Features

The Chinese ‘Debt Trap’ is a myth

Published

6 years ago

2021/02/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

The narrative wrongfully portrays both Beijing and the developing countries it deals with

by DEBORAH BRAUTIGAM and
MEG RITHMIRE
The atlantic

China, we are told, inveigles poorer countries into taking out loan after loan to build expensive infrastructure that they can’t afford and that will yield few benefits, all with the end goal of Beijing eventually taking control of these assets from its struggling borrowers. As states around the world pile on debt to combat the coronavirus pandemic and bolster flagging economies, fears of such possible seizures have only amplified.

Seen this way, China’s internationalization—as laid out in programmes such as the Belt and Road Initiative—is not simply a pursuit of geopolitical influence but also, in some tellings, a weapon. Once a country is weighed down by Chinese loans, like a hapless gambler who borrows from the Mafia, it is Beijing’s puppet and in danger of losing a limb.

The prime example of this is the Sri Lankan port of Hambantota. As the story goes, Beijing pushed Sri Lanka into borrowing money from Chinese banks to pay for the project, which had no prospect of commercial success. Onerous terms and feeble revenues eventually pushed Sri Lanka into default, at which point Beijing demanded the port as collateral, forcing the Sri Lankan government to surrender control to a Chinese firm.

The Trump administration pointed to Hambantota to warn of China’s strategic use of debt: In 2018, former Vice President Mike Pence called it “debt-trap diplomacy”—a phrase he used through the last days of the administration—and evidence of China’s military ambitions. Last year, erstwhile Attorney General William Barr raised the case to argue that Beijing is “loading poor countries up with debt, refusing to renegotiate terms, and then taking control of the infrastructure itself.”

As Michael Ondaatje, one of Sri Lanka’s greatest chroniclers, once said, “In Sri Lanka a well-told lie is worth a thousand facts.” And the debt-trap narrative is just that: a lie, and a powerful one.

Our research shows that Chinese banks are willing to restructure the terms of existing loans and have never actually seized an asset from any country, much less the port of Hambantota. A Chinese company’s acquisition of a majority stake in the port was a cautionary tale, but it’s not the one we’ve often heard. With a new administration in Washington, the truth about the widely, perhaps willfully, misunderstood case of Hambantota Port is long overdue.

The city of Hambantota lies at the southern tip of Sri Lanka, a few nautical miles from the busy Indian Ocean shipping lane that accounts for nearly all of the ocean-borne trade between Asia and Europe, and more than 80 percent of ocean-borne global trade. When a Chinese firm snagged the contract to build the city’s port, it was stepping into an ongoing Western competition, though one the United States had largely abandoned.

It was the Canadian International Development Agency—not China—that financed Canada’s leading engineering and construction firm, SNC-Lavalin, to carry out a feasibility study for the port. We obtained more than 1,000 pages of documents detailing this effort through a Freedom of Information Act request. The study, concluded in 2003, confirmed that building the port at Hambantota was feasible, and supporting documents show that the Canadians’ greatest fear was losing the project to European competitors. SNC-Lavalin recommended that it be undertaken through a joint-venture agreement between the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) and a “private consortium” on a build-own-operate-transfer basis, a type of project in which a single company receives a contract to undertake all the steps required to get such a port up and running, and then gets to operate it when it is.

The Canadian project failed to move forward, mostly because of the vicissitudes of Sri Lankan politics. But the plan to build a port in Hambantota gained traction during the rule of the Rajapaksas—Mahinda Rajapaksa, who served as President from 2005 through 2015, and his brother Gotabaya, the current President and former Minister of Defence—who grew up in Hambantota. They promised to bring big ships to the region, a call that gained urgency after the devastating 2004 tsunami pulverized Sri Lanka’s coast and the local economy.

We reviewed a second feasibility report, produced in 2006 by the Danish engineering firm Ramboll, that made similar recommendations to the plans put forward by SNC-Lavalin, arguing that an initial phase of the project should allow for the transport of non-containerized cargo—oil, cars, grain—to start bringing in revenue, before expanding the port to be able to handle the traffic and storage of traditional containers. By then, the port in the capital city of Colombo, a 100 miles away and consistently one of the world’s busiest, had just expanded and was already pushing capacity. The Colombo port, however, was smack in the middle of the city, while Hambantota had a hinterland, meaning it offered greater potential for expansion and development.

(Read: The undoing of China’s economic miracle)

To look at a map of the Indian Ocean region at the time was to see opportunity and expanding middle classes everywhere. Families in India and across Africa were demanding more consumer goods from China. Countries such as Vietnam were growing rapidly and would need more natural resources. To justify its existence, the port in Hambantota would have to secure only a fraction of the cargo that went through Singapore, the world’s busiest transshipment port.

Armed with the Ramboll report, Sri Lanka’s government approached the United States and India; both countries said no. But a Chinese construction firm, China Harbour Group, had learned about Colombo’s hopes, and lobbied hard for the project. China Eximbank agreed to fund it, and China Harbour won the contract.

This was in 2007, six years before Xi Jinping introduced the Belt and Road Initiative. Sri Lanka was still in the last, and bloodiest, phase of its long civil war, and the world was on the verge of a financial crisis. The details are important: China Eximbank offered a $307 million, 15-year commercial loan with a four-year grace period, offering Sri Lanka a choice between a 6.3 percent fixed interest rate or one that would rise or fall depending on LIBOR, a floating rate. Colombo chose the former, conscious that global interest rates were trending higher during the negotiations and hoping to lock in what it thought would be favourable terms. Phase I of the port project was completed on schedule within three years.

For a conflict-torn country that struggled to generate tax revenue, the terms of the loan seemed reasonable. As Saliya Wickramasuriya, the former chairman of the SLPA, told us, “To get commercial loans as large as $300 million during the war was not easy.” That same year, Sri Lanka also issued its first international bond, with an interest rate of 8.25 percent. Both decisions would come back to haunt the government.

Finally, in 2009, after decades of violence, Sri Lanka’s civil war came to an end. Buoyed by the victory, the government embarked on a debt-financed push to build and improve the country’s infrastructure. Annual economic growth rates climbed to 6 percent, but Sri Lanka’s debt burden soared as well.

In Hambantota, instead of waiting for phase 1 of the port to generate revenue as the Ramboll team had recommended, Mahinda Rajapaksa pushed ahead with phase 2, transforming Hambantota into a container port. In 2012, Sri Lanka borrowed another $757 million from China Eximbank, this time at a reduced, post-financial-crisis interest rate of 2 percent. Rajapaksa took the liberty of naming the port after himself.

By 2014, Hambantota was losing money. Realizing that they needed more experienced operators, the SLPA signed an agreement with China Harbour and China Merchants Group to have them jointly develop and operate the new port for 35 years. China Merchants was already operating a new terminal in the port in Colombo, and China Harbour had invested $1.4 billion in Colombo Port City, a lucrative real-estate project involving land reclamation. But while the lawyers drew up the contracts, a political upheaval was taking shape.

Rajapaksa called a surprise election for January 2015 and in the final months of the campaign, his own Health Minister, Maithripala Sirisena, decided to challenge him. Like opposition candidates in Malaysia, the Maldives, and Zambia, the incumbent’s financial relations with China and allegations of corruption made for potent campaign fodder. To the country’s shock, and perhaps his own, Sirisena won.

Steep payments on international sovereign bonds, which comprised nearly 40 percent of the country’s external debt, put Sirisena’s government in dire fiscal straits almost immediately. When Sirisena took office, Sri Lanka owed more to Japan, the World Bank, and the Asian Development Bank than to China. Of the $4.5 billion in debt service Sri Lanka would pay in 2017, only 5 percent was because of Hambantota. The Central Bank governors under both Rajapaksa and Sirisena do not agree on much, but they both told us that Hambantota, and Chinese finance in general, was not the source of the country’s financial distress.

There was also never a default. Colombo arranged a bailout from the International Monetary Fund, and decided to raise much-needed dollars by leasing out the underperforming Hambantota Port to an experienced company—just as the Canadians had recommended. There was not an open tender, and the only two bids came from China Merchants and China Harbour; Sri Lanka chose China Merchants, making it the majority shareholder with a 99-year lease, and used the $1.12 billion cash infusion to bolster its foreign reserves, not to pay off China Eximbank.

(Read: How Xi Jinping blew it)

Before the port episode, “Sri Lanka could sink into the Indian Ocean and most of the Western world wouldn’t notice,” Subhashini Abeysinghe, Research Director at Verité Research, an independent Colombo-based think tank, told us. Suddenly, the island nation featured prominently in foreign-policy speeches in Washington. Pence voiced worry that Hambantota could become a “forward military base” for China.

Yet Hambantota’s location is strategic only from a business perspective: The port is cut into the coast to avoid the Indian Ocean’s heavy swells, and its narrow channel allows only one ship to enter or exit at a time, typically with the aid of a tugboat. In the event of a military conflict, naval vessels stationed there would be proverbial fish in a barrel.

The notion of “debt-trap diplomacy” casts China as a conniving creditor and countries, such as Sri Lanka, as its credulous victims. On a closer look, however, the situation is far more complex. China’s march outward, like its domestic development, is probing and experimental, a learning process marked by frequent adjustment. After the construction of the port in Hambantota, for example, Chinese firms and banks learned that strongmen fall and that they’d better have strategies for dealing with political risk. They’re now developing these strategies, getting better at discerning business opportunities and withdrawing where they know they can’t win. Still, American leaders and thinkers from both sides of the aisle give speeches about China’s “modern-day colonialism.”

Over the past 20 years, Chinese firms have learned a lot about how to play in an international construction business that remains dominated by Europe: Whereas China has 27 firms among the top 100 global contractors, up from nine in 2000, Europe has 37, down from 41. The U.S. has seven, compared to 19 two decades ago.

Chinese firms are not the only companies to benefit from Chinese-financed projects. Perhaps no country was more alarmed by Hambantota than India, the regional giant that several times rebuffed Sri Lanka’s appeals for investment, aid, and equity partnerships. Yet an Indian-led business, Meghraj, joined the U.K.-based engineering firm Atkins Limited in an international consortium to write the long-term plan for Hambantota Port and for the development of a new business zone. The French firms Bolloré and CMA-CGM have partnered with China Merchants and China Harbour in port developments in Nigeria, Cameroon, and elsewhere.

The other side of the debt-trap myth involves debtor countries. Places such as Sri Lanka—or, for that matter, Kenya, Zambia, or Malaysia—are no stranger to geopolitical games. And they’re irked by American views that they’ve been so easily swindled. As one Malaysian politician remarked to us, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss how Chinese finance featured in that country’s political drama, “Can’t the U.S. State Department tell the difference between campaign rhetoric that our opponents are slaves to China and actually being slaves to China?”

The events that led to a Chinese company’s acquisition of a majority stake in a Sri Lankan port reveal a great deal about how our world is changing. China and other countries are becoming more sophisticated in bargaining with one another. And it would be a shame if the U.S. fails to learn alongside them.

DEBORAH BRAUTIGAM is Bernard L. Schwartz Professor of International Political Economy at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University

MEG RITHMIRE is F. Warren McFarlan Associate Professor at Harvard Business School.

All News Advertisement

Features

Sections of US media looking power straight in the eye

Published

11 hours ago

2026/10/1

Sahan Weerasooriya

President Trump addressing the media at the White House.(BBC)

Some fundamental freedoms seen to be at the heart of democracy in the US – religion, speech, the press, assembly and the right to petition the government – are at risk of being undermined at present by the country’s Executive President. However, the latter is being legally challenged on this score by some sections of the US media and the citizenry of the country could take heart from this notable defense of media freedom.

In fact this is good news for the world of democracy. The push back is coming from organizations such as CNN, ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC who constitute the nucleus as it were of the US media and their solidarity no less than their resourcefulness calls for commendation.

Following a recent White House decision to suspend CNN from what was referred to as ‘participation in presidential pool coverages’, the other media organizations mentioned refused to replace it in the pool. Their position was that the public had a right to receive ‘accurate and independent information about the government.’

Earlier, the White House decided to bar MS NOW and Politico from entering its premises following the restrictions imposed on CNN. The organizations were accused of publishing “FAKE NEWS’ , ‘Fiction’ and ‘lies’ in respect of the administration. These organizations lost no time in initiating a federal lawsuit accusing the central administration of violating their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.

However, the latter litigating organizations could now consider themselves as having been vindicated because the federal court hearing their case has ordered the Trump administration to temporarily restore White House press access to journalists from the mentioned media institutions. Notably, the court has declared that the ban is ‘likely unconstitutional’. The case is proceeding.

The mass media of the most vibrant democracies of the West ought to be no strangers to such inspirational acts of solidarity and exemplifications of independence but there are lessons here for the democracies of the South that could stand them in good stead. Minus the right of a people to be informed, the rest of fundamental rights featuring in Southern Bills of Rights and legislation of the kind are bereft of substance and meaning.

It is informed decision-making on the part of a citizenry that makes for democratic vibrancy and on this score many a Southern democracy fails. While Southern publics generally demand of their governments continuous economic well being and substantive material benefits they are not equally desirous of being informed and knowledgeable.

This lacuna in the consciousness of many Southern publics enables their governments ‘to get off the hook’, so to speak and govern, or more often misgovern, their countries with impunity. Among other factors, this species of mass ignorance makes it possible for governments to dismantle democracy and rule in perpetuity.

Accordingly, an educated and constantly informed public is an essential precondition for the flourishing of democracy and independent media are integral to this process. Minus an independent mass media sector that meets the knowledge needs of the people responsibly, democracy is as good as dead.

Needless to say, those sections of the US media that are currently taking the Trump administration to task over its media curbs are acutely aware of the cruciality of these fundamental knowledge requirements.

The hope of democratic opinion worldwide and locally is likely to be that media independence would thrive in the manner in which it is flourishing in the most vibrant and accountable democracies of the West.

Southern countries such as Sri Lanka that lay claim to democratic credentials, but are democracy-deficient in many ways, need to be particularly cognizant of these requirements. The publics of these countries need to go the extra mile to ensure the thriving of an independent but responsible mass media sector.

In fact it is veritably a matter of life and death. It is only an independent media sector that could, while ensuring the existence of an informed public, impress on the latter the need to protect and perpetuate its fundamental rights. In the absence of these campaigns, such publics could be eventually having on their hands governments that boast of ruling in perpetuity.

Taking a leaf from the sections of the US media referred to independent media organizations in Southern states need to act in solidarity as well. They would need to act on the basis of the principle that acts of victimization suffered by members in their fold at the hands of governments, for instance, are in fact inimical acts directed at their collectivity and which call for united remedial action. In short, no independent mass media institution could see itself as ‘an island’.

Besides some general guidance on the importance of media independence and solidarity, the message coming from the US with regard to media praxis is that power must be stood-up to unblinkingly. The mentioned sections of the US media are primarily in a struggle to ward off encroachments on their independence in the areas of policy and practice by the political executive, that is the President.

The latter would ride rough-shod over the media in the absence of robust opposition by the media itself to inimical executive action of this kind.

While media independence needs to be seen as crucial to democratic development, an obligation is cast on the media to ensure that it uses such independence responsibly and constructively.

The worst that could afflict a media sector is for it to fall prey to the clichetic ‘freedom of the wild ass’. In fact recurring irresponsibility on the part of the media could lend credence to the perception that a tightly regulated media is best for a country. It is a short step from this misguided view to the position that political authoritarianism is best for a state. That turn of events would be of course catastrophic for a democracy.

The issues discussed thus far point to the need for a broad discourse among Southern democracies in particular on what is best for them in this connection. Given the risks underscored earlier for Southern countries in particular a broad discussion on the matters at hand, which includes the public, emerges as a must for Sri Lanka. Besides, media solidarity within democratic countries and internationally is a must.

Features

What lessons can be learned to improve quality of Sri Lanka’s Grade 6 syllabus

Published

11 hours ago

2026/10/1

Sahan Weerasooriya

Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya

by Prof. M. W. Amarasiri de Silva

Following public controversy over an inappropriate web link found in an English study module, the Sri Lankan government formally deferred the full rollout of the Grade 6 curriculum reforms to January 2027. In the interim, state schools will maintain the existing syllabus, reverting to standard eight-period daily timetables and previous textbooks to ensure uninterrupted instruction. Prime Minister and Minister of Education Dr. Harini Amarasuriya emphasized that this temporary pause allows the Education Ministry to thoroughly review all instructional materials, fix editorial flaws, and conduct scientific impact assessments across pilot schools prior to nation-wide implementation.

To address the oversight, an expert committee evaluated the flawed materials, completed necessary amendments, and finalised discussions to resubmit corrected modules for printing. Beyond revising written texts, the Ministry established a broader preparation roadmap—allocating funds for extensive teacher training programs set to begin mid-year, alongside scheduled informational briefings for parents, teachers, and students. Prime Minister Amarasuriya reaffirmed that none of the valid first-term modules were completely discarded or scrapped, preserving state resources while systematically rebuilding public trust and strengthening quality assurance protocols.

In this respect, this article reviews the current grade 6 syllabus comparing it with similar syllabi of India and the USA, with a view to make recommendations for the upcoming grade 6 syllabus revision.

Architecture of nation’s future

Education is the quiet architecture of a nation’s future. It is the unseen scaffolding upon which generations build their character, their intellect, and their capacity to contribute meaningfully to society. In Sri Lanka, the Grade 6 syllabus occupies a particularly important place in this architecture. It is the bridge between primary learning and the more demanding intellectual terrain of secondary education. It is the moment when children begin to move from learning basic facts to understanding concepts, from memorising information to applying knowledge, and from passive reception to active engagement. Yet, despite its importance, the Grade 6 curriculum in Sri Lanka has long struggled with issues of breadth, depth, relevance, and pedagogy. As global education systems evolve, Sri Lanka must examine what lessons can be learned from international models—particularly India and the United States—to strengthen its own curriculum and prepare students for a rapidly changing world.

The first lesson Sri Lanka can learn is the value of conceptual clarity. India’s NCERT curriculum, especially in Mathematics and Science, is globally respected for its logical progression and conceptual depth. Indian students are introduced early to the idea that mathematics is not merely a set of procedures but a language of reasoning. They learn why a ratio works, not just how to compute one. They understand the structure of an equation, not merely the steps to solve it. In Science, they explore the properties of materials, the structure of plants, and the principles of motion with a clarity that encourages curiosity rather than rote memorisation.

Sri Lanka’s Grade 6 syllabus, while competency-based, often leans heavily toward content coverage. Students are expected to learn many topics, but the time allocated for each is limited, and the teaching culture often emphasizes memorisation over understanding. If Sri Lanka wishes to improve the quality of its syllabus, it must embrace the idea that fewer topics taught well are better than many topics taught superficially. Conceptual mastery builds confidence, and confidence builds lifelong learners.

Lesson from the US

A second lesson comes from the United States, where the curriculum is built around skills rather than content. American students in Grade 6 are expected to read complex texts, analyse arguments, write essays supported by evidence, conduct experiments, and engage in collaborative projects. The emphasis is not on how much they know but on what they can do with what they know. This skills-based approach encourages critical thinking, creativity, and independence—qualities essential for success in the modern world.

Sri Lanka’s syllabus, by contrast, often rewards students for reproducing information rather than interpreting it. The exam culture reinforces this tendency, as students are assessed primarily through written tests that measure recall. To improve the syllabus, Sri Lanka must integrate more opportunities for students to think, question, debate, and create. The classroom should become a space where students learn to solve problems, not just memorize solutions.

Another important lesson comes from the breadth of Sri Lanka’s own curriculum. One of the strengths of the Sri Lankan system is its inclusion of cultural and religious education. Subjects such as Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity provide moral grounding and cultural identity. Art, Music, Drama, and Health contribute to holistic development. These subjects remind students that education is not merely about academic achievement but about becoming a balanced human being. However, breadth without depth can become burdensome. Grade 6 students in Sri Lanka often juggle more than ten subjects, each with its own textbook, competencies, and assessments. This creates pressure not only for students but also for teachers, who must rush through content to meet syllabus requirements. The lesson here is not to reduce cultural subjects but to integrate them more meaningfully. Religious education can be taught through ethical discussions, community projects, and reflective writing. Art and Music can be connected to history, literature, and social studies. Health can be linked to science and physical education. Integration reduces overload while enriching learning.

Another lesson from India

India offers another valuable lesson in the form of standardised textbooks. NCERT books are used across the country, ensuring consistency in quality and content. They are written by subject experts, reviewed rigorously, and updated periodically. Sri Lanka’s textbooks, while generally well-structured, vary in quality and often lag behind modern pedagogical standards. Some are dense, text-heavy, and lacking in visual aids or real-world examples. To improve the syllabus, Sri Lanka must invest in high-quality textbooks that are engaging, accessible, and aligned with contemporary educational research. Textbooks should not merely transmit information; they should inspire curiosity. They should include stories, diagrams, experiments, and activities that make learning enjoyable and meaningful.

The United States provides a lesson in inquiry-based science education. American students conduct experiments, build models, observe natural phenomena, and engage in engineering design challenges. They learn science not as a set of facts but as a process of discovery. Sri Lanka’s science curriculum includes experiments, but many schools lack the resources, laboratory facilities, or teacher training to implement them effectively. Improving the syllabus requires improving the ecosystem around it. Schools need laboratories, equipment, and teacher development programs that empower educators to teach science through inquiry. A syllabus is only as strong as the environment in which it is taught. ***

International models

Another area where Sri Lanka can learn from international models is language education. In India, students often learn three languages—English, Hindi, and Sanskrit or Urdu. This heavy language load has its challenges, but it also produces students with strong linguistic skills. In the United States, English Language Arts emphasises reading complex texts, writing arguments, and analysing literature. Sri Lanka’s English curriculum, while improving, still struggles with uneven implementation across schools. Many students reach secondary school without adequate proficiency in English, limiting their access to global knowledge. To improve the syllabus, Sri Lanka must strengthen English instruction through better teacher training, more reading opportunities, and a shift from grammar-heavy teaching to communication-focused learning. At the same time, Sinhala and Tamil instruction should be modernised to include creative writing, literature appreciation, and critical reading.

Social Studies is another area ripe for improvement. Sri Lanka’s curriculum includes History, Geography, and Civics, but the teaching often emphasises memorization of dates, definitions, and facts. India’s Social Science curriculum, while also content-heavy, provides clearer conceptual frameworks. The United States, however, excels in teaching civics and citizenship. American students learn how governments function, how laws are made, how communities solve problems, and how citizens participate in democracy. Sri Lanka can strengthen its Civics curriculum by incorporating more discussions on governance, rights, responsibilities, and community engagement. Students should learn not only the structure of government but also the values that sustain it—justice, equality, and participation.

One of the most important lessons Sri Lanka can learn is the value of reducing exam pressure. In both India and Sri Lanka, exams dominate the educational landscape. Students are judged primarily by their ability to perform on written tests. The United States, while not free from assessment challenges, uses a wider range of evaluation methods—projects, presentations, portfolios, and continuous assessment. These methods allow students to demonstrate learning in diverse ways. Sri Lanka should consider adopting a more balanced assessment system that values creativity, collaboration, and practical skills alongside academic knowledge.

Technology integration is another area where Sri Lanka can improve. The United States incorporates digital literacy, coding, online research, and digital citizenship into the curriculum. Sri Lanka’s ICT syllabus is well-structured, but implementation varies widely. Many schools lack computers, internet access, or trained ICT teachers. Improving the syllabus requires improving infrastructure. Students must learn to navigate the digital world safely and effectively. They must learn coding not as a luxury but as a basic skill. They must learn to evaluate online information critically, a skill essential in an era of misinformation.

Teacher training

Teacher training is perhaps the most critical lesson of all. A syllabus is only as effective as the teachers who deliver it. India invests heavily in teacher training through national programs, workshops, and online platforms. The United States emphasises professional development, peer collaboration, and instructional coaching. Sri Lanka must strengthen its teacher training programmes, ensuring that educators understand not only what to teach but how to teach it. Teachers should be trained in inquiry-based learning, differentiated instruction, formative assessment, and classroom management. They should be empowered to adapt the syllabus to the needs of their students rather than follow it mechanically.

Sri Lanka must learn the lesson of relevance. A syllabus must prepare students not only for exams but for life. It must teach them how to think, how to communicate, how to solve problems, and how to work with others. It must prepare them for a world where knowledge is abundant, but wisdom is scarce. It must help them navigate a future shaped by technology, globalisation, environmental challenges, and social change. To improve the syllabus, Sri Lanka must ask: What kind of citizens do we want to produce? What kind of thinkers? What kind of leaders? The answers to these questions should shape the curriculum.

Lastly, improving the quality of Sri Lanka’s Grade 6 syllabus requires learning from both international models and local strengths. From India, Sri Lanka can learn the value of conceptual clarity and standardised textbooks. From the United States, it can learn the importance of skills, inquiry, and creativity. From its own traditions, it can preserve cultural education, moral development, and holistic learning. The goal is not to copy another country’s system but to build a uniquely Sri Lankan curriculum that is modern, relevant, and empowering. A curriculum that honours the past while preparing students for the future. A curriculum that nurtures thinkers, creators, and compassionate citizens. A curriculum worthy of a nation with immense potential and a proud educational heritage. If Sri Lanka embraces these lessons, the Grade 6 syllabus can become not just a bridge to secondary education but a foundation for national progress.

Features

Three magical nights at Colombo Fashion Week

Published

11 hours ago

2026/10/1

Sahan Weerasooriya

Melloney Dassanayaka is certainly a familiar name here, and abroad, as well, having represented Sri Lanka at the Miss Universe 2024 pageant, held in Mexico.

A former National Basketball player, she is also involved in several projects, beneficial to the community, including financial literacy for single women-headed families in the country.

A banker by profession, Melloney hold a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration.

Melloney with Asanka de Mel of Lovi Sri Lanka

This extremely talented old girl of Holy Family Convent, Bambalapitiya, was in the limelight, once more, when she was seen on the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week.

It was her very first experience, at this prestigious event, and she loved every minute of it, she said, and, what’s more, she was featured on three consecutive days.

According to the itinerary, on day 01 she walked for Lovi Sri Lanka; day 02 Rizwan Beyg (Pakistan designer), Arsath Furkhan (Indian designer), Haoyi Yan (Chinese designer) and Samant Chauhan (Indian designer); and on day 03 Vaishali Shandangule (Indian designer).