Connect with us

Features

Trump accepts gift (grift) of $400 million flying palace from QATAR to replace “dilapidated” Air Force One

Published

on

China calls Trump’s bluff on tariffs

At a recent interview with Kristen Walker on NBC’s Meet the Press, President Trump was asked, when the subject of due process was being discussed, “Don’t you, as the President of the United States, need to uphold its constitution?”

Trump, who had taken the oath to uphold the constitution on two presidential inaugurations, said, amazingly, “I don’t know”.

The foreign emoluments clause of Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 8 of the Constitution states: “No title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no person holding any office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the consent of Congress, accept any present, emolument, office, or any title, of any kind whatsoever, from any King, Prince or foreign state”.

Trump is at present on the first overseas trip of his second term, covering Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, nations where he has significant private business interests worth billions of dollars, in Trump Towers, golf courses and cryptocurrency deals; where the necessity of personally maintaining the geopolitical balance of these corrupt business deals, which have more than tripled since his first presidential term, takes precedence over any matters of national interest.

Matters of national interest like the pursuit of a peace process which will bring about the cessation of hostilities between Israel and the terrorist groups of Hamas and the Houthis, ending the ongoing genocide of the Palestinian people in Gaza. A humanitarian crisis surely of more urgency than meetings with sponsors of international corruption and terrorism, or a gift of a palace in the sky.

On the eve of the first overseas trip of his second term, Trump confirmed, once again, his apathy towards the constitution, when he decided to accept a $400 million luxury airplane as a gift from the Qatari royal family. A 13-year-old plane, hitherto used by the Emir of Qatar, touted as a palace in the sky. A palace, though considered not good enough for the Qatar royalty, and gifted basically as a 13-year-old hand-me-down to the President of the United States of America.

The gift is from Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al Thani, a scion of the same royal family of Qatar Trump denounced in 2017 as the largest funder of terrorism in the middle east. Qatar has been a key supporter of terrorist groups, the Houthis and Hamas, giving them political and financial aid in excess of an estimated $1.8 billion during the past decade.

Trump justified the White House decision to accept the gift of the Jumbo Jet, to be used in place of the United States Air Force One, on the ingenuous argument that the gift was made to the United States Air Force, and not personally to him. Converting the Qatar-owned 747 Jet into a new Air Force One for President Trump would involve, according to aviation experts, stripping the plane to its foundations to ensure that it is security-bug free, and the installation of multiple top-secret security systems, that will cost the American taxpayer over one billion dollars and take years to complete. The installation of these new systems will cost far more than the estimated value of the “gift” of $400 million, and probably will not be completed before the end of Trump’s final, presidential term.

So why should Trump act against the constitution and accept a gift of a plane he probably will not be able use during his final presidential term? Because, according to the terms of this gift, the plane will be presented as an exhibit to the yet-to-be-built Trump Presidential Library at the end of his presidency. It will then be available for his personal use until his long-awaited demise, after which it will revert to the possession of the Trump family, ad infinitum.

Unlike the current Air Force One presidential plane, which will be used by his successor, if and when he leaves the White House.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who follows her boss in thumbing her nose at the constitution, said that “any gift given by a foreign government is always accepted in full compliance with all applicable laws. President Trump’s administration is committed to full transparency!” Attorney General Pam Bondi agrees, confirming that the Qatar gift is “legally permissible and not a bribe, because President Trump is not giving Qatar anything in return”.

Both Leavitt, Bondi and their boss do not seem to understand the significance of that age-old truism – “There’s nothing called a free lunch”. When a sponsor of terrorism gifts the United States a $400 million airplane, he surely would expect more than a sandwich in return!

However, there are rumblings of complaints from even the usually sycophantic Republican members of the House and Senate that may make Trump’s dream of owning a personal palace in the sky after his presidency most unlikely to result in a happy ending.

Prescription drugs

Trump has also decided to reduce the cost of prescription drugs to the levels of prices in every other developed nation. The idea came to him after a telephone call from London from a seriously overweight and highly neurotic business friend, a billionaire, who complained, “What the hell is going on, Mr. President? I am in London, and I just took my ‘fat-shot drug’, as he called it; and it cost me just $88. I pay $1,300 for the same drug in New York – same box, made at the same plant by the same manufacturer. You have to do something about it, Sir”.

Blessed with the svelte six-foot-three, 210-pounds figure of his dreams, Trump nevertheless shared the pain of his neurotic and obese friend. He decided to immediately address the issue, which he was surprised no one had thought of before. Only Trump pretended to be ignorant of the efforts of Democratic Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and a host of progressive “woke” political leaders before them, who have been demanding the reform of the nation’s healthcare system, including the lowering of pricing of prescription drugs, for decades.

“I called the CEOs of some of the top drug companies, and asked them why drug prices are so high. They said, ‘Sir, it’s all the costs of research and development on which only American companies spend, and marketing costs; that’s why drugs cost so much in America’.

“So I told them – I suddenly thought of the word “equalization” – I bet no one has thought of this word before – I told them “You have to keep drug prices equal to those paid in other developed countries, get them to share in these research and development costs. I don’t care how you do it, but you have to sell these drugs at the same prices they are sold in other developed nations”.

Last Monday, Trump signed, with much fanfare, an Executive Order, instructing drug manufacturers to cut prices of their drugs from 58% to 90%, within six months. Unfortunately, although Trump is already calling this a fait accompli, a big win for an administration desperate for a win, there is no “or else” to this Executive Order. At the end of six months, nothing would have changed, no penalty levied.

Trump is fully aware that other administrations have made similar efforts to reduce drug prices, that the pharmaceutical companies will never reduce their prices – in six month or six years – as long as their lobbyists maintain control of the Republican politicians, who enjoy the majority in both the House and the Senate. Who, in turn, are controlled by Trump and the MAGA (Make America Great Again) cult.

In six months, Trump would have manufactured hundreds of new lies, addressing new scandals, and the public would have forgotten all about the lie of reduced drug prices. They would continue to pay the same high prices for drugs. And so the tried and proven Trump game of Deny, Distract and Delay will continue, until Americans wake up to the 21st century.

Citizens in other developed nations, who do live in the 21st century, often pay less than a tenth of the prices paid for the exact same drugs in the United States, because their governments manage universal healthcare systems. These governments negotiate the cost of drugs directly with the manufacturers, without having to contend with the enormous profits of the middlemen, the insurance and pharmaceutical companies, and, of course, bribes to crooked politicians.

Trump announces triumph in trade war by repudiating tariffs he had himself imposed on “Liberation Day”

Trump claimed yet another big win after his team led by Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary, held negotiations with officials of the Chinese government over the weekend in Geneva, Switzerland. Secretary Bessent said. “We have reached agreement on a 90-day pause and substantially moved down tariff levels; both sides will move their reciprocal tariffs down by a whopping 115%”.

Given Trump’s mercurial personality, no one can be sure what new trade policies he will conjure up in 90 days.

The Chinese government has successfully called Trump’s “Liberation Day” bluff when he increased tariffs on Chinese imports to 145%. They have done so by ignoring Trump’s unilateral announcements of increased tariffs, but threatening retaliation to the bitter end. The Chinese do not make empty bluffs. The largest American retailers like Walmart and Target took the defiant attitude of the Chinese most seriously, and warned Trump that they will be facing empty shelves within weeks; smaller retailers were already consulting with bankruptcy lawyers in the full knowledge that they would have to close down their businesses by Christmas, if not sooner. Economists were predicting a 60% possibility of a recession within six months, entirely caused by the declaration of Trump’s trade war on April 2, now generally recognized as the “dumbest economic policy in decades”.

So Trump is now renegotiating tariffs, many at a disadvantage to the US from the rates that existed before Trump’s Liberation Day, when he announced the beginning of “trade independence that would make America rich again”. He is touting the reversal of his tariffs, a return to the status quo, having caused immense losses in the stock markets in the interim, as a tremendous win for his unparalleled excellence in the Art of the Deal.

Which takes us back to the tale of political satirist, Jon Stewart’s dog, who poops all over the carpet, and returns after a few days and eats the poop, leaving an indelible stain and a noisome stink. But he looks proudly at Stewart, as if to say, “Haven’t I been a good dog, the greatest dog you have ever seen?” This pathologically narcissistic, triumphant expression on the face of Jon Stewart’s dog, having partially cleaned up a mess of his own making, is the expression I see on Trump’s face whenever he announces his phony “accomplishments” on TV.

In a mere 100 days, Trump has transformed the economy he inherited from the Biden administration, headlined by The Economist of October 2024 as “The Envy of the World” to an economy of increased prices and rising rates of inflation, teetering on the brink of a recession.

by Kumar de Silva



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Sustaining good governance requires good systems

Published

on

A prominent feature of the first year of the NPP government is that it has not engaged in the institutional reforms which was expected of it. This observation comes in the context of the extraordinary mandate with which the government was elected and the high expectations that accompanied its rise to power. When in opposition and in its election manifesto, the JVP and NPP took a prominent role in advocating good governance systems for the country. They insisted on constitutional reform that included the abolition of the executive presidency and the concentration of power it epitomises, the strengthening of independent institutions that overlook key state institutions such as the judiciary, public service and police, and the reform or repeal of repressive laws such as the PTA and the Online Safety Act.

The transformation of a political party that averaged between three to five percent of the popular vote into one that currently forms the government with a two thirds majority in parliament is a testament to the faith that the general population placed in the JVP/ NPP combine. This faith was the outcome of more than three decades of disciplined conduct in the aftermath of the bitter experience of the 1988 to 1990 period of JVP insurrection. The manner in which the handful of JVP parliamentarians engaged in debate with well researched critiques of government policy and actions, and their service in times of disaster such as the tsunami of 2004 won them the trust of the people. This faith was bolstered by the Aragalaya movement which galvanized the citizens against the ruling elites of the past.

In this context, the long delay to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act which has earned notoriety for its abuse especially against ethnic and religious minorities, has been a disappointment to those who value human rights. So has been the delay in appointing an Auditor General, so important in ensuring accountability for the money expended by the state. The PTA has a long history of being used without restraint against those deemed to be anti-state which, ironically enough, included the JVP in the period 1988 to 1990. The draft Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA), published in December 2025, is the latest attempt to repeal and replace the PTA. Unfortunately, the PSTA largely replicates the structure, logic and dangers of previous failed counter terrorism bills, including the Counter Terrorism Act of 2018 and the Anti Terrorism Act proposed in 2023.

Misguided Assumption

Despite its stated commitment to rule of law and fundamental rights, the draft PTSA reproduces many of the core defects of the PTA. In a preliminary statement, the Centre for Policy Alternatives has observed among other things that “if there is a Detention Order made against the person, then in combination, the period of remand and detention can extend up to two years. This means that a person can languish in detention for up to two years without being charged with a crime. Such a long period again raises questions of the power of the State to target individuals, exacerbated by Sri Lanka’s history of long periods of remand and detention, which has contributed to abuse and violence.” Human Rights lawyer Ermiza Tegal has warned against the broad definition of terrorism under the proposed law: “The definition empowers state officials to term acts of dissent and civil disobedience as ‘terrorism’ and will lawfully permit disproportionate and excessive responses.”  The legitimate and peaceful protests against abuse of power by the authorities cannot be classified as acts of terror.

The willingness to retain such powers reflects the surmise that the government feels that keeping in place the structures that come from the past is to their benefit, as they can utilise those powers in a crisis. Due to the strict discipline that exists within the JVP/NPP at this time there may be an assumption that those the party appoints will not abuse their trust. However, the country’s experience with draconian laws designed for exceptional circumstances demonstrates that they tend to become tools of routine governance. On the plus side, the government has given two months for public comment which will become meaningful if the inputs from civil society actors are taken into consideration.

Worldwide experience has repeatedly demonstrated that integrity at the level of individual leaders, while necessary, is not sufficient to guarantee good governance over time. This is where the absence of institutional reform becomes significant. The aftermath of Cyclone Ditwah in particular has necessitated massive procurements of emergency relief which have to be disbursed at maximum speed. There are also significant amounts of foreign aid flowing into the country to help it deal with the relief and recovery phase. There are protocols in place that need to be followed and monitored so that a fiasco like the disappearance of tsunami aid in 2004 does not recur. To the government’s credit there are no such allegations at the present time. But precautions need to be in place, and those precautions depend less on trust in individuals than on the strength and independence of oversight institutions.

Inappropriate Appointments

It is in this context that the government’s efforts to appoint its own preferred nominees to the Auditor General’s Department has also come as a disappointment to civil society groups. The unsuitability of the latest presidential nominee has given rise to the surmise that this nomination was a time buying exercise to make an acting appointment. For the fourth time, the Constitutional Council refused to accept the president’s nominee. The term of the three independent civil society members of the Constitutional Council ends in January which would give the government the opportunity to appoint three new members of its choice and get its way in the future.

The failure to appoint a permanent Auditor General has created an institutional vacuum at a critical moment. The Auditor General acts as a watchdog, ensuring effective service delivery promoting integrity in public administration and providing an independent review of the performance and accountability. Transparency International has observed “The sequence of events following the retirement of the previous Auditor General points to a broader political inertia and a governance failure. Despite the clear constitutional importance of the role, the appointment process has remained protracted and opaque, raising serious questions about political will and commitment to accountability.”

It would appear that the government leadership takes the position they have been given the mandate to govern the country which requires implementation by those they have confidence in. This may explain their approach to the appointment (or non-appointment) at this time of the Auditor General. Yet this approach carries risks. Institutions are designed to function beyond the lifespan of any one government and to protect the public interest even when those in power are tempted to act otherwise. The challenge and opportunity for the NPP government is to safeguard independent institutions and enact just laws, so that the promise of system change endures beyond personalities and political cycles.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

General education reforms: What about language and ethnicity?

Published

on

A new batch arrived at our Faculty again. Students representing almost all districts of the country remind me once again of the wonderful opportunity we have for promoting social and ethnic cohesion at our universities. Sadly, however, many students do not interact with each other during the first few semesters, not only because they do not speak each other’s language(s), but also because of the fear and distrust that still prevails among communities in our society.

General education reform presents an opportunity to explore ways to promote social and ethnic cohesion. A school curriculum could foster shared values, empathy, and critical thinking, through social studies and civics education, implement inclusive language policies, and raise critical awareness about our collective histories. Yet, the government’s new policy document, Transforming General Education in Sri Lanka 2025, leaves us little to look forward to in this regard.

The policy document points to several “salient” features within it, including: 1) a school credit system to quantify learning; 2) module-based formative and summative assessments to replace end-of-term tests; 3) skills assessment in Grade 9 consisting of a ‘literacy and numeracy test’ and a ‘career interest test’; 4) a comprehensive GPA-based reporting system spanning the various phases of education; 5) blended learning that combines online with classroom teaching; 6) learning units to guide students to select their preferred career pathways; 7) technology modules; 8) innovation labs; and 9) Early Childhood Education (ECE). Notably, social and ethnic cohesion does not appear in this list. Here, I explore how the proposed curriculum reforms align (or do not align) with the NPP’s pledge to inculcate “[s]afety, mutual understanding, trust and rights of all ethnicities and religious groups” (p.127), in their 2024 Election Manifesto.

Language/ethnicity in the present curriculum

The civil war ended over 15 years ago, but our general education system has done little to bring ethnic communities together. In fact, most students still cannot speak in the “second national language” (SNL) and textbooks continue to reinforce negative stereotyping of ethnic minorities, while leaving out crucial elements of our post-independence history.

Although SNL has been a compulsory subject since the 1990s, the hours dedicated to SNL are few, curricula poorly developed, and trained teachers few (Perera, 2025). Perhaps due to unconscious bias and for ideological reasons, SNL is not valued by parents and school communities more broadly. Most students, who enter our Faculty, only have basic reading/writing skills in SNL, apart from the few Muslim and Tamil students who schooled outside the North and the East; they pick up SNL by virtue of their environment, not the school curriculum.

Regardless of ethnic background, most undergraduates seem to be ignorant about crucial aspects of our country’s history of ethnic conflict. The Grade 11 history textbook, which contains the only chapter on the post-independence period, does not mention the civil war or the events that led up to it. While the textbook valourises ‘Sinhala Only’ as an anti-colonial policy (p.11), the material covering the period thereafter fails to mention the anti-Tamil riots, rise of rebel groups, escalation of civil war, and JVP insurrections. The words “Tamil” and “Muslim” appear most frequently in the chapter, ‘National Renaissance,’ which cursorily mentions “Sinhalese-Muslim riots” vis-à-vis the Temperance Movement (p.57). The disenfranchisement of the Malaiyaha Tamils and their history are completely left out.

Given the horrifying experiences of war and exclusion experienced by many of our peoples since independence, and because most students still learn in mono-ethnic schools having little interaction with the ‘Other’, it is not surprising that our undergraduates find it difficult to mix across language and ethnic communities. This environment also creates fertile ground for polarizing discourses that further divide and segregate students once they enter university.

More of the same?

How does Transforming General Education seek to address these problems? The introduction begins on a positive note: “The proposed reforms will create citizens with a critical consciousness who will respect and appreciate the diversity they see around them, along the lines of ethnicity, religion, gender, disability, and other areas of difference” (p.1). Although National Education Goal no. 8 somewhat problematically aims to “Develop a patriotic Sri Lankan citizen fostering national cohesion, national integrity, and national unity while respecting cultural diversity (p. 2), the curriculum reforms aim to embed values of “equity, inclusivity, and social justice” (p. 9) through education. Such buzzwords appear through the introduction, but are not reflected in the reforms.

Learning SNL is promoted under Language and Literacy (Learning Area no. 1) as “a critical means of reconciliation and co-existence”, but the number of hours assigned to SNL are minimal. For instance, at primary level (Grades 1 to 5), only 0.3 to 1 hour is allocated to SNL per week. Meanwhile, at junior secondary level (Grades 6 to 9), out of 35 credits (30 credits across 15 essential subjects that include SNL, history and civics; 3 credits of further learning modules; and 2 credits of transversal skills modules (p. 13, pp.18-19), SNL receives 1 credit (10 hours) per term. Like other essential subjects, SNL is to be assessed through formative and summative assessments within modules. As details of the Grade 9 skills assessment are not provided in the document, it is unclear whether SNL assessments will be included in the ‘Literacy and numeracy test’. At senior secondary level – phase 1 (Grades 10-11 – O/L equivalent), SNL is listed as an elective.

Refreshingly, the policy document does acknowledge the detrimental effects of funding cuts in the humanities and social sciences, and highlights their importance for creating knowledge that could help to “eradicate socioeconomic divisions and inequalities” (p.5-6). It goes on to point to the salience of the Humanities and Social Sciences Education under Learning Area no. 6 (p.12):

“Humanities and Social Sciences education is vital for students to develop as well as critique various forms of identities so that they have an awareness of their role in their immediate communities and nation. Such awareness will allow them to contribute towards the strengthening of democracy and intercommunal dialogue, which is necessary for peace and reconciliation. Furthermore, a strong grounding in the Humanities and Social Sciences will lead to equity and social justice concerning caste, disability, gender, and other features of social stratification.”

Sadly, the seemingly progressive philosophy guiding has not moulded the new curriculum. Subjects that could potentially address social/ethnic cohesion, such as environmental studies, history and civics, are not listed as learning areas at the primary level. History is allocated 20 hours (2 credits) across four years at junior secondary level (Grades 6 to 9), while only 10 hours (1 credit) are allocated to civics. Meanwhile, at the O/L, students will learn 5 compulsory subjects (Mother Tongue, English, Mathematics, Science, and Religion and Value Education), and 2 electives—SNL, history and civics are bunched together with the likes of entrepreneurship here. Unlike the compulsory subjects, which are allocated 140 hours (14 credits or 70 hours each) across two years, those who opt for history or civics as electives would only have 20 hours (2 credits) of learning in each. A further 14 credits per term are for further learning modules, which will allow students to explore their interests before committing to a A/L stream or career path.

With the distribution of credits across a large number of subjects, and the few credits available for SNL, history and civics, social/ethnic cohesion will likely remain on the back burner. It appears to be neglected at primary level, is dealt sparingly at junior secondary level, and relegated to electives in senior years. This means that students will be able to progress through their entire school years, like we did, with very basic competencies in SNL and little understanding of history.

Going forward

Whether the students who experience this curriculum will be able to “resist and respond to hegemonic, divisive forces that pose a threat to social harmony and multicultural coexistence” (p.9) as anticipated in the policy, is questionable. Education policymakers and others must call for more attention to social and ethnic cohesion in the curriculum. However, changes to the curriculum would only be meaningful if accompanied by constitutional reform, abolition of policies, such as the Prevention of Terrorism Act (and its proxies), and other political changes.

For now, our school system remains divided by ethnicity and religion. Research from conflict-ridden societies suggests that lack of intercultural exposure in mono-ethnic schools leads to ignorance, prejudice, and polarized positions on politics and national identity. While such problems must be addressed in broader education reform efforts that also safeguard minority identities, the new curriculum revision presents an opportune moment to move this agenda forward.

(Ramya Kumar is attached to the Department of Community and Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jaffna).

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

by Ramya Kumar

Continue Reading

Features

Top 10 Most Popular Festive Songs

Published

on

Certain songs become ever-present every December, and with Christmas just two days away, I thought of highlighting the Top 10 Most Popular Festive Songs.

The famous festive songs usually feature timeless classics like ‘White Christmas,’ ‘Silent Night,’ and ‘Jingle Bells,’ alongside modern staples like Mariah Carey’s ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You,’ Wham’s ‘Last Christmas,’ and Brenda Lee’s ‘Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree.’

The following renowned Christmas songs are celebrated for their lasting impact and festive spirit:

*  ‘White Christmas’ — Bing Crosby

The most famous holiday song ever recorded, with estimated worldwide sales exceeding 50 million copies. It remains the best-selling single of all time.

*  ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You’ — Mariah Carey

A modern anthem that dominates global charts every December. As of late 2025, it holds an 18x Platinum certification in the US and is often ranked as the No. 1 popular holiday track.

Mariah Carey: ‘All I Want for Christmas Is You’

*  ‘Silent Night’ — Traditional

Widely considered the quintessential Christmas carol, it is valued for its peaceful melody and has been recorded by hundreds of artistes, most famously by Bing Crosby.

*  ‘Jingle Bells’ — Traditional

One of the most universally recognised and widely sung songs globally, making it a staple for children and festive gatherings.

*  ‘Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree’ — Brenda Lee

Recorded when Lee was just 13, this rock ‘n’ roll favourite has seen a massive resurgence in the 2020s, often rivaling Mariah Carey for the top spot on the Billboard Hot 100.

*  ‘Last Christmas’ — Wham!

A bittersweet ’80s pop classic that has spent decades in the top 10 during the holiday season. It recently achieved 7x Platinum status in the UK.

*  ‘Jingle Bell Rock’ — Bobby Helms

A festive rockabilly standard released in 1957 that remains a staple of holiday radio and playlists.

*  ‘The Christmas Song (Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire)’— Nat King Cole

Known for its smooth, warm vocals, this track is frequently cited as the ultimate Christmas jazz standard.

Wham! ‘Last Christmas’

*  ‘It’s the Most Wonderful Time of the Year’ — Andy Williams

Released in 1963, this high-energy big band track is famous for capturing the “hectic merriment” of the season.

*  ‘Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer’ — Gene Autry

A beloved narrative song that has sold approximately 25 million copies worldwide, cementing the character’s place in Christmas folklore.

Other perennial favourites often in the mix:

*  ‘Feliz Navidad’ – José Feliciano

*  ‘A Holly Jolly Christmas’ – Burl Ives

*  ‘Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow!’ – Frank Sinatra

Let me also add that this Thursday’s ‘SceneAround’ feature (25th December) will be a Christmas edition, highlighting special Christmas and New Year messages put together by well-known personalities for readers of The Island.

Continue Reading

Trending