Features
THE NEW HOLOCAUST
by Vijaya Chandrasoma
Centuries of persecution of the Jewish people by Europeans and Russians culminated in the most horrible modern genocide in modern times committed by the Germans in the 1930s. The systematic murder of six million Jews and the ethnic cleansing of millions of Europeans of “impure blood”, bear repetition only as background to the present crisis in Israel.
As are the actions of the Americans who, with the its European allies, won World War II, and began the process of the illegal establishment of a Jewish State of Israel, stealing the homeland of centuries of the Palestinian people. A largely Arab, Muslim state is now facing the threat of extinction through a modern-day Holocaust, as inhumane as the German version.
Since the end of WWII, American aggression throughout the world in the pursuit of its own interests, their unquenchable thirst for the vast reserves of oil in the Middle-East, has brought the region into the cusp of yet another Arab-Israeli war. The military strength of Iran, covertly backed by Russia, threatens the extension of the arena of hostility, even the possibility of nuclear warfare.
These near 200 words make for a truncated and possibly prejudiced attempt at an introduction to the crisis that exists in the Holy Land today. There are many other contributory factors, like the emergence of China as a Superpower, Russian aggression in Ukraine, and the revival of the evil movement of white supremacy in America and Europe. Extraneous factors which could further muddy the waters.
Today, we are faced by the consequences of the brutal onslaught by 500 Hamas and Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) specially trained terrorists, who ran amok at an Israeli settlement (kibbutz) near the Israeli- Gaza border on October 7. Over 1,400 innocent Israeli civilians, men, women and children, were savagely butchered in a gruesome terrorist act.
The Israelis, consumed by grief and fury, immediately went into revenge mode against the entire population of nearly two million Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, for the despicable acts of a group of Hamas and PIJ terrorists. The attacks have now escalated to include Palestinian settlements in the West Bank, home to 1.8 million Palestinians. Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank live in fear of losing their homes, and their lives, at any moment during the relentless Israeli airstrikes. They live in terror, as the Jews did in Germany in the 1930s, guilty of no crime other than their ethnic identity.
Rather like the war waged by the Americans after the atrocity of 9/11, consumed by rage after the worst terrorist attack on the American mainland in history. A brutal attack, carried out by 19 terrorists (15 Saudis) of the Al Qaeda terrorists, led by Saudi Arabian Osama Bin Laden, based mainly in Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, in their thirst for revenge, Americans waged war on Iraq, which had absolutely nothing to do with the tragedy of 9/11. In an illegal, 15-year war against the wrong enemy, which claimed 4,431 lives of American soldiers, in which over 600,000 Iraqi military and civilians, men, women and children, lost their lives. Representing approximately 140 Iraqis, who bore no responsibility for the tragedy of 9/11, to one precious life of an American soldier.
Which begs the questions: how deep is the thirst for revenge of the Israelis for the October 7 massacre? How many more innocent Palestinians must be slaughtered, how many more billions of dollars must Americans pump in, before the Israeli hunger for revenge is entirely sated? When will, in Israeli and American eyes, the punishment on innocent Palestinians be deemed to adequately fit the October 7 crime committed by Hamas?
In other words, when will the Israeli-American aggressor achieve the compassion, the maturity, to recast the concept of vengeance into the quality of justice?
Simply put, what is the going conversion rate for massacred human beings, Jews to Arabs? How many killings of Palestinians will justify the loss of 1,400 Israelis butchered on October 7. Palestinian civilian deaths currently stand at 6,000+ Palestinian deaths, representing nearly five Palestinian civilians to one Israeli civilian. What is the final count that will satisfy Israeli revenge? Some 30,000 Palestinians, representing 15 Palestinians to one Israeli? Or are they going for a new Holocaust of 3.5 million Palestinians, representing ethnic cleansing and genocide? Which the despicable Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said recently is “coming”, with the imminent ground invasion of Northern Gaza.
The historic and current war waged by the American-Israeli military machine against the Palestinian people is not without precedent.
The Nazis blamed the Jews for stabbing Germany in the back, betraying the Vaterland, for their loss in World War I. They accused the Jews of supporting communism in Germany in 1918, for promoting banking and finance in Western countries and America at enormous cost to Germany’s economy. Killing innocent Jews by the millions was not a crime, the Holocaust was considered by the Third Reich to be an act of self- defense. Seriously.
The 2010 best seller of Timothy Snyder “Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin” offers a more credible explanation why Hitler and the Nazis wanted to exterminate European Jews.
Hitler admired America’s rapid industrialization and growth, made possible by the free labour provided by slaves imported from Africa in the 17th century. Hitler could not, in the 1930s, emulate the Americans by importing slaves with impunity, as the Americans did four centuries ago. So he took the next best option. He seized productive lands belonging to neighbouring indigenous Europeans of “impure blood”, including Jews. If they resisted, they were killed. The survivors provided the slave labour to sustain the German economy in the concentration camps, just as the Americans had done centuries ago in the cotton plantations of southern states.
Remember the historically inspiring slogan, “Arbeit Macht Free” (Work Sets You Free) blazoned on top of the gates of Auschwitz and other Nazi concentration camps, which greeted Jewish prisoners? A particularly appropriate symbol, as these camps worked their Jewish and other prisoners, men, women and children to near death, and murdered those who survived in the ovens when they were no longer able to function.
According to Edgar E. Baptist, in his analysis of American slavery: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism, “The institution of slavery, the commodification and suffering and forced labour of African-Americans is what made the United States powerful and rich”.
Hitler also had the ultimate dream of returning Germany to its former glory as Europe’s dominant pure-blooded Christian nation. His model was in fact the Holocaust against African slaves in 17th century United States of America.
As is Netanyahu’s model of seizing land of the Palestinians with the help of the Americans, eliminating Arab terrorists and civilians. In spite of American and Israeli sanctimonious hypocrisy, there’s no difference in their minds between terrorists and civilians, they are all Arabs, and coincidentally, they also are brown-skinned, of impure blood, expendable “collateral damage”.
Like the lands of native American tribes slaughtered by white “settlers” are just mythical names on an obsolete map of the United States, so will Palestine cease to exist, a mere asterisk on future maps of the Middle-East.
Not an exact parallel, though. The native Indians were murdered by the marauding Europeans out of greed. The Palestinians were slaughtered in the divine realization of God’s Plan.
The involvement of the United States in the ultimate ambition of an exclusively Jewish State of Israel, having eliminated the owners of the land by genocide or displacement, is unconscionable. In fact, during his first speech after his appointment as the Speaker of the Republican majority House of Representatives last Wednesday, Mike Johnson (a Trump supporter, who played a major role in the attempt to overturn the 2020 election), said, “The first bill I’m going to bring to this floor will be in support of our dear friend Israel, and we are overdue in getting that done”. Meaning that they have been overdue in helping the Israelis to establish a one-state solution of a Jewish state in Palestine.
America currently faces four major adversaries, in China, Russia, North Korea and Iran. Three of these adversaries have a direct interest in the situation in Palestine. How the Americans deal with this conflict, whether they, with the Israelis, will opt for short-term revenge or seek a long-term solution of a problem which has been festering in violence for over half a century, will determine the immediate future of the region.
China’s position on the conflict has been consistent. Foreign Minister Wang Yi, in a recent press conference, stated that “China condemns all acts of violence and opposes any violation of international law…. Israel has the right to statehood. So does Palestine…. The Jewish nation is no longer homeless in the world, but when will the Palestinian nation return to its home?”
Peace in the Middle-East is vital to China’s huge energy demand. The region accounts for nearly half of China’s oil imports, making it vital to China’s energy security.
Russia has long been a critic of the United States’ complicity with Israel in the marginalization of the Palestinians. Russia values its ties with Arab states, especially its growing alignment with Iran, the arch-foe of Israel and the United States. President Putin has emphasized that his country “adheres to a two-state solution, but “the problem must be solved on an equitable basis that takes into account the interests of all people living in the region”.
Iran has warned that any Israeli ground offensive in the Gaza Strip “could expand the scope of the conflict elsewhere in the Middle-East”, as the Israeli airstrikes and blockade of essential supplies to northern Gaza continue to bring dreadful suffering to Palestinians. An offensive, with the complicity of the United States, that constitutes a war crime against international law.
North Korea, has no direct interest, but its media accuses Israel of “ceaseless criminal actions against the people of Palestine, with the United States escalating the conflict”, adding that “the fundamental solution is an independent Palestinian state”.
The role of the United States in the Israeli-Palestine conflict, in which they have tried to broker a solution is, to put it diplomatically, untenable. How would it be possible for the United States to presume to mediate in a conflict when their stand with Israel has always been “rock solid”, as President Biden affirmed after his recent visit to Tel Aviv? How can they be they so arrogant as to offer to act as a “peacemaker”, when they have been providing military funding to Israel, from $1.8 billion per year in 1987, progressively increasing to $3.8 billion in 2022? With another 20 billion in the works subsequent to the October 7 attacks.
Thousands of protests and demonstrations in solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza have erupted in major cities throughout the world, and not just in Muslim countries. They call for an end to the relentless and continuing Israeli blockage and airstrikes on Gaza, demanding an immediate ceasefire and the beginning of negotiations for a two-party solution to the decades-long conflict.
There also have been protests against Hamas holding captive nearly 220 hostages in Gaza, including 20 Americans, demanding their immediate and unconditional release. To date, four American ladies have been released, unharmed.
The self-acclaimed stance of the United States as a benign Superpower, the Leader of the Free World, the Bastion of Democracy, the Shining City on the Hill, is proving to be spurious, at least in the current Israeli-Palestine conflict. I never imagined the day would dawn when I am in complete agreement with the positions taken by China, Russia, North Korea and Iran on an international conflict.
Features
Trump-Xi meet more about economics rather than politics
The fact that some of the US’ topmost figures in business, such as Tesla chief Elon Musk and major US chipmaker Jensen Huang of NVIDIA fame, occupied as nearly a prominent a position as President Donald Trump at the recent ‘historic and landmark’ visit by the latter to China underscores the continuing vital importance of business in US-China ties. Business seemed to outweigh politics to a considerable degree in importance during the visit although the political dimension in US-China ties appeared to be more ‘headline grabbing’.
To be sure, the political dimension cannot be downplayed. For very good reason China could be seen as holding the power balance somewhat evenly between East and West. The international politics commentator couldn’t be seen as overstating the case if he takes the position that China could exercise substantial influence over the East currently; that is Russia and Iran, in the main. The latter powers hold the key in the Eastern hemisphere to shaping international politics in the direction of further war or of influencing it towards a measure of peace.
For example, time and again China has prevented the West from ‘having its own way’, so to speak, in the UN Security Council, for instance, in respect of the ongoing conflicts involving Russia and Iran, by way of abstaining from voting or by vetoing declarations that it sees as deleterious. That is, China has been what could be seen as a ‘moderating influence’ in international politics thus far. It has helped to keep the power balance somewhat intact between East and West.
At present a meet is ongoing between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing. This happened almost immediately after the Trump visit. Apparently, Beijing is in an effort to project itself as treating the US and Russia even-handedly while underscoring that it is no ‘special friend’ of the US or the West.
This effort at adopting a non-partisan stance on contentious questions in international politics is also seen in Beijing’s policy position on the Hormuz tangle and issues growing out of it. The Chinese authorities are quoted as saying in this regard, for instance, that China is for ‘a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire in the Middle East’.
Such a position has the effect of enhancing the perception that China is even-handed in its handling of divisive foreign policy posers. It is not openly anti-West nor is it weighing in with Iran and other Eastern actors that are opposed to the West in the West Asian theatre. A ‘comprehensive and lasting ceasefire’ implies that a solution needs to be arrived at that would be seen as fair by all quarters concerned.
On the highly sensitive Taiwan issue, President Xi was comparatively forthright during the Trump visit, but here too it was plain to see that Beijing was not intent on introducing a jarring, discordant note into the ongoing, largely cordial discussions with Washington. On the Taiwan question President Xi was quoted saying: ‘If mishandled, the two nations could collide even come into conflict.’ In other words, the US was cautioned that China’s interests need to be always borne in mind in its handling of the Taiwan issue.
The cautioning had the desired result because Trump in turn had reportedly conveyed to Taiwan that the latter’s concerns on the matter of independence had to be handled discreetly. He had told Taiwan plainly not to declare ‘independence.’
Accordingly, neither the US nor China had said or done anything that would have made either party lose face during their interaction. Apparently, both sides were sensitive to each others’ larger or national interests. And the economic interests of both powers were foremost among the latter considerations.
There is no glossing over or ignoring economic interests in the furtherance of ties between states. They are primal shaping forces of foreign policies and the fact that ‘economics drives politics’ is most apparent in US-China ties. That is, economic survival is fundamental.
Among the more memorable quotes from President Xi during the interaction, which also included US business leaders, was the following: ‘China’s doors will be open wider’ and US firms would have ‘broader prospects in the Chinese market.’
Xi went on to say that the sides had agreed to a ‘new positioning for ties’ based on ‘constructive strategic stability’. The implication here is that both sides would do well not to undermine existing, mutually beneficial economic relations in view of the wider national interests of both powers that are served by a continuation of these economic ties. That is, the way forward, in the words of the Chinese authorities, is ‘win-win cooperation.’
It is the above pronouncements by the Chinese authorities that probably led President Trump to gush that the talks were ‘very successful’ and of ‘historic and landmark’ importance. Such sentiments should only be expected of a billionaire US President, bent on economic empire-building.
One of the most important deals that were put through reportedly during the interaction was a Chinese agreement to buy some 200 Boeing jets and a ‘potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes.’ However, details were not forthcoming on other business deals that may have been hatched.
Accordingly, from the viewpoint of the protagonists the talks went off well and the chances are that the sides would stand to gain substantially from unruffled future economic ties. However, there was no mention of whether the health of the world economy or the ongoing conflicts in West Asia were taken up for discussion.
Such neglect is regretful. Although the veritable economic power houses of the world, the US and China, are likely to thrive in the short and medium terms and their ruling strata could be expected to benefit enormously from these ongoing economic interactions the same could not be said of most of the rest of the world and its populations.
Needless to say, the ongoing oil and gas crisis, for instance, resulting from the conflict situation in West Asia, is taking a heavy toll on the majority of the world’s economies and the relevant publics. While no urgent intervention to ease the lot of the latter could be expected from the Trump administration there is much that China could do on this score.
China could use its good offices with the US to address the negative fallout on the poorer sections of the world from the present global economic crunch and urge the West to help in introducing systemic changes that could facilitate these positive outcomes. After all, China remains a socialist power.
Features
The Quiet Shift: China as America’s “+1” in a Changing World Order
“Everything ever said to me by any Chinese of any station during any visit was part of an intricate design”
— Henry Kissinger
That design may already be complete before this week’s , a meeting that could shape the future balance of global power.
The wind arrives quietly. By the time it is heard, history has already begun to turn. Across Asia, that wind is no longer distant. It carries with it the exhaustion of an old order and the uncertain birth of another. The question now is not whether the world will change. It is whether those who hold power possess the wisdom to guide that change toward something less violent than the century behind us.
Since 1945, the United States has carried the burden of a global order built with its Western allies. To its credit, the world avoided another direct world war between great powers. The conflicts remained contained in distant lands—proxy wars fought in the shadows of ideology, oil, and influence. From Latin America to Asia, the American century expanded not only through prosperity, but through intervention. Yet empires, even democratic ones, grow tired. Fatigue settles slowly into institutions, alliances, and public memory. The role of global policeman no longer inspires certainty in Washington as it once did.
The “rules-based order” now confronts its own contradiction: it was built to be universal, yet it often appeared selective. During my recent visit to , a young researcher asked me quietly, “Does the West itself still believe in the rules-based order?” The question lingered long after the conversation ended. The rising century demands a more inclusive architecture—one that recognises the reality of Asian power, especially China.
My three years of field research across South and Southeast Asia, documented in , revealed a transformation too significant to dismiss as temporary. China has moved beyond being merely a competitor to the United States. In trade, infrastructure, technology, cultural diplomacy, and economic influence, Beijing has established itself as what may be called the world’s “US +1.”
Great powers often search for such a partner. History shows this tendency clearly. When an empire becomes overextended—burdened by wars, alliances, sanctions, tariffs, and crises—it seeks another center of gravity to stabilize the system it can no longer manage alone. The United States today faces disorder stretching from Venezuela to Iran, from Ukraine to the unsettled Middle East. In this landscape, China emerges not simply as a rival, but as a state powerful enough to broker peace where Washington alone no longer can.
Drawing from the lessons of the Nixon–Mao era, warned that “” The United States and China are now engaged in a long-term economic, technological, political, and strategic competition. Managing that competition wisely may become the defining challenge of this century. In such a deeply polarized and unstable world, recognising China as a “US +1” partner is not surrender, but strategic realism.
Donald Trump understood this reality before boarding his flight to meet Xi Jinping. Their meeting inside Zhongnanhai—the guarded compound where China’s leadership governs—was never merely ceremonial. It symbolized a deeper recognition already acknowledged quietly within the itself: China is the nearest peer competitor the United States has ever confronted. Before departing Washington, Trump seemed to reassess not only China’s strength, but its unavoidable position as a “” shaping the future global balance.
Yet the significance of a Trump–Xi meeting extends beyond trade wars, tariffs, or diplomatic spectacle. It presents an opportunity to confront two crises shaping the century ahead: global energy insecurity and regional instability. Washington increasingly understands the limits of direct engagement with Tehran. Decades of pressure, sanctions, and confrontation have produced exhaustion rather than resolution. In that vacuum, Beijing now possesses leverage that Washington does not.
For China, this is an opportunity to evolve from a development partner into a security actor. Xi Jinping’s (GSI) was never designed merely as rhetoric. It was intended as the next phase of Chinese influence—transforming economic dependence into strategic trust. The geopolitical spillover from the Iranian conflict now offers Beijing a historic opening to project itself as a stabilising force in the region, not against the United States, but alongside it as a “US +1” partner.
If China succeeds in helping stabilise the Gulf and secure energy corridors vital to Asia, it will reshape perceptions of Chinese power globally. Beijing would no longer be seen only as the builder of ports, railways, and industrial zones, but as a guarantor of regional balance. This transition—from infrastructure diplomacy to security diplomacy—may become one of the defining geopolitical shifts of the coming decade.
Xi Jinping does not seek open confrontation. His strategy is older, more patient, and perhaps more formidable because of its restraint. Beijing speaks not of domination, but of a “,” advanced through three instruments of influence: the Global Development Initiative (GDI), the Global Security Initiative (GSI), and the Global Civilization Initiative (GCI). These are not slogans alone. Across Asia, many governments increasingly trust China as a development partner more than any other power.
India, despite its ambitions, has not matched this scale of regional penetration. In both ASEAN and South Asia, China’s economic gravity is felt more deeply. Ports, railways, technology networks, and financial dependency have altered the geopolitical map quietly, without the spectacle of war.
In , I compared three inward-looking national strategies shaping Asia today: Trump’s MAGA, Modi’s emerging economic nationalism , and Xi’s strategy. Among them, China has demonstrated the greatest structural resilience. Faced with American tariffs and decoupling pressures, Beijing diversified its supply chains across Central Asia, Europe, and Southeast Asia. Rail corridors now connect Chinese industry to European markets through Eurasia. ASEAN has surpassed the United States as China’s largest trading partner, while the European Union follows closely behind. Exports to America have declined sharply, yet China continues to expand. Trump, once defined by confrontation, now arrives seeking a new “” with China—an acknowledgment that economic rivalry alone can no longer define the relationship between the world’s two largest powers.
Unlike Washington, which increasingly retreats from multilateral institutions, Beijing presents itself as the defender of multilateralism. Whether genuine or strategic matters less than perception. In geopolitics, perception often becomes reality.
What emerges, then, is not surrender between rivals, but interdependence between powers too large to isolate one another. The future may not belong to a bipolar Cold War, but to a reluctant coexistence. The United States now recognises that China possesses diversified markets and partnerships capable of reducing dependence on America. China, in turn, understands that its long march toward global primacy still requires strategic engagement with the United States.
This is where the true geopolitical shift begins.
Many analysts continue to frame China solely as a threat. Yet history rarely moves through absolutes. The next world order may not be built through confrontation alone, but through uneasy partnership. Artificial intelligence, technological supremacy, economic stability, and global governance now demand cooperation between Washington and Beijing, whether either side admits it publicly or not.
Trump will likely celebrate his personal relationship with Xi, presenting himself as the American leader capable of negotiating a “better deal” with China than his predecessors. But beneath the rhetoric lies something larger: the gradual acceptance of China’s indispensable role in shaping the future international order.
Even the question of war increasingly returns to Beijing. If Washington seeks an understanding with Tehran, China’s influence becomes unavoidable. Iran listens to Beijing in ways it no longer listens to the West. This alone signals how profoundly the balance of power has shifted. And Xi, careful as always, refuses to openly inherit the mantle of global leadership. He delays, softens, and obscures intention. It is part of a longer strategy: to rise without provoking the final resistance of a declining hegemon too early.
History rarely announces its turning point. Empires fade slowly, while new powers rise quietly beneath the noise of the old order. Washington still holds immense power, but Beijing increasingly holds the patience, reach, and strategic depth to shape what comes after.
The century ahead may not belong to one power alone, but to the uneasy balance between Washington and Beijing. And in that silence, a new world order is already taking shape.
By Asanga Abeyagoonasekera
Features
Egypt … here I come
Chit-Chat Nethali Withanage
Three months ago, 19-year-old Nethali Withanage, with Brian Kerkoven as her mentor, walked the ramp at Colombo Fashion Week. On 06 June, she’ll walk for Sri Lanka in Hurghada, Egypt, as the country’s delegate to Top Model of the World 2026._
I caught up with Nethali as she prepares to fly out, this weekend, and here’s how our chit-chat went:
1. Tell me something about yourself?
I’m someone who blends creativity with ambition. I’ve always loved expressing myself, whether it’s through fashion, styling, or the way I present myself to the world. At the same time, I’m very driven and disciplined, especially when I was working, as a student counsellor, at Campus One, at a young age, where I’ve learned how to connect with people, understand them, and communicate with confidence. I believe I’m still evolving, and that’s what excites me the most … becoming better every single day.
2. What made you decide to be a model?
Modelling felt natural to me because it combines everything I love – fashion, confidence, and storytelling without words. I realised that modelling isn’t just about appearance, it’s about presence and how you carry your energy. I wanted to be part of an industry where I could express different sides of myself, while inspiring others to feel confident in their own skin.
3. What sets you apart from other models?
I would say my ability to connect. Whether it’s with the camera, a brand, or an audience, I bring authenticity. I also have a strong background in communication and sales, which gives me an edge in understanding how to represent a brand, not just wear it. I don’t want to just model clothes, I want to bring them to life.
4. What clothing do you prefer to model?
I enjoy modelling versatile styles, but I’m especially drawn to elegant and expressive fashion pieces that tells a story. I love looks that allow me to embody confidence and femininity, whether it’s a structured outfit or something soft and flowing.
5. What is the most important aspect of modelling?
Confidence combined with professionalism. Confidence allows you to own the moment, but professionalism ensures that you respect the work, the team, and the brand you represent. Both are equally important.
6. If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be?
I would say I’m learning to trust myself more and not overthink. I’ve realised that growth comes from embracing who you are, not constantly trying to change it. So instead of changing something, I’m focused on becoming more confident in my own voice.
7. School?
I did my O/Ls at Seventh Day Adventist High School Kandana, and, while at school, I was actively involved in creative activities. I enjoyed participating in English Day events that allowed me to express myself and interact with others. Those experiences helped me build confidence, teamwork, and communication skills, which continue to shape who I am today.
8. Happiest moment?
One of my happiest moments is realising how far I’ve come from being unsure of myself to stepping into opportunities, like modelling, and representing myself with confidence. That feeling of growth is something I truly value, and also a dream come true!
9. Your idea of perfect happiness?
Perfect happiness for me is peace of mind, being surrounded by people I love, doing what I’m passionate about, and feeling proud of who I am becoming.
10. Your ideal guy?
My ideal partner is someone who is respectful, supportive, and confident in himself. Someone who values growth, understands my ambitions, and encourages me to be the best version of myself.
11. Which living person do you most admire?
I admire strong, self-made individuals who have built their identity through hard work and resilience. People who stay true to themselves, despite challenges, inspire me, because they show that success is not just about talent, but also about strength and consistency.
12. Your most treasured possession?
My most treasured possession is my confidence. It’s something I’ve built over time, and it allows me to face challenges, take opportunities, and believe in myself, even when things are uncertain.
13. If you were marooned on a desert island, who would you like as your companion?
I would choose someone who is calm, positive, and resourceful, someone who can turn a difficult situation into an adventure. The right mindset matters more than anything.
14. Your most embarrassing moment?
I’m 19 and still haven’t faced any most embarrassing moment. But I would say I’ve had small moments where things didn’t go as planned, but I’ve learned to laugh at myself. Those moments remind me that perfection isn’t necessary; confidence is about how you recover, not how you avoid mistakes.
15. Done anything daring?
Pursuing modelling and stepping into competitions is something I consider daring. It pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to grow, both personally and professionally.
16. Your ideal vacation?
My ideal vacation would be somewhere peaceful, yet beautiful, like a beach destination where I can relax, reflect, and reconnect with myself, while enjoying nature.
17. What kind of music are you into?
I choose music that matches my mood at that time, whether it’s calm and relaxing or energetic and uplifting. Music is something that helps me express emotions and stay inspired.
18. Favourite radio station?
Usually I don’t listen to radio stations but whenever I get into a car I would search for Yes FM because it has a refined balance of contemporary hits and timeless music. I appreciate how it maintains a vibrant yet sophisticated energy, keeping listeners engaged while creating a consistently uplifting atmosphere. It’s something I enjoy because it adds a sense of positivity and elegance to my day.
19. Favourite TV station?
At the moment, I don’t have a television at home, but growing up, my favourite TV station was ‘Nickelodeon’. I genuinely loved the shows and series it aired; they were fun, creative, and full of personality. It was something I always looked forward to, and those memories still bring a sense of joy and nostalgia, whenever I think about it.
20. Any major plans for the future?
My future plans are to grow in the modelling industry, work with international brands, build a strong personal brand and finish completing a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Studies. At the same time, I want to explore my creative side further, especially in fashion and business, so I can create something of my own one day.
-
Features5 days agoSri Lankan Airlines Airbus Scandal and the Death of Kapila Chandrasena and my Brother Rajeewa
-
News6 days agoLanka’s eligibility to draw next IMF tranche of USD 700 mn hinges on ‘restoration of cost-recovery pricing for electricity and fuel’
-
News5 days agoKapila Chandrasena case: GN phone records under court scrutiny
-
News5 days agoRupee slide rekindles 2022 crisis fears as inflation risks mount
-
Features2 days agoOctopus, Leech, and Snake: How Sri Lanka’s banks feast while the nation starves
-
Business5 days agoExpansion of PayPal services in Sri Lanka officially announced
-
Features7 days agoMysterious Death of United Nations Secretary General Hammarskjöld
-
News5 days agoCourt orders further arrests in alleged USD 42 Mn NDB fraud case
