The Asian Scene from Colombo in 1954
The Colombo Powers Conference provided the momentum for Asian-African and led to 1955 Bandung Conference
(Excerpted from the Memoirs of JR Jayewardene)
I participated in this Conference held in Colombo in 1954 at which many of the Asian Regional States were represented by their Prime Ministers and led to Conferences in Bogor and Bandung and to the Non-Aligned Movement. It also gave ideas for the SAARC Organisation in the 1980s.
In April 1954, Sir John Kotelawala, Prime Minister of Ceylon, invited the Prime Ministers of Burma, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, to meet at a conference in Colombo “for an informal discussion of matters of common interest”. In his autobiography An Asian Prime Minister’s Story, Sir John relates how he thought of the idea of a Colombo Powers Conference and makes this comment:–
The South-East Asian Prime Ministers Conference began in Colombo on April 28, 1954, and ended in Kandy early in the morning of May 2. It was a historic occasion for Ceylon, and Colombo went gay for the visitors, who were received with acclamation and whom everyone united to make happy and comfortable during their short stay with us. The visitors too made themselves immensely popular.
“I had known Nehru of India, Mohammed Ali of Pakistan, and Nu of Burma before, but this was the first time I was meeting Ali Sastroemidjojo of Indonesia. I took to him instantly. It was interesting to observe the personalities of my distinguished colleagues. Each carried his individual quality and his individual charm–Nehru, earnest, disinterested, fiery; Mohammed Ali, debonair, forceful, practical; Nu, serene, dispassionate, brief, but very much to the point; Ali Sastroemidjojo, courteous, understanding, dedicated.”
I was one of the members of the Ceylon Delegation. Here I give an account of two important discussions of the Conference regarding the Indo-China war and the menace of International Communism, and relate how the final decisions, after heated debates, were arrived at.
The Colombo Powers Conference led to the Bandung Conference where 30 nations of Africa and Asia
met at Bandung, in Indonesia, in April 1955, to–
(a) promote goodwill and cooperation among the nations of Asia and Africa; to explore and advance their mutual as well as common interests; and to establish and further, friendliness and neighbourly relations;
(b) consider the social, economic and cultural problems and relations of the countries represented;
(c) consider problems of special interest to Asian and African peoples–e.g., problems affecting national sovereignty and of racialism and colonialism;
(d) view the position of Asia and Africa and their peoples in the world of today and the contribution they can make to the promotion of world peace and cooperation.
It is not my purpose to write of the Bandung Conference, for I was not present, Ceylon being represented by the Prime Minister, Sir John Kotelawala. Suffice it to say that the final decisions arrived at Bandung have become world-famous as the Bandung Ideals, a code of international morality that nations should seek to follow.
The Colombo Powers Conference was Sir John’s idea. His original proposal was to invite his colleagues, the Prime Ministers of Ceylon’s close neigbours, Burma, India and Pakistan, for an informal discussion on matters of common interest. Indonesia was included later. These Prime Ministers represented five nations having a population of almost 500 million people and immense resources that still awaited development. The international tensions then existing in Korea, Formosa, and Indo-China made the Conference more important than it originally appeared to be.
Fortunately, the Korean war concluded by dividing Korea into two, North and South, and the future of Formosa had not assumed that stage which nearly caused a war between America and Red China early in 1955. It was the war in Indo-China, now in its seventh year, which interested the world, and simultaneously with the meeting of the five Colombo Powers, nine nations which included the United Kingdom, France, and Red ChThe Asian Scene from Colombo in 1954
The Colombo Powers Conference provided the momentum for Asian-African and led to 1955 Bandung Conference
ina, met at Geneva to find a way of preventing the Indo-China war from becoming a Third World War. No nation had a greater interest in a just and peaceful settlement in Indo-China than the five nations that now met at Colombo.
The Asian Scene
The first few years after the end of the Second World War saw more changes in the Asian scene than had occurred previously during much longer periods lasting hundreds of years. When the War commenced in 1939, the whole of Asia with the exception of Japan and the portion of Russia in Asia was under Western rule, or controlled by Western Powers as was China. Nations with great cultural traditions and ancient civilizations were, during a period of 400 years, commencing with the rounding of the Cape of Good Hope in the latter part of the fifteenth century, brought under the rule of some Western power – England, Holland, France, and Portugal – who divided Asia among themselves and in the nineteenth century. America sought to exercise her authority over China and the countries in the Pacific.
Japan alone remained free and showed that an Asian nation could equal the great nations of the West in achievements. The five years after the end of the War in 1945 saw the consummation of the hopes of many Asian leaders, the attainment of freedom by their native lands. India and Pakistan, carved out of India, Burma, Ceylon, Indonesia and the Philippines, attained freedom. Malaya was on the road to freedom. She attained freedom in 1957. China, now a red colossus, challenged the great Western powers. The wheel of destiny turned a full circle. The subject nations attained freedom and Japan was occupied for six years.
New problems now arose. The great movements that had been launched in these countries for the attainment of freedom had unleashed forces that continued to stir the masses. Men of varying political views had joined together to secure freedom for their countries, but after freedom they differed as to how that freedom should be used. Racial and religious conflicts arose in India and Ceylon; democrats and Communists fought in Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
These differences were not yet resolved, but it could be stated that there was now no threat to the sovereignty of these new nations. They had also all accepted the principle of the well-being of the largest number, and not of a privileged few, as their economic goal. Through the Colombo Plan the developed nations had joined them in a cooperative effort to help in their economic and social development. The Colombo Plan was an example of the Asian nations joining together to protect their freedom, and to ensure peace in the Asian countries through their unity of purpose.
Indo-China required that an agreement on a cease-fire should be reached without delay. The Prime Ministers felt that the solution of the problem required direct negotiations between the parties principally concerned, namely, France, the three Associated States of Indo-China and Viet-Minh, as well as other parties invited by agreement.
The area known as Indo-China is in the land mass that juts out into the South China sea from the south-west portion of China. Before the War it consisted of the Protectorates of Tong-king, Laos, Annam, Cambodia and the colony of Cochin China, and formed part of the French Colonial Empire. These territories covered an area of almost 300,000 square miles and had a population of about 28 millions. A thousand years ago, Cambodia was a great Hindu Empire in Indo-China stretching from the Gulf of Bengal to the China Sea. The present Cambodia is only a feeble remnant of that great empire of the Khmer people, which at the height of its power produced great cities such as Angkor.
Laos, to the north-east of Cambodia, is a smaller state with a population of a million and a half and was founded by the Thai people who also founded the Kingdom of Siam or Thailand. Both these states were monarchies and the French ruled through the reigning monarchs. Tong-king, Annam, and Cochin-China, the largest land group known as Vietnam, lie between the Protectorates mentioned above and the South China Sea, and have a populationof 23 milions. The vast majority of the inhabitants are of Mongolian stock, closely allied to the Chinese in religion and culture and were governed by their own monarch before the War. The Laotians and Cambodians are Buddhists of the Theravada School, as are the Siamese, Burmese, and Sinhalese, and their culture is Hindu.
The Japanese armies swept through these territories and at the end of the War, together with other Asian countries, the peoples of French Indo-China clamoured for freedom. The French negotiated with the Kingdoms of Laos and Cambodia and agreed with them in 1949, to grant them complete internal sovereignty within the French Union. In Vietnam, the position was different, for there were two nationalistic movements, one led by Bao-Dai which was pro-democracies and purely nationalistic; and the other led by Ho-Chi-Minh was pro-Communist and was supported by Red China.
Ho-Chi-Minh resorted to force to achieve his goal, and the war with the French had now been waged with varying degrees of fortune for almost seven years. The French had employed large armies but their efforts had been in vain. Ho-Chi-Minh had gained many successes and the intervention of America on the side of the French was imminent when the Geneva Conference met to seek a way of avoiding a Third World War.
This was the position on the eve of the Colombo Conference. The Colombo Powers who were intimately concerned with the Indo-China events were not invited, yet the Conference became all the more important for that reason. It had before it certain proposals made by Nehru in the Indian Parliament, viz:
(1) An immediate ceasefire.
(2) The parties to the ceasefire should be France and the actual belligerents, the three Associated States and Viet-Minh (i.e., the territory occupied by HoChi-Minh’s forces).
(3) A complete transfer of sovereignty by the French.
(4) The setting up of machinery for direct negotiation between France and the Indo-Chinese.
(5) Non-intervention in Indo-China by any of the Great Powers.
(6) Supervision by the UNO of the implementation of these proposals.
The Prime Ministers were in agreement with the main principles underlying these proposals but differences of opinion were expressed with regard to their implementation. Indonesia thought that if Red China was admitted to the UNO the tension would cease and any help she was giving to Ho-Chi-Minh would also cease. The majority were not in favour of tying up this question with the Indo-China problem, though they all agreed that Red China should be admitted to the UNO. The other question that difficulty was the part to be played by the Western powers in the negotiations before and after the ceasefire, and also the scope of non-intervention.
Pakistan’s Premier saw the conflict as one between Communism as represented by Ho-Chi-Minh, and Colonialism as represented by France. He was not keen that either should win, but if one was to succeed, he preferred colonialism as it was a decaying force. Ultimately, a solution was found by limiting the non-belligerent invitees to the negotiations, to those “parties invited by agreement”. With regard to non-intervention the burden was placed on the Great Powers “to agree on the steps necessary to prevent a recurrence or resumption of hostilities”.
The stage was set for the final communique and this was telegraphed to Anthony Eden at Geneva. His hands were strengthened by the unanimous decision of the five Colombo Powers and the Geneva Conference ended successfully with the cessation of hostilities and the possibility of a permanent settlement in Indo-China. Today Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam are independent nations. The original Vietnam was divided into two states, the dividing line being the 17th parallel.
Communism
The problems caused by the spread of Communism and the influence exercised by International Communism raised a heated debate. The controversy showed more the attitude of certain countries towards the Soviet Union and Red China rather than their views on Communism, which academically they unanimously disliked. There was also the influence of local Communist parties, such as in Indonesia, which made that country’s Prime Minister lean heavily on the side of Red China and Communism.
Burma, led by its Buddhist Prime Minister U Nu, while expressing its strong disapproval of Communism, did not wish to annoy Red China, its neighbour. India and Pakistan carried their private quarrel into the international sphere too, and Nehru and Mohammed Ali clashed. Ceylon’s Prime Minister opened the discussion and pointed out that the greatest danger to the countries of the region arose from the subversive activities of International Communism.
He said: The countries of the region should, therefore, combine and assist each other in meeting this menace. The infiltration activities of International Communism took many forms. Funds were brought into the country by various means to help local Communists and Communist organizations. The countries of the region were flooded with Communist literature. Russian agents established contacts with local Communists.
At the recent ECAFE Conference held in Ceylon, for instance, the Soviet Delegation had consisted of 22 persons while the other delegations contained far smaller numbers. These delegates had attempted to establish clandestine contacts with local Communists. Another of the undesirable activities of International Communism was the attempt made by Communist countries to induce nationals of non-Communist countries to visit them by awarding generous scholarships and arranging attractive free tours. During these tours the persons concerned were indoctrinated with Communist ideas. All these activities involved interference in the internal affairs of other countries, and the conference should therefore adopt a strongly worded resolution condemning the activities of International Communism.
Pakistan and Burma supported Ceylon. India thought otherwise. She was anxious to avoid aligning with any one of the two Great Power blocs. The countries of the region were aware of the dangers of Communism, yet each must decide how best to deal with the problem in the context of the country’s politics. England dealt with it in one way and America in another. He preferred the former. Dr Sastroemidjojo adopted India’s attitude. In Indonesia they permitted Communist parties to function and they were of the Tito brand and not Stalinist. His government was “non-Communist” but not “anti-Communist”.
The debate produced fierce words between India and Pakistan, and was adjourned for the discussion to be continued in the cooler atmosphere of Kandy, up in the hills. Here too, it was not until in the morning of May 2 that an agreement was reached and the signatures of all five Prime Ministers appended to the communique. Nehru’s contributions had a great effect in producing this unanimity. On one occasion he used eloquent words.
He said that in his long experience of dealing with issues involving large numbers of human beings, he always felt that the better approach was to try to win the confidence of the people and wean them away from something which was evil rather than attempt to suppress anything by force. Such a course often had the effect of encouraging and strengthening the very thing it was desired to suppress.
He was certainly in favour of each country taking all possible steps, either by law or more efficient administrative methods, to stop Communist intervention or infiltration into its territory, but he thought that in dealing with Communism little could be achieved by merely denouncing it. A different approach was necessary: an approach to people’s minds and an attempt to influence them against the attractions of Communism would, he thought, be more effective.
He said that, after all, if one attempted an analysis of the situation, one would find intellectuals in every country who were strongly attracted towards Communist ideologies. The challenge of Russian Communism today was really the challenge of her economic system. The real test was which economy, Communist or Capitalism, would pay better dividends to the people. It therefore boiled down to a conflict of ideas. The idea that would prevail in the end would be that which would be more acceptable to humanity, and it was for this reason that the approach should be by reason and persuasion, rather than by compulsion.
Ultimately, difference of views could not be reconciled. So the communique mildly stated that: “The Prime Ministers made known to each other their respective views on and attitudes towards Communist ideologies” and continued to affirm “their faith in democracy and democratic institutions”. They were all resolved “to resist interference in the affairs of their countries by external Communist, anti-Communist or other agencies”.
On other matters there was controversy and the Conference adjourned. The Colombo Powers met again at Bogor in 1955. Another meeting was held New Delhi in 1956. It would be a pity if the unity, on many matters of national and international interest forged at Colombo was allowed to weaken; the one way of preserving this unity was for these Powers to meet often and express their views, which carry weight in the Councils of the World.
Features
The Ramadan War
A Strategic Assessment of a Conflict Still Unresolved
The Unites States of America and its ally, Israel attacked Iran on 28 February, or the 10th day of the month of Ramadan. More than a month of intense fighting has passed since, and the Ramadan War has settled into a grinding, attritional struggle that defies early declarations of victory. Despite sustained U.S. and Israeli air and naval bombardment, Iran remains standing, and continues to strike back with a level of resilience that has surprised many observers. The conflict has evolved into a contest of endurance, adaptation, and strategic innovation, with each side attempting to impose costs the other cannot bear.
Iran’s response to the overwhelming airpower of its adversaries has been both simple and devastatingly effective: saturate enemy defences with swarms of inexpensive drones and older ballistic missiles, forcing them to expend costly interceptors and reveal radar positions, and then follow up with salvos of its most advanced precisionguided missiles. This layered approach has inflicted severe physical damage on Israel and has shaken its national morale. The country has endured repeated missile barrages from Iran and rocket fire from Hezbollah, straining its airdefence network and pushing its civilian population to the limits of endurance.
The United States, meanwhile, has been forced to evacuate or reduce operations at several bases in the Gulf region due to persistent Iranian drone and missile attacks. For both the U.S. and Israel, the war has become a test of strategic credibility. For Iran, by contrast, victory is defined not by territorial gains or decisive battlefield outcomes, but by survival, and by continuing to impose costs on its adversaries.
The central strategic objective for the U.S. has now crystallised: reopening the Strait of Hormuz to secure global energy flows. Ironically, the Strait was open before the war began; it is the conflict itself that has rendered it effectively closed. Air and naval power alone cannot achieve this objective. The geography of the Strait, combined with Iran’s layered defences, means that any lasting solution will require ground forces, a reality that carries enormous risks.
U.S. Strategic Options
The United States faces five broad operational options, each with significant drawbacks.
1. Seizing Kharg Island
Kharg Island handles roughly 90% of Iran’s oil exports, making it an attractive target. However, it lies only a short distance from the Iranian mainland, where entrenched Iranian forces maintain dense networks of missile batteries, drones, artillery, and coastal defences. Any attempt to seize Kharg would require first neutralising or capturing the adjacent coastline, a costly amphibious and ground operation.
Even if successful, this would not reopen the Strait of Hormuz. It would merely deprive Iran of export capacity, which is not the primary U.S. objective. At least ostensibly not; there are those who argue that the U.S. simply wants to take over Iran’s petroleum (see below).
2. Forcing the Strait of Hormuz by Naval Power
Sending U.S. naval forces directly through the Strait is theoretically possible but operationally hazardous. Iran has mined all but a narrow channel hugging its own shoreline. That channel is covered by overlapping fields of antiship missiles, drones, artillery, and coastal radar. Clearing the mines would require prolonged operations under fire. Attempting to push through without clearing them would risk catastrophic losses.
3. Capturing Qeshm, Hengam, Larak, and Hormuz Islands
These islands dominate the Iranian side of the Strait and host radar, missile, and drone installations. Capturing them would degrade Iran’s ability to close the Strait, but the islands are heavily fortified, and the surrounding waters are mined. Amphibious assaults against defended islands are among the most difficult military operations. Even success would not guarantee the Strait’s longterm security unless the mainland launch sites were also neutralised.
4. Invading Southern Iraq and Crossing into Khuzestan
This option would involve U.S. forces advancing through southern Iraq, crossing the Shatt alArab waterway, and pushing into Iran’s Khuzestan province — home to most of Iran’s oilfields. The terrain is difficult: marshes, waterways, and narrow approaches. Iranian forces occupy the high ground overlooking the plains.
While this route would allow Saudi armoured forces to participate, it would also expose U.S. and allied logistics to attacks by Iraqi Shia militias, who have already demonstrated their willingness to target U.S. assets. The political and operational risks are immense.
5. Capturing Chabahar and Advancing Along the Coast
The most strategically promising — though still costly — option is seizing the port of Chabahar in southeastern Iran and advancing roughly 660 kilometres along the coast toward Bandar Abbas. This approach offers several advantages:
· Distance from Iran’s core population centres complicates Iranian logistics.
· Chabahar’s deepwater port (16m draught)
would provide a valuable logistics hub.
· U.S. carriers could remain at safer standoff distances
, supporting operations without entering the Strait.
· The coastal route allows naval gunfire and missile support
to assist advancing ground forces.
· Local Baluchi insurgents
could provide intelligence and limited support.
· Capturing Bandar Abbas would
outflank Iran’s island defences and effectively reopen the Strait.
This option is likely to form the backbone of any U.S. ground campaign, potentially supplemented by diversionary attacks by regional partners to stretch Iranian defences.
The Limits of U.S. Superiority
The United States retains overwhelming superiority in naval power and manned airpower. But whether this advantage translates into dominance in unmanned systems or ground combat is far from certain.
The 2003 invasion of Iraq is often cited as a model of U.S. military prowess, but the comparison is misleading. Iraq in 2003 had been crippled by a decade of sanctions. Its forces lacked modern mines, antitank missiles, and effective air defences. Tank crews had little training; some could not hit targets at pointblank range. RPG teams were similarly unprepared. The U.S. enjoyed numerical superiority in the theatre and total control of the air, allowing it to isolate Iraqi units and prevent reinforcement.
Even under those favourable conditions, Iraqi forces managed to delay the U.S. advance. At one point, forward U.S. units nearly ran out of ammunition and supplies, forcing the diversion of forces intended for the assault on Baghdad to secure the lines of communication.
Iran is not Iraq in 2003. Its armed forces and industrial base have adapted to nearly half a century of sanctions. It produces its own drones, missiles, artillery, and armoured vehicles. It has built extensive underground facilities, hardened command posts, and redundant communication networks.
Moreover, the battlefield itself has changed. The RussoUkrainian war demonstrated that deep armoured penetrations – once the hallmark of U.S. doctrine – are now extremely vulnerable to drones, loitering munitions, and precision artillery. The result has been a return to attritional warfare reminiscent of the First World War, with front lines stabilising into trench networks.
Yet, as in the First World War, stalemate has been broken not by massed assaults but by small, highly trained teams infiltrating thinly held lines, identifying targets, and guiding drones and artillery onto enemy positions deep in the rear. Iran has studied these lessons closely.
Mosaic Defence and Transformational Warfare
Iran’s military doctrine has evolved significantly over the past two decades. Its “mosaic defence” decentralises command and control, ensuring that even if senior leadership is targeted, local units can continue operating autonomously. This structure proved resilient during the initial waves of U.S. and Israeli strikes.
Iran has also absorbed lessons from U.S. “shock and awe” operations. The botched U.S. invasion of Grenada in 1983 exposed weaknesses in joint operations, prompting the development of “effectsbased operations,” “rapid dominance” and the broader concept of “transformational warfare.” These doctrines (better known colloquially as “Shock and Awe”), influenced by Liddell Hart and Sun Tzu, emphasised simultaneous strikes on strategic targets to paralyse the enemy’s decisionmaking.
While the U.S. struggled to apply these concepts effectively in Iraq and Iran, Tehran has adapted them for asymmetric use. Its drone and missile campaigns have targeted not only military assets but also economic infrastructure and psychological resilience. Israel’s economy and morale have been severely tested, and the United States finds itself entangled in a conflict that offers no easy exit.
Iran has also pursued a broader strategic objective: undermining the petrodollar system that underpins U.S. financial dominance. By disrupting energy flows and encouraging alternative trading mechanisms, Iran seeks to weaken the economic foundations of U.S. power.
Will the USA Achieve Its War Aims?
The United States’ core objective appears to be securing control over global energy flows by reopening the Strait of Hormuz and limiting China’s access to Middle Eastern oil before it can transition to alternative energy sources. Whether this objective is achievable remains uncertain.
A ground campaign would be long, costly, and politically fraught. Iran’s defences are deep, layered, and adaptive. Its drone and missile capabilities have already demonstrated their ability to impose significant costs on technologically superior adversaries. Regional allies are cautious, and global support for a prolonged conflict is limited.
The United States retains overwhelming military power, but power alone does not guarantee strategic success. Iran’s strategy is simple: survive, adapt, and continue imposing costs. In asymmetric conflicts, survival itself can constitute victory.
In Frank Herbert’s Dune, the protagonist, Paul Muad’dib says “he who can destroy a thing, controls a thing.” This is the essence of Iranian strategy – they have a stranglehold on petroleum supply, and can destroy the world economy. Trump has had to loosen sanctions on both Iran’s and Russia’s oil, simply to prevent economic collapse.
The Ramadan War has already reshaped regional dynamics. Whether it reshapes global power structures will depend on how the next phase unfolds, and whether the United States is willing to pay the price required to achieve its aims.
by Vinod Moonesinghe
Features
Nayanandaya:A literary autopsy of Sri Lanka’s Middle Class
“Nayanandaya,” meaning the enchantment of indebtedness, is Surath de Mel’s latest novel. True to his reputation as a maximalist writer, de Mel traverses the labyrinth of middle-class struggles; poverty, unemployment, the quest for education, through a father’s fragile dreams. The novel unfolds around Mahela, his son, his friendships, and the fragile relationships that keep him tethered to life.
“Happiness is not a destination; it is a journey. There are no shortcuts to it. At some point, the path you thought was right will be wrong. You have to make sacrifices for it.”
These words, uttered by the protagonist Mahela to his ten-year-old son, is the silent mantra of every middle-class parent. A common urban middle-class father’s yearning for his child to climb the ladder he himself could not ascend.
A Socio-Political Mirror
Sri Lanka’s middle class remains trapped in paradox. They are educated but underemployed, salaried but indebted, socially respected yet politically invisible. Structural inequalities, economic volatility and populist politics inclusively contribute to keep them “forever middle”.
Through protagonist Mahela, who is sometimes a graphic designer, sometimes a vendor and always a failure Surath de Mel sketches the deficiencies of an education system that does not nurture skills of the students. Sri Lanka boasts about high literacy rates, yet the economy cannot absorb the thousands of graduates produced into meaningful work. Underemployment becomes the inheritance of the middle class. With political connections often the stories can be transformed. De Mel pens it in dark humour to expose these truths:
“Some notorious writer once sneered in a newspaper, ‘Give your ass to the minister, and you’ll earn the right to keep it on a bigger chair.’ Countless people waiting in ministers’ offices, pressing
their backsides to seats, carrying the weight of their own lives.”
Childhood Trauma and Its Echoes
Surath de Mel frequently weaves psychoanalysis into his fiction. In Nayanandaya, he captures the lingering shadows of childhood trauma. Mahela, scarred by a loveless and fractured youth, suffers phobic anxiety and depression, apparently with a personality disorder as an adult. His confession at the psychologist reveals it out:
“Childhood? I didn’t have one. I was fifteen when I was born.”
Here, Mahela marks his true birth not at infancy, but at the death of his parents. This statement itself reveals the childhood trauma the protagonist had gone through and the reader can attribute his subsequent psychological struggles as the cause of it.
From a Lacanian perspective, trauma is not just something that happens to a child; it is a deep break in how the child understands the world, themselves, and others. Some experiences are too painful to be put into words. Lacan calls this the Real — what cannot be fully spoken or explained. This pain does not disappear but returns later in life as anxiety, fear, or obsessive compulsive disorder.
This trauma disturbs the child’s sense of self and their place in society. When language fails to make sense of loss, the mind creates fantasies to survive. These fantasies quietly shape adult desires, relationships, and choices.
In Nayanandaya, childhood trauma of the protagonist does not stay buried — it lives on, shaping the adulthood in unseen ways. In the narrative, Mahela’s struggles are not just personal failures but the result of a past that was never given words.
Tears of Fathers – Forgotten in Sri Lankan Literature
Sri Lankan literature has long been attentive to suffering — especially rural poverty, social injustice, and the silent endurance of women and single mothers. Countless novels, poems, and songs have given voice to maternal sacrifice, female resilience, and women’s oppression.
Yet, within this rich narratives, the quiet grief of the urban middle-class father remains mostly unseen. Rarely does fiction pause to examine the emotional lives of men who shoulder responsibility without language for their pain. These masculine tears are private, swallowed by routinely and masked by humour or silence. Definitely never granted literary space.
In Nayanandaya, Surath de Mel breaks this silence. Through Mahela, he lends voice to these overlooked men — fathers whose love is expressed through sacrifice rather than speech. However, de Mel does not romanticise the tears. Rather he humanises them. He allows their vulnerabilities, anxieties, and quiet despair to surface with honesty and compassion. In doing so, Nayanandaya fills a striking gap in Sri Lankan literature, reminding us that fathers, too, carry invisible wounds.
Literary value
With Nayanandaya, Surath de Mel reaches a new pinnacle in his literary craft. His language is dense yet lyrical, enriched with similes, metaphors, irony, and a full range of literary tools deployed with confidence and control.
One of the novel’s most touching narrative choices is the personification of Mahela’s son’s soft toy, Wonie. Through personified Wonie, de Mel captures the two most touching incidents in the entire novel . This simply reveals the author’s artistic maturity, transforming a simple object into a powerful emotional conduit that anchors the novel’s tenderness amidst its despair.
At a deeper symbolic level, Mahela himself can be read as more than an individual character, but a metaphor for Sri Lanka — a nation struggling under economic hardship, clinging to impractical dreams, witnessing the migration of its people, and drifting towards a slow, painful exhaustion. His personal failures could mirror the broader decay of social and economic structures. This symbolic reading lends Nayanandaya a haunting national resonance.
Today, many write and many publish, but only a few transform language into literature that lingers in the reader’s mind long after the final page. Surath de Mel belongs to that rare few. In a literary landscape crowded with voices, he remains devoted to art rather than popularity or trend. As a scholar of Sinhala language and literature, de Mel writes with intellectual depth, dark humour, and deep human empathy.
In conclusion, Nayanandaya is not merely a story; it is social commentary, psychoanalytic reflection, and tragic poetry woven into richly textured prose. With this novel — a masterful interlacing of love, debt, and fragile dreams — Surath de Mel engraves a distinctly Dostoevskian signature into Sinhala literature.
Reviewed by Dr. Charuni Kohombange
Features
Domestic Energy Saving
Around 40 percent of the annual energy we use is consumed in domestic activities. Energy is costly, and supply is not unlimited. Unfortunately, we realize the importance of energy – saving only during the time of a crisis.
If you adopt readily affordable energy-saving strategies, you will cut down your living expenditure substantially, relieving the energy burden of the nation. Here are some tips.
Cooking:
Cooking consumes a good portion of domestic energy demand and common practices, and negligence leads to 30 – 40 percent wastage. A simple experiment revealed that the energy expenditure in boiling an egg with the usual unnecessary excess water in an open pan is nearly 50 percent higher than boiling in a closed lid pan with the minimal amount of water. In an open pan, a large quantity of heat is lost via convection currents and expulsion of water vapor, carrying excessive amounts of heat energy (latent heat of vaporisation). Still, most of us boil potatoes for prolonged intervals of time in open receptacles, failing to realise that it is faster and more efficient to boil potatoes or any other food material in a closed pan. About 30 – 40 percent of domestic cooking energy requirements can be cut down by cooking in closed-lid pans. Furthermore, food cooked in closed pans is healthier because of less mixing with air that causes food oxidation. Fat oxidation generates toxic substances. In a closed- lid utensil (not tightly closed), food is covered with a blanket of water vapor at a positive pressure, preventing entry of air and therefore food oxidation.
Overcooking is another bad habit that not only wastes energy but also degrades the nutritional value of food.
Electric kettle:
For making morning or evening tea or preparing tea to serve a visitor. Do not pour an unnecessarily large quantity of water into the electric kettle. Note that the energy needed to make 10 cups of tea is ten times that of one cup.
Electric Ovens:
Avoid the use of electric ovens as far as possible. Remember that foods cooked at higher temperatures are generally unhealthy, and even carcinogens are formed when food is fried at higher temperatures in an oven. If ever you need to bake something in an oven, limit the number of times you open the door. Use smaller ovens adequate for the purpose and not larger ones just for fashion.
Refrigerators:
Refrigerators consume lots of energy. Do not use over-capacity refrigerators just for fashion. Every time you open the fridge, more electricity is used to reset the cooling temperature. Plan your access to the appliance accordingly. Check whether the doors are properly secured and there are no leakages. Keep the fridge in a cooler location, not hit by direct sunlight and away from warmer places in the kitchen. Remember that turning off the fridge frequently will not save energy, instead it draws more energy.
Use of gas burners:
Do not use oversized utensils. Keep the lid closed as far as possible to prevent the escape of heat. Remember that excessive amounts of heat energy are carried away by a large surface-area conducting utensil. Do not open the gas vent to allow the flame to flash outside the vessel. A flame not impinging on the pan would not heat it, and gas is wasted. Ensure that the flame is blue. Frequently check whether gas vents are clogged with rust and carbon. Frequently, cooking material in the pan drops into the gas vents, and salt there corrodes the gas vents. Cleaning and washing would be necessary. Do not prolong cooking, taking time to prepare ingredients and adding them to the pan intermittently. Add ingredients at once and before switching the burner. If the preparation of a dish is prolonged to slow the cooking, use earthenware pots rather than metallic ones. An earthenware pot, being thermally less conducting retain heat.
Firewood for cooking:
Do not attempt to eliminate the use of firewood in cooking. If you are living in a village area, the exclusive use of LPG gas is an unnecessary expenditure. Large smoke-free, efficient oven designs are now available. If you are compelled to use gas, keep the option of firewood ovens, especially for prolonged cooking. Admittedly, there are locations, especially in cities, where the use of firewood is unsuited.
Hot water showers:
Before installing hot water showers, reconsider whether they are really necessary in a hot tropical climate. Go for solar water heaters, although the installation cost is high. Instant water heaters consume much less electricity compared to geysers with water tanks. Now, cheap and safe instant water heaters are available.
Lighting:
Arrange and design your residence to optimise daytime illumination until late evening. If you are constructing a new house, take this issue into account. Use LED lamps, which provide the same illumination for 85 percent less energy. In study rooms and areas that require prolonged illumination, paint the walls white. Angle – poised LED lamps with very low voltage are available. Use them for reading and studies. Routinely clean the surfaces of all lamps. Dust deposition cuts off light.
Air conditioning and ventilation:
Air conditioning consumes prohibitively large quantities of electrical energy. You can avoid air conditioning by optimising ventilation. The principle is to have air entry points (windows) in the house near the ground level and exit points (vents or windows) near the roof. Ground level is cooler, and the region near the roof is warmer. Thus, a cool air current enters the house near the ground level and hot air is drawn by the vents near the roof. The region near the ground can be rendered cooler by planting trees. Architectural designs are available to optimise this effect. You can sense the direction of air motion by holding a thin strip of paper near the windows at the ground and near the roof level. In addition to ceiling fan, install exhaust fans in the upper points of the house to remove hot air and draw cooler air through windows near the ground. Reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the roof by shading with trees. There are techniques for increasing the reflectance of the roof with paints and other designs.
Transportation:
A good portion of your budget is drained by transportation. Irrespective of who you are, use public transport if convenient and available. As much as possible, use the telephone and email to get your things done. If the officers do not comply for no valid reason, complain. Plan your trips to the town to do several things at the same time. Whenever possible, plan to share transport. Buy energy – efficient small vehicles. Routinely examine your vehicle for energy efficiency, i.e. correct tire pressure etc.
Charge electric vehicles off peak hours. Slow charging reduces heat generation in the circuit, reducing energy loss.
Energy is costly and limited in supply. Everything you do consumes energy. Be energy conscious in all your deeds. That attitude will reduce your expenditure, lessen the environmental degradation and financial burden of the nation in importing fuel.
Educating the general public is the most effective way of implementing energy-saving strategies.
By Prof. Kirthi Tennakone
(kenna@yahoo.co.uk)
-
News3 days ago2025 GCE AL: 62% qualify for Uni entrance; results of 111 suspended
-
News5 days agoTariff shock from 01 April as power costs climb across the board
-
News6 days agoInquiry into female employee’s complaint: Retired HC Judge’s recommendations ignored
-
Features7 days agoWhen seabed goes dark: The Persian Gulf, cable sabotage, and race for space-based monopoly
-
Features6 days agoNew arithmetic of conflict: How the drone revolution is inverting economics of war
-
Editorial3 days agoSearch for Easter Sunday terror mastermind
-
Business4 days agoHour of reckoning comes for SL’s power sector
-
Sports6 days agoSri Lanka’s 1996 World Cup heroes to play exhibition match in Kuala Lumpur

