Connect with us

Features

The Impeachment and DUNF – how I saw the drama unfolding

Published

on

“I want to be a soldier in the battle of ideas”Fidel Castro

In 1989, with the Presidency already in its pocket, the UNP was well placed to emerge as the winner in the Parliamentary election. The opposition was divided and bereft of its chief vote getter Vijaya Kumaratunga who had been murdered by the JVP in 1987. The big question therefore was who was to be the Prime Minister in the forthcoming Premadasa Cabinet? In the presidential election Premadasa had skilfully exploited the rivalry of Gamini and Lalith by indicating that the harder campaigner between them would be considered for the post of PM.

Partly for this reason, and also because they were dedicated UNPers, the two aspirants threw themselves into the presidential campaign and garnered a large number of votes in their bailiwicks for Premadasa. They were then asked to win their electoral districts in the Parliamentary election with large majorities so as to be considered for higher office. Both undertook this task with gusto, but Lalith appeared to be leading because his base was in the Colombo district which was numerically superior to Gamini’s Nuwara Eliya district. It was at this time that Gamini decided to contest Kandy district in the future to ensure a wider support base to propel his vaulting ambition.
While President Premadasa shrewdly kept the younger contenders in the fight we received disconcerting news from time to time that he was also looking for other options. Before nominations were concluded he brought in DB Wijetunga, who had been relegated to the wilderness as the Governor of North Western Province by JRJ, to contest from the Kandy district. Premadasa supported Wijetunga’s campaign with enough funds and instructed him to make sure that he came first in the UNP list from Kandy come what may.

Both Lalith and Gamini received secret information about these designs but there was little they could do except to exert themselves even more to gather votes to impress the new President. I remember attending Lalith’s mamoth last rally in Ratmalana where his supporters were openly exhorting voters to back Lalith, the next Prime Minister. No doubt these announcements were filtered back to Premadasa who was carefully planning his next political “coup”.

The UNP won handsomely but with the new PR electoral system the SLFP led by Mrs. Bandaranaike also gained a considerable number of seats and she became the Leader of the Opposition. The President then sprang a surprise, particularly to the other contenders, by appointing Wijetunga as Prime Minister thereby signaling his desire to have a “weak” PM, who would sign off on all his presidential orders. To soften the blow he sent messages to Lalith and Gamini that this was only a “transitional” appointment and that he would be reviewing this arrangement in one years time.

This did not satisfy them but there was little they could do but accept the “fait accompli” and hope for the best. This however was the beginning of a disenchantment which laid the basis for the dramatic events that followed some time later, particularly in the impeachment of the President which convulsed the political atmosphere of this period. In his first Cabinet appointments President Premadasa gave plum posts to Gamini and Lalith. It was rumoured that Sirisena Cooray and Mrs. Premadasa had urged the President to be charitable.

Gamini was made the Minister of Plantation Industries and Lalith the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Cooperatives. While both accepted these appointments their staff, in their disappointment at not being been made the PMs men as they had anticipated, began to malign the new President, often in an unfair manner. They did not realize that party politics had changed from the “laissez faire” approach of JRJ to the intensive involvement in detail by the new chief. Gamini’s staff was particularly nasty in their whispering campaigns. Gamini too began to act in an offhanded manner and soon the two former adversaries were again on collision course.

Then Gamini made, in my opinion, a bad political mistake. Thinking that “distance lends enchantment to the view”, he sought to avoid conflict with the President by asking for long leave to follow studies in Cambridge University while at the same time remaining in the Cabinet. This request which was extraordinarily unorthodox and ill advised naturally infuriated Premadasa who took it as a calculated insult to him personally. He sacked Gamini from the Cabinet and added sarcastically that he was now free to pursue his studies without the burden of cabinet responsibilities.

Gamini left for Cambridge and Premadasa began inquiring into his activities as a Minister in the JRJ cabinet with a view to eliminating him from the political arena. In the course of these investigations he was assisted by Ravi Jayewardene, JRJs son, who had developed an antipathy to Gamini for reasons unknown. Ravi led Premadasa to the Buultjens case which I have described in Volume One of my autobiography, with the idea of implicating Gamini in a criminal case which included kidnapping. At one stage a message was sent to Gamini not to return as he would be arrested at the airport on arrival. It is to Gamini’s credit that he boldly decided to return and face charges.

While the antipathy of the new President to Gamini was clear, Lalith did not attempt to cross his path and may have survived but for local politics of the Colombo district and the dramatic abduction and murder of Richard de Zoysa. Sirisena Cooray was the new President’s right hand man and the rise of Lalith was resented by his supporters even during the election campaign when they competed for the top slot in the Colombo list. However in fairness it must be stated that Cooray never encouraged this rivalry and, as mentioned above, even recommended to Premadasa that either Gamini or Lalith should be made PM. This advice was duly noted by Wijetunga who gave short shrift to Cooray for his pains after the death of Premadasa.

Impeachment

The tale of the Premadasa impeachment has not yet been fully told. There are so many angles and versions to this episode that it has a “Rashomon” like quality with each participant presenting his own version of the event that is often at odds with the recollections of others. I will attempt to describe the evolving scenario mostly from the vantage point of Lalith and Gamini who were bamboozled by the Speaker Mohamed and had their political futures irrevocably compromised. I will narrate those events as they unfolded before my eyes.

One day in August 1991, I received an urgent telephone call from Gamini saying that he and Wickreme Weerasooria were on their way to my home in Siripa Road to discuss an important matter. Gamini had the habit of dropping in on his friends at short notice to discuss political and personal matters. On this day we went to my office room and Gamini asked me whether In my opinion he could trust Lalith on a serious political matter. I was not taken aback since the evening before I had been with some friends at the Eighty Club and there had been whispers of a crisis in the Cabinet though nobody really knew what it was all about.

I replied that Lalith was an ambitious and able politician and that it would be difficult to fight him. On the other hand if he was to be a partner in a political venture he would be an indefatigable and effective comrade in arms. This seemed to satisfy Gamini and Wickreme and they confided in me about the impeachment process that had been launched. From then on till their betrayal by the Speaker, I was in the know of the details of the impeachment attempt which was unique in the annals of our modern history.

Background

The background to the impeachment attempt was Premadasa’s Impatience to mould the UNP into a party in his own image. This was reasonable in that he had loyally long served the party In various capacities and had saved the UNP from disaster by his heroic efforts in winning the presidency. This was followed by the UNP victory under his leadership in the succeeding parliamentary election. He then characteristically lost no time In attempting to make the UNP more democratic and efficient.

A long tenure since 1977 during which JRJ had permitted his MPs to earn money by way of liquor licences, permits to open petrol sheds, allocation of import quotas, allocating of lands under the Land Reform Commission and all manner of other “deals” had alienated them from their voters. The new President wanted “fresh blood”, preferably of those personally loyal to him, to come into the grass roots organizations of the party.

For example under JRJ party branches could be set up only by the relevant party organizer who usually was the MP. Premadasa allowed the formation of party branches without the imprimatur of the MP cum organizer. This led to much heartburn as party branches sprang up, often times in opposition to the MP. A test case was that of the Speaker’s son Hussein Mohamed who made no attempt to nurse his electorate but depended on his father to pull his political chestnuts out of the fire.

Premadasa, for whatever reason, pounced on him and wanted him removed from the organisership of the Borella electorate. In fact Lalith Athulathmudali, as district leader, was nominated to hold an inquiry into Hussein’s inefficiency and lethargy. Hussein was a bit of a joke among the party leaders due to his uncritical worship of his father. His nickname was “Daddy told” because he would begin every sentence with “Daddy told” much to the amusement of his colleagues. The bond between father and son was very strong.

Another instance of Premadasa’s growing impatience was the manner in which he treated GM Premachandra who was the MP representing Mawatagama electorate. Premachandra was known to be a camp follower of the President being identified as “Punchi Premadasa” or acolyte of the big man. This identification was enhanced when he was selected as the deputy to the Minister of Highways – a portfolio held by the President himself. However he had countermanded an order made by his minister and a furious Premadasa had him removed.

This led to an enmity between the two and Premachandra switched his allegiance to Gamini and became a leader of the impeachment effort. Samaraweera Weerawanni, an able young orator from Uva, had been warned by Premadasa about allegations of bribery. Thus there were both political and personal interests involved in the impeachment effort.
Speaker Mohamed had another grouse with Premadasa. As a party senior he had expected to join the Cabinet. However Premadasa made him the Speaker. This was to prevent Mohamed from interfering in tenders and engaging in other forms of corruption that he was known for under the JRJ dispensation when he was Minister of Transport. There also may have been electoral rivalry as both came from the Colombo district and had to compete under proportional representation. The Speaker, who was a party senior and former UNP Mayor of Colombo, referred to the new President without much respect.

The upshot of this hostility was that Mohamed spent time in studying the constitutional provisions regarding the impeachment of an incumbent President. This was article 38 of the Constitution which had not been studied with any enthusiasm by MPs during the JRJ Presidency. The Constitution gave considerable discretion to the Speaker. If more than half the number of MPs supported a motion for the impeachment of the President for prescribed reasons he could launch proceedings on the lines set out culminating in the dismissal of the incumbent after an inquiry and the passage of a motion with a two third majority.

Once he accepted the impeachment notice with the support of half the number of MPs the President was precluded from dissolving Parliament by article 70[i]c. Mohamed’s first masterstroke was to draw Mrs. Bandaranaike into his grand design. She was smarting uinder her defeat to Premadasa who had used harsh words on her, and her son Anura, in Parliament which she found difficult to accept.
Perhaps an even more important development was that the new President had set a cracking pace after he was elected and was cutting into her electoral base.

By emphasizing the need to get the IPKF out of Sri Lanka he had taken over the main demand of the SLFP and the JVP. Moreover given his opposition to Indian policies from the time of JRJ he had gained credibility among the Sinhala voters who had earlier backed the SLFP. Unlike in the case of JRJ, Premadasa became a favourite of the Sangha. He took great pains to attend to their everyday needs and wean them away from their natural ally – the SLFP.

I was personally aware of his sensitivity after I went on a mission to Malwatta and Asgiriya on behalf of Gamini Dissanayake. Uduwawela Chandananda, who was the head priest of the influential Adahana Maluwa of the Asgiriya fraternity, was my kinsman. On one of my visits he told me that the rooms of the priests in the Asgiriya monastery were in a very bad state and needed to be repaired. I mentioned this to Gamini who immediately decided to undertake that work at his expense. He delegated this job to one of his businessman friends who had probably grown rich on contracts awarded by the Mahaweli Ministry.

This friend and I visited Asgiriya and itemised the repair work which was necessary. Included in this list was the “pansala” of the influential Mahanayake, Palipane Chandananda who was a fierce critic of the Indo-Lanka accord and of JRJ himself. Imagine our surprise when we learnt that the businessman had betrayed Gamini and had taken the refurbishment project to Premadasa. In order to please Premadasa he undertook to complete the work with his own funds which were probably the byproduct of Gamini’s largesse.

Gamini’s friend thereby became a favourite of the new President and his liaison officer to the Kandyan monks who had been introduced to him by me at Gamini’s behest. Such were the background tensions among the leaders of the UNP notwithstanding its electoral successes which were envied by the SLFP. Some leaders of the SLFP like Stanley Tillekeratne, who did not forgive Mrs. B for not making him a minister in her 1970 Cabinet, were consorting with Premadasa and adding to Mrs. B’s woes.

The SLFP was split Into warring factions. The most tragic situation for Mrs. B was that she was at loggerheads with her favourite child, Anura. The anti-Sirimavo faction of the SLFP was so offensive to her that she suffered a stroke which later in time killed her. To her great credit she did not abandon the SLFP in spite of the rank ingratitude of many of its leaders who had earlier been sponsored by her.
Another threat to the SLFP was the populist measures undertaken by President Premadasa. He launched the “Janasaviya” programme which was a radical poverty alleviation measure. All families below the poverty line were entitled to a “relief package” of basic food items. In turn they were to contribute their manual labour for village infrastructure projects. This was a novel village level program which caught the imagination of the rural populace who formed the bulk of the SLFP vote base. The President succeeded in inducting a new set of young public servants like Susil Siriwardhana who helped in conceptualizing this project and implementing it through the public service. The Janasaviya program became a signature project of the new President. It has survived to this day under different names despite changes of rulers and their political ideologies.

Modus operandi

The biggest challenge was to keep the impeachment project a secret while at the same time coopting a majority of signatories as required by law. Nihal Seneviratne who was the Secretary General to the House in his book “A Clerk Reminisces” refers to this saying “Anil Moonesinghe MP walked into my room and sat down. He opened his conversation by saying “Nihal, you will be at the centre of a big controversy very soon.” I was quite puzzled by this remark and asked him, “why me of all people”? Anil smiled and said, “You will know soon” and walked out of my room”.

Keeping this secret was almost a superhuman effort as MPs are loose tongued and apt to run to their chiefs with the latest information to score brownie points. So it is likely that some were not told the truth before they signed the petition. The “modus operandi” was to entrust the collection of signatures to a few trusted “conspirators” who were then to ensure that their quota of members would be roped in. The main “collectors” were Lalith and Gamini from the UNP, Anuruddha Ratwatte and Anura for the SLFP and the Speaker for the rest.

It is said that the Speaker over dramatized the situation by kissing his set of signatories on both cheeks and offering them refreshments in the Speaker’s chamber. It need hardly be said that this was not a conduct in keeping with the traditional responsibilities of a Speaker of Parliament. All the while he was egging on Lalith and Gamini by frequently telephoning them and assuring them that everything was going according to plan. Actually it was not so though the plotters were optimistic. Mrs. B gave her full support and her confidence in Gamini and Lalith was complete though they were in different parties.

Once there was panic when Stanley Tillekeratne, who was inching ever closer to Premadasa, demanded to see the petition and even wanted to take it home for further study. Mrs. B adroitly evaded the issue though Stanley had already alerted Premadasa regarding some challenge to his authority. Each conspirator had a separate sheet of paper on which their designated MPs would sign. Later many of them alleged that they were asked to sign a blank sheet in the hope that they were asking for a salary increase.

This may have been a lame excuse after their efforts failed and they had to face a future with a revengeful President. However a friend of Gamini I shared the incoming information in “real time”which at that stage appeared to be satisfactory. Gamini was in constant touch with Lalith and Mohamed. Little did he, and by the same token we his supporters, know of what was really going on. A huge drama of intrigue and betrayal was about to begin.

(Excerpted from volume 3 of the Sarath Amunugama autobiography) ✍️



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Pay attention or pay the price: Sri Lanka’s maritime imperative in a fractured ocean

Published

on

An AFP photo of people queuing up for LP gas in Colombo

Sri Lanka stands at a geopolitical crossroads where geography is both its greatest asset and its most vulnerable liability. Sitting astride the Indian Ocean’s critical east-west highway, the waters, south of Dondra Head, channel nearly 30% of the world’s maritime trade. This route is the arterial vein connecting Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Yet, as tensions flare in the Middle East and great power competition intensifies, Sri Lanka finds itself guarding a highway it does not own, with an economy too fragile to absorb the shocks of collateral damage.

Recent analyses, including insights from the Financial Times on the fragility of global ocean governance, offer a stark warning: international treaties alone cannot guarantee security. The newly enacted UN Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) treaty may be a diplomatic triumph, but as major powers, like the US, sidestep commitments, while China seeks strategic influence, the high seas are becoming increasingly lawless. For Sri Lanka, relying on international law to protect its 600,000 km² Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), is a strategy destined to fail. The moment demands a shift from passive reliance to active resilience.

The Naval Imperative: Sovereignty requires strength

The first pillar of survival is a robust Navy. The FT report highlights that without enforcement mechanisms, marine protected areas become “paper parks.” Similarly, an EEZ without patrol capacity is merely a line on a map. With Sri Lanka’s Navy having just rescued 32 Iranian sailors from the sunken frigate IRIS Dena, following a US submarine strike in nearby international waters, and additional Iranian vessels now seeking assistance, or operating in the region, amid major powers vying for influence, the risk of direct incidents at sea remains very real.

Sri Lanka must accelerate investment in blue-water naval capacity and EEZ surveillance. Strengthening patrols, south of Dondra Head, is not just about conservation, it is about sovereignty. The ability to manage rescue operations, grant diplomatic clearances, and monitor traffic, without external coercion, is the definition of independence. “Might is right” remains the operating principle for some superpowers. Sri Lanka cannot afford to be a bystander in its own waters. A strong Navy acts as a deterrent, ensuring that the 30% of global shipping passing nearby does not become a theatre for proxy conflicts.

Statecraft: Balancing economics and sovereignty

The second pillar is nuanced statecraft. Sri Lanka imports nearly 100% of its fuel, making it hypersensitive to disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz. Prolonged conflict in the Middle East will spike oil prices, reigniting inflation and threatening the hard-won economic stability following recent crises. However, economic desperation must not drive diplomatic misalignment.

The smartest priority is strict neutrality. Sri Lanka cannot afford to alienate any major partner – the US, India, China, Iran, or the Gulf states. Coordinating quietly with India for maritime domain awareness is prudent given proximity, but joining any military bloc is perilous. Recent discussions highlight how the US aggressively prioritises resource extraction in international waters, often at the expense of broader environmental protections. Sri Lanka must navigate these competing agendas without becoming a pawn. Publicly urging de-escalation, through forums like the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), allows Colombo to advocate for safe passage without picking sides.

Securing the economy and energy future

The third pillar is economic shielding. The immediate threat is fuel security. The government must build emergency fuel stocks and negotiate alternative suppliers to buffer against Hormuz disruptions. The Central Bank must be prepared to manage rupee pressure as import bills swell. Furthermore, monitoring secondary effects is crucial; higher shipping costs will hit exports like tea and garments, while tourism warnings could dampen arrival numbers.

Long-term resilience demands energy diversification, prioritising solar power. Sri Lanka’s abundant sunshine offers huge potential to cut reliance on Middle Eastern oil and shield the economy from geopolitical shocks. Accelerate rooftop/utility-scale solar with incentives: duty exemptions on equipment, enhanced net-metering, subsidies/loans for households and businesses, and fast-tracked approvals plus battery storage support. This attracts investment, creates jobs, and boosts energy security. Secure financier confidence for sustainable blue economy initiatives without compromising sovereignty.

The bottom line

The message for Sri Lanka is clear: This is a “pay attention or pay the price” moment. The country is geographically positioned on the critical Indian Ocean highway but remains economically fragile. The smartest priorities are to protect people first, secure the seas second, and shield the economy third, all while staying strictly neutral.

Any misstep, whether getting drawn into naval incidents or visibly picking sides in a great power struggle, would be far costlier than the fuel price hike itself. The global oceans treaty may offer a framework for cooperation, but as experts warn, we need “systems of co-operation that go beyond the mere words on the page.” For Sri Lanka, those systems must be built on national capacity, diplomatic agility, and an unwavering commitment to neutrality. The ocean is rising with tension; Sri Lanka must ensure it does not drown in the wake.

Reference:

“The geopolitics of the global oceans treaty”https://www.ft.com/content/563bef02-f4a7-42c3-9cfa-7c3fe51be1eb

By Professor Chanaka Jayawardhena
Professor of Marketing
University of Surrey
Chanaka.j@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Features

Winds of Change:Geopolitics at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia

Published

on

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s latest book is a comprehensive account of international relations in the regions it covers, with particular reference to current rivalries between India and China and the United States. It deals with shifting alliances, or rather alliances that grow stronger or weaker through particular developments: there are no actual breaks in a context in which the three contestants for power in the region are wooing or threatening smaller countries, moving seamlessly from one mode to the other though generally in diplomatic terms.

The area is now widely referred to as the Indo-Pacific. Though that term was coined over a hundred years ago by a German keen to challenge the Anglo-American hegemony that triumphed after the First World War, it gained currency more recently, following a speech by the hawkish Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who was instrumental in developing the Quad Alliance between Japan, India, the United States and Australia.

This marked a radical change in Indian Foreign Policy, for India had prided itself previously on being Non-Aligned, while the West saw it as close to the Soviet Union and then to Russa. But as Abeyagoonasekera constantly reiterates, India’s approach is governed now by nervousness about China, which in the last couple of decades has made deep inroads into the Indian Ocean. Now many states around this Ocean, relatively far from China, are being closely connected, economically but also otherwise, with China.

Instrumental in this development is the Belt and Road Initiative, which China has used to develop infrastructure in the region, designed to facilitate its own trade, but also the trade of the countries that it has assisted. Abeyagoonasekera is clear throughout the book that the initiative has been of great assistance to the recipient countries, and contests vigorously the Western claim that it was designed as a debt trap to control those countries.

I fully endorse this view. To supplement his perspective with a couple of anecdotes, I recall a British friend in Cambodia telling me how the country had benefited from Chinese support, which developed infrastructure – whereas the West in those days concentrated on what it called capacity building, which meant supporting those who shared its views through endless seminars in expensive hotels, a practice with which we are familiar in this country too.

Soon afterwards I met a very articulate taxi driver in Ethiopia, who had come home from England, where he had worked for many years, who described the expansion of its road network. This had been neglected for years, until the Chinese turned up. I remembered then a Dutchman at a conference talking about the sinister nature of a plane full of Chinese businessmen, to which an African responded in irritation that the West had applauded the plunder of the continent by their own businessmen, and that the Africans now knew better and could ensure some benefit to themselves as the owners of the commodities the West had long thought their own birthright.

Abeyagoonasekera contrasts with the Chinese approach the frugality of the Indians, a frugality born of relative poverty, and appends the general suspicions with which Indian interventions are treated, given previous efforts at domination. And while he is himself markedly diplomatic in his accounts of the different approaches of the three players in this game, time and time again he notes the effortless ease with which the Chinese have begun to dominate the field.

His research has been thorough, and the statistics he cites about trade make clear that the Chinese are streets ahead of the other two, both in terms of balances as well as in absolute terms. And he notes too that, whereas the Western discourse is of Chinese restrictions on freedom, in Sri Lanka at any rate it is the others who are wary of transparency.

Though he notes that there is no clarity about the agreements the current government has entered into with the Indians, and that contrary to what might have been expected from former Marxists it has not resumed the tilt towards China of earlier left wing regimes, he shows that there has been no break with China. He seems to believe that the groundwork China laid still gives hope of more economic development than what the other two countries have to offer.

We cannot after all forget that the Rajapaksa government first asked India to develop the Hambantota port, and I still recall the Indian High Commissioner at the time, Ashok Kantha, wondering whether India had erred in not taking up the offer. In a marked example of how individuals affect bilateral relations, I have no doubt his predecessor, the effusive Alok Prasad, would have taken up the offer.

It was Rajapaksa hubris that made the cost of the port escalate, for when the rock inside the breakwaters was discovered, before the harbour was filled, and Mahinda Rajapaksa was told it would not cost much to get rid of it, he preferred to have the opening on his birthday as scheduled, which meant the waters then had to be drained away for the rock to be dynamited. And unfortunately, planning being left to the younger brother, we had grandiose buildings in the town, instead of the infrastructure that would have ensured greater economic activity.

This error was repeated in spades with regard to Mattala. Though not in the right place, which was not the case with the Hambantota development, nothing was done to take advantage of the location such as it was and institute swift connections with the hill country, the East Coast, and the wildlife so abundant in the area.

The last section of the book, after its thorough examination of the activities of the three major players in the region as a whole, deals with Sri Lanka’s Domestic Political Challenges, and records, politely but incisively, the endless blunders that have brought us lower and lower. But while highlighting the callousness of politicians, he also notes how efforts to appease the West weakened what he describes as core protections.

Though there has been much speculation about what exactly brought down Gotabaya Rajapaksa – not his government, for that in essence continued, with a different leader – perhaps the most far-reaching revelation in Abeyagoonasekera’s book is of Gotabaya’s conviction that it was the CIA that destroyed him. As so often when the hidden hand of the West is identified, the local contributions are ignored, as Gotabaya’s absurd energy policy, and the ridiculous tax concessions with which his rule began. But that does not mean there were no other players in the game.

Ironically, Gotabaya’s accusations against the United States occur after a startling passage in which Abeyagoonasekera declares of that country that ‘The fatigue gripping the nation is deeper than weariness; it is a spiritual exhaustion, a slow erosion of belief. Rising prices, policy paralysis, and a fractured foreign policy have left America adrift. Inflation haunts them like a spectre, while the immigrant crisis stirs frustrations in communities already stretched to their limits’.

This he claims explains the re-emergence of Donald Trump. Now, in the midst of the horrors Trump has perpetrated, this passage suggests that he is desperate to assert himself in denial of the fatigue that has overcome a nation initially built on idealism, now in the throes of ruthless cynicism. What will follow I do not know. But the manner in which India’s slavishness to the bullying of Netanyahu and Trump has destroyed the moral stature it once had suggests that Abeyagoonasekera’s nuanced but definite adulation of Chinese policy will be a hallmark of the new world order.

By Rajiva Wijesinha

Continue Reading

Features

Human–Elephant conflict in Sri Lanka

Published

on

Human–elephant conflict (HEC) in Sri Lanka results in significant loss of human life, elephant deaths, and extensive damage to crops and property. Despite numerous interventions over the decades, the situation continues to deteriorate. The reasons for the breakdown of what was once a relatively tolerant coexistence—albeit one dominated by humans—into an increasingly confrontational relationship must be clearly understood by both the public and policymakers. Immediate measures are required to minimise losses, alongside long-term solutions grounded in sound ecological and governance principles. It must also be recognised that this is a complex problem; effective mitigation and sustainable solutions require a multidisciplinary approach integrated into the country’s overall development planning. This article examines several cost-effective methods that have been successfully implemented in other countries and may apply to the Sri Lankan context.

Key Challenge: Lack of Reliable Data

The primary reason for the escalation of human–elephant conflict (HEC) is the shrinking of wildlife habitats in the country due to poorly planned development and uncontrolled, unwise land encroachment. A major barrier to effective intervention is the lack of accurate and comprehensive data in two key areas: (a) land and land utilisation, and (b) the elephant population and their range.

It became evident after the Ditwah cyclone disaster that the lack of readily accessible, reliable data on land and its use, is a major obstacle to a wide range of project planning and implementation efforts. Regardless of how HEC is mitigated, the government must take immediate action to establish a digital land-use database, as this is a key component of long-term planning for any development initiative. Using modern aerial mapping technologies, it should be possible to catalogue the geography and utilisation of every square metre of the island’s landmass.

Crossing a railroad in the North Central Province (File photo)

Wild elephant near an electric fence (File photo

Chilli-grease fence

Similarly, accurate data on the number of elephants, their age and gender distribution, and the extent of their habitat range, are essential for data-driven decision-making. Here, too, modern technology offers practical solutions. Land-based digital cameras have been successfully used to count elephants, identify individual animals, and monitor their range. Research has shown that the pigmentation patterns of Asian elephants—particularly those on their ears—can serve as a “fingerprint” for identifying individuals. The same technique can also be used to study elephant movement patterns and habitat range. Computer programmes already exist for such cataloguing purposes; however, developing a similar programme, locally, could be both economical and educational, for example, as part of a university IT programme. Since data-driven decision-making is key to the success of any long-term strategy, data collection must begin immediately while short-term mitigation measures are implemented.

Root cause

There must be a general understanding of how this problem has worsened. Sri Lanka is considered an anomaly in island biogeography for supporting a high density of megafauna—including Asian elephants, leopards, and sloth bears—on a relatively small landmass of about 65,000 square kilometres. This is further complicated by the country’s high human population density, estimated at about 356–372 people per square kilometre, ranking among the highest in the world. The human population has increased more than fivefold between 1900 and 2024, from about 4.5 million to nearly 22 million.

The corresponding expansion of land use for human settlement, agriculture, and infrastructure development has placed enormous pressure on wildlife habitats. Habitat loss, together with imbalances in predator populations, has resulted not only in escalating human–elephant conflict (HEC) but also in increasing crop damage caused by peacocks, monkeys, giant squirrels, and feral pigs. The Sri Lankan elephant has no natural predators; its only significant threat arises from human activities. Restoring balance within this complex ecological system is no easy task, yet it must remain the long-term objective if the country is to safeguard its unique biodiversity.

Short-term Measures

Since the current situation has developed over an extended period, practical and humane solutions will also take time to implement. In the short term, several interventions can reduce direct interactions between humans and elephants while ensuring the safety of both:

* Strict prohibition of roadside feeding and improved waste management.

* Public education on safe deterrence methods and the promotion of ethical and sustainable practices in forests, national parks, and sanctuaries.

* The use of proven, non-lethal deterrent methods implemented in a coordinated and systematic manner.

* Anti-depredation squads (ADS): well-trained response teams tasked with implementing and monitoring these measures.

* The use of AI-based technologies to prevent train–elephant collisions.

Several countries have successfully used chilli as a deterrent to keep elephants away from farms and settlements. While cultivating chilli as a crop may contribute to this effort, it alone is not an effective deterrent; the pungent compounds in chilli, which act as an irritant to elephants, must be delivered effectively. One widely used and economical method is chilli-grease fencing, an alternative to electric fencing. In this method, rags soaked in a mixture of ground chilli and used motor oil are hung from ropes in strategic locations to create a deterrent barrier.

More advanced deterrence techniques have also been tested. For example, compressed-air launchers that fire chilli-filled projectiles have demonstrated effectiveness in safely redirecting elephants from a distance without causing harm. In some countries, locally made projectiles containing chilli powder, sand, and firecrackers enclosed in flexible sheaths, such as rubber balloons, are ignited and launched ahead of approaching animals. When combined with strobe lights, air horns, or other noise-making devices, these methods have been found to be even more effective. Over time, elephants may learn to associate irritation with light and sound, allowing these signals alone to act as deterrents. The main limitation of this approach is the need for well-trained personnel available throughout the day. Therefore, the involvement of existing national services—such as the armed forces—in developing and implementing such systems should be considered.

Technology can also play an important role in reducing train–elephant collisions. Night-vision cameras mounted on trains, combined with artificial intelligence, could be used not only to detect elephants but also to identify patterns in elephant movements near railway tracks. Once such high-risk locations are mapped, additional cameras could be installed along the tracks to transmit warning signals to approaching trains when elephants are detected nearby. As a further step, this system could be integrated with the Driver’s Safety Device (DSD)—the “dead man’s” handle or pedal—so that trains can be automatically stopped when elephants are detected on or near the tracks, thereby reducing reliance solely on driver response.

Sustainable Long-Term Solutions

A lasting resolution depends on strategic land-use planning and coexistence-based management. This must form part of a broader national discussion on the sustainable use of the country’s limited land resources.

* Protection and restoration of elephant migration corridors.

* Data-driven placement and maintenance of fencing, rather than attempting to confine elephants within fixed areas.

* Strengthened management of wildlife reserves, including the prevention of human encroachment and uncontrolled cattle grazing.

* Habitat improvement within forests to reduce the attraction of elephants to agricultural lands.

* Introduction of drought-resistant grass varieties such as Cenchrus purpureus (commonly known as elephant grass or Napier grass) and Pennisetum purpureum in wildlife refuges and national parks to alleviate food shortages during the dry season.

* Population control measures, including vaccine-based methods, supported by reliable population data.

Public education on the importance of maintaining ecological balance—especially amid environmental change and expanding economic development—must also be a key priority. Basic principles of environmental management should be incorporated into higher education across all disciplines. At the same time, difficult but necessary questions must be asked about the long-term sustainability and economic return of certain land-use patterns, particularly those shaped during the colonial period for plantation crops. Inefficient agricultural practices, such as chena cultivation, should be phased out, and the clearing of wilderness—especially in ecologically sensitive highland areas for tourism development—must be strictly regulated.

Elephants typically travel between 15 and 50 kilometres a day. Therefore, restoring uninterrupted elephant corridors, linking existing wildlife reserves, must be a central component of long-term planning. In some cases, this may require carefully considering the relocation of human settlements that have developed within former elephant corridors.

Unfortunately, rural communities often bear a disproportionate share of the burden created by these conservation measures. It is, therefore, essential that policies ensure they receive a fair share of the economic benefits generated by wildlife-based industries, particularly tourism. Such policies should aim to help these communities transition from subsistence livelihoods toward improved standards of living. In this context, a critical evaluation of existing agricultural systems must form part of a broader national land-management strategy. Put plainly, the long-term viability of plantation industries, such as tea and rubber, should be assessed in terms of their return on investment—particularly the investment of scarce land resources.

Finally, all ecosystems have a carrying capacity, meaning there is a limit to the number of people and animals that a given area of land can sustain. This issue extends beyond Sri Lanka; many scientists argue that, given current levels of malnutrition and resource depletion, the planet may already have exceeded its sustainable carrying capacity. Others suggest that technological advances and lifestyle changes may increase that capacity. In either case, significant changes in human consumption patterns and lifestyles are likely to become inevitable.

For elephants, however, the absence of natural predators means that humane human intervention may be required to manage population growth sustainably. If elephant populations were allowed to increase unchecked, food scarcity could lead to malnutrition and starvation among the animals themselves. At the same time, a nation, already struggling with child malnutrition, must carefully balance its limited resources between human welfare and wildlife conservation.

One promising approach is immunological sterilisation using the Porcine Zona Pellucida (PZP) vaccine, a reversible and humane form of immunocontraception used in wildlife population management. By stimulating antibodies that prevent sperm from fertilising eggs, this dart-delivered vaccine controls reproduction without significantly altering the animals’ natural behaviour. Once accurate data are obtained on the age and gender distribution of the Sri Lankan elephant population, the systematic application of such methods could become feasible.

Moreover, the development of local capacity to produce such vaccines should be encouraged. Similar technologies could also be applied to manage populations of other animals—such as monkeys and stray dogs—whose numbers can become problematic if left unchecked. Local vaccine production would not only address domestic needs but could potentially create opportunities for export and scientific collaboration.

Conclusion

Human–elephant conflict (HEC) in Sri Lanka is intensifying due to habitat fragmentation, unplanned development, and weak governance. Elephants require large, connected landscapes to survive, and when traditional migration corridors are blocked, conflict becomes inevitable.

Current ineffective practices—such as the mass translocation of elephants, fragmented fencing that obstructs migration routes, and policies that overlook the livelihoods of rural communities—must be reconsidered and replaced with more effective strategies. Mechanisms must also be established to ensure that the economic benefits of environmental protection, particularly those generated by wildlife tourism, are fairly shared with rural populations who bear the greatest burden of living alongside wildlife.

A shift toward data-driven planning, protection of ecological corridors, community partnerships, and stronger institutional accountability is essential. The human–elephant conflict is not solely a wildlife issue; it is fundamentally a land-use and governance challenge. Sri Lanka would benefit from establishing a dedicated Human–Elephant Coexistence Organisation, or from strengthening an existing Wildlife Commission with the authority and capacity to implement long-term, science-based management strategies.

With informed policies and genuine support for affected communities, peaceful coexistence between humans and elephants is both achievable and sustainable. Ultimately, educating future generations and equipping them to face emerging environmental challenges with knowledge and responsibility is the most effective long-term strategy.

BY Geewananda Gunawardana and Chula Goonasekera
on behalf of LEADS forum
Email admin@srilankaleads.com

Continue Reading

Trending