Midweek Review
A deal on ECT at the Colombo harbour
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) leader Rauff Hakeem, MP, recently told The Island that Sri Lanka had no option but to involve India in the development of the deep water facility, the East Container Terminal at the Colombo Port, which has been built to accommodate the largest container ships that ply around the world carrying as many as 16,000 containers (TEUs), like its competing Chinese-run Colombo International Container Terminal also in the more recently built and what is known as the Colombo South harbour.
The Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) Kandy District lawmaker said so in response to the writer seeking an explanation as regards his stand on the issue at hand in the wake of his quite controversial statement on Derana ‘Wadapitiya’, anchored by Chathura Alwis.
In response to The Island assertion that the SLMC leader took a bold but factual stand on the matter and responded: “Why beat around the bush? That is the truth.”
He hit the nail on the head, when Attorney-at-Law Hakeem declared that due to the Colombo harbour’s very heavy dependence on Indian transhipment cargo, there was no choice.
Having first entered Parliament in 1994 on the People’s Alliance (PA) National List, Hakeem took over the leadership of the SLMC soon after its founder leader M.H.M. Ashraff was killed in a helicopter crash in September 2000.
Amidst a simmering dispute over alleged Indian investment in the ECT that had engulfed the SLPP administration, Hakeem is the only lawmaker to publicly come out with the somewhat unpalatable truth that the bulk of Colombo port’s business come from Indian transhipment cargo. Hakeem, who has been in the PA, UPFA (United People’s Freedom Alliance) and the UNF (United National Front) governments as a Cabinet Minister didn’t mince his words and quite surprised the other participants, Wasantha Samarasinghe (former JVP MP and its current Anuradhapura District leader) and State Ministers, D.V. Chanaka (Hambantota District) and D.B. Herath (Kurunegala District).
Hakeem joined the programme after its commencement but lucidly explained his stand on a number of matters, including the simmering dispute over cremation of Muslim Covid-19 victims and the high profile ECT transaction. The SLMC group, within the 54-member SJB, consists of five lawmakers, including Hakeem. Hakeem recently suffered a severe setback when his four other MPs in Parliament voted for the SLPP’s 20th Amendment last October, while he alone from his party voted against it.
Besides the yahapalana regime, in which Hakeem’s SLMC was a full partner, had already muddied the Lankan waters by giving away the Hambantota Port to China on a 99-year lease. So it is only natural for New Delhi to have a foothold in Colombo with the ECT. Even our comrades, the JVP, though now making lots of noise over ECT going to the Adani Group of India, hardly murmured a word in protest when it was cavorting with the yahapalana regime at the time of the virtual sale of Hambantota to the Chinese.
The Kandy District MP, who had previously held the Ports and Shipping portfolios, said that the SLPA (Sri Lanka Ports Authority) owned JCT (Jaya Container Terminal) in addition to Unity Container Terminal. The SLMC leader emphasized the need to further develop JCT whereas CMPH (China Merchant Port Holdings) managed Colombo International Container Terminal (CICT) and Keells-led conglomerate owned South Asia Gateway Terminal (SAGT) conducted their operations successfully.
Amidst the simmering ECT issue, the former Minister declared that though some opposed foreign investment in such strategic projects, the country facing a daunting financial crisis had no option but to accept the Indian investment.
Ironically when the SLPA advertised the Colombo South Harbour for investment after it built its breakwater with a USD 300 million loan from the Asian Development Bank after the end of the war, India was not interested and for that matter no one else made any worthwhile offer other than the Chinese. However as in the case of Hambantota, New Delhi awakened to its value when the China Merchant Port Holdings singlehandedly bid and obtained the CICT berth on a 35-year Build, Operate and Transfer agreement after 2010, with the SLPA holding a mere 15 per cent stake in the venture.
Lawmaker Hakeem asserted that the situation here could be stabilized by Indian involvement in the expansion of the overall Colombo Port operations. The SJB constituent took up the position that the country was in such a desperate situation, the incumbent government couldn’t afford to antagonize India.
How Indian investments can stabilize Lanka
Hakeem took a very clear stand on ECT as well as overall foreign investment in the ports and shipping sectors. The former Ports Minister articulated that against the backdrop of foreign investment in SAGT, the first public private partnership container terminal in Sri Lanka and also CICT, there couldn’t be any issue with regard to the agreed Indian investment.
SAGT launched operations in 1999. According to the SAGT: “The Company is a Board of Investment flagship entity with approximately 60% of Sri Lankan shareholding, and is backed by John Keells Holdings, APM Terminals, SLPA and Peony investments (subsidiary of Evergreen Marine Corporation).”
State Minister Herath interrupted MP Hakeem to raise a question though the former ignored the SLPP politician.
Hakeem declared that under no circumstances he would say not to accept Indian investment though the final decision lies with the incumbent government. The former Shipping Minister made reference to current Ports and Shipping Minister Rohitha Abeygunawardena declaration that 49 per cent of the ECT ownership would be foreign and the remaining 51 owned by the government. SLPA holds just 15 per cent each of SAGT and CICT. The SAGT deal is for a 30-year period on BOT (Build Operate and Transfer basis) whereas the agreement on CICT covers 35 years.
Hakeem’s stand drew opposition from all other participants, including Chathura Alwis. However, Hakeem stood firm on his stand regardless of consequences. The SLMC leader asserted that Sri Lanka couldn’t turn a blind eye to the need to appease India. Declaring that Sri Lanka had appeased India before, Hakeem, turning towards Wasantha Samarasinghe emphasized the country should come to terms with the reality.
State Minister Chanaka asked Hakeem whether the previous yahapalana government entered into a MoC (Memorandum of Cooperation) with India in respect of the ECT. Hakeem however conveniently side-stepped the query, while JVPer Samarasinghe said that was finalized in May 2019.
After having been an active team player in the much muddied yahapalana rule, MP Hakeem however had the nerve to ridicule the incumbent government’s much touted ‘neutral’ foreign policy. “I haven’t the slightest idea what this government meant by neutral or balanced foreign policy. If we took a non-aligned stand, the public can clearly understand what the government intended. How one can balance the foreign policy,” MP Hakeem said.
Hakeem silent on inter-terminal transport crisis
Trade union leader Samarasinghe alleged that one-time Ports and Shipping Minister Hakeem conveniently failed to mention the crisis caused by what the JVPer called inter-terminal transport.
Samarasinghe alleged that the inter-terminal transport was in a mess. For want of sufficient space within the harbour area, vessels couldn’t be unloaded. Samarasinghe claimed that successive governments caused unprecedented deterioration due to giving the relevant contract to immensely politically influential people outside proper tender procedures.
MP Hakeem without hesitation acknowledged the crisis within the harbour, in addition to the simmering issue over the ECT.
State Minister Herath sought MP Hakeem’s opinion on the leasing of the Hambantota Port for a period of 99 years to CMPH in late July 2017. Having been a partner to that pact, MP Hakeem naturally defended the agreement on Hambantota Port to the hilt. Hakeem had been a member of the Cabinet of the yahapalana government that finalized the controversial deal on the Hambantota Port. The then Ports and Shipping Minister Arjuna Ranatunga strongly opposed the deal. UNPer Ranatunga’s stance finally led to him being replaced by SLFPer Mahinda Samarasinghe. Ranatunga was replaced on May 22, 2017. The former national cricket Captain received the Petroleum Resources Development Ministry as a consolation prize.
Both the Minister and his brother, Dhammika objected to the deal whereas Vasudeva Nanayakkara on behalf of the Joint Opposition, moved the Supreme Court against the port transaction.
President Sirisena and Premier Wickremesinghe ensured the finalization of the controversial transaction following the delay caused by the opposition.
Panelist Samarasinghe asked Hakeem whether the yahapalana government used USD 1.2 bn received from CMPH to settle what we owed China. Warning Sri Lanka would run out of foreign reserves next year once debts were settled, MP Hakeem predicted an unprecedented financial crisis.
The SLMC leader asserted that except China all other countries were in deepening financial turmoil. The MP categorized Sri Lanka with Angola, Liberia and Lebanon. While acknowledging the economic deterioration started during the yahapalana administration, MP Hakeem faulted the incumbent government for not being able to tackle the situation.
Hakeem warned that unless the government and the Opposition worked together, the country would have to go down on its knees to international lenders as Sri Lanka had done before on many occasions. In spite of big boasts by some, those in power and others should be realistic and be aware of the challenges faced by the country. Hakeem predicted a massive tragedy. He expressed the view that against the backdrop of the incumbent government asking for foreign investments, it should be ready to consider investments in sectors preferred by those having the wherewithal. “We have to be realistic.”
Emphasizing the responsibility on the part of Sri Lanka to exploit the country’s strategic position in the East-West route on the Indian Ocean, the SLMC leader explained how the two strategic harbours in Colombo and Hambantota could be utilized.
Now that Sri Lanka had given controlling shares to one terminal at the Colombo harbour to China why not another to India, the SJB lawmaker asserted, demanding that Sri Lanka adopt a realistic approach as the country is desperately in need of foreign investment.
Subsequently, Hakeem suggested that the controlling shares of the ECT should be given to India, Japan though JVPer Samarasinghe insisted the SLPA could handle it. “With the installation of three gantry cranes, 400 m long ECT is in operation now. A further 800 m has to be built,” Samarasinghe said, asserting USD 400 mn investment was required. With the three cranes, ECT in op even now with the 440m already built, now had to build 800 m more, which required USD 400 mn.
Declaring the SAGT and CICT generated an annual income of USD 160 mn and 250 mn, respectively,
Samarasinghe asked why investors could not build a terminal in the remaining Western side. “It can be bigger than all existing facilities. Why do we have to give up lucrative ECT?”
Samarasinghe predicted in spite of claims that SLPA would receive 51 per cent and the investor 49 holding per cent, finally ECT, it too, was expected to be eventually shared in the proportion of 15 per cent to the SLPA and 85 per cent to the investor.
ECT aggravates Prez, PM dispute
The then President Maithripala Sirisena and Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe clashed over the ECT. The dispute caused rapid deterioration of yahapalana relationship in the run-up to the sacking of Wickremesinghe’s government on Oct 26, 2018. Wickremesinghe insisted on Indian investment whereas Sirisena rejected it. But, Wickremesinghe went ahead with the project regardless of the President’s intervention. Amidst deepening turmoil, Wickremesinghe brought in Japan into the picture.
On the instructions of Wickremesinghe, Sri Lanka, Japan and India signed a MoC on the ECT on May 28, 2019. According to an SLPA statement issued following the signing of the MoC, the GoSL through the SLPA retained 100% ownership of the ECT, while the Terminal Operatiing Company, is jointly owned. Sri Lanka will hold a 51 per cent-stake in the project and the joint venture partners will retain 49%.
The ECT is positioned about 3 km away from the China-funded Colombo Port City on reclaimed land on Colombo’s sea front.
“Japan is likely to provide a 40-year soft loan with a 0.1 percent interest rate,” The Hindu quoted Sudarshana Gunawardana, Director of Development Communications at the Prime Minister’s office as having said. The SLPA then termed the “envisaged Japanese loan” as “one of the best loan terms Sri Lanka has obtained”.
What is not yet clear is whether the incumbent government intends to go ahead with the MoC finalized by Wickremesinghe or change it.
JVP, SJB on ECT deal
The JVP played a significant role in paving the way for the disastrous Maithripala Sirisena presidency. The likes of trade unionist Samarasinghe have conveniently forgotten how the JVP backed UNP’s presidential candidate Sirisena, the longstanding General Secretary of the SLFP. Having installed Sirisena, the UNP-led coalition comprising one-time LTTE mouthpiece Tamil National Alliance (TNA), the JVP, the SLMC pursued an agenda of its own. One shouldn’t be surprised by lawmaker Hakeem standing as a UNP breakaway faction the SJB still followed UNP strategies though Wickremesinghe obviously had no say in its affairs.
Chief Opposition Whip Lakshman Kiriella’s recent declaration that the government should take advantage of the constitution making process undertaken by the previous yahapalana government is a case in point.
Lawmakers Kirieilla and JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently flayed the government over the decision to involve India’s biggest ports and logistic company Adani Group in the operation. Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone Limited seems to be confident of overcoming the obstacles. The project that had been delayed due to labour protests launched ahead of the last parliamentary polls in August drew stepped up condemnation of the SJB and the JVP.
It would be pertinent to ask whether the SJB and the JVP opposed only the involvement of Adani Group in the ECT development or disputed the MoC finalized in May 2019 in the run-up to Nov 2019 presidential polls by the previous regime, in which JVP and present day SJB members were partners?
SJB heavyweight Kiriella speculated whether the government intended to win over Indian Premier Narendra Modi by giving control of the ECT to billionaire Gautam Adani. Kiriella asserted that Sri Lanka couldn’t appease India by giving ECT to a close friend of Modi. Nothing can be further from the truth.
Obviously, the SJB hasn’t taken into consideration the roles played by India and Japan as well as Australia in the overall Indo-Pacific US strategy meant to counter the growing Chinese challenge. The US led coalition is still struggling to cope up with the vastly strengthened China relentlessly pursuing an anti- China policy.
A ‘Comprehensive Partnership’ with Japan
JVP leader Dissanayake is on record as having said that a director and a local shareholder of Shangri-La who had been involved with Viyathmaga, too, promoted the deal with Adani Group. The JVPer also alleged that the same person immensely benefited from recent government decisions to change import levies on sugar and coconut oil.
Outgoing US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s recent visit to New Delhi and Colombo highlighted their strategy. There is no doubt the Adani Group’s move on the ECT had been approved by the highest level of political leadership and the talk of Sri Lanka trying to appease India by involving Gautam Adani is nothing but bunkum.
The public should not forget the then Premier Wickremesinghe entered into a ‘Comprehensive Partnership’ with Japan in early Oct, 2015. In the following year on Oct 09, the training squadron of the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force (JMSDF) was in Colombo to underscore the strengthening of the partnership. The writer had an opportunity to visit JS Kashima on the invitation of the Japanese Embassy in Colombo. Asked for a clarification as regards growing Japanese military role in Asia in support of the US as well as joint military cooperation among the US, Japan and India in response to the Chinese Challenge, Commanding Officer of the squadron Rear Admiral Hidetoshi Iwasaki explained the circumstances under which the Japanese forces could be deployed overseas along with the US.
Sri Lanka-Japan ‘Comprehensive Partnership’ should be examined taking into consideration three agreements sought by the US, the ACSA (Acquisition and Cross Servicing Agreement finalized in early August 2017), stalled MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) Compact and SOFA (Status of Forces) agreement. The recent US declaration that Sri Lanka wouldn’t be accommodated in the MCC Compact is unlikely to be the end of the US efforts to bring Sri Lanka under its control.
As part of overall Western strategy, the US seeks a government receptive in Colombo. The US wants to deny China access to Sri Lanka. The US made an abortive bid to install the then General Sarath Fonseka as the President in January 2010. However, the US project succeeded at the January 2015 presidential election. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe regime initially took a hardline stand on China. Some members of that administration responsible for Treasury bond scams in Feb 2015 and March 2016 alleged corruption couldn’t be tackled here unless Chinese investments were drastically pruned. Having accused China of promoting corruption here, the yahapalana administration ended up handing over the Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease to China.
In the run-up to the July 2017 Hambantota Port deal, former President Mahinda Rajapaksa accompanied by ex-External Affairs Minister and Chairman of the SLPP Prof. G.L. Peiris visited Beijing where the issue was discussed. During the weeklong visit in late 2016, they also visited Southern China. They urged the Chinese to stick to the original Hambantota development project to avert possible protests. They suggested it would be better to utilize 750 acres as originally planned. This suggestion was made against the backdrop of the then Development Strategies and International Trade Minister Malik Samarawickrema’s revelation that the Chinese wanted 15,000 acres of land in the Hambantota district for large scale development projects. In the second week of January 2017, Wickremesinghe launched the Hambantota project in spite of President Sirisrena’s objections. Wickremesinghe ignored Sirisena’s claim that the agreement hadn’t been finalized yet. Having launched the Hambantota project, Wickremesinghe declared that negotiations were underway with India and Japan for the development of the strategic Trincomalee Port.
With US-China hostility on the rise, Sri Lanka shouldn’t expect breathing space from either party. A much weaker economy as a result of the rampaging corona epidemic when compared with the time Gotabaya Rajapaksa won the presidency in Nov 2019, should prompt Sri Lanka to adopt an austerity drive.
Let that begin at the Parliament, dubbed the most corrupt institution in the country by no less a person than one-time Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapaksa, PC.
Midweek Review
A question of national pride
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, who also holds the Finance and Defence portfolios, caused controversy last year when the Defence Ministry announced that he wouldn’t attend the National Victory Day event. Angry public reactions over social media compelled the President to change his decision. He attended the event. Whatever his past and for what he stood for as the President and the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces, Dissanayake cannot, under any circumstances, shirk his responsibilities. The next National Victory Day event is scheduled in mid-May. The event coincides with the day, May 18, when the entire country was brought back under government control and the Army put a bullet through Prabhakaran’s head as he hid in the banks of the Nanthikadal lagoon, on the following day. The government also forgot the massive de-mining operations undertaken by the military to pave the way for the resettlement of people, rehabilitation of nearly 12,000 terrorists, and maintaining UN troop commitments, even during the war.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
The majestic presence of Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka, Admiral of the Fleet Wasantha Karannagoda and Marshal of the Air Force Roshan Goonetileke, though now more than 16 years after that historic victory, represented the war-winning armed forces at the 78 Independence Day celebrations. Their attendance reminded the country of Sri Lanka’s greatest post-independence accomplishment, the annihilation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in May 2009.
Among the other veterans at the Independence Square event was General Shavendra Silva, the wartime General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the celebrated 58 Division. The 58 Division played a crucial role in the overall Vanni campaign that brought the LTTE down to its knees.
The 55 (GOC Maj. Gen. Kamal Gunaratne) and 53 Divisions (GOC Brig. Prasanna Silva) that had been deployed in the Jaffna peninsula, as well as newly raised formations 57 Division (GOC Maj. Gen. Jagath Dias), 58 Division and 59 Division (Brig. Nandana Udawatta), obliterated the LTTE.
Chagie Gallage, Fonseka’s first choice to command the 58 Division (former Task Force 1) following his exploits in the East, but had to leave the battlefield due to health issues then, rejoined the Vanni campaign at a decisive stage. Please forgive the writer for his inability to mention all those who gave resolute leadership on the ground due to limitations of space. The LTTE that genuinely believed in its battlefield invincibility was crushed within two years and 10 months. Of the famed ex-military leadership, Fonseka was the only one with no shame to publicly declare support for ‘Aragalaya,’ forgetting key personalities in the Rajapaksa government who helped him along the way to crush the Tigers, especially after the attempt on his life by a female LTTE suicide bomber, inside the Army Headquarters, when he had to direct all military operations from Colombo. And he went to the extent of addressing US- and India-backed protesters before they stormed President’s House on the afternoon of July 9, 2022. President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, wartime Defence Secretary, whose contribution can never be compared with any other, had to flee Janadhipathi Mandiyara and take refuge aboard SLNS Gajabahu, formerly of the US Coast Guard. The same sinister mob earlier ousted him from his private residence, at Mirihana, that he occupied previously without being a burden to the state. It was only after the attack on his private residence on March 31, 2022, that he came to reside in the official residence, the President’s House.
The presence of Fonseka, Karannagoda and Goonetileke at the Independence Day commemoration somewhat compensated for the pathetic failure on the part of the government to declare, during the parade, even by way of a few words, the armed forces historic triumph over the LTTE against predictions by many a self- proclaimed expert to the contrary. That treacherous and disgraceful decision brought shame on the government. Social media relentlessly attacked the government. To make matters worse, the elite Commandos and Special Forces were praised for their role in the post-Cyclone Ditwah situation. The Special Boat Squadron (SBS) and Rapid Action Boat Squadron (RABS), too, were appreciated for their interventions during the post-cyclone period.
The shocking deliberate omission underscored the pathetic nature of the powers that be at a time the country is in a flux. If Cyclone Ditwah hadn’t devastated Sri Lanka, the government probably may not have anything else to say about the elite fighting formations.
The government also left out the main battle tanks, armoured fighting vehicles, tank recovery vehicles and various types of artillery, as well as the multi barrel rocket launchers (MBRLs). The absence of Sri Lanka’s precious firepower on Independence Day shocked the country. The government owes an explanation. Lt. Gen. Lasantha Rodrigo of the Artillery is the 25th Commander of the Army. How did the Commander of the Army feel about the decision to leave the armour and artillery out of the parade?
The combined firepower of armour and artillery caused havoc on the enemy, thanks to deep penetration units that infiltrated behind enemy lines giving precise intelligence on where and what to hit.
The LTTE suffered devastating losses in coordinated attacks mounted during both offensive and defensive action, both in the northern and eastern theatres. The current dispensation would never be able to comprehend the gradual enhancement of armour and artillery firepower over the years to meet the growing LTTE threat. The MBRLs were a game changer. President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s government introduced the MBRLs in 2000 in the aftermath of devastating battlefield debacles in the northern theatre. (If all our MBRLs had been discarded after the successful conclusion of the war in May 2009, there is no point in blaming this government for non-display of the monster MBRLs. But, there cannot be any excuse for the government decision not to display the artillery.
Even during the three decades long war and some of the fiercest fighting in the North and East, the armour and artillery were always on display. It would be pertinent to mention the acquisition of Chinese light tanks in 1991, about a year after the outbreak of Eelam War II, and T 55 Main Battle Tanks (MBTs) from the Czech Republic, also during the early ’90s, marked the transformation of the regiment. Let me remind our readers that both Armour and Artillery were deployed on infantry role due to dearth of troops in the northern and eastern theatres.
No kudos for infantry
The Armour and Artillery were followed by the five infantry formations, Sri Lanka Light Infantry (SLLI), Sinha Regiment (SR), Gemunu Watch (GW), Gajaba Regiment (GR) and Vijayabahu Infantry Regiment (VIR). They bore the brunt of the fighting. They spearheaded offensives, sometimes in extremely unfavourable battlefield situations. The team handling the live media coverage conveniently failed to mention their battlefield sacrifices or accomplishments. It was nothing but a treacherous act perpetrated by a government not sensitive at all to the feelings of the vast majority of people.
The infantry was followed by the Mechanized Infantry Regiment (MIR). Raised in February 2007 as the armed forces were engaged in large scale operations in the eastern theatre, and the Vanni campaign was about to be launched, at the formation of the Regiment, it consisted of the third battalion of the SLLI, 10th battalion of SR and 4th battalion of GR. The 5th and 6th Armoured Corps were also added to the MIR. The 4th MIR was established also in February 2008 and after the end of war 21 battalion of the Sri Lanka National Guard was converted to 5 (Volunteer) MIR.
The contingent of MIR troops joined the Independence Day parade, without their armoured vehicles. Perhaps the political leadership seems to be blind to the importance of maintaining military traditions. Field Marshal Fonseka, who ordered the establishment of MIR must have felt really bad at the way the government took the shine off the military parade. What did the government expect to achieve by scaling down the military parade? Obviously, the government appears to be confident that the northern and eastern electorates would respond favourably to such gestures. Whatever the politics in the former war zones, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led Jathika Jana Balawegaya (JJB) must realise that it cannot, under any circumstances, continue to hurt the feelings of the majority community.
The description of Commandos and Special Forces was restricted to their post-Ditwah rehabilitation role. The snipers were not included in the parade. Motorcycle riding Special Forces, too, were absent. The way the Armour, Artillery, Infantry, as well Commandos and Special Forces were treated, we couldn’t have expected justice to other regiments and corps. In fact, the government didn’t differentiate fighting formations from the National Guard.
The National Guard was raised in Nov. 1989 in the wake of the quelling of the second JVP-led terrorist campaign. Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s government swiftly crushed the first JVP bid to seize power in April 1971. The second bid was far worse and for three years the JVP waged a murderous campaign but finally the armed forces and police overwhelmed them. On Nov. 1, 1989, prominent battalions that had been deployed for the protection of politicians were amalgamated to establish the first National Guard battalion and upgraded as a new battalion of the Volunteer Force.
The Navy and Air Force, too, didn’t receive the recognition they deserved. Just a passing reference was made about the Fourth Attack Flotilla, the Navy’s premier offensive arm. The government also forgot the turning point of the war against the LTTE when Karannagoda’s Navy, with US intelligence backing, hunted down Velupillai Prabhakaran’s floating arsenals, on the high seas.
Karannagoda, the writer is certain, must have felt disappointed and angry over the disgraceful handling of the parade. The war-winning armed forces deserved the rightful place at the Independence Day parade.
The government did away with the fly past. Perhaps, the Air Force no longer had the capacity to fly MiG 27s, Kfirs, F 7s and Mi 24s. During the war and after Katunayake-based jet squadrons thundered over the Independence Day parade while the Air Force contingent was saluting the President. Jet squadrons and MI 24s (Current Defence Secretary Air Vice Marshal (retd) Sampath Thuyakontha commanded the No 09 Mi 24 squadron during the war (https://island.lk/govt-responds-in-kind-to-thuyaconthas-salvo/). Goonetileke’s Air Force conducted an unprecedented campaign to inflict strategic blows to the enemy fighting capacity. That was in addition to the SLAF taking out aerial targets and providing close-air-support to ground forces, while also doing a great job in helicopters whisking away troop casualties for prompt medical attention.
Chagie’s salvo

Maj. Gen Chagie Gallage
The armed forces paid a very heavy price to bring the war to a successful conclusion. During the 1981 to 2009 period, the Army lost nearly 24,000 officers and men. Of them, approximately 2,400 died during January-May 2009 when the Vanni formations surrounded and decimated the enemy. (Army, Navy and Air Force as well as police suffered loss of lives during the campaigns against the JVP in 1971 and during the 1987-1989 period) At the crucial final days of the offensive, ground forces were deprived of aerial support in a bid to minimise civilian losses as fleeing Tigers used Tamil civilians they had corralled as a human shield. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as revealed by Wikileaks acknowledged the armed forces gesture but no government sought to exploit such unintentional support for Sri Lanka’s advantage. That wasn’t an isolated lapse.
In the run-up to the now much discussed 78 Independence Day parade, Gallage caused unprecedented controversy when he warned of possible attempts to shift the Security Forces Headquarters, in Jaffna, to the Vanni mainland. The GR veteran’s social media post sent shockwaves through the country. Gallage, known for his outspoken statements/positions and one of the victims of global sanctions imposed on military leaders, questioned the rationale in vacating the Jaffna Headquarters, central to the overall combined armed forces deployment in the Jaffna peninsula and the islands.
Regarding Gallage’s explosive claim, the writer sought clarification from the government but in vain. About a year after the end of the war, the then government began releasing land held by the armed forces. In line with the post-war reconciliation initiatives, the war-winning Mahinda Rajapaksa government released both government and public property, not only in the Jaffna peninsula, but in all other northern and eastern administrative districts, as well. Since 2010, successive governments have released just over 90 percent of land, once held by the armed forces. Unfortunately, political parties and various local and international organisations, with vested interests, continue to politicise the issues at hand. None of them at least bothered to issue a simple press release demanding that the LTTE halted the forcible recruitment of children, use of women/girls in suicide missions and end reprehensible use of civilian human shields.
The current dispensation has gratefully accepted President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s proposal to reduce the Army strength to 100,000 by 2030. Wickremesinghe took that controversial but calculated decision in line with his overall response to post-Aragalaya developments. The Island learns that the President’s original intention was to downsize the Army to 75,000 but he settled for 100,000.
Whatever those who still cannot stomach the armed forces’ triumph over the LTTE and JVP had to say, the armed forces, without any doubt, are the most respected institution in the country.
Maithripala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe can never absolve themselves of the responsibility for betraying the armed forces at the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Oct. 2015. The treacherous JVP-backed the Yahapalana government to co-sponsor a US-led accountability resolution. That massive act of unprecedented betrayal should be examined taking into consideration primarily two issues – (1) the Tamil electorate throwing its weight behind Sirisena at the 2015 presidential election at the behest of now defunct Tamil National Alliance [TNA] (2) a tripartite agreement on the setting up of hybrid war crimes court. That agreement involved the US, Sri Lanka and TNA. Let me stress that at the 2010 presidential election, the TNA joined the UNP and the JVP in supporting war-winning Army Commander Fonseka’s candidature at the first-post war national election. Thanks to WikiLeaks, the world knows how the US manipulated the TNA to back Fonseka, the man who spearheaded a ruthless campaign that decimated the LTTE. Fonseka’s Army beat the LTTE, at its own game. Then, the Tamil electorate voted for Fonseka, who won all predominately Tamil speaking electoral districts but suffered a humiliating defeat in the rest of the country.
Let us not forget ex-LTTE cadres as well as members of other Tamil groups who backed successive governments. Tamil men contributed even to clandestine operations behind enemy lines. Unfortunately, successive governments had been pathetic in their approach to counter pro-Eelam propaganda. Sri Lanka never had a tangible action plan to counter those propagating lies. Instead, they turned a blind eye to anti-Sri Lanka campaigns. Dimwitted politicians just played pandu with the issues at hand. The Canadian declaration that Sri Lanka perpetrated genocide in May 2022 humiliated the country. Our useless Parliament didn’t take up that issue while three years later the Labour Party-run UK sanctioned four persons, including Karannagoda and Shavendra Silva, in return for Tamil support at the parliamentary elections there.
Victory parade fiasco
In 2016, the Yahapalana fools cancelled the Victory Day parade, held uninterrupted since 2009 to celebrate the country’s greatest post-independence achievement. By then, the Yahapalana administration had betrayed the armed forces at the UNHRC. The UNP-SLFP combine operated as if the armed forces didn’t exist. Sirisena had no option but to give in to Wickremesinghe’s despicable strategy meant to appease Eelamists whose support he desired, even at the expense of the overall national interest.
The Victory Day parade was meant to mark Sri Lanka’s triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism. It was never intended to humiliate the Tamil community, though the LTTE consisted of Tamil-speaking people. Those who complained bitterly about the May Victory Day celebration never wanted to publicly acknowledge that the eradication of the LTTE saved them from being terrorised any further. All concerned should accept that as long as the LTTE had the wherewithal to wage terror attacks, peace couldn’t have been restored. As Attorney-at-Law Ajaaz Mohamed repeatedly stressed to the writer the importance of UNP leader Wickremesinghe’s genuine efforts to address the national issue, he could have succeeded if the LTTE acted responsibly. The writer is also of the view that Wickremesinghe even risking his political future bent backwards to reach consensus at the negotiating table but the LTTE exploited the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) arranged by Norway, to bring down Wickremesinghe’s government.
Wickremesinghe earned the wrath of the Sinhalese for giving into LTTE demands but he struggled to keep the talks on track. Then, the LTTE delivered a knockout blow to his government by withdrawing from the negotiating table, in late April 2003, thereby paving the way for President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga to take over key ministries, including Defence, and set the stage for parliamentary polls in April 2004. The LTTE’s actions made Eelam War IV inevitable.
The armed forces hadn’t conducted a major offensive since 2001 following the disastrous Agnikheela offensive in the Jaffna peninsula. Wickremesinghe went out of his way to sustain peace but the LTTE facilitated Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory, at the presidential election, to create an environment which it believed conducive for the final war. Having killed the much-respected Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, in August 2005, and made suicide attempts on the lives of Sarath Fonseka and Gotabaya Rajapaksa in April and Oct 2006, the LTTE fought well and hard but was ultimately overwhelmed, first in the East and then in North/Vanni in a series of battles that decimated its once powerful conventional fighting capacity. The writer was lucky to visit Puthumathalan waters in late April 2009 as the fighting raged on the ground and the Navy was imposing unprecedented blockade on the Mullaitivu coast.
The LTTE proved its capabilities against the Indian Army, too. The monument at Battaramulla where Indians leaders and other dignitaries, both military and civilian, pay homage, is a reminder of the LTTE fighting prowess. India lost nearly 1,500 officers and men here (1987 to 1990) and then lost one-time Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in a suicide attack in Tamil Nadu just over a year after New Delhi terminated its military mission here. The rest is history.
Midweek Review
Theatre and Anthropocentrism in the age of Climate Emergency
A few days ago, I was in a remote region of Sri Lanka, Hambantota, a dry zone area, where people mainly live on farming. The farming methods are still very primitive. I was engaged in a television series, titled Beddegama, directed by Priyantha Kolambage. The character I play is ‘Silindu’, a hunter. Silindu is a character created by Leonard Woolf, a colonial administrator, who lived in Sri Lanka in the early 20th century. In his widely read book, Village in the Jungle, Silindu, the hunter lives with his two daughters and his sister in a mud hut in the forest. They are one of the few families in this village struggling to survive amidst drought, famine and overbearing government authority.
Phenomenologically speaking, Silindu is an environmental philosopher. He believes that the jungle is a powerful phenomenon, a living entity. He thinks that the animals who live in the jungle are also human-like beings. He talks to trees and hunts animals only to dull the pangs of hunger. He is an ethical man. He believes that the jungle is an animate being and its animals are his fellow travellers in this world. His younger daughter, Hinnihami, breastfeeds a fawn. His sustainable living with fellow animals and nature is challenged by British law. He kills two people who try to dominate and suppress poor villagers by using their administerial powers. He is sentenced to death.
What I want to highlight here is the way our predecessors coexisted with nature and how they made the environment a part of their lives. Silindu’s philosophy of nature and animals is fascinating because he does not think that humans are not the centre of this living environment. Rather humans are a part of the whole ecosystem. This is the thinking that we need today to address the major environmental crises we are facing.
When I first addressed Aesthetica, the International conference on Performing Arts, as a keynote speaker, at Christ University, Bangalore, in 2018, in my keynote address, I emphasised the importance of understanding the human body, particularly the performing body as an embodied subject. What I meant by this term ‘embodied subject’ is that over the centuries, our bodies in theatre, rehearsal spaces and studios are being defined and described as an object to be manipulated. Even in modern dance, such manipulation is visible in the modernist approaches to dance. The human body is an object to be manipulated. However, I tried to show the audience that the performing body was not a mere object on stage for audience appreciation. It is a being that is vital for the phenomenological understanding of performance. The paradox of this objectification is that we objectify our bodies as something detached from the mind and similarly, we assume our environment, the world as something given for human consumption.
Performance and Sustainability
Just to bring the phenomenological lexicon to this discussion, I will draw your attention to one of the chapter in my latest book, titled, Lamp in a Windless Place: Phenomenology and Performance (2025) published by VAPA Press, University of Visual and Performing Arts, Colombo. This project is based on Sarah Kane’s famous play text 4.48 Psychosis. In this chapter I wrote phenomenological environmentalists explain the two ways that human beings interact and engage with the life-world. The one way of this engagement is defined as ‘involvement’ we involve with various activities in the world and it is one of the ways that we are being-in-the-world. The second way of being-in-this-world is that we ‘inhere’ in the world meaning that we are built with worldly phenomena or we are made out of the same stuff of our environment. (James cited in Liyanage 2025, pp. 98-99). This coupling and encroachment between our bodies and the environment occur mostly without our conscious interference. Yet, the problem with our human activities, and also our artistic practices is that we see our environment (human body) as an object to be consumed and manipulated.
Today, it is more important for us to change our mindsets to rethink our daily practices of performing arts and understand how human, nature, space and non-human species are vital for our existence in this world. Sustainable discourse comes into play with the United Nations initiative to make humans understand the major crises we are facing. In 2016, 195 parties agreed to follow the treaty of the Paris Agreement, which is mainly focused on climate change and the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Major scientists are talking about the ‘tipping points’. Tipping points indicate the current crisis that humans and other-than humans are going to face in the coming years.
Among those sustainable goals, the most important and the urgent point to be focused seems to be the climate emergency. Leading scientists of environmental sciences have already warned that within a few years, global warming will increase up to the level that the consequences will be catastrophic and dangerous to all, human and non-human. Ice sheets are shrinking; sea water level is increasing, and coral reefs are dying. It is becoming increasingly evident that countries in our region, particularly in South Asia, have been experiencing major climate shifts over the past few decades. Recent Cyclone Ditwah and the catastrophic flood devastated parts of not only Sri Lanka but also Malaysia, Sumatra, India, etc. Professor Missaka Hettiarachchi and Devki Perera published a landmark book, titled Nature – based method for water resource management (2025). In this work Hettiarachchi and Perera clearly argue that flood, erosion, and landslides are a part of the geological evolution and transformations. They are inherent activities in nature, which form new landscapes and conditions in natural environments. But the problem is that we experience these natural events frequently and they abruptly occur in response to human-nature collisions.
Climate Emergency
Professor Jeffry Sachs stresses the importance of taking action to prevent future climatic change. For him, we are facing three mega environmental crises: 1. Climate crisis leading to greenhouse gas emission due to fossil fuel burning. We have already come to the 1.5 warming limit now. He predicts that humans will experience 2.0 degree Celsius within two decades. 2. Second is the ecological crisis. This is the destruction of rainforests in South East Asia, Amazon and other regions. He argues that Amazon has reached the tipping point, meaning that the rain forest is in danger and it would be a dry land in a few decades time. Because of ocean acidification, scientists have already warned that we are in the wake of the destruction of coral reefs. The process is that high carbon dioxide dissolves in the water and it creates the carbonic acid. It causes the destruction of the coral reef system. 3. The third ecological crisis is the mega pollution. Our environment is already polluted with toxic chemicals, our waterways, ocean, soil, air and food chains are polluted. Micro plastics are already in our blood streams, in our lungs and even in our fetuses to be born.
The climate crisis is not just a natural catastrophe; it is political in many ways. Greenhouse gas emission is still continuing, and the developed countries such as the United States of America, Canada, China and Germany produce more carbon than the countries in the periphery. As Sachs rightly argues, the US politics is manipulated by the biggest oil companies in the world and President Trump is an agent of such multinational companies whose intention is to accumulate wealth through oil burning. Very recently, the US invaded Venezuela not to restore democracy but to gain access to the largest oil reserves in the country. We have seen many wars, led by the US, due to greed for wealth and natural resources. The US has withdrawn from the Paris agreement. President Trump calls climate change a hoax! So, the world’s current political situation is directly linked to the future of our environment, our resources and climate change.
Anthropocentrism in Performance
Back to creative arts. In the modernist era of our artistic practices and culture, we mimicked and replicated proscenium theatre inherited from Europe and elsewhere and revolutionised the ways that we see performance and perceiving. Our traditional modes of performance practices were replaced by the modern technology, architectural structures, studio training methods and techniques. Today, we can look back and see whether these creative arts practices have been sustainable with the larger human catastrophes that we experience almost daily. Eddie Patterson and Dr. Lara Stevenson have recently published an important and influential book, titled Performing Climate (2025). Being performance studies scholars, Patterson and Stevenson’s book contains 14 chapters interconnected and explores the human and non-human or more than human elements in the world. Patterson and Stevenson write that ‘performance is a messy business; a bloody mess’. ‘Performance is a mess of matter, climate, things, actors, and affects: neither a dramatic or postdramatic theatre but a network of dramaturgical elements; a site of birth and death, decay and renewal’ (Patterson and Stevenson, 2025, p. 1). In this book, they further explore the new ways of reading performance, making performance and perceiving performance. They argue that ‘we are interested in analyzing performance not as an insulated, exclusive art form predicated on human centrality but as a process that celebrates the transformative properties of waste – bacteria, debris and breakdown – composting and mulching within a larger network of bacteria, fungi and microbes embedded in the skin, air, soil and interacting with cellular networks and atmospheric conditions’ (ibid).
Our modern theatre has always been anthropocentric. Even in Sri Lanka, the father of modern Sinhala theatre, Professor Ediriweera Sarachchandra adapted traditional dance drama and developed a modern theatre for middle class theatregoers. This modern theatre was anthropogenic, patriarchal and marginalised the subaltern groups such as women, non-human beings, environment and so forth. The traditional dance and dramas, nadagam and kooththu were much more embedded in rituals performed by communities for various social, cultural and spiritual purposes were uprooted and established in the proscenium theatre for the audience, whose aesthetic buds were trained and sustained by the colonial theatre and criticism. Even traditional dance was uprooted from its traditional setting embedded in the ecosystem and placed on the proscenium theatre for the sake of modernisation of dance for the modern theatregoers. A new group of spectators, theatregoers, were produced to watch those performances which took place in city theatre buildings, insulated architectural spaces where the black boxes were lit up with expensive lighting technology and air-conditioning. As Patterson and Stevenson argue, the Western theatre has been obsessed with the human drama or autobiography. This western history of theatre has been ‘blind to the non-human agency and the natural world has always been in the background to the human centred stories’ (Patterson and Stevenson 2025).
Carbon Emission theatre
The performance practice that we have inherited and is continuing even today is highly problematic in the ways that we centre human agency over the non-human and the environment. This anthropocentric performance practice, as German philosopher Peter Sloterdijk called it, is ‘biospherical’. The biospherical theatre sees human action in the artificially constructed atmospheres for artistic innovations (Patterson and Stevenson 2025). Biospherical theatre is proto-laboratories and human greenhouses – in which able-bodied actors are trained and perform within air-conditioned black boxes; or more tellingly white people in white cubes’ (ibid).
Patterson and Stevenson further assert that ‘biospherical theatre is an enclosed Western form it is labour intensive, carbon intensive, hierarchical, exclusive, inaccessible extractive rather than generative of new knowledge and different ways of being with the world (ibid, p. 10). We inherited this hierarchical, exclusive, and carbon-oriented performance space from our past; as a colonial heritage. This colonial heritage of labour intensive, carbon intensive theatre is the major practice of performance in our societies. I am currently the Chairman of the National Theatre Sub-Committee under the purview of the Arts Council of Sri Lanka. Theatre practitioners today in Colombo are highly critical of the Ministry of Cultural Affairs for not having quality enclosed theatres in major cities in the country. They do not see the problems pertaining to the performance practice that is not ecologically sustainable for island nations like us.
We are possessed with the model of Globe theatre, which has been the model for theatre and entertainment in our regions for centuries now. However, today, we are forced to revisit and rethink this model of Globe theatre in the wake of the climate emergency. Patterson and Stevenson remind us that ‘inside these globes, art develops in enclosed and air-conditioned bubbles (laboratories, rehearsal rooms, conservatories, and galleries). This kind of theatre is biospherical: a human centric endeavour, evolving inside the globe, largely upholding the fantasy of itself as disconnected from atmospheric and environmental interactions beyond the human’ (Patterson and Stevenson 2025, p. 16).
Conclusion
According to Jim Bendell, it is not enough for us to develop resilience towards the climatic emergency; we need to embrace relinquishment (Stevenson, 2020, p. 89). It is the letting go of certain assets, behaviours and beliefs. Grotowski articulated this concept many decades back in his actor training at the Polish theatre laboratory. Grotowski developed the idea of via negative, letting go, or elimination for actors. Letting go of all the acculturations as Eugenio Barba articulates, to tap into the pure impulses and action. Grotowski even rejected the audience participation in his later works, para theatre, like Antonin Artaud, who rebelled against the dialogic, bourgeoisie theatre in France at the time. So, the modernist theatre directors have shown us that the Globe theatre is no longer a sustainable pathway for performance practice. It is time for us to rethink the carbon intensive, labour intensive, hierarchical, exclusive, and class-oriented theatre and performance.
References
Hettiarachchi, M., & Perera, D. (2025). Nature-Based Methods for Water Resources Engineering. The Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka.
India Today Global. (2025, September 24). “U.S. government is in an open war against the Sustainable Development Goals”: Jeffrey Sachs. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb4Jpqq4wvE
James, S. P. (2009). The Presence of Nature A Study in Phenomenology and Environmental Philosophy. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN IK.
Liyanage, S. (2025). Lamp in a Windless Place: Phenomenology and Performance. VAPA Press. (Original work published 2025)
SDSN. (2024, October 11). Sustainability Fundamentals with Jeffrey Sachs. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJR0Q8ueQpc
Stevens, L. (2019). Anthroposcenic Performance and the Need For ‘Deep Dramaturgy’. Performance Research, 24(8), 89-97.
Stevens, L., & Varney, D. (2022). The Climate Siren: Hanna Cormick’s The Mermaid. TDR, 66(3), 107-118.
Woolf, L. (2012). The village in the jungle. Forgotten Books.
Author wishes to thank Himansi Dehigama for proofreading this manuscript.
Professor Saumya Liyanage is a professor of Drama and Theatre Currently working at the Department of Theatre Ballet and Modern Dance, Faculty of Dance and Drama, University of the Visual and Performing Arts, Colombo. He is the chairman of the State Theatre Subcommittee.
by Saumya Liyanage
Midweek Review
Islander Unbound
The pomp and pageantry of just a few hours,
Is not for him on this day in February,
When he’s been asked to think of things lofty,
Such as that he is the sole master of his destiny,
And that he’s well on track to self-sufficiency,
Rather, it’s time for that care-free feeling,
A time to zero in on the best of clothing,
Go for a carouse on the golden beaches,
And round-up pals for a cheering evening.
By Lynn Ockersz
-
Features4 days agoMy experience in turning around the Merchant Bank of Sri Lanka (MBSL) – Episode 3
-
Business5 days agoZone24x7 enters 2026 with strong momentum, reinforcing its role as an enterprise AI and automation partner
-
Business4 days agoRemotely conducted Business Forum in Paris attracts reputed French companies
-
Business4 days agoFour runs, a thousand dreams: How a small-town school bowled its way into the record books
-
Business4 days agoComBank and Hayleys Mobility redefine sustainable mobility with flexible leasing solutions
-
Business1 day agoAutodoc 360 relocates to reinforce commitment to premium auto care
-
Business5 days agoHNB recognized among Top 10 Best Employers of 2025 at the EFC National Best Employer Awards
-
Business5 days agoGREAT 2025–2030: Sri Lanka’s Green ambition meets a grid reality check
