Opinion
What not to do
By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana
It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!
Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.
Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.
Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.
Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera
Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.
The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!
Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.
Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!
Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!
Opinion
A paradox of history
There seems to be a striking similarity between ancient Greece and modern Britain. Both countries remain paradoxes of history. Greece was a small city state constantly at war with neighbouring countries. It did not have a big army, but it had considerable sea power. However, Greece was a leading state over the whole of the Mediterranean. In fact, Greece was once a super power in the Western world.
Britain was very powerful in the 19th century. British justice was administered in Africa, India and Ceylon. British factories flourished in many countries and schoolchildren started reading R.L. Stevenson’s ‘Treasure Island’ and the works of Rudyard Kipling. What Ralph Waldo Emerson said in the 1850s is still valid today. He said, “If there’s one test of national genius universally accepted, it is success; and if there be one successful country in the universe for the last millennium, that country is England. It is the best of actual nations.”
In World War I, Britain faced a crushing defeat. Eventually, the British Empire was reduced to a Commonwealth. World War II shattered the image of Britain further. Although Britain lost much of its power, it continued to be an influential country. Even after achieving independence, India retained English as an official language. The British parliament system is well established in many Commonwealth countries. Some people still wonder how England still exercises its influence over the minds of men and women.
Staying power
There are many powerful countries in the world today such as the United States, Russia and China. Although England is not a super power, she has staying power. According to Oliver Wendell Holmes, a good part of greatness is simply being there. For that matter, England has been there for many centuries. So far no other country has been able to defeat her. As a result, sometimes we wonder whether we can have a world without England.
England has had an unwritten Constitution for a very long time. Other countries have emulated her political institutions. The British people have an established church with complete religious freedom. Although there are social classes in Britain, there has been no major clash among them. Unlike in many other countries, there are only two leading political parties in England. When the Labour Party is in power, the government is not subservient to labour. Similarly, when the Conservative Party is in power, the government is not conservative.
Most British colonies in the East including India and Ceylon did not sever the cultural and emotional links with Britain and retain them even after achieving independence. India became independent in 1947, but she decided to retain English as an official language. By doing so, India produced a number of English writers such as R.K Narayan. However, Ceylon did not give English any official status and treated it as a link language. As a result, students paid less attention to learning English. They were made to understand that everything can be done by learning Sinhala and Tamil. We have failed to produce English writers in the calibre of J. Vijayatunga who wrote ‘Grass for my feet.’
Politically shrinking
The United Kingdom is politically shrinking. However, its influence vibrates throughout the world. English has brought many nations together. There is a common understanding among countries that share the English language and literature. William Shakespeare’s dramas are staged in countries such as China where English is not an official language. People have come to the conclusion that English has become a broker of ideas and institutions.
England is not an aggressive country. However, if provoked, it can deliver a mortal blow to its enemy. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher showed her mettle as the iron lady. Britain held the fort against the might of Napoleon Bonaparte who ruled France. The country can still boast of a heavy moral credit. The British stick to their international agreements. The power of England draws mainly from its language. British people say ‘It’s right’ when it is right’. When it is not right, they say, ‘It’s not right.’ Meanwhile English occupies a pre-eminent place in world languages. All the research work in many parts of the world is available in English. You can learn any subject easily through English.
Apart from the language, people respect British standards which are technical specifications and quality benchmarks developed by the British Standards Institution. The United Kingdom’s independent national standards body was established in 1901. It maintains over 37,000 standards covering industries such as construction, manufacturing and technology ensuring safety and reliability.
British English
Standard British English is the variety of English that has undergone codification to the point of being socially perceived as the standard language associated with formal schooling, language assessment and official print publications. For historical reasons dating back to the rise of London in the ninth century, the form of language spoken in London and the East Midlands became the Standard English used in schools, universities, literature and law.
British English functions as one of the two major foundational and standard varieties of the English language alongside American English. It serves as a primary reference point for spelling and grammar. It acts as a global standard, and international institutions are often defined by specific pronunciation.
Most Sri Lankan doctors primarily move to England for postgraduate training, higher specialisation and better career prospects. They are driven by superior training infrastructure, world-class facilities and globally recognised qualifications.
To sum up, when you think of learning an international language, there is no alternative to English. If you wish to read literature, you cannot ignore eminent English dramatists and poets such as William Shakespeare and John Milton. Many leading Sri Lankans like S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike were Oxford University products. Therefore, English deserves to be made an official language in Sri Lanka.
By R.S. Karunaratne
Opinion
State Literary Awards only for the rich?
The Department of Cultural Affairs has once again called authors, and publishers to lodge their entries for selection of the prestigious State Literary Awards 2026.The criteria and conditions required and notified in the public domain, makes it mandatory for the literary work to be printed and published prior to submission for consideration of the awards. There is absolutely no provision for writers to submit their work in Manuscript form.
Where does that leave the financially impoverished writers who are talented, creative and wish to submit a well edited typescript of their work as manuscript for consideration of the State Literary Awards? In a literary environment that encourages a proliferation of self-published books of all forms and features presented by vanity publishers who have their eye on the purse of the author than on literary merit and artistic excellence, it is easy to show that you are an ” established writer” by spending your cash abundantly towards glossy covered books which the printing industry and fawning publishers will lap up with greed.
Even the Gratiaen Prize in Sri Lanka, sponsored by world-renowned Michael Ondaatje allows for Manuscript entries together with published books. Significantly, the manuscript entries that win the prize are assisted to publish their work which is part of the winnings. Many a young, aspiring writer with little funds who won the Gratiaen Prize on merit, but had submitted their entry in manuscript form have been thereby encouraged to submit their work on merit basis only.
It is a fact that the Commonwealth Short Story Prize, a massive state-supported initiative across 56 nations accepts only unpublished short fiction. Further, several countries in the world have established national or state level literary prizes that specifically accept unpublished manuscripts to provide equity in discovering new talent and supporting national literature without bias or favour. In Australia, Jamaica, Philippines, major national awards organised by the State for literature, specifically accept unpublished manuscripts for consideration.
Let’s face the truth. The printing costs are escalating. There is little demand in Sri Lanka for literary work in the English Language in particular. Traditional Publishing where the literary work is reviewed and assessed for talent and creativity and thereafter published is seldom found. The reviews and critical analysis of literary works are rare. But publishers make a pile by pandering to the vanity of aspiring writers who have the financial clout to pay their way through to being featured in prestigious award ceremonies and accolades. Thereafter, their substandard works get a further fillip by bearing the label of “Won the State Literary Award for Literature”! It is a cycle of literary charlatans and their pimps in the publishing industry for whom the price that is paid for publishing and not Meritocracy is the sine-qua-non.
Is this the level playing field promised by the NPP Government and their Marxist protagonists? A government that was voted into power on the platform of affording fair opportunity and equality seems to discriminate in favour of the Haves against the Have- nots in the cultural department to say the least! Anil Fernando
Opinion
Delivering on English
English literature offers a rich heritage of wonderful ideas and thoughts. The reader can be intellectually uplifted. It brings refreshing new vistas and stimulating new ideas. However, this English literature has to be first introduced to the student in order to fire up his or her interest and be made aware of this rich source of culture. Students of basic English as a second language work hard and learn all the hum-drum mechanics of the language, for which they get tested and graded. But importantly, nae crucially, this should be followed up with intellectual rewards for the students’ efforts – which, of course, is the enjoyment of the works of literature of the many great writers in the English language. This is the great payoff, the great dividend for all their efforts but this, apparently goes missing.
One of the obvious reasons for the lack of “follow through” may be lack of time allocated in the curriculum – or, perhaps, more darkly, the teachers’ own lack of knowledge of the great range of good reading materials produced by the countless generations of literary geniuses who have gone before. Such writers have laid down for us a heritage of glorious literary works in books and essays, all of which are to be found in any good library. It is thought that much of this good literature ought to be introduced to all students of English, “full stop,” as part of developing a knowledgeable and cultured society. (Isn’t that what we want?) Reading English literature should bring an intellectual enrichment to all those willing to drink from this Bacchanalian horn of plenty.
It must be said finally, that it can be fairly expected that most young people, especially those learning English as a second language, are totally unaware of the many outstanding pieces of writing that propel English to stand tall amongst the rest. That is, students need to be first introduced to great writings and have a spark of interest ignited in these great works of literature.
For example, by being introduced to “Daffodils,” a short descriptive poem by William Wordsworth, the student can get some very pleasant ideas to think on.
Do not overlook Conan Doyle’s “Sherlock Holmes” detective stories, each one captivating the reader’s attention right to the end. It is by these short stories that the novice reader can first consolidate his power of reading.
For light reading Jerome K. Jerome’s book “Three Men in a Boat” is suggested. On one occasion he goes to the library suffering from a slight hay-fever (allergy) seeking a cure. He consults a book, “Lexicon of Pharmacology”, and recoils in horror as his symptoms fit most of those diseases described in the book! He concludes he cannot live much longer and staggers home to rest and recuperate! This is a well related tale in the book – although seemingly quite implausible!
Similarly, by having the poem meanings explained, e.g. “What is Life if Full of Care?” by William Henry Davis – how he regrets that we humans are always in a hurry, too busy to notice or see the delights of nature, and scenes of natural beauty, e.g., a young woman’s smile as she passes by; we have no time to make friends and even kiss her. Regrets! Explaining this to students would bring a certain intellectual insight.
John Keats’s poem, “Ode to Autumn” is another great work describing the ripening fruits of the autumn season and how nature as a living being, brings to fruition all the good things of a rural landscape quietly humming with warmth after a hot summer.
Again, it is likely necessary to explain to a young, Sri Lankan mind the meaning of the descriptive poetry found in this magnificent poem.
This is the real English to be tasted and then swigged at lustily in pleasure and satisfaction, not some writing airing historical grievances for children to study!
1970 British Cohort Study
It should be observed here that the ‘1970 British Cohort Study’ followed 70,000 people to examine various aspects of their lives. One result discovered was that if a young person reads a lot, it develops his/ her general intelligence no-matter his parents; it makes him smarter.
It was also noted that reading brings life-long benefits; it improves mood, it helps with social skills, increases empathy, reduces anxiety, protects against depression and slows brain decay, the study found.
But these days many young people never gain a great competence in reading English; the fear is that standards are falling. This is bringing poorer critical thinking, less depth of personality and less empathy for others which has the result of a more turbulent society.
People are urged to switch off their headphones and read more of what they like – try reading the newspapers!
Priyantha Hettige
-
Life style1 day agoMarriot new GM Suranga
-
Midweek Review5 days agoA question of national pride
-
Business5 days agoAutodoc 360 relocates to reinforce commitment to premium auto care
-
Features1 day agoMonks’ march, in America and Sri Lanka
-
Opinion4 days agoWill computers ever be intelligent?
-
Features1 day agoThe Rise of Takaichi
-
Features1 day agoWetlands of Sri Lanka:
-
Midweek Review5 days agoTheatre and Anthropocentrism in the age of Climate Emergency
