Connect with us

Features

The Denial and Whitewashing of History

Published

on

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

Censorship, the burning and banning of books and the persecution/murder of writers have been despicable crimes perpetrated by the human race through the ages. The first such recorded atrocity was in 213 BCE, during the Qin dynasty, when Emperor Qin Shi Huang ordered the burning of books and the live burial of scholars in order that he may remain on his throne.

The obliteration of the Grand Library of Baghdad by the marauding Mongols in 1258; the destruction of Aztec and Mayan manuscripts during the Spanish colonization of the Americas; the burnings of Catholic manuscripts in England after Henry VIII broke away from the Catholic Church; the use of books seized from the US Library of Congress to burn the US Capitol during the War of 1812; Nazi book burning of communist and Jewish manuscripts “subversive to or representing ideologies opposed to Nazism”; and, closer to home, the complete destruction, in 1981, of the Jaffna Public Library allegedly by government-sponsored Sinhalese mobs, who set fire to one of the biggest libraries in Asia, containing over 97,000 irreplaceable books and manuscripts.

Though the three-decade long ethnic war in Sri Lanka took the lives of tens of thousands of Sri Lankans and caused incalculable destruction to valuable property and resources, history will rank the burning of the Jaffna Library as the greatest atrocity in a conflict replete with atrocities.

These are but a few of the more egregious instances of destruction of books and manuscripts, representing efforts by kings, tyrants, invaders and politicians to destroy historical records, traditions and cultures of civilizations, to seize lands and rule as conquerors. They may have silenced some, they may have destroyed others, but they are all destined to fail. As Heinrich Heine, one of Germany’s greatest poets, wrote, “When they burn books, they will ultimately also burn people”.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution enshrines freedom of speech, and guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly and petition. Many American classics have been “challenged” in the USA during the past two centuries, but their suppression has not remained in force because of the guard-rails provided by the First Amendment. Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species was challenged and suppressed from 1859 for its theories on evolution, which went against Christian beliefs of Divine Creation. Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird and J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye are all examples of American classics that have survived spurious challenges of censorship.

The Trump-owned Republican party is now showing a trend towards racism and anti-Semitism, using censorship and suppression in an attempt to rewrite the nation’s history of genocide and slavery, and to deny the horrors of the holocaust.

Critical Race Theory (CRT), also known as the 1619 Project, fancy names of what we used to study as plain “History”, has become a target of censorship for Republicans, primarily Governors DeSantis of Florida and Youngkin of Virginia. These Republican Governors lead the anti-CRT movement, but they are not alone. Many Republican states including Idaho, Oklahoma, Texas, Tennessee, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Arizona and North Dakota have all passed legislation banning the teaching of CRT in their classrooms. The objective of such censorship is the obsession of the Radical Right to keep the more gory aspects of US history, including genocide and slavery, out of school curricula; in other words, to teach “selective history” as defined by the invaders and oppressors. CRT has become the latest Bogeyman for the country’s racist history and the way it has impacted its racist present.

The opponents for the dissemination of CRT argue that all white people are unfairly feared as “oppressors” or predators; while black people are all classified as “the oppressed” or victims, through the teaching of historical atrocities and discrimination committed against Native Americans and African Americans by the ancestors of the white man. They aver, against all available evidence, that systemic racism does not exist in the nation today, that CRT is largely an expedient strategy by politicians to win the minority vote. Many of them even hallucinate that the USA is an equitable democracy. They are simply unwilling or unable to remove the blind spot obscuring the fact that America is not great for everyone, that the nation has a long way to go before it becomes a democracy for all of its citizens.

Proponents of CRT submit that American children should be taught the complete history of America, warts and all, not just its grand experiment of Democracy which began in 1789. They do not acknowledge that the nation’s violent and racist past, including genocide and slavery, ultimately led to this experiment, which remains a work-in-progress.

CRT explains how systemic racism is currently the defining feature of the nation, coming to terms with the racial anomalies that exist today in police brutality, the judicial and prison systems, voter suppression and the classification of Black neighbourhoods as “ghettos”. The more we try to deny the atrocities and racial discrimination that have tormented the nation to the present day, the more likely that they will continue, unabated, into the future.

Governors DeSantis and Youngkin, who are walking the tightrope of sucking up to Trump while nursing their own presidential ambitions for 2024, have already banned the teaching of CRT in Florida and Virginia. There is little doubt that this legislation and other such attempts to camouflage and whitewash history will ultimately be overturned by even a 6/3 stacked Republican Supreme Court, as such bans are in direct violation of the First Amendment.

A school district in the State of Tennessee recently voted to ban the sale of the 1992 Pulitzer Prize winning graphic novel titled “The Complete Maus”, by graphic cartoonist/writer Art Spiegelman. The reasons given for the ban are that the book contains “graphic use of unnecessary nudity and profanity and depiction of violence and suicide”. The only example of “unnecessary nudity and suicide” in the book is a small panel illustrating the suicide of Spiegelman’s mother in the tub, having slashed her wrists.

I guess the centrefolds appearing in magazines like Playboy, with lewd illustrations of female genitalia photographed at every possible angle in minute detail, are examples of “necessary nudity”.

And unbelievably, the “profanity” objected to in the book includes seven instances of the expletive “damn”!

Spiegelman’s graphic narrative is based on an interview with his father, a holocaust survivor, of his experiences and suffering at Auschwitz Concentration Camp, and the subsequent suicide of his mother in 1968, apparently because she was unable to live with these memories after the war. Spiegelman depicts the various ethnicities in the form of animals: Jews are Mice (vermin or pests, carriers of disease), Nazis Cats (predators who prey on the Jewish mice), Americans are Dogs (who rescue the Jewish mice from the German cats). The book contains numerous graphic illustrations of hangings and other forms of violence and torture inflicted by the Nazis to subjugate and murder Jews in Auschwitz. Spiegelman’s Pulitzer Prize winning book is a graphic narrative of the atrocities of the holocaust.

Just as the banning of Critical Race Theory is a denial of the grim realities of genocide and slavery in the founding of America, the banning of a book illustrating the brutality suffered by Jews during the 1930s in Hitler’s Germany is a denial of the holocaust.

Legislation recently proposed by the New Hampshire Republican legislature also provides a nightmare of things to come if the Republicans gain control of Congress and the presidency. The proposed Bill, entitled “An Act Relative to Teachers’ loyalty”, seeks to ban public schoolteachers from fostering any theory that depicts US history or its founding in a negative light. The Bill states, “Such prohibition includes but is not limited to teaching that the United States was founded on racism”. Which it was, and there is no doubt that genocide and slavery are implicit in this concept of “racism”.

These examples of repression highlight the current racist and anti-Semitic trends shown by Trump and the Republican Party to promote such authoritarian and racist measures of censorship. If these repressive measures are ever accepted nationally, they will prove a great danger to a diverse and just American society in the future. Especially if a defeated, seditious former president or wannabe dictators like DeSantis and Youngkin take control of the presidency and Congress in 2024.

The Radical Right attempts to erase the history of America in the hope that such erasure will whitewash the sins of their white forefathers, and so falsely paint America as a universally equitable democracy. A democracy where, according to the preamble to the US Constitution, “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”. Unfortunately, the new Republican Party intends, as the original Framers also intended, to restrict these “inalienable rights” only to white, Christian men.

The nation will overcome, in the fullness of time, the challenges of racism and authoritarianism posed by Trump and his Republican, white supremacist base. Martin Luther King’s dream, that outlines the long history of racial injustice in America, with the hope that his children will one day be “judged not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character” has only been delayed by the death throes of white supremacy.

Just as Hitler’s dream of the birth of an ethnically pure, blonde and blue-eyed Aryan Nation never saw the light of day, so the concept of a Trump-backed Republican Party’s dream of a nation dominated by white supremacists will also be destroyed by the very history it seeks to suppress.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Playing blind man’s bluff with tariff man

Published

on

President Trump unleashing the tariff tsunami

While the whole world was waiting anxiously for President Donald J. Trump, a self- proclaimed “tariff man”, to present his plan for “reciprocal tariffs” on his “Liberation Day”, an American commentator Jon Stewart declared on “The Weekly Show” podcast that he knew what “Donald Trump’s whole plan” was. Since Trump was elected, I have been closely following the developments in Washington but didn’t come across any other such claims. Yet, I was not surprised by Jon Stewart’s claim because he is a highly paid comedian and his podcast was recorded on the day before President Trump unveiled his plan. But now I know Jon Stewart was not the only person who knew how Trump’s plan for “reciprocal tariffs” would unfold. Most of our politicians (other than those in the government) had known what the plan was, much in advance of the official announcement. Now they are on our evening TV news blaming the government for not taking measures to pre-empt Trump’s move and providing their expert advice on how the government should engage with the US!

Tariff Tsunami

Unlike these politicians and their advisers, I did not expect President Trump to slap punitive tariffs of 44 percent on our exports. Our garment exports to the United States expanded from the early 1980s to December 2004, due to a very generous textile and apparel quota extended by the United States under the now-defunct Agreement on Textiles and Clothing. It was a clear and very successful example of providing trading opportunities as development aid by a development partner. However, we were also paying high tariffs for these exports but remained competitive in the US market as quotas ensured a reasonable market share. But after 2004, with the end of the quotas, the Sri Lankan exporters started to face strong competition in the US market, particularly from countries that had duty-free market access. So, in December 2004, Sri Lanka was hit by two tsunamis, the Asian Tsunami and the Tariff Tsunami.

On 06 January 2005, The Wall Street Journal published on its op-ed page an opinion piece titled, “Tariff Tsunami,” highlighting this: “… some eye-popping statistics showing how U.S. tariffs discriminate against world’s poor, including in particular those in Sri Lanka. The duties paid on Sri Lankan garment exports to the US in 2003 were $238.5 million – which was more than the total duties ($227 million) paid that same year on every product exported to the U.S. from all six countries of Scandinavia. That’s despite the fact that Scandinavia exports roughly 12 times more to the US than does Sri Lanka – $23.8 billion versus $1.8 billion in 2003. The average US duty rate from products from those rich nations of Northern Europe is about 1%, while the average rate on Sri Lankan goods is 13.8% and 16.6% on the bulk of its exports, which happens to be clothing.”

Twenty-one years later, if one checks the US Customs data for 2024 a similar pattern will be observed, as our exports’ basket to the US and the import duties in the US have not changed much. Though, some of our exports, like tea, gem stones and rubber products, have duty free access. for some apparel products we pay 25% tariff resulting in very high average tariff.

When Trump promised, during his campaign for the White House, a 10 percent tariff on all imports from all countries and a higher tariff on China, I expected Sri Lanka to improve her competitiveness and anticipated a shift in sourcing from China to other Asian countries. I also believed that the “slow surge in orders” received by Sri Lankan apparel exporters after the US elections, as well as the investment by an American engineering technology group at Wathupitiwala, could have resulted from this discreet shift of sourcing. (Please read my article published on 8th January in “The Island.”). It also appeared that when US Ambassador Julie Chung stated, last October, at the foundation stone laying ceremony for a new American factory at Wathupitiwala, “SHIELD’s decision to shift its facility in China to establish a manufacturing facility here in Sri Lanka is a testament to the growing interest of US investment in Sri Lanka …. If the new government can strengthen the investment climate, implement anti-corruption measures, and strengthen business-friendly governance and transparency, there is potential for even more manufacturers to make similar moves,” she, too, didn’t expect that, six months later, the United States would hit us with punitive tariffs. Because no American investor would ever think of investing in Sri Lanka with an over 44% tariff.

A guessing game on the tariff plan

When President Trump announced, in early February, his “Fair and Reciprocal Plan” on Trade, he did not provide much information about the plan. Then a few weeks later, the Director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett, stated that 10 to 15 countries accounted for America’s “entire trillion-dollar trade deficit” and the Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, mooted a plan for a higher tariff for the ‘Dirty 15’, a group of countries that have large trade imbalances. But they did so without naming the countries they were planning to target. Based on these two statements a guessing game started all over the world on the composition of this group. Still, most of the observers expected these countries to be those with highest goods trading deficit with the United States. In 2024, the United States faced highest trade deficits with China ($291 billion), the EU ($236 billion), Mexico ($172 billion), Vietnam ($124 billion), and Taiwan ($74 billion). Compared to these countries, Sri Lanka’s trade deficit with the United States is relatively insignificant.

However, with these declarations, there was a remote possibility of Sri Lanka getting hit by a higher tariff due to our relatively large trade deficit as a percentage of the total trade. For many years this was always raised by the American negotiators during the negotiations at bilateral multilateral levels. Though we had always managed to settle it amicably, with mutually acceptable explanations, the issue had remained as an irritant in our bilateral relations. Therefore, the Sri Lankan Embassy in Washington, and appropriate government agencies in Colombo, with inside knowledge of the views of the US trade officials on the bilateral trade deficit, should have prepared for this worst-case scenario, however remote it was, and strategised on possible responses.

Highest tariff on countries “which nobody has ever heard of”

A few weeks after the American elections, at a birthday party, I bumped into a Sri Lankan expert on the United States who works on these issues for the government. During our conversation I raised Trump’s proposed tariff with him, and inquired whether they had initiated any study on it, particularly any possible adverse impact on Sri Lanka. “Don’t worry,” he quipped, “…

Trump doesn’t know where Sri Lanka is. So, we will be the last to get hit!” As we were standing at the bar, sipping our first round of drinks, I didn’t take the conversation any further. But what he said reminded me of my first visit to the office of the United States Trade Representative, in Washington. That was in January 1998. After examining my freshly issued State Department diplomatic ID, the security guard inquired, very politely, where Sri Lanka was. And I explained, with the help of a quick sketch, where we are located. During the next three years, during my frequent visits to that building, she always welcomed me with a broad smile and remembered my name and where I was from. During my tour in the United States, I met few other people who had never heard of a country called Sri Lanka.

Unfortunately, predictably unpredictable Donald J. Trump had decided to impose the highest reciprocal tariffs on countries “which nobody has ever heard of,” Lesotho and the French Archipelago of Saint Pierre and Miquelon! Both got 50% tariffs under the new reciprocal tariff plan. Since the beginning of the century, Lesotho, a tiny landlocked African country, managed to expand her exports to the US under the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA) and is considered as one of the success stories under that programme. But during his annual address to Congress last month, President Trump, while defending his extensive cuts in the US aid budget, singled out a past aid project of “eight million dollars to promote LGBTQI+ in the African nation of Lesotho … a country that nobody has ever heard of.” In spite of its size, Lesotho refused to ignore the comment or take the matter lightly.

Foreign Minister Lejone Mpotjoane declared that the Lesotho government was “shocked and embarrassed” by the comments because Lesotho “… did not expect a head of state to refer to another sovereign nation in such a manner” and had sent an official protest note. Now, Mr. Mpotjoane must be a contented man. With the highest tariffs in place, the entire world has heard of a country called Lesotho! Saint Pierre and Miquelon, with a population of roughly 6,000 people and very limited trade with the US was the other country to get hit by 50% tariff. However, for this a tiny French archipelago, located off the shores of Canada, the time under the global limelight was short-lived as soon after the announcement the US administration made a U-turn and reduced the tariff to 10%.

Some of the other countries in this group with highest tariffs are not so tiny and are more well known. The table illustrates the United States imports from these countries and trade balance (in USD million) during 2023. (See Table 1)

Although President Trump has declared that these reciprocal tariffs are necessary to tackle America’s massive $1.2 trillion goods trade deficit, from this group of countries only Vietnam with $109 billion surplus and Cambodia with $11.8 billion surplus can contribute meaningfully towards a reduction of that deficit. The US trade deficit with all other countries in the group are minimal and together accounts for less than $5 billion. Based on 2023 statistics it is difficult to even understand Syria’s inclusion in the list. Then how did these countries end up with highest reciprocal tariffs?

Calculation of reciprocal tariffs

President Trump, while presenting his new tariff plan, stated that “reciprocal means they do it to us, and we do it to them. Very simple. Can’t get simpler than that,” and according to his Executive Order on the reciprocal tariffs, these are based on the average tariff rate charged to US exports, plus currency manipulation and other trade barriers. However, in many countries it is very difficult to quantify the tariffs, currency manipulation and other trade barriers. So, the calculation was simply done for each country by taking its trade in goods deficit for 2024, then dividing that by the total value of imports which provides the size of the trade imbalance in percentage terms. The US administration simply presumes that persistent trade deficits are due to a combination of tariff and non-tariff factors that prevent trade from balancing. Therefore, it divided that percentage number by 2 to fix the amount of reciprocal tariff. If the presumption on which the tariff is fixed is inaccurate then the burden of proof is with the country affected by the tariffs.

Way forward – ‘Make Haste Slowly’

With a 90-day grace period, Sri Lanka has sufficient time to move forward thoughtfully, appropriately, and discreetly. However, it is essential to negotiate with the American Administration the removal of the reciprocal tariffs, and if that is not negotiable, then reduce them to the global average. As the livelihood of thousands of poor workers are dependent on it, the government should act fast without making any wrong moves. In other words, it is time to make haste, slowly. But it is important to understand, as of now, it is a guessing game like blind man’s bluff, with modified rules: only two players at a time, and you are blindfolded. You have to guess where the other player stands and catch him, while the game is played on a cliff edge.

By Gomi Senadhira

(The writer, a former public servant and a diplomat, can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

Continue Reading

Features

New species of Bronzeback snake, discovered in Sri Lanka

Published

on

Dendrelaphis thasuni

In a rare and a prestigious honour in the world of biological sciences, a newly discovered species of bronzeback snake has been named after one of Sri Lanka’s foremost herpetologists, Dr. A. A. Thasun Amarasinghe. The new species, scientifically named Dendrelaphis thasuni, was found in Eastern Sri Lanka and belongs to the genus Dendrelaphis— a group of slender, tree-dwelling snakes known for their agility and distinctive colouration.

This naming is more than symbolic. It reflects global recognition of Dr. Amarasinghe’s invaluable contributions to the field of herpetology and biodiversity research, not only in Sri Lanka but across South and Southeast Asia. The discovery and naming were published in the prestigious journal Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, one of the leading international platforms for herpetological research.

Fitting Tribute to a Career in Conservation

For Dr. Amarasinghe, the gesture is both humble and meaningful. “To have a species from my own country named after me is one of the greatest honours I could receive,” he said in response to the announcement. “Over the past two decades, I’ve dedicated myself to the study of reptiles and amphibians. This recognition is a reflection not only of my work but also of the importance of scientific exploration in Sri Lanka and our region.”

Dr. Amarasinghe’s career has been marked by an unwavering commitment to uncovering and understanding the hidden diversity of reptiles and amphibians, particularly within the biodiverse Indo-Malayan region. His efforts have helped bring international attention to the unique and often endangered herpetofauna of South Asia.

So far, he has been involved in the discovery and formal description of more than 35 new species, including frogs, lizards, and snakes. These include six species of snakes from countries like Sri Lanka, India, Vietnam, and Indonesia—each one expanding the scientific understanding of ecosystems that are rapidly being altered by human activity.

The Discovery of Dendrelaphis thasuni

The new species was discovered during fieldwork conducted in Eastern Sri Lanka by a diverse team of researchers, including Anusha Aththanagoda, Dr. Anslem de Silva, Dr. Gernot Vogel (Germany), Sithar Udayanga, Champika Bandara, Majintha Madawala, Dr. L. Lee Grismer (USA), and Suranjan Karunaratne. The team’s findings led them to identify a previously undocumented member of the Dendrelaphis genus.

Bronzeback snakes are arboreal, non-venomous colubrids widely distributed across Asia. However, Dendrelaphis thasuni exhibits several unique morphological traits—such as distinct colouration, scale arrangement, and body proportions—that justified its classification as a new species.

The species was named using Dr. Amarasinghe’s first name, “Thasun,” in accordance with international zoological naming conventions. This gesture not only immortalises his name in scientific literature but also connects his legacy to Sri Lanka’s ecological history.

Rich and Fragile Habitat

The discovery location—Eastern Sri Lanka—is part of a region known for its ecological richness, containing a mix of dry zone forests, wetlands, and coastal ecosystems. These habitats are home to many endemic species, making them crucial for conservation.

Sri Lanka itself is one of the world’s top biodiversity hotspots. With high rates of endemism and relatively unexplored terrain, the island continues to yield new species even in the 21st century. However, this biodiversity is under increasing threat due to deforestation, urban expansion, agriculture, and climate change.

The discovery of Dendrelaphis thasuni underlines the importance of continued research and conservation efforts. As Dr. Amarasinghe has frequently noted in his writings and interviews, documenting biodiversity is a critical first step in protecting it.

 “We cannot conserve what we do not know exists. Each new species we discover is another piece of the puzzle, another reason to fight for the ecosystems that sustain them.”

Global Collaboration

One of the most inspiring aspects of this discovery is the international collaboration it represents. Scientists from Sri Lanka, Germany, and the United States worked together to conduct fieldwork, analyse morphological data, and publish their findings. It showcases the growing network of researchers who are committed to preserving global biodiversity.

Such collaborations are vital in herpetology, a field that often relies on both deep local knowledge and advanced global research techniques. The research team behind Dendrelaphis thasuni exemplifies this synergy—combining traditional field surveys with modern scientific methodologies to deliver world-class outcomes.

Dr. Thasun Amarasinghe with his daughter

Dr. Thasun Amarasinghe: A Scientist, Educator, and Conservationist

Dr. Amarasinghe is not only a prolific researcher but also a mentor and advocate for conservation. Over the years, he has co-authored numerous scientific papers, trained young researchers, and raised public awareness about the importance of reptiles and amphibians in maintaining healthy ecosystems.

He is known for his ability to bridge the gap between science and conservation policy, often emphasising the role of taxonomy—the science of naming and classifying organisms—as a tool for environmental protection. His work has influenced local and international efforts to safeguard species and habitats that would otherwise be overlooked.

His contributions have been recognised through fellowships, international speaking invitations, and now, with a species named in his honor—a rare distinction in the scientific world.

More Than Just a Name

While having a species named after someone is often considered one of the highest accolades in biology, Dr. Amarasinghe views it as part of a broader mission.

“This isn’t just about me. It’s about the science, the ecosystems, the communities who live alongside these species, and the young researchers who will carry this work forward. Naming a species is not the end—it’s the beginning of a deeper responsibility to protect it.”

The discovery of Dendrelaphis thasuni adds a significant chapter to Sri Lanka’s natural history and serves as a reminder of the urgent need to conserve the country’s fragile ecosystems. It also shines a spotlight on the people behind the scenes—scientists like Dr. Amarasinghe—whose dedication makes such discoveries possible.

With biodiversity loss accelerating globally, the role of field biologists and taxonomists has never been more critical. Their work not only reveals the hidden wonders of nature but also provides the data necessary for policymakers, educators, and conservationists to act.

As Sri Lanka continues to emerge as a key player in global biodiversity research, recognitions like this one highlights the nation’s scientific potential—and the global importance of preserving its wild spaces.

By Ifham Nizam 

Continue Reading

Features

Why Sinhala omitted in famous stone inscription by ancient Chinese Admiral ?

Published

on

A plaque erected to mark the opening of a new electronic library at the Attorney General’s Department was removed because the writing thereon was only in Sinhala and English, and Tamil had been left out. This reminded me of a stone plaque bearing the date 15th February 1409 put up by Chinese Admiral Zheng He at the Galle harbour during one of his grand voyages to Sri Lanka, India and the African Continent.

Zheng He was a Chinese mariner, explorer, diplomat, fleet admiral , and court eunuch during China’s early Ming Dynasty. Born as Ma He or Ma Sanbao into a Muslim family in 1371, he later adopted the surname Zheng conferred by the Yongle Emperor. He completed seven historical voyages to trade and gather knowledge from other parts of the world. He died in 1433, at the age of 62, during his last voyage near Calicut (now Kozhikode), India. His remains were dropped to Davy Jones’ locker (buried at sea) off Coromandel coast of India.

Zheng He had his voyages a long time before the European powers visited this part of the world. (The Portuguese first landed in India on 20 May 1498). Zheng visited Sri Lanka almost a century before him, and his stone stela is about the offerings he made to the Buddha, Allah and Hindu God Vishnu seeking their blessings for successful trade with Sri Lanka.

Sinhala omitted

Now, this historical stela is at the National Museum, Colombo. What he offered to Buddhist temples, Mosques and Hindu temples is fascinating and the whole list has been inscribed on the stela, which was erected in a predominantly Sinhala area, is in three languages—Tamil, Persian and Chinese; he omitted Sinhala!

Admiral Zheng He’s fleet was unbelievably large. He had sailing ships which were more than 120 metres in length (longer than the Sri Lanka Navy’s flagship) and had five decks each. Unconfirmed stories say their crews grew fresh vegetables on the top decks and had piggeries in the bottom bilge decks, where pigs were fed with leftover food of the crew during passage. These ships were floating fortresses.

Admiral Zheng He had more than 100 ships of this size and smaller vessels; his fleet consisted of 217 ships and 28,000 sailors/marines. In comparison, Columbus, in 1492, had only three ships and 90 sailors. “Santa Maria”, the flagship of Columbus, was only 30 meters in length.

Admiral Zheng He’s big ships carried valuable cargo, like silk, gold and silver coins, porcelain vases and plates for trading around the world.

When Admiral Zheng He first visited Sri Lanka, in 1405, at the Beruwala harbour, which was popular among Arab traders at that time, he visited the Kotte Kingdom and climbed Sri Pada. His first visit was only limited to India and Sri Lanka. During his second voyage in 1411, he clashed with the Kotte kingdom, and King Alakeshwara tried to attack his ships. The Admiral launched a counterattack with his expeditionary forces and captured Alakeshwara, who was subsequently replaced with King Parakramabahu VI. He sailed to China with the Sinhalese prisoners, including King Alakeshwara.

According to historical records, Admiral Zheng He presented captured King Alakeshwara and his followers to Yongle Emperor (third Emperor of Ming dynasty), only to be told that the Chinese went on voyages to promote their trade and not to wage war, and ordered to take the captives to Sri Lanka during his next voyage itself. The Admiral took them back to Sri Lanka, as ordered by the Emperor. They were looked after well during their stay in China.

The present-day Chinese leaders have said the same thing as regards their Belt and Road initiative: “We are for trade and investment and not war.”

After his sixth voyage, Admiral Zhang He concluded that there was nothing China could learn from the outside World. True enough, China was very much advanced compared to the outside world at that time. He reported this to the Emperor, who later had the fleet dismantled after the Admiral’s last voyage and funds were utilised for keeping the Mongolian invaders at bay. Admiral Zheng He spent 28 years of his adult life on voyages.

Stone tablet

In 1911, S.H. Thomlin, a British engineer working in Galle, along the southwestern coast of Sri Lanka, found the stone tablet lying in a culvert.

I am only a seafarer and not a historian. Can someone enlighten me on why the Sinhala language was not used in this plaque?

Were the Sinhalese upset and angry then as there was no inscription in Sinhala. Let us have a discussion on this interesting subject.

(I will be failing in my duty if I do not mention the help I received from Ravi junior for gathering some historical details.)

(The writer Admiral Wijegunaratne WV, RWP& Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc (Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defense Staff, Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd., Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation and Former High Commissioner to Pakistan.)

By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne

Continue Reading

Trending