Features
Working with Dahanayake – the man, his habits and departure from ‘Temple Trees’
(Excerpted from Rendering Unto Caesar by Bradman Weerakoon)
I began to get used to his unusual ways. Dahanayake was an early riser and insisted on starting work at 7.00 am. I didn’t mind as I lived close by at de Fonseka Place and it was not more than a 10 minute drive at that time in the morning. It wasn’t a matter of a leisurely run-over in sarong or pyjama of the day’s work at the breakfast table, interspersed with asides from the morning’s newspapers, as others were wont to do, but the actual start of an official day with interviews, conferences and files.
Acutely conscious of retaining his good health – in his youth he had indulged heavily in drinking and smoking – Dahanayake was usually up at 4.30 am and would have done his hour’s barefooted perambulation on the lawns of Temple Trees soaking in the early morning dew. As he put it in one of his many expositions on how to stay healthy, walking barefoot on wet grass – especially if there was a patch of convenient indupiyeli around – mightily helped in “clearing the brain”! Another of his favoured recipes, as he mentioned to my very interested wife one day, was how to keep one’s weight down with a diet of raw vetakolu and rice bran aggala spiced with pol kudu, for lunch.
Dahanayake had beautiful handwriting. His official minutes and orders in files in his characteristic purple ink – he always used a fountain pen – were eminently legible, clear and often quite long winded. When I once observed on the clarity and style of his handwriting he replied that it was his diligence with the copybook during his years at the Teacher’s Training College at Maharagama which had endowed him with this facility. He had been taught, he said, ‘the civil service style’ of writing; large well formed letters gently sloping to the right, and as he put it, “once you put pen to paper lift your hand only after you’ve finished your sentence!” Which probably accounted for the length of his minutes and the absolute absence of corrections or erasures.
I found that the prime minister was quick in decision-making, generally based on the first complaint he received. He was also not averse to completely reversing his decision no sooner he received a contrary opinion from one of his officials. So, deciphering his minutes, particularly regarding teachers’ transfers – he had been minister of education earlier – could give one a sense of ‘constant to-ing and fro-ing’.
The circumstances of Mr Bandaranaike’s death and his own elevation to the post of prime minister as a result, led inevitably, but as far as I was convinced unfairly, to some suspicion of Dahanayake’s own conduct in the affair.
Stories began to spread about his seeming reluctance to press charges against the big names who the public quickly associated with the heinous crime. These were the Hon Vimala Wijewardene, minister of health in Mr Bandaranaike’s Cabinet and still one of his ministers, and the Ven Mapitigama Buddharakhita, the high priest of the prominent Kelaniya Temple and one of the most influential of the monks in the Eksath Bhikku Perumuna which had propelled Mr Bandaranaike into power in 1956.
By early 1959, however, both these luminaries had begun to move away from Mr Bandaranaike. Mrs Wijewardene became an important part of the right wing of the SLFP (the Regent Flats group), as the press had begun to term them. The high priest was openly critical of Mr Bandaranaike both on account of the latter’s seeming reluctance to fulfil his radical reform programme of 1956 while the more prosaic reason was that he, the prime minister, had not helped him sufficiently in securing contracts for the shipping business in which the priest was heavily involved. The woman minister and the high priest had already acquired a certain notoriety for conducting an unusually close association.
This, I soon found out, was one of the primary exigencies of holding high office in the country. People are prone to attribute an ulterior motive to whatever you do. The story soon got about that two persons, Kelanitilleke and Michael Baas, had informed Dahanayake on the night of September 26, the day of Mr Bandaranaike’s death, about Buddharakhita’s involvement in the act of murdering Bandaranaike, but upon Dahanayake’s accession to the prime ministership, he had tried to dissuade the informants from proceeding with the matter. Although not proven at the subsequent inquiry before a presidential commission, the story itself gained ground and contributed to Dahanayake’s growing unpopularity in the country.
Through October and November, Dahanayake tried to hold his fractious team together and keep Parliament going. The House elected in 1956 with a five year term could have continued till April 1961, but the raison d’etre for that Parliament had gone with the death of Bandaranaike. Dahanayake was now prime minister in his own right having succeeded to the position through the support of the majority in Parliament but clearly the ministers were not in favour of him continuing. He tried, for a while, to bask in the sunshine of Bandaranaike’s name.
I remember him once telling the foreign press that Bandaranaike had now become a Bosath – a Bodhisatva, a Mahayana Buddhist conception that elevates exemplary virtuosity to the highest level before Buddhahood. He was not alone as S D Bandaranaike, the Imbulgoda veeraya who had stopped J R Jayewardene on his march to Kandy in 1958, also came out at the time with his Bosath Bandaranaike Party, virtually a one-man show of which he was the president.
The air was full of talk of conspiracies and plots and coups in the days that followed Bandaranaike’s death. Dahanayake ordered the (Temple Trees) wall skirting Duplication Road raised by four feet. This was considered by the press to be a major security measure and Collette retaliated with a cartoon in the Observer, with Jim Munasinghe and Stanley de Zoysa, two of his more loyal ministers standing guard duty. There was no Prime Minister’s Security Division (PMSD) in those days but only an inspector, or at most an ASP as personal security officer and a small contingent of men on duty.
Dahanayake ordered more police security men to be moved in, and also tightened entry procedures for the public. He also created a new ministry of internal security and had Sydney de Zoyza who was then one of the four DIGS appointed to the position of secretary. Two votes of no confidence in Parliament against Dahanayake’s government, one against him personally and the other against the minister of justice, for not being more forceful in bringing to book those responsible for the assassination, were narrowly defeated.
On December 3, 1959 the emergency lapsed and Dahanayake, now tired out with all the machinations against him, decided to recommend to Sir Oliver the dissolution of Parliament. Elections were called for March 19, 1960. Dahanayake was now head of a caretaker government and took some major strategic decisions. He first announced his resignation from the SLFP but this was refused by the executive committee who proceeded in turn to sack him from the party. Dahanayake retaliated by sacking five ministers, the letters being delivered to them at midnight. Some of them read of their dismissal in the morning’s Daily News.
I had a busy time until all the ministers were dismissed and five new ones appointed to assist Dahanayake until the elections. Among them were M M Mustapha from Nintavur in the Eastern Province as minister of finance and R E Jayatilleke from Nawalapitiya. The Soulbury constitution permitted a non-parliamentarian to be in the Cabinet for a maximum period of three months and that gave Dahanayake sufficient time.
To fight the elections Dahanayake formed a new party which he called the Lanka Prajatantra Party — the Lanka Democratic Party. He cobbled it together from a few former SLFP members who yet remained loyal to him and an odd assortment of people from all walks of life, many of them with absolutely no previous experience of politics. Some were literally picked off the street like one ‘never do well’ from Welimada whom I knew as a habitual drunkard from my teaching days at St Thomas’ College in Gurutalawa during the university vacations.
Temple Trees was a party office in those days with Dahanayake presiding over ‘walk-in’ interviews for MP aspirants. Those who took the trouble to present themselves were usually rewarded with a letter of appointment as candidate of the LPP, personally signed by the prime minister, and a sum of Rs 25,000 as election expenses. I am sure my friend from Welimada must have got rip-roaring drunk that night.
The LPP put forward 101 candidates, just a few less than the SLFP’s 113 for the March elections. Ninety-four of Dahanayake’s candidates lost their deposits, including of course my Welimada friend, and only four were returned to Parliament. Dahanayake himself lost narrowly by 400 votes in Galle. He was still immensely popular there but he had over-stretched himself attempting to campaign all over the country single-handed, and leaving Galle, to be handled by friends. This was proved by his winning back Galle in the July ’60 election, again narrowly by 444 votes, where he contested again as an LPP candidate.
At election time, although I could well have had myself excused from election duty as secretary to the prime minister, I had made it a habit to volunteer for duty. The only special favour I sought from the Elections Commissioner, the highly efficient and affable Felix Dias Abeysinghe, was that of being posted to one of the more remote parts of the country. The chief reason for that was that officers could take their wives along. Damayanthi too could be on duty as the Lady Presiding Officer dealing with the women voters who were provided with a separate ballot box.
The traveling allowance, at 35 cents per mile could also give one a sizable bonus when one returned home. In addition it gave one a chance to see a part of the island one would normally not have gone to, and meet rural people. Felix gave us the polling station at Lahugalle, ten miles west of Arugam Bay, which had a very nice rest-house, for the night. The returning office was at Batticaloa, to which we would have to take the sealed ballot boxes in the evening for the counting.
It was a fascinating day and we encountered in the election registers a phenomenon I was not aware of earlier. This was the existence of some wonderful combined names where Sinhala and Tamil came together, a reflection of life in the transitional zones in the country and the intermixing that must have gone on from former times. The people were fluent in both languages and bore names like `Somasunderam Banda’ and Ariyawathie Kanagaratnam’. On my questioning how they came by their names some would venture the explanation that it was due to the Tamil Registrar of Births writing down whatever he felt would be proper as a surname. I was however more inclined to the view that there had been considerable intermarriage in these parts of the country.
As we travelled back to Colombo, the radio was announcing the results of Dahanayake’s heavy defeat. His loss at Galle surprised me as I knew how popular he was with ordinary people like the betel-seller on the pavement, those who patronized the local tea boutiques, shops, the bus stand and the sellers of gram. When I arrived at Temple Trees late in the evening he was sitting in an arm chair in the long verandah with his two faithful suitcases by his side.
He had a request to make of me, that I permit the use of one of the two official Humber Hawks the prime minister’s office had to be used for dropping him at his home in Galle. It was sad to see him leave alone that evening only accompanied by his bags. The staff came together to see him off, gathered around the portico as the car drove off, and gave him a spontaneous cheer of good wishes and farewell.
Yet, you could not keep this good man down for long and he continued for years to make news in the political history of the country. He was back in Parliament in July 1966 and continued to be a thorn in Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s side throughout that session of Parliament. I met him again in 1965 when he joined Dudley Senanayake in his seven-party National Government. Dudley appointed him minister of home affairs and we had a lot to do with each other. I was also secretary of the committee consisting of representatives of the seven parties trying to determine what subjects and functions we could delegate to the district councils – another attempt at devolution and part of the Dudley-Chelvanayakam agreement – and what should be left to the Centre.
Dahanayake had obviously thought about the issue seriously and I got the impression that he, like most southerners was for a strong Centre. In the 1970 election which Sirimavo won with a United Front administration, and Dudley and the UNP were reduced to 17 seats, Dahanayake retained his seat with a greatly reduced majority. He had by now moved to the UNP but when the party refused his request to enjoy a free vote on the new 1972 Constitution, he resigned. He remained an independent thereafter opposing with vigour Sirimavo’s move to extend the life of Parliament by two years from 1975.
Nevertheless Parliament went on till 1977 when, at the elections, the swing to the UNP was so great that the SLFP was annihilated and reduced to eight seats while J R secured a five-sixths majority. Dahanayake, too, contesting as an independent candidate against his old rival Albert Silva of the UNP lost. But the old soldier was not yet down and out. He filed a petition against Silva in the Galle High Court against Albert Silva. Preliminary objections were raised by the other party, and on the High Court judge accepting the objections, Dahanayake’s petition was dismissed.
He next filed an appeal in the Supreme Court. The five judge bench divided four to one, set aside the order of the High Court and ordered re-trial. In this appeal Dahanayake appeared on his own behalf without any legal assistance. Dahanayake’s appeal was taken up by a bench comprising the Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon, and Justices G T Samarawickrama and R S Wanasundara. Despite his advanced age, he was then 77, he submitted some powerful arguments before the Court. People followed the case with great interest as Dahanayake was not a lawyer and the only job he had done other than politics had been teaching. In September 1979 the Supreme Court announced their unanimous decision, depriving Albert Silva of his seat.
Dahanayake next presented J R with a most perplexing problem when he sought nomination from the UNP at the upcoming by-elections. Disregarding all the objections by the Galle UNP members J R gave him the nomination having found another safe seat for the rival Albert Silva. Five candidates contested the by-election. Dahanayake won Galle by a majority of 13,012 votes, one of his best-ever victories. The young Lionel Bopage, one of the main accused in the 1971 insurrection, contested the by-election as an independent candidate since the JVP had not as yet obtained registration as a political party. Bopage addressing an election meeting, referring to Dahanayake’s renowned political somersaulting reminded the voters, correctly, that the only parties Dahanayake had not been part of, in his fabulous political career, were the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and the Tamil United Liberation Front.
Dahanayake remained a back bench MP for a few years in the J R Jayewardene Government of 1977. In March of 1986, mirabile dictu, at the age of 84, Wijayananda Dahanayake was once again appointed to the Cabinet, this time as minister of cooperatives. He was not yet finished. When in 1989 Premadasa was readying himself for the general election which took place in January in the midst of the JVP violence, Dahanayake solicited nomination for the Galle district under the changed proportional representation system from the UNP. He had no intention of contesting but hoped he could get into Parliament through the National List. The UNP won a majority at the election but the old war horse was left out.
A long and eventful tenure in the legislature commencing from the days of the State Council had come to an end. He was 86. There was one other goal he could not reach. He had hoped to complete his 100th year but at 95 he fell ill at his home in Richmond Hill, Galle, and died soon after. During his short retirement he started work on an autobiography which he could not complete and indulged in his favourite recreation composing little parodies about his political contemporaries. Here is a typical effort of one in homespun Lewis. Carrol nursery-rhyme metre about his favourite bete noire Sir John Kotelawela.
Twinkle, twinkle, good Sir john
How you’ve fooled our fair Ceylon
Looking young in spite of age
Like an actor on the stage
When the girls at ‘Temple Trees’ crowd and dance like buzzing bees,
Then you sing your sweetest song, Twinkle, twinkle, all night long!
But if you care to see the woe
Of starving men who come and go,
Then you’ll sing a sadder song
And twinkle like a wiser John.
From White House to Wall Street:
I am going to examine the financial market repercussions of President Donald Trump’s 2025 tariff policies, focusing on equities, bonds, derivatives, and interest rates. It explores how asymmetric information and alleged insider trading influenced market dynamics, highlighting the challenges posed to market integrity and investor confidence.
In 2025, President Donald Trump’s administration implemented a series of tariffs targeting major trading partners, including China, Canada, and Mexico. These policies aimed to protect domestic industries but resulted in significant volatility across global financial markets. The sudden shifts in trade policy introduced uncertainty, affecting various asset classes and raising concerns about the exploitation of insider information.
In response to escalating market turmoil and international pressure, President Trump announced a 90-day deferral on certain tariffs, via social media on April 9, 2025. However, the announcement’s ambiguity led to continued market instability.
Pre-Tariff Market Conditions
(February 2025)
In February 2025, US financial markets were experiencing relative stability. The S&P 500 was trading near record highs, buoyed by strong corporate earnings and positive economic indicators. Interest rates remained steady, with the 10-year Treasury yield hovering around 3.9%, reflecting moderate inflation expectations and a balanced economic outlook. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), a measure of market volatility, was subdued, indicating investor confidence.
Impact on Financial Markets
Equities and Traditional Investment Strategies
The announcement of tariffs led to a sharp decline in US stock markets. Major indices, such as the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the Nasdaq Composite, experienced significant losses, with the Nasdaq entering bear market territory after a 5.82% drop. The traditional 60/40 investment strategy, allocating 60% to equities and 40% to bonds, proved ineffective during this period, as both asset classes suffered losses due to rising bond yields and falling stock prices (Figure 1).
Market Indices (S&P 500, Nasdaq, Dow Jones): Major crashes occurred on April 3–4, 2025, following the tariff imposition. Slight recovery or stabilisation followed Trump’s deferral tweet on April 9, but markets dipped sharply again on April 10 (Table 1).
Market Reaction to Tariff Imposition
(April 2–5, 2025)
* April 3, 2025: The S&P 500 plummeted by 4.88%, the Nasdaq Composite fell by 5.97%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average declined by 3.98%. The Russell 2000 entered bear market territory, dropping over 20% from its recent peak.
* April 4, 2025: Markets continued their downward trajectory. The S&P 500 fell an additional 5.97%, the Nasdaq Composite decreased by 5.82%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped by 5.50%.
* April 5, 2025: The newly imposed tariffs officially took effect, further exacerbating market volatility and investor uncertainty.
* Over this period, US stock markets lost approximately $6.6 trillion in value, marking the largest two-day loss in history.
Market Response to Tariff Deferral
(April 9–11, 2025)
* April 10, 2025: Despite the deferral, the S&P 500 declined by approximately 15%, and long-term Treasury bonds faced significant selling pressure. The US dollar weakened, and gold prices surged as investors sought safe-haven assets.
* April 11, 2025: Consumer sentiment plummeted, with the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index dropping to 50.8, the second-lowest level since records began in 1952. This decline reflected widespread economic pessimism amid the ongoing trade tensions.
Bond Market and Interest Rates
The bond market reacted to the tariffs with increased yields, reflecting investor concerns about inflation and economic growth. The US 10-year Treasury yield rose to 4.358%, indicating expectations of higher interest rates. This rise in yields contributed to the decline in bond prices, further challenging traditional investment strategies.
10-Year Treasury Yield: Climbed steadily from 3.9% to 4.358% (April 2–21), suggesting increased inflation expectations and risk premium. The bond market experienced significant fluctuations during this period. Therefore, investors demanded higher returns for perceived increased risk. This rise in yields indicated expectations of higher inflation and potential economic slowdown due to the tariffs. (Table 2).
Derivatives and Market Volatility
The derivatives market, including options and futures, experienced heightened volatility in response to tariff announcements. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), often referred to as “Wall Street’s fear index,” spiked to its highest level since 2020, closing at 45.31 points. This surge in volatility presented both risks and opportunities for investors, particularly those with access to timely information.
VIX Volatility Index: Rose from 19 on April 2 to a peak of 45.31 on April 4, indicating extreme market fear. The VIX spiked to 45.31, its highest level since 2020, indicating heightened market anxiety (Table 3).
Asymmetric Information and Insider Trading Allegations
Allegations of insider trading emerged during the tariff saga, highlighting concerns about asymmetric information. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene faced scrutiny for stock transactions made shortly before tariff announcements, including purchases in companies like Amazon and Tesla, and the sale of Treasury bills. While Greene denied insider knowledge, the timing of these trades raised questions about the potential exploitation of non-public information (The Times, 2025).
Additionally, unusual trading patterns in S&P 500 futures preceding major policy shifts suggested possible insider activity. Although direct evidence linking these trades to White House insiders remains inconclusive, the patterns underscore the challenges in detecting and preventing insider trading in policy-driven markets (Los Angeles Times, 2025).
Tariff Decisions as Business Deals
While tariffs are typically seen as instruments of trade policy aimed at protecting domestic industries or rebalancing trade deficits, the Trump administration’s 2025 tariff imposition and abrupt deferral appear less rooted in strategic policy and more akin to short-term market manipulations. These decisions unfolded not through institutional processes or legislative debates, but rather through presidential tweets and sudden reversals, strongly suggesting a deal-making mindset characteristic of business negotiations rather than public governance.
The Role of Asymmetric Information and Market Elites
Insider trading is traditionally associated with illegal access to non-public corporate information. However, in this case, asymmetric political information—known only to a select few close to power—may have created an opportunity to profit.
Market actors with proximity to decision-makers, or even sophisticated algorithms tied to social media monitoring, could have anticipated the tariff deferral.
Billionaire investors and influencers like Elon Musk, who maintain both financial influence and political access, are often speculated to benefit from such opaque decision-making environments. The quick reversal of tariffs led to a surge in tech stocks, many of which form the core holdings of large institutional investors, hedge funds, and elite entrepreneurs.
For example: The Nasdaq rebounded by 1.5% following the deferral tweet. Options trading volumes spiked on tech-heavy indices, indicating pre-positioning by well-informed actors. Reports from Bloomberg and Reuters noted unusual activity in Tesla call options shortly before the deferral (Reuters, 2025; Bloomberg Markets, 2025).
A Business Deal Mindset
Trump’s own language underscores the deal-making philosophy. The President tweeted that the tariffs were a “strong hand in negotiations” and “paused for talks with China”, using terms more common in corporate boardrooms than diplomatic channels. This rhetoric, combined with the lack of institutional transparency, raises serious concerns about the manipulation of public policy for private gains.
In this light, the administration’s behaviour is not reflective of classical economic policy objectives like comparative advantage or strategic protectionism. Instead, it aligns with the wealth-maximising tactics of a private enterprise, where the aim is to control narrative, timing, and volatility to benefit select stakeholders.
Conclusions
More critically, the Trump tariff saga of 2025 blurs the lines between public policy and private profit. The opacity, erratic timing, and informal communication channels—particularly via presidential tweets—suggest that these were less about coherent trade strategies and more akin to orchestrated business maneuvers. The reactive movements of major indices, coupled with unusual options trading patterns and speculative capital flows, indicate that market elites likely capitalised on volatility, benefiting from privileged access or predictive positioning based on asymmetric information.
This raises serious concerns about market integrity and the ethical boundaries between governance and profiteering. When financial markets are left vulnerable to abrupt and opaque political actions, especially ones lacking institutional oversight, the door opens to manipulation, insider trading, and erosion of public trust.
In sum, the 2025 Trump tariff episode serves as a cautionary tale—one that highlights the dangers of politicising economic policy, the vulnerabilities of global markets to personalised decision-making, and the importance of upholding the foundational principles of fairness, transparency, and accountability in modern financial systems.
(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT University, Malabe. He is also the author of the “Doing Social Research and Publishing Results”, a Springer publication (Singapore), and “Samaja Gaveshakaya (in Sinhala). The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the institution he works for. He can be contacted at saliya.a@slit.lk and www.researcher.com)
The cosy relationship between President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is causing concerns, perhaps, for good reasons. The inheritor of the leadership of the party, the JVP, which launched the first insurgency in the modern history of Sri Lanka, way back in 1971 citing ‘Indian expansionism’ as one of the reasons, seems to have undergone a miraculous transformation; it is now cosying up to India. The process started well before the last presidential election, with the astute Indian intelligence sensing which way political winds were blowing in Sri Lanka; AKD was invited as an honoured guest to India, though he did not hold any important position in Sri Lanka. This, no doubt, increased his chances of victory but the bigger beneficiary was India as during that trip AKD showed that he was prepared to reverse the attitude of the JVP towards India. The camaraderie between AKD and Modi has increased, culminating in the latter’s Sri Lanka visit, which Indian media have hailed as a foreign policy success.
Some political commentators have expressed concern that Sri Lanka is heading towards being the 29th state of India. Those in government may attempt to dispel this as a baseless fear but, unfortunately, they fail to realise that it is the very actions of their president that has given rise to such concerns, the way Indo-Lanka Defence MoU/agreement was signed during the recent visit of the Prime Minister Modi. One may wonder why there are no protests but there is a very reasonable explanation for this; those who mounted repeated protests against closer ties with India, from as far back as 1971, are now in government and seem to have metamorphosed to be the most pro-Indian!
During the recent ‘flying’ state-visit of the Indian PM Modi, a large number of MOUs have been signed, including the one on defence corporation, the contents of which are unknown, apparently even to the members of the Cabinet! How come this happens with a government that came to power on the promise of eradicating corruption, establishing transparency, and system change? Neville Ladduwahetty, in an excellent analysis, points out that this agreement would result in Sri Lanka becoming, at least, a vassal state of India (Sri Lanka-India MoUs and their implications, The Island 18 April).
Some of the excuses being doled out are nothing short of hilarious. When questions were raised in parliament about the contents of these MOUs and pacts, the response from a government spokesman was that if anyone is interested, they can obtain details by making a request under the Rights to Information act! Isn’t this the actions of a government which has lost all semblance of transparency in such a short period of time? An even more important question is whether India is exploiting the lack of experience of the politicians in power to its advantage.
One may wonder whether it was a coincidence that this extremely important and closely guarded defence pact was signed on 5 April, 54 years to the very day the JVP launched its first insurrection in Sri Lanka with the rallying-cry, “Motherland or death”! Considering the sinister ways of India’s operations, at times, it is more likely to be a deliberate and subtle reminder to the NPP/JVP government than a coincidence. What an irony it was for the Sri Lankan President, the heir to the JVP throne, to award the highest honour possible to the Prime Minister of India, a country they detested so much! After his very successful trip, PM Modi flew by helicopter, no doubt, gazing at the remnants of the Ram Sethu bridge, probably dreaming of rebuilding it to connect the 29th state to the mainland!
It is high time the government reassured the public by informing at least the context of the defence pact signed, even if details are withheld for security reasons. If it is not done the credibility of the government would be further eroded. It has already lost its credibility on the promise of honesty and integrity. The former speaker, who had to give up the third highest ranking position in the country as he had misplaced the certificates of his doctorate from a private university in Japan, promised to produce the certificates to clear his name. Enough time has passed for him to get even duplicates but despite the obvious dishonesty, unashamedly, he remains an MP! Is this the cleansing of Diyawannawa they promised?
What is happening regarding the Easter terrorist attack is raising concerns too, as it is being reinvestigated to find a mastermind under the supervision of two retired police officers, who were rewarded with top posts for openly supporting the NPP, despite being found fault for neglect of duty by a committee of Inquiry tasked to investigate the failures leading to that attack. Even if they were wrongly implicated by that committee, they should not be a party to any relevant investigation till their names were cleared. The government has demonstrated the lack of good governance by allowing these two officers to be involved in the investigation and the two officers have demonstrated their total lack of integrity by not removing themselves voluntarily. The current investigation reminds one of the Sinhala saying Horage ammagen pena ahanawa wagei (seek help from a female clairvoyant to catch a thief who happens to be her own son.)
This search for a mastermind, which started with the pronouncements of a previous Attorney-General who has refused, so far, to substantiate his claims took a new turn with the notorious Channel 4 programme based on the testimony of an asylum seeker who has produced fraudulent documents. President Sirisena, long after he left the presidency, claimed to know the mastermind! Anyone with an interest in facts ought to watch the excellent “Hyde Park” interview on Ada Derana with Professor Rohan Gunaratna, an internationally acclaimed authority on counterterrorism. He has interviewed key personnel in ISIS and has studied 337 intelligence reports, both local and international including those from FBI, Scotland Yard, Interpol etc. He is of the strong opinion that it was an attack masterminded by ISIS and there is no basis, whatsoever, to consider it to be politically motivated. However, he did not address the issue of whether a foreign nation was masterminded for other reasons.
Attributing a political motivation may suit the government as it has a vested interest. It should not be forgotten that the father of two of the bombers, one of them the leader, was a prominent financial backer of the JVP whose name was on its national list.
The other theory advanced by some is that India’s RAW may be behind the attack, the reasons given being that RAW gave exactingly detailed intelligence regarding the attacks and that the attack on Taj Samudra was aborted, at the last moment, due to a mysterious telephone call the bomber received.
Adding fuel to the fire of speculation is the latest action of AKD. His much-promised exposure of the mastermind on 21 April turned out to be a pus wedilla! The country waited eagerly, but all he did was to hand over the Presidential Inquiry report to the CID, contrary to the recommendation of the commission that it be handed over to the Attorney General for action!
Hasn’t there been a sea-change after PM Modi’s visit?
By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana
At a time when misinformation spreads so easily—especially online—there’s a need for scientists to step in and bring accurate, evidence-based knowledge to the public. This is exactly what Dr. Ruchira Somaweera is doing with RuGoesWild, a YouTube channel that brings the world of field biology to Sri Lankan audiences in Sinhala.
“One of my biggest motivations is to inspire the next generation,” says Dr. Somaweera. “I want young Sri Lankans to not only appreciate the amazing biodiversity we have here, but also to learn about how species are studied, protected, and understood in other parts of the world. By showing what’s happening elsewhere—from research in remote caves to marine conservation projects—I hope to broaden horizons and spark curiosity.”
Unlike many travel and wildlife channels that prioritise entertainment, RuGoesWild focuses on real science. “What sets RuGoesWild apart is its focus on wildlife field research, not tourism or sensationalised adventures,” he explains. “While many travel channels showcase nature in other parts of the world, few dig into the science behind it—and almost none do so in Sinhala. That’s the niche I aim to fill.”
Excerpts of the Interview
Q: Was there a specific moment or discovery in the field that deeply impacted you?
“There have been countless unforgettable moments in my 20-year career—catching my first King cobra, discovering deep-diving sea snakes, and many more,” Dr. Somaweera reflects. “But the most special moment was publishing a scientific paper with my 10-year-old son Rehan, making him one of the youngest authors of an international peer-reviewed paper. We discovered a unique interaction between octopi and some fish called ‘nuclear-forager following’. As both a dad and a scientist, that was an incredibly meaningful achievement.”
Saltwater crocodiles in Sundarbans in Bangladesh, the world’s largest mangrove
Q: Field biology often means long hours in challenging environments. What motivates you to keep going?
“Absolutely—field biology can be physically exhausting, mentally draining, and often dangerous,” he admits. “I’ve spent weeks working in some of the most remote parts of Australia where you can only access through a helicopter, and in the humid jungles of Borneo where insects are insane. But despite all that, what keeps me going is a deep sense of wonder and purpose. Some of the most rewarding moments come when you least expect them—a rare animal sighting, a new behavioural observation, or even just watching the sun rise over a pristine habitat.”
Q: How do you balance scientific rigour with making your work engaging and understandable?
“That balance is something I’m constantly navigating,” he says. “As a scientist, I’m trained to be precise and data-driven. But if we want the public to care about science, we have to make it accessible and relatable. I focus on the ‘why’ and ‘wow’—why something matters, and what makes it fascinating. Whether it’s a snake that glides between trees, a turtle that breathes through its backside, or a sea snake that hunts with a grouper, I try to bring out the quirky, mind-blowing parts that spark curiosity.”
Q: What are the biggest misconceptions about reptiles or field biology in Sri Lanka?
“One of the biggest misconceptions is that most reptiles—especially snakes—are dangerous and aggressive,” Dr. Somaweera explains. “In reality, the vast majority of snakes are non-venomous, and even the venomous ones won’t bite unless they feel threatened. Sadly, fear and myth often lead to unnecessary killing. With RuGoesWild, one of my goals is to change these perceptions—to show that reptiles are not monsters, but marvels of evolution.”
Q: What are the most pressing conservation issues in Sri Lanka today?
“Habitat loss is huge,” he emphasizes. “Natural areas are being cleared for housing, farming, and industry, which displaces wildlife. As people and animals get pushed into the same spaces, clashes happen—especially with elephants and monkeys. Pollution, overfishing, and invasive species also contribute to biodiversity loss.”
Manta Rays
Q: What role do local communities play in conservation, and how can scientists better collaborate with them?
“Local communities are absolutely vital,” he stresses. “They’re often the first to notice changes, and they carry traditional knowledge. Conservation only works when people feel involved and benefit from it. We need to move beyond lectures and surveys to real partnerships—sharing findings, involving locals in fieldwork, and even ensuring conservation makes economic sense to them through things like eco-tourism.”
Q: What’s missing in the way biology is taught in Sri Lanka?
“It’s still very exam-focused,” Dr. Somaweera says. “Students are taught to memorize facts rather than explore how the natural world works. We need to shift to real-world engagement. Imagine a student in Anuradhapura learning about ecosystems by observing a tank or a garden lizard, not just reading a diagram.”
Q: How important is it to communicate science in local languages?
“Hugely important,” he says. “Science in Sri Lanka often happens in English, which leaves many people out. But when I speak in Sinhala—whether in schools, villages, or online—the response is amazing. People connect, ask questions, and share their own observations. That’s why RuGoesWild is in Sinhala—it’s about making science belong to everyone.”
‘Crocodile work’ in northern Australia.
Q: What advice would you give to young Sri Lankans interested in field biology?
“Start now!” he urges. “You don’t need a degree to start observing nature. Volunteer, write, connect with mentors. And once you do pursue science professionally, remember that communication matters—get your work out there, build networks, and stay curious. Passion is what will carry you through the challenges.”
Q: Do you think YouTube and social media can shape public perception—or even influence policy?
“Absolutely,” he says. “These platforms give scientists a direct line to the public. When enough people care—about elephants, snakes, forests—that awareness builds momentum. Policymakers listen when the public demands change. Social media isn’t just outreach—it’s advocacy.”
by Ifham Nizam
-
Business5 days agoDIMO pioneers major fleet expansion with Tata SIGNA Prime Movers for ILM
-
News4 days agoFamily discovers rare species thought to be extinct for over a century in home garden
-
Features7 days agoNipping the two leaves and the bud
-
Features6 days agoProf. Lal Tennekoon: An illustrious but utterly unpretentious and much -loved academic
-
Features7 days agoAvurudu celebrations … galore
-
Foreign News4 days agoChina races robots against humans in Beijing half marathon
-
News7 days agoCounsel for Pilleyan alleges govt. bid to force confession
-
Editorial5 days agoSelective use of PTA