Connect with us

Features

The Commonwealth

Published

on

Unlike UN bodies, the Commonwealth and its Secretariat do not have the same high profile in Sri Lanka or in any other country. That should not mean that the Commonwealth is an unimportant organization. The Commonwealth has its value in many fields, specially in promoting informal negotiations and contacts and in technical assistance. There are many similarities and connections among Commonwealth countries, largely in the fields of administration and governance and in education, and therefore important opportunities for closer interaction.

I have always thought of the Commonwealth as a useful institution and that Sri Lanka has the opportunity to make use of it more. Until the early 1970s, Commonwealth affairs were largely dealt with by the Foreign Ministry, and its technical assistance work was handled by the External Resources Division of the Planning Ministry. In the 1970s, however, there was an increasingly economic dimension to the work of the Commonwealth Secretariat and as a result I was drawn to it as Director of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Planning.

My main engagement with the Commonwealth came through my participation at two Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings (CHOGMs), the first one at Kingston Jamaica in May 1975 and the next one in London in June 1977. The CHOGM is a very unusual inter-governmental meeting. There were about 40 members of the Commonwealth at the time, and unlike other international gatherings, it is largely informal. The meeting is conducted in one language, English, and there are no translations and interpretations. That alone leads to a sense of informality.

The host country chairs the meeting, and although the meetings can be tense, there is no acrimony. The Heads of Governments meet round a table (at least those days), and only two officials were allowed at any one time to sit behind each Head of Government. There was opportunity for frank exchanges and across the table interventions and set piece speeches were rare. At the two CHOGMs I attended there were crowded agendas.

The Kingston meeting I attended with the Prime Minister Mrs. Bandaranaike, was fascinating. The Sri Lankan delegation consisted of, apart from the Prime Minister, Tissa Wijayaratna, Additional Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, N. Balasubramaniam, a Director at the Foreign Office, Dhanapala Samarasekara of the Foreign Ministry, Sunethra Bandaranaike, the PM’s Coordinating Secretary, Dr. Mackie Ratwatte, the PM’s Private Secretary and myself We stayed at the Sheraton Hotel in Kingston.

When we got to the hotel, we found that only four members, apart from the Prime Minister could stay as guests of the Jamaican Government. Other members of the delegation had to pay. Mrs. Bandaranaike was particular about the expenses of her visits abroad. She had a great sense of financial rectitude and accountability to Parliament. She told me and Balasubramaniam to share a room at the Sheraton so that the expenses will be low. I told the PM that I would prefer to go to another hotel close by which was cheaper. She said that it was not satisfactory as we have to be close to her. So I had to share a room with Balasubramaniam. I relate this story to illustrate Mrs. Bandaranaike’s frugality with public money. This is unimaginable nowadays.

As I said before, only two members of the delegation could sit behind the Prime Minister at any one time. I was the only one dealing with economic affairs, and as economic issues took up a lot of the time, I was inside the meeting room for most of the time. We were there for ten days, and during that time, the informality was such that you get to know other heads of government, during tea breaks and at other times. Talking of informality let me relate a few stories.

Pierre Trudeau Prime Minister of Canada was at the meeting, and he was in his prime. He had married a beauty, and they had come with their little child, and they were the great attraction in Kingston. That little child was Justin, now the Prime Minister of Canada. I met Trudeau many times during the Conference and became a nodding acquaintance. He was one of the most charming of Prime Ministers. He was friendly with Mrs. Bandaranaike, as he had visited Sri Lanka in 1973 and had been her guest.

I remember him in Colombo on that visit as I had to be present when Prime Minister Trudeau addressed a press conference at Temple Trees. Trudeau had told Mrs. Bandaranaike that he wished to meet a Sri Lankan astrologer and Mrs. Bandaranaike recommended one of them. Trudeau at that time was aged 49 and was not married. The astrologer told Trudeau that he will be married within the year and that prediction had come true. So when Trudeau met Mrs. Bandaranaike in Kingston, this matter of Sri Lankan astrology was referred to.

There was Mrs. Indira Gandhi, staying at the same Hotel Sheraton and we met many times informally. She left the Conference early, as her friend, Sarojini Naidu’s daughter had passed away. The others who were there were Lee Kuan Yew, Prime Minister of Singapore, Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere, Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia, General Gowon of Nigeria, Gough Whitlam of Australia, Wallace Rowling of New Zealand, and others.

There was also Mujibur Rahman from newly created Bangladesh. He was nurturing a strong grievance against Sri Lanka and Mrs. Bandaranaike, and he was not at all friendly. Sri Lanka had provided landing facilities to Pakistani aircraft on their way to East Bengal during the uprising and breakup from Pakistan. He was there with his young son of ten years, both to be assassinated within the next three or four months in a Bangladeshi coup.

The Foreign Minister, Kamal Hossain, whom we knew was also unfriendly, although he was to be friendly with me later on when he ran a development institute at Oxford. He and his wife visited us in Geneva years later. Michael Manley, the Prime Minister of Jamaica chaired the Conference with great panache and skill.

At the meeting itself, the main agenda item was the proposal for a new scheme for stabilization of primary commodity prices submitted by Harold Wilson, the British Prime Minister. This was at the time of North South tensions, and Harold Wilson was offering an alternative scheme to that of UNCTAD. In presenting this proposal, Harold Wilson took some time over it.

The CHOGM was meeting just the same week that the Vietnam war was ending and US forces were fleeing Vietnam. This had rattled the Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and he made a long and rambling presentation (unlike his usual precise self) on the dangers of what is happening in South East Asia. When Harold Wilson made his proposal, Lee Kuan Yew at the end of Wilson’s speech, shouted at Wilson and said that if this kind of presentation from a prepared text was to be the pattern that will be the end of informal discussions at CHOGMs.

Wilson hit back and said that he had listened to a rambling, illogical speech from Harry (meaning Lee Kuan Yew) and that was tolerated. I saw them later shaking hands at the tea interval. The Vietnam war was a subject of discussion at the meeting, and there was a sharp exhange of views between Lee Kuan Yew and Mrs. Gandhi.

Sri Lanka had one matter of substantive interest at the meeting. We had presented a paper on the Brain Drain, following on our own report In Sri Lanka on the subject. We proposed that there can be reciprocal arrangements among Commonwealth countries. Briefly what we said was that the developed countries could contribute to the building of technical educational capacities in those countries which are losing skills, so that there are extra capacities to allow for an outflow. This triggered a valuable discussion on the brain drain but there were no firm decisions.

There was another issue where Mrs. Bandaranaike wanted me to brief her in Kingston. Harold Wilson had proposed that the subject of machinery of government be taken up for discussion at the traditional weekend retreat for heads of government. No officials are present on these occasions. Mrs. Bandaranaike wanted to take up the subject of Cabinet proceedings and cabinet agendas, where relatively minor issues are discussed, and large long term issues are neglected. She wanted to open up a discussion on the framing of cabinet agendas and cabinet committees. I briefed her and she told me later that there was a lively discussion.

An important issue at the CHOGM was the election of a new Secretary General for the Commonwealth. Arnold Smith of Canada was the first and the only SG so far, and he was there in Kingston for his last meeting. He had done a great job in building up the Secretariat. The new candidate was Sridath Ramphal from Guyana. He was the Attorney General and Foreign Minister of Guyana. The Caribbean countries were pushing for him. There was no contest and he was selected to be the SG which he held for the next 15 years.

This was far too long, and later, the CHOGM decided to restrict the tenure of an SG to two terms totalling eight years. Shridath Ramphal, unlike Arnold Smith, was a politician and a flamboyant personality whose view of the Secretariat was in contrast to his predecessor. He was a more activist Secretary General and saw his role as an equal to other heads of government.

Another matter was the appointment of a Committee of Experts to examine the current state of international economic relations from a North South perspective. This arose directly from the discussions on Harold Wilson’s paper on international trade in commodities. The Commonwealth had both developing and developed countries and it was felt that a consensual position could be developed within it, so that the North-South tensions in UN forums could be reduced.

Aliste McIntyre, Head of the Caricom Secretariat and an academic was appointed to head the Committee. They produced a very useful report. Alister was later to be deputy secretary general of UNCTAD during the days of Gamani Corea, and after his retirement he was knighted. When we were in Geneva, he was also there and we became family friends, also working together in UNCTAD.

When I lost my job in Colombo in late 1977, Alister had recommended me to Sridath Ramphal to be the Director of Economic Affairs at the Commonwealth Secretariat, but that could not materialize, as the Government of Sri Lanka was not in favour of my appointment.

Daniel Arap Moi, Vice President Kenya was there acting for Jomo Kenyatta. At that time, Sri Lanka had made a proposal, within the framework of tea negotiations, to establish an Organization of Tea Exporting Countries (OTEC). This was a proposal I had suggested to the Prime Minister and she was glad to pursue it. The objective was to take the tea negotiations out of FAO’s control, so that tea exporters can generate more goodwill and better and more innovative ideas.

Kenya had not been helpful with regard to this proposal. So I thought that an intervention by Mrs. Bandaranaike might help. At a tea break, during the conference, I suggested to Mrs. Bandaranaike that she has a word with Arap Moi. It was all very cordial and he promised to see what he can do. The next thing I heard about it was when our high commissioner in Nairobi, Kenya (W.T Wijekulasuriya, former Mayor of Galle) sent us a press cutting of a speech by Arap Moi in the Kenyan highlands where tea was grown. Arap Moi had said that the Sri Lankan Prime Minister had wanted to control the expansion of tea production in Kenya!

Queen Elizabeth 11 as Head of the Commonwealth was present at Kingston, and threw a glittering party to the Commonwealth Heads of Government on board HMS Britannia, anchored in Kingston harbour. Some of us were able to have a look in at the party. I remember Tissa Wijeyaratna being recognized by the Queen’s private secretary, Michael Charteris, whom he had known in his London days and he never forgot to mention it to us repeatedly.

There was a small but active Sri Lankan community in Kingston who felicitated the Prime Minister. Tony and Charmalene (Perera) Bennet were there and Tony, who is a chartered accountant had been in Colombo working with the United Nations and for some time in the Planning Ministry. When discussing cricket, Tony told me that he could take me to meet George Headley, the great West Indian cricketer, known as the “Black Bradman”, who was living in reirement.

So we spent a delightful morning having breakfast with George Headley at his simple residence. George Headley showed me some cricketing artifacts associated with cricketers like Wally Hammond and Nawab of Pataudi, cricketers of his generation. Tony and Charmalene have remained our friends and now they live in England.

The second CHOGM I attended was in London in May 1977.1 was in Geneva, the previous six weeks working with UNCTAD on the non aligned proposal for a Third World Bank when I got a telephone call from Dharmasiri Pieris, Secretary to the Prime Minister, asking me to go to London and assist Felix Dias Bandaranaike who was to lead the Sri Lankan delegation at the CHOGM. Mrs. Bandaranaike, who was to have come to London cancelled her visit, due to the announcement of the General Election in Sri Lanka.

Felix was in London at a clinic recuperating from an eye infection. I met him there and he wanted a few things done.The CHOGM in London was not as interesting and informal as at Kingston. The Heads of Government were more preoccupied and they had other business to conduct in London. We did not stay in the same one or two hotels as in Kingston. James Callaghan, who was the British Prime Minister chaired the meeting and I remember listening to a wide ranging survey of the global economic situation from Denis Healey, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

From Ghana had come the army general who was then the ruler of that country (if I remember right, it was General Acheampong), resplendent in his army uniform. When he returned to Accra from the Summit meeting, he was shot dead at the airport, in a military coup. At this meeting, I renewed my contacts with Moni Malhotra of the Commonwealth Secretariat, who had been Mrs. Gandhi’s private secretary, and who was now with the Commonwealth Secretariat.

Queen Elizabeth, invited the officials, accompanying Heads of Government for a Buckingham Palace party and it was informal. I had a two minute chat with the Queen, and I told her that I had seen her on her 28th birthday in 1954 in then Ceylon. This made her think about her Ceylon visit and she had many questions to ask me. She had confused memories and she was mixing up tea plantations and elephants and the Polonnaruwa rest house.

Apart from CHOGMs, I had other interactions with the Commonwealth. One meeting I remember clearly is the Commonwealth Ministers Meeting on Food Production held in London in 1974. 1 accompanied the Minister Hector Kobbekaduwa and Mahinda Silva, the secretary of the ministry to London. It was a very pleasant visit and working with the minister and his secretary were most enjoyable. It was a roundtable meeting chaired by Judith Hart, the then Minister of Overseas Development in the UK. She was a brilliant chairperson.

We listened to a superb exposition on the problems associated with food and hunger by Michael Liption, from the Institute of Development Studies, Sussex who was advising Judith Hart (Lipton had been a member of the Seers mission to Sri Lanka). The Commonwealth also organized sometime in 1973 a meeting on Tea in London. Most tea exporting countries were in the Commonwealth.

I met Anne Weston, then with the Overseas Development Institute in London who was advising the Kenyan delegation, for the first time. Since that time, Anne has worked with me in many projects in Geneva and London. Anne later became Vice President of the North South Institute in Ottawa.

My association with the Commonwealth over a period of seven years leads me to the conclusion that it can be a very useful body for countries like Sri Lanka, if the opportunities are appropriately identified.

Mrs. Bandaranaike found CHOGMs very useful to her. While officials and even Ministers attend large numbers of conferences and seminars, Heads of Government have very little opportunity to interact personally, and the Commonwealth meetings were in the nature of a seminar or workshop on foreign, political and economic issues for them. For this to happen, CHOGMs have to be informal occasions.

What happened in Colombo in 2014 was a travesty of what a CHOGM experience should be. It is my belief that if we wish to strengthen institutions like the Commonwealth, then we should be actively engaged with them continuously so that we in Sri Lanka can influence and shape events, There is a trend now for institutions (the United Nations, the Commonwealth) to dominate the shaping of agendas and programmes, with little regard to the interest of less influential countries. A few powerful countries have come to dominate these institutions. There is no reason why we cannot reverse this trend.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

The Ramadan War

Published

on

Benjamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump and Mojtaba Khamenei

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

Continue Reading

Features

Nayanandaya:A literary autopsy of Sri Lanka’s Middle Class

Published

on

“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.

Surath de Mel

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

Continue Reading

Features

Domestic Energy Saving

Published

on

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)

Continue Reading

Trending