Connect with us

Features

Abrogation of the B-C Pact and what followed

Published

on

(Excerpted from Render Unto Caesar by Bradman Weerakoon, Secretary to the Prime Minister)


Yet, as was to happen over and over again in the country’s politics, the vocal minority, in this case the hardliners finally won the day (in getting SWRD to abrogate the B-C Pact). In October 1957 the UNP under the leadership of J R Jayewardene set out on a march from Colombo to Kandy to protest against the pact. On the first day they covered 11 miles amidst some obstruction and skirmishes with government sponsored elements.

On the second day after going three miles they were met at Imbulgoda by a blockade of the road led by the local MP for Gampaha, S D Bandaranayake. The MP, a distant relative of the prime minister, was well-known as an eccentric and was referred to as an ‘unguided missile’. Many of us did not believe that Mr Bandaranaike had any responsibility for this. It was regarded as a purely local endeavour in showing opposition to the pact and the police behaved impartially in keeping the marchers and the obstructors apart.

Altogether it was somewhat of an embarrassment to the prime minister who felt that the march would have lost steam on its own as it proceeded up country. J R Jayewardene had no hesitation in calling off the march but went on four days later to the Dalada Maligawa in Kandy to worship the Sacred Tooth relic of the Buddha and offer puja to the gods of the four devales “to stop the pact.”

The attempt of the UNP to undermine the prime minister by mobilizing people with the march to Kandy, palpably failed and the tension over the BC Pact subsided; but not for long. By February 1958, the FP put pressure on the prime minister to move the agreement into legislation which would guarantee regional councils and their powers.

Mr Bandaranaike, whose authority in the Cabinet was being challenged by minister Philip Gunewardene over his proposed reform of the Paddy Lands legislation, now found himself increasingly besieged. Those who were against concessions to the Tamils began to assert themselves and asked not only for details of the regional councils draft legislation but the abrogation of the pact itself. Foremost among Mr Bandaranaike’s critics were the self-same bhikkus who had helped to ensure his victory in 1956.

In March of 1958, the ministry of transport made a decision – in hindsight a major blunder given the fragile situation – to send some nationalized buses to the North with the Sinhala letter `Sri’ on the licence plates. The northern militants began to deface the licence plates and the southern extremists retaliated with a widespread campaign of smearing tar over Tamil name boards wherever they occurred.

I recall that the Tamil lettering of the name board in the prime minister’s office in Senate Square itself and even the Tamil lettering on the prime minister’s official gold-coloured Cadillac, which read ‘left hand drive’, were not spared in this virulent tar-brush campaign. There was much confusion in the city at the time but after police shooting, things were brought under control in a few days.

The Tamil leaders, especially Chelvanayakam, who was always for non-violent protest to win rights, did what they could to restrain the militants but the die had been cast. At the Cabinet meeting held on April 9, 1958, some ministers urged that the pact be scrapped but the prime minister managed to hold them off. What finally undid Mr Bandaranaike’s genuine bid for accommodating with the Tamils was the action of around 150 bhikkus who attempted to march to 65, Rosmead Place and compel the prime minister to withdraw from the pact.

The police had stopped the procession about 100 yards away on McCarthy Road but the group refused to move until they had won their demand. Mr Bandaranaike went down to meet them and tried to explain, but the monks would have none of it. Finally, at noon that day he drove to Radio Ceylon and announced that given the militant behaviour of the Tamils and the popular opposition this had caused, he was unilaterally abrogating the pact. Some political commentators have called this the most ‘grievous blunder of his career’.

The Tamil leaders responded immediately by calling for a civil disobedience mass campaign and planned for a conference on May 23 in Vavuniya to organize the protest. While this was going on serious violence was breaking out between groups of Sinhalese and Tamils in several parts of the country. Reports began to come in to the PM’s office first from Polonnaruwa where G A Derek Aluvihare had to give orders to the police to fire and stop lorry loads of Land Development Department labour from raiding Tamil settlements.

On the 24 May, a former mayor of Nuwara Eliya, Seneviratne, and two friends were waylaid and killed in Eravur. As news of this spread, vehicles and trains were halted and Tamils were searched for, in Polonnaruwa and other towns in the North Central Province. The violence quickly spread to Colombo and the larger towns were fanned by the most fantastic rumours. In Mount Lavinia on Hotel Road, where my mother lived, a Tamil man had petrol thrown on him and was being burnt to death. He was saved only by the most courageous exertions of the Warden of St. Thomas’ College who fought off the miscreants. This, some of my family members personally witnessed.

It became clear that the only way to quell the widespread rioting was to bring in the Emergency and after some consultation with the Governor-General Sir Oliver Goonetilleke Emergency was declared at mid day on May 27, 1958. This meant that the press was censored, night and day curfews imposed; and public meetings, processions and strikes in essential services prohibited.
However, as the news was taken to the north and east by persons fleeing from the violence in the capital, rioting against the small temporary settlements of migrant Sinhalese fishermen from Dondra and Negombo and business establishments in the towns followed. One of the worst incidents was the attack on the Buddhist Naga vihare in Jaffna town sparked by the news of the burning alive of the pusaries in the Panadura kovil.

On May 30 news came in to the small coordinating unit set-up in the prime minister’s office of the destruction of the temple on the island of Nagadipa. This piece of information of the sacking of an important place of Budddhist pilgrimage — by tradition believed to be a site hallowed by a visit of the Buddha to settle a conflict between the Nagas and the original inhabitants of the land — could have led to a massacre of Tamils in the south. The news was deliberately withheld from the public.

Emergency ’58 was undoubtedly the most serious communal outbreak the country had suffered in modern times. I was at the centre of things conveying information to the prime minister as the news came in from the police desk. Having served for a year in Jaffna four years earlier, I was particularly stricken by the turn of the events took. I recalled how on Independence Day in 1955, as the Civil Service Cadet in office, I was chosen by the government agent, the pious and gentle M Sri Kantha, to represent the government and hoist the national flag at the ceremonies on the island of Delft.

It was a small but impressive function with the school children in their starched white uniforms singing the national anthem with great gusto, of course in Tamil. It was a two-hour journey by Navy boat to the island, which boasts a population of 8,000 people and hundreds of wild ponies, introduced by a Dutch governor in the 17th century when the protectorate of Jaffna was under Dutch rule. In British times a Lieutenant Nolan and his men were rumoured to have sown some ‘wild oats’ as well. This was still evident in the fair complexion, blonde hair and blue eyes of some of the village lasses.

It was a full day of pony races, singing and dancing and a tearful farewell procession back to the jetty late in the evening. The journey back to Kayts remains etched in my memory; of the luminescence of the spray as the boat cut through the water, the soft moonlight that bathed the serene night and the quiet chatter of the seamen seated on the gunwale.

Sir Oliver, who was a very able and persuasive administrator with a long track record of crisis management, was given the job of handling the emergency by the prime minister and soon brought things under control.

Tarzie Vittachi who described Emergency ‘58 with minute attention to detail and great perspicacity relates a story of the bluff and bluster with which Sir Oliver managed his difficult role. Sir Oliver apparently invited the press to meet him soon after taking charge. As the pressmen moved into his room at Queens House, now converted into some kind of Command Headquarters, they saw Sir Oliver seated before a battery of telephones.

The phones would ring very often during the press briefing and lifting one phone after the other and without a moment of hesitation Sir Oliver would intone – he always had a slight stammer – “shoot, shoot” and replace the instrument. It was dramatic and very telling and there was no doubt after that as to who was in charge.
There was much for us to do and to think about in the prime minister’s office those days. It was difficult to discern any specific pattern in what had taken place. There were elements of both ethnic rivalry and hate and plain criminality. Most of the looting was indiscriminate with the looters plundering whatever they could lay their hands on. Boutiques and little food outlets – those selling plantains and the Jaffna cigars, seemed to be especially attractive to local thugs who made merry while `law and order’ was busy elsewhere.

In great measure, the police and the army when called out later, acted promptly and equitably. The police in the main did not take sides, as has unfortunately happened in later communal clashes, and sometimes to the great surprise of some militant organizations, shot at Sinhalese looters as well. Perhaps Sir Oliver’s command helped and the more multi-racial make-up of the law enforcers, especially at the higher levels, would have made a difference.

It was different in 1983 when I was directly concerned as commissioner-general of essential services. In 1958, the police and armed forces generally won the respect of the people for their broadly impartial behaviour and there were virtually no attacks on service personnel directly. An unfortunate trend was the incursions into the estate line-rooms, where the Indian Tamil population on estates close to the up-country towns were subject to pillage and harassment. Things on the estates had got particularly bad around the towns of Matale and Badulla.
While Sir Oliver appeared to be the man in charge of the Emergency – a role he was glad to take on at the prime minister’s bidding – there was no doubt that Mr Bandaranaike was always very much in the picture. The Emergency continued to be in force for several months and the Federal Party members were detained, albeit in some comfort, at the Galle Face Hotel. Mr Bandaranaike took a firm stand against the Sinhalese rioters and kept them in jail for as long as possible. This caused resentment among some government supporters.

As the tension subsided, Bandaranaike thought it time to present to the Parliament the legislation which provided for the `reasonable use of Tamil’. This was passed but neither the FP nor the UNP participated in the debate. However, the Act which was intended to permit a wide official use of Tamil in the Northern and Eastern provinces was not implementable without the regulations which the Act provided for being brought into law. It took almost 10 more years before the operative regulations were brought into effect. By this time the FP had become, for the first time, a part of the national government.

Towards the third quarter of 1958, things began to become very difficult for Mr Bandaranaike and there were frequent convulsions in the Cabinet. In addition there erupted a series of strikes especially in the nationalized port and transport sectors, including the post and telecommunication services and the plantations. Organized labour, very much controlled by the LSSP and CP, and on the estates by the CWC and DWC, had been brought into powerful federations.

The Unions were restive, not having yet received the fruits of the ‘socialist’ peoples’ revolution, which they, the workers had brought into being in 1956. Some of the trade union leaders like D A Piyadasa of the All Ceylon Harbour and Dock workers union, D G William of the State Employees Federation and Bala Tampoe were then important and powerful people. Tension between the unions, flexing their muscles, and the bureaucracy were not uncommon.

One morning, Vernon Peiries, a civil service colleague, a few years senior to me who was deputy port commissioner, came rushing into my room holding his jaw and asking for a hot-water compress. Apparently he had been having a heated discussion with D A Piyadasa, whose union was on strike on why a salary increase could not be given. Piyadasa had suddenly jumped up and slapped him across the face. Vernon whose office was also in Senate Square had come to me for treatment, solace and recompense for the indignity, more than to complain of the pain, he had suffered.

The civil service bush telephones began to hum and Shirley Amerasinghe, then a rising star as director of establishments called a confab for the afternoon and the CCS association decided that it was time to take a stand. They would take-up the issue with the prime minister on a non-negotiable condition, that Piyadasa must be both, criminally charged in the courts and suspended from entering the Port. The problem was a complex one for the prime minister since the higher echelons of the bureaucracy had now decided to dig their heels in while the political union leadership including Philip Gunawardene, his minister of agriculture and food, who had connections with Piyadasa, were for settling the matter with an apology or similar face-saving device.

I will never forget a particular high-level meeting called by the prime minister in his Senate Square office when he pleaded and tried to cajole the permanent secretary to the ministry of transport and works, the diminutive and implacable M F de S Jayaratne, under whom the Port then functioned, to step down from the high position that he was taking and agree to some compromise so that the deadlock could be broken.

To emphasize his point Bandaranaike got up and walked round the table, to Jayaratne but the permanent secretary who remained sitting throughout, would not budge. `Not on my life’ was all he did not say. Bandaranaike’s pleas were of no avail and the case against Piyadasa was filed. In this particular contest the prime minister had lost.

Actually, the prime minister and M F de S Jayaratne were good friends and often played billiards against each other at the Orient Club in Colombo 7 where they were both members, but this relationship had nothing to do with the performance of duty. Jayaratne was one of the best officials I have ever seen in that respect.

There were other points of contention developing in the coalition, which Mr Bandaranaike had, with ingenuity and persuasive skill, put together. The fundamental contradictions between right and left, which he had managed with such resourcefulness, were emerging and they burst out into the open with Mr Philip Gunawardene’s Paddy Lands draft legislation.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Misinterpreting President Dissanayake on National Reconciliation

Published

on

President Dissanayake

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been investing his political capital in going to the public to explain some of the most politically sensitive and controversial issues. At a time when easier political choices are available, the president is choosing the harder path of confronting ethnic suspicion and communal fears. There are three issues in particular on which the president’s words have generated strong reactions. These are first with regard to Buddhist pilgrims going to the north of the country with nationalist motivations. Second is the controversy relating to the expansion of the Tissa Raja Maha Viharaya, a recently constructed Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai which has become a flashpoint between local Tamil residents and Sinhala nationalist groups. Third is the decision not to give the war victory a central place in the Independence Day celebrations.

Even in the opposition, when his party held only three seats in parliament, Anura Kumara Dissanayake took his role as a public educator seriously. He used to deliver lengthy, well researched and easily digestible speeches in parliament. He continues this practice as president. It can be seen that his statements are primarily meant to elevate the thinking of the people and not to win votes the easy way. The easy way to win votes whether in Sri Lanka or elsewhere in the world is to rouse nationalist and racist sentiments and ride that wave. Sri Lanka’s post independence political history shows that narrow ethnic mobilisation has often produced short term electoral gains but long term national damage.

Sections of the opposition and segments of the general public have been critical of the president for taking these positions. They have claimed that the president is taking these positions in order to obtain more Tamil votes or to appease minority communities. The same may be said in reverse of those others who take contrary positions that they seek the Sinhala votes. These political actors who thrive on nationalist mobilisation have attempted to portray the president’s statements as an abandonment of the majority community. The president’s actions need to be understood within the larger framework of national reconciliation and long term national stability.

Reconciler’s Duty

When the president referred to Buddhist pilgrims from the south going to the north, he was not speaking about pilgrims visiting long established Buddhist heritage sites such as Nagadeepa or Kandarodai. His remarks were directed at a specific and highly contentious development, the recently built Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai and those built elsewhere in the recent past in the north and east. The temple in Kankesanturai did not emerge from the religious needs of a local Buddhist community as there is none in that area. It has been constructed on land that was formerly owned and used by Tamil civilians and which came under military occupation as a high security zone. What has made the issue of the temple particularly controversial is that it was established with the support of the security forces.

The controversy has deepened because the temple authorities have sought to expand the site from approximately one acre to nearly fourteen acres on the basis that there was a historic Buddhist temple in that area up to the colonial period. However, the Tamil residents of the area fear that expansion would further displace surrounding residents and consolidate a permanent Buddhist religious presence in the present period in an area where the local population is overwhelmingly Hindu. For many Tamils in Kankesanturai, the issue is not Buddhism as a religion but the use of religion as a vehicle for territorial assertion and demographic changes in a region that bore the brunt of the war. Likewise, there are other parts of the north and east where other temples or places of worship have been established by the military personnel in their camps during their war-time occupation and questions arise regarding the future when these camps are finally closed.

There are those who have actively organised large scale pilgrimages from the south to make the Tissa temple another important religious site. These pilgrimages are framed publicly as acts of devotion but are widely perceived locally as demonstrations of dominance. Each such visit heightens tension, provokes protest by Tamil residents, and risks confrontation. For communities that experienced mass displacement, military occupation and land loss, the symbolism of a state backed religious structure on contested land with the backing of the security forces is impossible to separate from memories of war and destruction. A president committed to reconciliation cannot remain silent in the face of such provocations, however uncomfortable it may be to challenge sections of the majority community.

High-minded leadership

The controversy regarding the president’s Independence Day speech has also generated strong debate. In that speech the president did not refer to the military victory over the LTTE and also did not use the term “war heroes” to describe soldiers. For many Sinhala nationalist groups, the absence of these references was seen as an attempt to diminish the sacrifices of the armed forces. The reality is that Independence Day means very different things to different communities. In the north and east the same day is marked by protest events and mourning and as a “Black Day”, symbolising the consolidation of a state they continue to experience as excluding them and not empathizing with the full extent of their losses.

By way of contrast, the president’s objective was to ensure that Independence Day could be observed as a day that belonged to all communities in the country. It is not correct to assume that the president takes these positions in order to appease minorities or secure electoral advantage. The president is only one year into his term and does not need to take politically risky positions for short term electoral gains. Indeed, the positions he has taken involve confronting powerful nationalist political forces that can mobilise significant opposition. He risks losing majority support for his statements. This itself indicates that the motivation is not electoral calculation.

President Dissanayake has recognized that Sri Lanka’s long term political stability and economic recovery depend on building trust among communities that once peacefully coexisted and then lived through decades of war. Political leadership is ultimately tested by the willingness to say what is necessary rather than what is politically expedient. The president’s recent interventions demonstrate rare national leadership and constitute an attempt to shift public discourse away from ethnic triumphalism and toward a more inclusive conception of nationhood. Reconciliation cannot take root if national ceremonies reinforce the perception of victory for one community and defeat for another especially in an internal conflict.

BY Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Recovery of LTTE weapons

Published

on

Sri Lanka Navy in action

I have read a newspaper report that the Special Task Force of Sri Lanka Police, with help of Military Intelligence, recovered three buried yet well-preserved 84mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers used by the LTTE, in the Kudumbimalai area, Batticaloa.

These deadly weapons were used by the LTTE SEA TIGER WING to attack the Sri Lanka Navy ships and craft in 1990s. The first incident was in February 1997, off Iranativu island, in the Gulf of Mannar.

Admiral Cecil Tissera took over as Commander of the Navy on 27 January, 1997, from Admiral Mohan Samarasekara.

The fight against the LTTE was intensified from 1996 and the SLN was using her Vanguard of the Navy, Fast Attack Craft Squadron, to destroy the LTTE’s littoral fighting capabilities. Frequent confrontations against the LTTE Sea Tiger boats were reported off Mullaitivu, Point Pedro and Velvetiturai areas, where SLN units became victorious in most of these sea battles, except in a few incidents where the SLN lost Fast Attack Craft.

Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers

The intelligence reports confirmed that the LTTE Sea Tigers was using new recoilless rocket launchers against aluminium-hull FACs, and they were deadly at close quarter sea battles, but the exact type of this weapon was not disclosed.

The following incident, which occurred in February 1997, helped confirm the weapon was Carl Gustaf 84 mm Recoilless gun!

DATE: 09TH FEBRUARY, 1997, morning 0600 hrs.

LOCATION: OFF IRANATHIVE.

FACs: P 460 ISRAEL BUILT, COMMANDED BY CDR MANOJ JAYESOORIYA

P 452 CDL BUILT, COMMANDED BY LCDR PM WICKRAMASINGHE (ON TEMPORARY COMMAND. PROPER OIC LCDR N HEENATIGALA)

OPERATED FROM KKS.

CONFRONTED WITH LTTE ATTACK CRAFT POWERED WITH FOUR 250 HP OUT BOARD MOTORS.

TARGET WAS DESTROYED AND ONE LTTE MEMBER WAS CAPTURED.

LEADING MARINE ENGINEERING MECHANIC OF THE FAC CAME UP TO THE BRIDGE CARRYING A PROJECTILE WHICH WAS FIRED BY THE LTTE BOAT, DURING CONFRONTATION, WHICH PENETRATED THROUGH THE FAC’s HULL, AND ENTERED THE OICs CABIN (BETWEEN THE TWO BUNKS) AND HIT THE AUXILIARY ENGINE ROOM DOOR AND HAD FALLEN DOWN WITHOUT EXPLODING. THE ENGINE ROOM DOOR WAS HEAVILY DAMAGED LOOSING THE WATER TIGHT INTEGRITY OF THE FAC.

THE PROJECTILE WAS LATER HANDED OVER TO THE NAVAL WEAPONS EXPERTS WHEN THE FACs RETURNED TO KKS. INVESTIGATIONS REVEALED THE WEAPON USED BY THE ENEMY WAS 84 mm CARL GUSTAF SHOULDER-FIRED RECOILLESS GUN AND THIS PROJECTILE WAS AN ILLUMINATER BOMB OF ONE MILLION CANDLE POWER. BUT THE ATTACKERS HAS FAILED TO REMOVE THE SAFETY PIN, THEREFORE THE BOMB WAS NOT ACTIVATED.

Sea Tigers

Carl Gustaf 84 mm recoilless gun was named after Carl Gustaf Stads Gevärsfaktori, which, initially, produced it. Sweden later developed the 84mm shoulder-fired recoilless gun by the Royal Swedish Army Materiel Administration during the second half of 1940s as a crew served man- portable infantry support gun for close range multi-role anti-armour, anti-personnel, battle field illumination, smoke screening and marking fire.

It is confirmed in Wikipedia that Carl Gustaf Recoilless shoulder-fired guns were used by the only non-state actor in the world – the LTTE – during the final Eelam War.

It is extremely important to check the batch numbers of the recently recovered three launchers to find out where they were produced and other details like how they ended up in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka?

By Admiral Ravindra C. Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc (Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Continue Reading

Features

Yellow Beatz … a style similar to K-pop!

Published

on

Yes, get ready to vibe with Yellow Beatz, Sri Lanka’s awesome girl group, keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-pop!

With high-energy beats and infectious hooks, these talented ladies are here to shake up the music scene.

Think bold moves, catchy hooks, and, of course, spicy versions of old Sinhala hits, and Yellow Beatz is the package you won’t want to miss!

According to a spokesman for the group, Yellow Beatz became a reality during the Covid period … when everyone was stuck at home, in lockdown.

“First we interviewed girls, online, and selected a team that blended well, as four voices, and then started rehearsals. One of the cover songs we recorded, during those early rehearsals, unexpectedly went viral on Facebook. From that moment onward, we continued doing cover songs, and we received a huge response. Through that, we were able to bring back some beautiful Sri Lankan musical creations that were being forgotten, and introduce them to the new generation.”

The team members, I am told, have strong musical skills and with proper training their goal is to become a vocal group recognised around the world.

Believe me, their goal, they say, is not only to take Sri Lanka’s name forward, in the music scene, but to bring home a Grammy Award, as well.

“We truly believe we can achieve this with the love and support of everyone in Sri Lanka.”

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz as they have received an exceptional opportunity to represent Sri Lanka at the World Championships of Performing Arts in the USA.

Under the guidance of Chris Raththara, the Director for Sri Lanka, and with the blessings of all Sri Lankans, the girls have a great hope that they can win this milestone.

“We believe this will be a moment of great value for us as Yellow Beatz, and also for all Sri Lankans, and it will be an important inspiration for the future of our country.”

Along with all the preparation for the event in the USA, they went on to say they also need to manage their performances, original song recordings, and everything related.

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz

“We have strong confidence in ourselves and in our sincere intentions, because we are a team that studies music deeply, researches within the field, and works to take the uniqueness of Sri Lankan identity to the world.”

At present, they gather at the Voices Lab Academy, twice a week, for new creations and concert rehearsals.

This project was created by Buddhika Dayarathne who is currently working as a Pop Vocal lecturer at SLTC Campus. Voice Lab Academy is also his own private music academy and Yellow Beatz was formed through that platform.

Buddhika is keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-Pop and Yellow Beatz began as a result of that vision. With that same aim, we all work together as one team.

“Although it was a little challenging for the four of us girls to work together at first, we have united for our goal and continue to work very flexibly and with dedication. Our parents and families also give their continuous blessings and support for this project,” Rameesha, Dinushi, Newansa and Risuri said.

Last year, Yellow Beatz released their first original song, ‘Ihirila’ , and with everything happening this year, they are also preparing for their first album.

Continue Reading

Trending