Features
The dilemmas of multilateralism
By Uditha Devapriya
Jim Hacker: Surely we are committed to the European ideal!
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Really, Minister!
Jim Hacker: If not, why are we pressing for an increase in membership?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: For the same reason. It’s just like the United Nations, in fact. The more members it has, the more arguments it can stir up, the more futile and impotent it becomes.
Jim Hacker: What appalling cynicism!
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Yes. We call it diplomacy, Minister.
— “Yes, Prime Minister”
The last week has been very busy for President Ranil Wickremesinghe. First he travelled to Cuba, in time for the G77 Plus China Heads of State Summit in Havana from September 15 to 16. Largely dismissed by the Western press, the Summit saw the participation of delegations from more than a hundred countries across the Global South. Speaking at the Summit, UN Secretary-General António Guterres reiterated the importance of South-South cooperation in light of developments like vaccine hoarding by rich countries. President Wickremesinghe, meanwhile, made use of the event to strengthen ties with Cuba.
Wickremesinghe’s next destination was New York, where he attended the 78th Session of the UN General Assembly and made a speech on Thursday, September 21. On the sidelines he attended a number of events, including a Conference on Sustainable Development Goals, and met with several officials, including USAID Administrator Samantha Power. He also took part in a business roundtable discussion organised by the Business Council for International Understanding and the Sri Lankan Embassy in the US.
More crucially, he took part in a programme, the third Annual Indo-Pacific Islands Dialogue, which focused on island nations in the Indian Ocean. At the event, hosted jointly by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Sasakawa Peace Foundation of Japan, he observed that such countries are reluctant to take sides in big power rivalries, especially in hotly contested oceans such as the Indo-Pacific.
He contended that Sri Lanka does not wish to take sides or get embroiled in conflicts between superpowers, emphasising that the island will only look up to its national interests. He also noted that military alliances such as Quad and AUKUS have only provoked big power rivalries in the region and violated the rules-based setup of organisations like ASEAN, APEC, and IORA.
Predictably, the Western press has taken to depicting Wickremesinghe’s comments as some kind of balancing act. Foreign Policy, for instance, notes his critique of Western military alliances and his rejection of claims that China is sending spy vessels as “music to China’s ears”, adding that “Wickremesinghe likely wanted to reassert his government’s neutral position by signalling that Colombo values its relations with Beijing as well.
” Foreign Policy may be reading too much between the lines and into Wickremesinghe’s motives here, but it is reflective of how the Western foreign policy establishment has viewed his statements. In any case, it’s not just political and business initiatives that he has limited his engagements to in the city: he also met with Nick Clegg, President of Global Affairs for Meta, and elaborated on the government’s controversial new anti-online hate speech initiatives.
In his speech on Thursday, President Wickremesinghe reflected on how he saved democracy last year by preventing a takeover of the parliament. False modesty aside, he also dwelt on the economic reforms he instituted and how these have gone a long way in “rebuilding trust and confidence between the people and the government.” The disconnect between the two of course remains, but at the General Assembly the President seemed content in saying that Sri Lankans “are already witnessing the positive outcomes of these measures in their daily lives.
” He then reiterated his belief, which I believe he takes to be his government’s view, that global challenges require solutions beyond borders. What emerged from the speech essentially was a tribute to multilateralism and to the necessity of working “in solidarity with the developing world” in combating issues like climate change.
These visits and speeches have taken place against the backdrop of simmering domestic tensions, instigated by a particularly inconvenient documentary on the Easter bombings. Yet by all accounts, on the foreign policy front, Ranil Wickremesinghe seems to have scored a hit or two. Feted by one world leader after another, he has depicted himself as a champion of small states and island nations, not to mention solidarity in the Global South.
There remains a disconnect, however, between aspiration and reality. Wickremesinghe will no doubt reflect on these values and principles when he addresses future forums abroad, particularly in the West. But how practical are they for Sri Lanka, a small state that has been pushed against its will into the same big power contests he wishes us to avoid?
Wickremesinghe’s advocacy of multilateralism and his critique of Western military alliances is certainly a breath of fresh air. In contrast to his uncle, J. R. Jayewardene, he has made a case against Western intervention in the Global South. Without over praising him, it must be acknowledged that no other national leader has articulated as clear and concise a critique of outfits like AUKUS and Quad as he has.
But the world of today is not the world of the 1980s. The vision for multilateralism the President has sided with, and touts himself as a champion of, is more complex than the ideologies of the Cold War, including non-alignment. As I have frequently contended elsewhere, multilateralism means different things to different people today. What vision of multilateralism, then, should Sri Lanka embrace?
The Sri Lankan government and foreign policy establishment have, thus far, avoided this question. Admittedly, this question is not easy to answer, still less resolve. Yet it must be answered, and it must be resolved. The flipside to multilateralism is that different countries and different groupings want to align it with their national interests.
Hence India, while championing multipolarity at even the recent G77 Summit, has refused to back a BRICS currency, partly because it wants to enthrone the rupee and partly because it does not wish to enthrone a unit of exchange within a bloc that is fundamentally dominated by its arch-rival China. President Wickremesinghe may declare, again and again, that Sri Lanka will not side with big powers in the region. But there are big power contests within the multilateral setup that he champions. How is Sri Lanka to navigate those waters?
It is this point that the mainstream Western press has picked up in its dismissals of the G77 Summit. Talking to the National Public Radio in the US, for instance, one correspondent observed that nothing concrete came out of the gathering, adding facetiously that “the most concrete thing… is that the G-77 plus China agreed to declare September 16 as the Day of Science, Technology and Innovation in the South.
” It was also this point that India picked up when it called on member states to speak as one “without getting distracted by bilateral issues.” It is questionable to what extent India itself has abided by this principle. But I think the point is well taken. Unless the Global South casts aside internal dissensions, as seen even in the Left-dominated Latin America, there can be no hope for multipolarity.
Sri Lanka’s lunge towards multilateralism did not begin with Ranil Wickremesinghe, nor will it end with him. Over the last year or so he has presented himself as a champion not just of the Global South, but also of specific concerns such as climate change. At COP27 he went as far as to fault industrialisation in the West for the problems of climate change in the Global South.
It is not fair to dismiss such sentiments lock, stock, and barrel. Yet they must also be put in perspective. At a time when the country’s assets, specifically State assets, are being auctioned off to everyone and anyone, it paradoxically might make sense to advocate these values, so as to attract the highest bidder. This is being somewhat cynical, to be sure. But it is in line with the Sri Lankan government’s economic reforms.
While all this is going on, however, the government has omitted to mention which vision of multilateralism it intends on advocating. As President Wickremesinghe wraps up his visit to New York and the UN General Assembly and returns home, the world will doubtless have their eyes on him. For Sri Lankans, though, he will remain the divisive, ambivalent figure he always has been. In that light, it would help if the government became a little more specific in its grand designs for foreign policy. This is asking for the bare minimum.
The writer is an international relations analyst, independent researcher, and freelance columnist who can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com.
Features
Combining local resources,traditional knowledge and science to build a food-secure Sri Lanka
World Food Day 2026: Innovating today for a better food future
by Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
What will be on the Sri Lankan dinner table ten years from now? Will our children be able to get nutritious food at a price their families can afford? Will farmers be able to grow enough despite changing weather and rising costs? And how much of the food we produce will actually reach the consumer, instead of being lost or wasted along the way?
These questions can’t wait. A farmer faces unpredictable weather. A family faces rising food costs. Fruit goes unsold after a good harvest. Some children do not get enough nutrition. The future of food is tied to the future of Sri Lanka itself.
World Food Day 2026 is a chance to look beyond the immediate problems and ask whether we can build a food system that feeds our people well, gives farmers better opportunities, protects the environment and makes better use of what we already have. The answer can be yes, but we will have to think differently.
We are not starting from zero. Sri Lanka has diverse crops, fisheries, traditional food knowledge, indigenous varieties, research institutions, universities and a young generation able to create new solutions. What we need is to bring these together and act. Producing more will not secure our food future on its own. It will depend on how intelligently we produce, process, preserve, distribute and consume food.
Making more of what we already have
Innovation does not always mean inventing something new. Often it means finding better uses for the resources we have.
Sri Lanka grows traditional rice varieties, kurakkan, green gram, cowpea, jackfruit, breadfruit, cassava, sweet potato, coconut and palmyrah. All of them have great potential for modern, nutritious, value-added foods. Jackfruit and breadfruit can be made into flour and other convenient products. Traditional rice varieties can go into new foods that suit changing consumer needs. Palmyrah, with its strong cultural heritage, can create new income through better processing, packaging, quality assurance and market development.
The aim is to connect our traditional food knowledge with modern consumer needs and technology, while keeping our food heritage.
Stop wasting the food we produce
Reducing food loss and waste should be a major priority. Seasonal fruits such as mango, banana, papaya and pineapple can be lost in large quantities when production exceeds demand or when storage, transport and processing facilities are inadequate. With suitable technology, these fruits can become dried products, pulps, powders, beverages and other shelf-stable foods.
Agricultural and fisheries by-products are resources too. They could be turned into food ingredients, animal feed, bio-based products and other useful materials, which would move us toward a more circular food economy.
Technology alone is not enough. We need stronger local processing facilities, cold storage, efficient transport, collection centres and market information systems, especially close to where food is produced. Cutting food loss raises the value of what our farmers and fishers already produce.
Nutrition and food safety come first
Food security means more than having enough food. People also need food that is safe and nutritious.
Sri Lanka can develop affordable, nutritious foods from local pulses, grains, vegetables, fruits and fish. Children and other vulnerable groups should get particular attention. Schoolchildren in particular deserve a focus: safe, nutritious, locally sourced products for school feeding programs would support child nutrition, local farmers and domestic food industries at the same time.
Food safety must stay at the centre of food innovation. Good hygiene, quality control, laboratory testing, traceability and appropriate food safety systems are what make new products safe as well as attractive and nutritious.
A food system that can cope with climate change
Climate change is already affecting agricultural production, water availability, crop yields and food prices. We need food systems that can handle changing conditions. That means climate-resilient crops, efficient water use, soil and water conservation, better storage and resource-efficient food processing.
Traditional knowledge matters here. Generations of Sri Lankan farmers have developed practices suited to local climates and ecosystems. Combining that experience with modern science can give us solutions that fit local conditions and are sustainable. Technology alone will not build the future of food. Science, experience and local knowledge together can.
Give young people a bigger role
Sri Lanka’s universities have an important part to play in shaping our food future. Young people should be encouraged to identify real problems in the food system and work on practical solutions in areas such as food waste, sustainable packaging, nutrition, food safety, modernising traditional foods and digital technologies.
A good research project should not always end as a research paper. Where appropriate, research should be supported to move on to products, technologies, enterprises and community solutions. That needs stronger partnerships between universities and industry, along with mentoring, research funding, business support and market connections. If young researchers and entrepreneurs can turn their ideas into viable food innovations, both consumers and producers will benefit.
A pathway designed for Sri Lanka
We do not need to copy food-system models from other countries. We can build a pathway that suits our own resources, culture and needs. It would bring together local resources, traditional knowledge, scientific research, appropriate technology and entrepreneurship, with farmers, fishers, universities, research institutions, food industries, entrepreneurs and policymakers working side by side.
The goal goes beyond selling raw materials. We need to create more value, reduce waste, improve nutrition, generate jobs and strengthen rural livelihoods. This matters especially for small and medium-scale food enterprises, which can drive local economic development when they get the right technical, financial and market support.
The choices we make today
The food future will not create itself. It will be shaped by what we grow, what we research, what we process, what we consume and what we choose not to waste.
So, the question for World Food Day 2026 is this: what can we do today so that every Sri Lankan has safe, nutritious, affordable and sustainable food tomorrow?
The answers are already around us, in our farms, fisheries, food businesses, universities, laboratories and communities. We have the resources, the traditional knowledge, the scientific expertise and talented young people. What we need now is to connect them and act.
A better food future begins with the choices we make today.
Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
Senior Lecturer, Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, University of Ruhuna
Features
20th Anniversary of Digampathana blast – the day Sri Lanka Navy cried
By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
The Digampathana suicide truck attack on 16th October 2006 remains the deadliest single strike in Sri Lanka Navy history, leaving scars that time cannot erase.
It was a seemingly ordinary Monday morning on 16 October 2006, but the calm of that day would soon be shattered in a way none of us could have imagined. As the Commandant of the Naval and Maritime Academy and Flag Officer Commanding Naval Fleet at Trincomalee, I was aware that a number of my cadets were travelling that morning, part of a convoy of fifteen buses carrying naval personnel from Trincomalee, Colombo, and other bases, heading toward Dambulla to rendezvous with another group. The convoy also included trucks and escort vehicles, a routine movement planned and coordinated with the army to ensure the roads were clear. The morning started quietly. Some personnel greeted friends, handed over their weapons, or strolled to a nearby tea shop. It all seemed so ordinary—too ordinary for what would come next.

Sri Lanka Navy sunk LTTE Ships carrying arms, ammunition and warlike materials thousand miles away from Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean in September and October 2007.
By late morning, both convoys had reached the small ground at Digampathana, near the Sigiriya junction, and personnel mingled briefly, unaware that a carefully orchestrated act of terror was waiting. Then, suddenly, an empty half-truck veered directly into the convoy. It exploded with a ferocity I can still recall as if it were yesterday. Nuts, bolts, and high explosives tore through the air. Pandemonium erupted instantly. I later learned that 107 of our naval personnel were killed on the spot and another 153 critically injured. The scene was indescribable—bodies scattered, vehicles mangled, personal effects strewn across the ground. I remember later hearing that the head of the suicide bomber was recovered more than 100 meters away from the blast, a grim testament to the sheer force of the explosion.
I was in my office at the Naval and Maritime Academy when my mobile phone rang. A young midshipman from the 21st intake called, his voice trembling: “Sir, there was a huge explosion at the convoy point! Many are dead … my batch mate Wijesundara is among them.” I immediately jumped into my jeep with my escort Chief Petty Officer and driver and rushed to Digampathana, relying on every ounce of my driving skill to reach the scene. The journey, which usually took little more than an hour, felt endless that day, each passing mile weighed down by dread.
When I arrived, I was confronted with a sight that no training can prepare you for. The injured were being rushed to Dambulla Hospital, where doctors and nurses worked tirelessly, improvising in ways that saved lives despite the overwhelming chaos. I went back to the site after visiting the hospital. The remains of our naval personnel were scattered across the ground, and someone had begun collecting weapons and protective gear. I immediately contacted Surgeon Rear Admiral Nico Jayasekara and received his instructions: collect all body parts in separate bags and transport them to the Trincomalee Naval Hospital mortuary. This gruesome work had to be done with care and dignity, and it filled the icebox in my vehicle. Through DNA testing initiated by Rear Admiral Nico, we were able to identify every naval personnel lost that day, bringing some closure to grieving families.
The Navy Commander at the time, Vice Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda, was devastated. I had worked closely with him and knew how deeply he cared for his men. He ensured that the fallen were honoured with full ceremonial naval funerals at Welisara Naval Base, attended by families and comrades. Sixty-seven funerals were conducted in a single day—a number that still haunts me.
The Digampathana attack remains the largest single loss of naval life in our history. It was a day of sorrow, but also a day that reinforced our resolve. The tragedy galvanized the Navy to target the LTTE Sea Tiger wing with renewed determination and reshaped our maritime operations forever. Every time I think of that day, I remember not just the lives lost, but the courage, professionalism, and dedication of those who survived, those who treated the injured, and those who ensured the fallen were honored properly. May the souls of our naval hero’s rest in peace, their sacrifice guiding us and inspiring generations of naval personnel to come.
Features
‘Murder at Whitby Abbey’
Tales of Mystery and Suspense – 24
I was intrigued by the title of a book I found in a book drop at the condominium of a friend, Murder at Whitby Abbey, and I brought it home with me though I will not be able to return it in the near future. It was described on the cover page as ‘a standout in the crowded medieval mystery field’, though I fear I do not know of other books in this field, apart from the Cadfael series, which I have dealt with earlier.
The book, by Cassandra Clark, is set during the reign of Richard II and has as a backdrop his precarious position, which led to his being replaced, and murdered, by his cousin Henry, who reigned as Henry IV. It is a gloomy book, the action taking place in the twelve days of Christmas leading up to the Epiphany. And the gloom is pervasive, even though this is supposed to be a time of festivity, with mummers performing, and many of those in the guest house where the heroine stays going to town to enjoy themselves, with much drinking and much music, which also fills the guesthouse.
The heroine Hildegarde is a nun, sent to try to acquire a relic being sold by Whitby Abbey, though this was also a penance set by the Abbot of the monastery that governed her abbess because she had had sex with a man. Soon after she and her companions reach the Abbey set high on a cliff, she finds that there are other bidders, and soon suspects that the hierarchy, not perhaps the Abbot who seems a weakling, but his rapacious bursar, is determined to make money, and not above creating false relics to sell to several aspirants.
After Hildegarde and her Cistercian companions – Whitby is a Benedictine Foundation – two monks, Gregory and Egbert, and a young priest Mark, reach the abbey, they find that Aelwyn, a monk they had met on their way to the guesthouse had died. This was in the apple store, and they realize, when they find the surplices of novices stuffed into the air vents, that he had been left to suffocate in the overwhelming scent of apples.
The Cistercians are asked to look into the death, perhaps because they are likely to get no cooperation from the Abbey folk, but perhaps because those in charge are keen to know what happened. And the infirmarer, an old monk, suggests Hildegarde talk to a man called Edred who worked for the bursar, and had been a friend of Aelwyn’s. But Edred too is killed, before he can keep an appointment he had made with Hildegarde, drowned in a pool near the farmhouse of the Abbey.
Meanwhile tensions arise between the fisherfolk and the abbey for the bursar wants to charge them for using the beach that technically belongs to the abbey to dry their fish and their nets. This leads to physical battles, when the guards used by the abbey, under the command it seems of the bursar whose determination to make money is not resisted by the abbot and the prior, try to storm the area where the fishermen live.
Hildegard finds out more about what had happened through two youngsters, one of whom Torold is the son of Aelwyn by a woman who worked as a prostitute for a cartel, and with whom Mark fell in love. The other works on the farm and had seen Edred meet someone near the pool, after which that someone left the place by himself. And the boy had also found in the pool a sort of dagger with the seal of the abbey.
He and his dog, and Torold who follows her, rescue Hildegarde from a man at arms who has waylaid her and tries to rape her earlier. Escaping into the abbey she was nearly been raped then by the bursar, but she managed to escape, in the process setting fire to him and the muniments room, which led, when he was rescued, to the discovery of a box with the money he said had been stolen, blame being cast on both Aelwyn and Edred.
Matters come to a head when the fisherfolk try to storm the abbey, being resisted by the men at arms stationed on the towers. But then Hildegarde realizes that behind the murders was the bursar’s clerk, whom she pursued to the cathedral. There is great drama then as she escapes from him when he tries to kill her, and then from the man at arms who had tried to both rape and kill her, but they both fall from the scaffolding she had climbed, the latter coming from a tower where he had been stationed.
Both of them think they run the rapacity of the abbey, the latter claiming to work for the nobles opposed to Richard, who is presented throughout the book as devoted to his subjects, not to power or money. But though the villains die, the bursar continues, having got over the hysteria the fire had caused and his acknowledgment then of guilt – and though the abbot and the prior seem less vicious, whether they will be able to assert themselves is questionable.
Before the climax, when the others in the guesthouse were leaving, Hildegarde found that two of them were in possession of the relic, for which they seem to have paid well. Hildegarde herself had made a derisory offer, but before she leaves the abbot gives her the relic, perhaps in gratitude for what she and her fellow Cistercians had discovered, the abbey having made as much money as it needed and more from the gullible other buyers.
Mark’s inamorata is saved from the stews because she moves in with Edred’s widow whom the bursar had thrown out of the rooms he occupied when her husband was found dead. Hildegarde had paid for lodgings, in a house run by the man who ran the brothels, but he had a kindly side and was going to finance them to make nets for the fishermen.
So, the Cistercians set off for their home as swiftly as they can to get there on the day of the Epiphany, having stopped en route to pray for King Richard whose birthday it was.
-
News6 days agoSri Lanka escalates anti-graft drive with Shiranthi’s jailing
-
News7 days agoNPP govt. reminded of its responsibilities as US warship leaves Colombo
-
Latest News5 days agoFarhan and Sadaqat help Pakistan seal series in style
-
News6 days agoIranian ships stranded, Lanka fears US sanctions
-
Latest News4 days agoNissanka’s return headlines Sri Lanka’s Test squad against Pakistan
-
News7 days agoInterdicted top House official Kularatne receives special recognition in Mexican Parliament
-
Features5 days agoIntake 16: 45 years of duty and honour
-
News5 days agoMalwathu Chapter issues statement on talks with President over Gnanasara Thera’s robes


