Features
Will NPP continue Sri Lanka’s path of Economic Suicide?
By Sunil Abhayawardhana
Though Sri Lanka has a new government, its first budget for 2025 remains within the conditions and targets of the ongoing IMF programme (which will continue until the end of 2027).
A major shortfall in the budget is the lack of a ‘developmental thrust,’ which is essential for the country to grow out of the current crisis. Rather than discussing the minutiae of the budget, it is worth looking at how Sri Lanka got into this situation by making the same mistakes over and over again.
Though these mistakes can be pointed out, mainstream economists prefer to stick to the outdated textbook economics taught at university even when proven wrong. Therefore, the best way to bring up Sri Lanka’s mistakes is through a comparative approach with the High Performing Asian Economies (HPAEs).
Missed Opportunities
At independence in 1948, Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) was expected to develop rapidly due to advantages such as its strategic location, which was expected to be a multiplier by itself. This ‘strategic location’ has not fully been made use of to this day.
The oil tank farm in Trincomalee was a big storage facility in 1948. If the government had negotiated to buy the facility from the British (which was finally done in 1965 for 250,000 sterling pounds) and set up a refinery, Trincomalee could have become the oil hub of Asia, long before Singapore. This could have saved the country from the perennial forex crisis that it had to deal with due to the diminishing returns from the plantation economy.
The plantation economy had reached its peak over two decades before Independence and was not able to sustain a growing population. Yet, the immediate post-Independence governments did nothing about this. Though funds were available, there was a deficit in the thinking and a lack of vision for the future. The lack of immediate effort to diversify and industrialise the economy was the first act of economic suicide.
At around the same time, HPAEs such as Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan (China) embarked on their development programmes, which have brought results far exceeding their own expectations. What was it that the HPAEs got so right, and what did Sri Lanka get so wrong?
A comparison between Sri Lanka and the HPAEs brings up many differences. The four major points of interest that stand out were as follows:
1) No plan
2) Bad theory
3) Bad advice
4) Not understanding development
No Plan
A sovereign country should know where it wants to go and how it hopes to reach its objectives. This is normally expressed in a development plan that provides the public with a clear roadmap. A plan becomes more necessary when countries start out from a very low level of development. An initial burst of energy is required before markets can take over.
A fair amount of strategic thinking goes into the formulation of such a plan. It should take into account the natural and human resources available and the strategic sectors that need development. The plan should aim to keep the cost of development as low as possible.
In a country with different communities, the plan should also unite people to work towards a common objective. A development plan looks not only at growth but also at the pattern of growth. When growth becomes more widespread, it opens up more opportunities for the public.
All HPAEs began their journeys with development plans covering many decades. Some countries, like China and Vietnam, still adhere to five-year plans. Sri Lanka is the one country that tried to develop without a plan. The World Bank mission of 1952 recommended a planning process for Sri Lanka, though it was hardly implemented. The first Ten-Year Plan of 1959 (which took three years to formulate) was never implemented. The Five-Year Plan of 1972 was derailed by the 1973 oil shock.
While Sri Lanka struggled to plan, the HPAEs were already implementing their plans and seeing results. Sri Lanka drifted to depending on ad-hoc methods without long-term objectives. Even after 77 years of Independence, the country is still unable to identify the sectors for industrial development.
Bad Theory
At independence, the country did not have much know-how in economics. The few who had been educated in economics at the UK universities were taught neoclassical economics with a Keynesian tinge. The Quantity Theory of Money (QTM) was the guiding orthodoxy of the time. What the QTM says is that if the quantity of money is increased, there would be a corresponding increase in prices and therefore inflation.
However, the HPAEs realised that if new money was directed towards investment in productive industry, the result would be an expansion of the economy rather than inflation. The bulk of their funds for development came from monetary financing from the Central Bank. They would have taken inspiration from examples such as Canada in the 1940s and Japan in the 1930s, both of which used monetary financing for specific purposes.
Another point to note is the fact that all the HPAEs had multiple development banks, which helped in the development drive. In contrast, Sri Lanka got rid of its two development banks on advice from the West, thereby reducing the availability of long-term credit for the development process.
Due to Sri Lanka’s adherence to the QTM, we have had to rely on other methods of finance, which has created a dependency on foreign aid and a huge foreign currency debt. Though there is so much evidence that monetary financing used wisely can bring great results, many in Sri Lanka still adhere to the QTM. While most universities still teach the old concepts, it is sad that students at the master’s level and beyond do not think for themselves.
Bad Advice
When a country lacks knowledge and experience, it becomes necessary to seek advice from others. The World Bank and the IMF did perform this function in the early days. However, since the neoliberal onslaught, the purpose of these institutions has taken a more politicised turn.
The advice given by the IMF and other international advice has to be analysed, as it often turns out to be more damaging. For example, austerity has been proven to be counterproductive and causes more damage to the economy and social life. The present advice the government is receiving from the IMF, the CBSL, and the Ministry of Finance is no different.
When South Korean President Park Chung-Hee was offered Western economic advisors, he knew exactly what their advice would be. So, he declined the offer and obtained economic advisors from Japan instead.
Sri Lanka, on the other hand, accepted whatever came from the West. Our leaders accepted the ‘Washington Consensus,’ which we follow to this day, even though the author of the document, John Williamson, has himself declared it a dead document.
Economists advise governments towards suicidal actions without observing what has been done around the world before. There are political aspects to this bad advice. As there is an overproduction of global money, such bad advice is actually beneficial to the Western financial sector and its political interests.
Not Understanding Development
Sri Lanka has still not understood what development means. This can be seen from the fact that despite having a potential 30,000 MW of wind power generation, the government wants to give this opportunity to foreign companies and buy back the power with foreign exchange. Even the export potential is given to foreign companies, while local companies lose that opportunity.
If such a situation had been in any of the HPAEs, they would have first developed a local windmill manufacturing industry to meet their needs. That is what development is – developing productive capabilities and creating a productive ecosystem. There are many opportunities that Sri Lanka has missed because the concept of development has not been understood.
Had local inventors been encouraged and supported, a true industrial base would have been flourishing today. One example is Ray Wijewardene’s hand tractor, to which one Sri Lankan asked, “Why do we need hand tractors when there are so many buffaloes around?”. Imagine what the HPAEs would have done with a brilliant, innovative mind like Ray Wijewardene’s.
Even the few sectors of industry built up to world-class levels have been destroyed by bad government policy. One such industry was the heavy construction industry, which is vital for infrastructure development. A local company had built up its capacity to do international projects funded by the World Bank and had performed many projects in the country, but the change of policy after 1977 destroyed the company and opened the doors to foreign companies at inflated prices, for which the country struggles to pay off its loans.
The local highway construction projects are an example, where Sri Lanka’s highways are considered the most expensive in the world, which opened opportunities for corruption. The very first industry developed in the HPAEs was the heavy construction industry in order to keep the cost of development low. Sri Lanka did the opposite.
Conclusion
It is quite clear that Sri Lanka’s present position is of its own making, following quite the opposite of what the HPAEs did. However, though many learn from mistakes, Sri Lanka does not seem to have learnt any lessons. Our advisors keep telling us to repeat our mistakes, and we keep listening to them.
It was expected that the NPP government would make a radical change in thinking, but it has not expressed any meaningful change of thinking with regard to major issues. Without such a change, Sri Lanka will continue on its suicidal path.
(Sunil Abhayawardhana was CEO of Sri Lanka’s largest heavy construction company. He has a master’s degree from the University of Wales and is working on a PhD in economics. He is a member of the Asia Progress Forum, which is a collective of like-minded intellectuals, professionals, and activists dedicated to building dialogue that promotes Sri Lanka’s sovereignty, development, and leadership in the Global South. APF can be contacted at asiaprogressforum@gmail.com).
Features
Silence of the majority keeps West Asian conflict raging
With no military quick-fix in sight to the ongoing, convoluted West Asian conflict it ought to be clear to the rationally inclined that there is no other way to a solution to the blood-letting other than through a negotiated one. Unfortunately, there are not many takers the world over for such an approach.
Consequently the war rages on incurring the gravest human costs to all relevant sides. Whereas it should be obvious to the Trump administration that Iran wouldn’t be backing down any time soon from its position of taking on the US frontally and with the required military competence in the Hormuz Strait and adjacent regions, the US demonstrates a stubbornness to persist with war strategies that are showing no quick, positive results on the ground.
Clearly, the virtual ‘lock down within a lock down’ situation in the Strait is not proving beneficial for either party. Instead, the spilling of civilian blood in particular continues with unsettling regularity along with an all-encompassing economic crisis that carries a staggering material toll for ordinary people all over the world.
From this viewpoint it is commendable for Pakistan to offer itself as a peace mediator and go ‘the extra mile’ to keep the principal parties engaged in some sort of negotiatory process. But its efforts need to win greater support from the world community. It is a time for peace-makers the world over to stand up and be counted.
It is also a time for straight-talking. To his glowing credit Pope Leo XIV is doing just that and he is the only religious head worldwide to do so. Very rightly he has called on President Trump to end the war through negotiations and described it as ‘unjust’ and ‘a scandal to humanity’.
May this crucial cause be taken up by more and more world leaders, is this columnist’s wish. Instead of speaking fatalistically about a ‘Third World War’, decision and policy makers and commentators, and these are found in plenty in Sri Lanka as well, would do better to help in drumming-up support for a peaceful solution and the latter is within the realms of the possible.
Incidentally, the commonplace definition of the phrase ‘World War’ is quite contentious and it would be premature to speak forebodingly about one right now. The fissures within the West on the Middle East conflict alone rule out the possibility of a ‘World War’ occurring any time soon.
Instead, it would be preferable for the international community, under the aegis of the UN, to take the ‘straight and narrow’ path to a peaceful solution. As implied, this path is no easy avenue; it is cluttered with obstacles that only doughty peace makers could take on and clear.
However, the path to a negotiated peace is worth taking and no less a power than the US should know this. After all, the US ‘bled white’ in Vietnam and had to bow out of the conflict, realizing the futility of pursuing a military solution. A similar lesson should have been learned by Russia which bled futilely in Afghanistan. It too is in an unwinnable situation in Ukraine.
The Pope’s observations to President Trump on negotiating peace have earned for him some snarls and growls of criticism but with time these critics would realize that peace could come only by peaceful means and not through ‘the barrel of a gun.’
For far too long the ‘silent majority’ of the world has allowed politicians to take the sole initiative on working towards peaceful solutions to conflicts and wars. As could be seen, the results have been disastrous. The majority of politicians speak the language of Realpolitik only and this tendency runs contrary to the ways of the selfless peace maker.
Power, which is the essence of Realpolitik, and peace are generally at loggerheads in the real world. Power and self-aggrandizement have to be shelved in the pursuit of durable peace anywhere and it is a pity that the likes of Donald Trump and his team are yet to realize this.
At this juncture the ‘peace constituency’ or the silent majority would need to take centre stage and play their rightful role as the ‘Conscience of the World’. If the latter begins to take on the cause of peace in earnest everywhere, the politicians would have no choice but to pay heed to their cause and take it up, since a contrary course would earn for them public displeasure and votes.
An immediate challenge would be for the ‘peace constituency’ to come together and act as one. Right now, such a coordinating role could be played effectively by only the UN and its agencies. Practical problems are likely to get in the way but these need to be managed insightfully and resourcefully by all stakeholders to peace.
In fact the time couldn’t be more appropriate for the backers of peace to come together and work as one. Right now, economic pressures are increasing worldwide and no less a public than that in the US is beginning to feel them in a major, crushing way.
Going ahead the US public, along with other polities, would find the economic consequences of war to be intolerable. There would be no choice but for governments and peoples to champion peace. Peace makers would need to ‘strike while the iron is hot.’
The success of the above endeavours hinges on the importance humans attach to their consciences. The danger about prolonged wars is that they deaden consciences; particularly those of politicians. The latter deaden their consciences to the extent that they prove impervious to the pain and suffering wars incur.
Thus, the ‘peace constituency’ has its work cut out; it cannot rest assured that politicians would prove sensitive to their demands. The latter would need to be constantly dinned into the hearts and minds of politicians and decision-makers if peaceful solutions to conflicts are to be arrived at.
Likewise, the publics of war-torn countries would need to demand the activation and sustaining of accountability processes with regard to those sections that are suspected of committing war crimes and like atrocities. Those publics that cease to demand accountability from powerful sections among them which are faced with war-time atrocity charges are as good as condemning themselves to lives of permanent dis-empowerment and enslavement.
Features
Don’t take the baby: In the quiet night, mother always returns

Chaminda Jayasekara
There is a particular stillness in Sri Lanka’s forests, after dusk — a kind of hushed expectancy where shadows lengthen, cicadas soften their chorus, and the night begins to breathe in its own rhythm. It is a world that does not reveal itself easily. You have to wait for it. You have to listen.
And then, suddenly, you see them — a pair of luminous, unblinking eyes suspended in the dark.
The Grey Slender Loris, or unahapuluwa, emerges, not with drama, but with quiet precision. Small, slow-moving, and almost impossibly delicate, it is one of Sri Lanka’s most enigmatic nocturnal primates — a creature that has survived millennia by mastering the art of stillness.
Yet, during these months — from late March through July — the forests hold a more tender story. It is the breeding season of the slender loris, and with it comes a scene that is often misunderstood by those who encounter it for the first time: a tiny infant, alone on a branch, barely three inches long, its fragile body silhouetted against the night.

Grey Slender Loris with twin babies
To many, it appears to be a moment of abandonment.
To nature, it is a moment of trust.
“People often act out of compassion, but without understanding what they are seeing,” explains Chaminda Jayasekara of the University of Hertfordshire. “A baby loris left alone is not necessarily in danger. In fact, it is part of a natural process that is critical for its survival.”
According to Jayasekara, when a baby loris is about a month old, the mother begins a remarkable routine. As darkness settles, she gently places her infant on a secure branch and moves off into the forest to forage. Her journey can take her hundreds of metres away — sometimes close to 800 metres — as she searches for insects and other small prey.
In those hours of solitude, the infant is not abandoned. It is learning.
Clinging to the branch, it begins to explore its immediate surroundings. Tentatively, almost hesitantly, it reaches out — testing balance, grip, and instinct. It may attempt to catch tiny insects, mimicking behaviours it will one day rely on entirely. This is its first classroom, and the forest its only teacher.
“Those early nights are crucial,” Jayasekara says. “The baby is developing motor skills, coordination, and the ability to interact with its environment. These are things that cannot be replicated in captivity.”
And yet, this is precisely where human intervention often disrupts the process.
Across rural and even semi-urban Sri Lanka, stories circulate of well-meaning individuals who come across a lone baby loris and assume the worst. Driven by concern, they pick it up, take it home, or attempt to hand-rear it — believing they are saving a life.

Grey Slender Loris
But the reality is far more complex — and far more tragic.
“When a baby is removed unnecessarily, it loses something fundamental,” Jayasekara emphasises. “It loses the chance to learn how to survive in the wild. Without that, even if it survives in the short term, its long-term prospects are extremely poor.”
The forest, after all, is not just a habitat. It is a living, evolving system of lessons — how to detect predators, how to navigate branches, how to hunt silently, how to recognise territory. These are not instincts alone; they are behaviours refined through experience.
And the mother, contrary to assumption, is rarely far away.
“If people simply waited — even for several hours — they would often see the mother return,” Jayasekara explains. “She knows exactly where she left her baby. Her absence is temporary, purposeful.”
The advice from conservationists is clear and consistent: observe, but do not interfere.
If you encounter a baby loris, watch quietly from a distance. Avoid using bright lights or making noise. Give it time — at least 10 to 12 hours — before drawing conclusions. In most cases, the situation will resolve itself, just as nature intended.

35 days old Grey Slender Loris
Only if the animal is clearly injured, or if there is strong evidence of abandonment after prolonged observation, should intervention be considered — and even then, it must be done through the proper channels, particularly the Department of Wildlife Conservation.
Attempting to care for such a delicate animal at home is not only ineffective but often fatal.
Sri Lanka is home to two species of slender loris — the Grey Slender Loris and the Red Slender Loris — each adapted to specific ecological zones across the island. Both are protected under national legislation and recognised internationally as species requiring urgent conservation attention.
Their threats are many: habitat loss, road mortality, illegal pet trade, and, increasingly, human misunderstanding.
Yet, in the midst of these challenges, there are also signs of hope.

In recent years, the slender loris has become the focus of a unique form of wildlife tourism — one that values patience over spectacle. Night walks, conducted with trained naturalists and strict ethical guidelines, offer visitors a chance to witness the loris in its natural environment without disturbing its behaviour.
At places like Jetwing Vil Uyana, this approach has been refined into a model of responsible eco-tourism. Over more than a decade, the property has developed a dedicated Loris Conservation Project, recording thousands of sightings while educating visitors and supporting local communities.
Here, the loris is not handled, chased, or exploited. It is simply observed — a quiet presence in a carefully protected landscape.
“The success of such initiatives shows that conservation and tourism do not have to be at odds,” Jayasekara reflects. “When done responsibly, tourism can actually support conservation by creating awareness and value for these species.”
There is something profoundly moving about encountering a loris in the wild. It does not roar or charge. It does not demand attention. Instead, it exists — quietly, deliberately — as it has for millions of years.
And perhaps that is why it is so easily misunderstood.

In a world that often equates visibility with importance, the loris reminds us that some of the most extraordinary lives unfold beyond the spotlight.
It also reminds us of something else — something simpler, yet harder to practice.
Restraint.
Because conservation is not always about stepping in. Sometimes, it is about stepping back. About recognising when nature does not need our help, but our patience.
So if, on some future night, you find yourself walking beneath the trees, and your light catches a tiny figure sitting alone on a branch — do not rush forward.
Pause.
Watch.
Let the moment unfold.
Because somewhere, moving silently through the darkness, guided by instinct and memory, a mother is already on her way back.
And by morning, the forest will be whole again.
By Ifham Nizam
Features
Kumar de Silva: 40 years of fame and flair
We first saw him on the small screen in January 1986 – a relatively raw, totally untrained and a very nervous 24-year-old presenting ‘Bonsoir’ on ITN.
And now, 40 years later, and as one looks back, one realises what a multi-dimensional journey Kumar de Silva has navigated across the small screen yes, from your television screens to your laptops, and iPads, tabs, and mobile phones.
Says Kumar: “It is the French language I speak that opened the world of television to me, 40 years ago. It was ‘Bonsoir’ alone, and so to my French teacher at Wesley College, Mrs. BA Fernando, to ‘Bonsoir’, and to the Embassy of France in Sri Lanka, I am eternally grateful”.

Promoting the French language, and culture, in Sri Lanka, in a big way
Kumar went on to say that on the heels of ‘Bonsoir” came ‘Fanclub’, on ITN, describing it as yet another resounding success story which saw him as a music DJ on TV.
His inherent talent saw him handle a range of contrasting programmes across ITN, TNL, Prime TV and SLRC with consummate ease – from News Reading, Business Talk Shows, Celebrity Chats, to Dhamma discussions, on Poya Days, to name a few.

Kumar – the 1986 look
Trained in Paris in television production and presentation, the Government of France, in 2012, conferred on him the title of ‘Chevalier dans l’Ordre des Arts et Lettres’ (Chevalier in the Order of Arts and Letters) in recognition of his contribution to promoting the French language, and culture, in Sri Lanka.
In celebration of his four decades on the small screen, Kumar recently launched ‘Bonsoir Katha’, the Sinhala translation (by Ciara Mendis) of his English book ‘Bonsoir Diaries’ (2013), at a gala soiree. at the Alliance Francaise de Colombo, under the distinguished patronage of the French Ambassador in Sri Lanka, Remi Lambert, and francophone President Chandrika Kumaratunga.
He’s now excited about launching the French version of this book, ‘Les Coulisses de Bonsoir’, in Paris, in autumn this year. It is currently being translated by Guilhem Beugnon, a former Deputy Director of the Alliance Francaise de Colombo. This will, co-incidentally, also be Kumar’s 30th visit to Paris.

Chief Guest French Ambassador in Sri
Lanka Remi Lambert
Says Kumar: “The word GRATITUDE means a lot to me and so I always make it a point to spend time with two very special French people every time I go to France. One is Madame Josiane Thureau, formerly of the French Foreign Ministry, who began ‘Bonsoir’ in Sri Lanka. way back in the mid-1980s. The other is Madame Aline Berengier, the lady who designed the ‘Bonsoir’ logo – the Sri Lankan elephant in the colours of the French national flag”.
Kumar is also a much-sought-after Personal Development and Corporate Etiquette Coach in Colombo’s corporate world. Over the past 15 years, tens of thousands of corporates, have been through the different modules of his interactive training sessions. There have also been thousands of school leavers and undergraduates from national and private universities, many of whom will constitute the corporates of tomorrow.

Guest of Honour francophone President Chandrika Kumaratunga at the gala soiree
at the Alliance Francaise de Colombo
The multi-talented Kumar turns 65 next year, and his journey on the small screen still continues – you see him on the (monthly) ‘Rendez-Vous with Yasmin and Kumar’ on the French Embassy’s YouTube Channel, and (every Friday) on ‘Fame Game with Rozanne and Kumar’ on Daily Mirror Online, Hi Online and The Sun Online.
There’s yet another podcast in the pipeline, he indicated, but diplomatically declined to give us details. All he said, with a glint in his eye, was, “It will hit your screens soon.”
Whatever he has in mind, one can be certain that the new programme will continue to showcase Kumar de Silva’s enduring presence in Sri Lanka’s entertainment scene.
-
News2 days agoRs 13 bn NDB fraud: Int’l forensic audit ordered
-
Business5 days agoHarnessing nature’s wisdom: Experts highlight “Resist–Align” path to resilience
-
Opinion3 days agoShutting roof top solar panels – a crime
-
News5 days agoGratiaen Trust announces longlist for the 33rd Annual Gratiaen Prize
-
News4 days agoFrom Nuwara Eliya to Dubai: Isha Holdings markets Agri products abroad
-
Latest News7 days agoSingapore Zoo’s first Sri Lankan leopard cubs make their public debut
-
News5 days agoHeroin haul transported on 50-million-rupee contract
-
News3 days agoChurch calls for Deputy Defence Minister’s removal, establishment of Independent Prosecutor’s Office
