Connect with us

Editorial

Channel 4 – Why now? Why not?

Published

on

The latest Channel 4 documentary on Sri Lanka’s Easter Sunday bombings is claimed to be an exposure, but while there’s nothing dramatically new in it, it seems to have is set the cat among certain pigeons. Allegations that the military intelligence was involved with Islamic extremists involved in the Easter Sunday carnage is not new. In fact, three investigations have already linked the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) and the State Intelligence Service (SIS) to the bombers.

What the new allegations in the Channel 4 documentary against the current SIS chief and former DMI officer, retired Major General Suresh Sallay, are aimed at is connecting the dots to the Rajapaksa family, and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in particular. The video suggests there was a conspiracy to bring the Rajapaksas back to power in 2019. The bombing certainly helped Gotabaya to clinch the presidential candidacy at a time when the country clamoured for a strong leader who could fight terrorism. Within two days of the April 21, 2019 bombing, Gotabaya came out declaring that he was the national security candidate who could wipe out Islamic extremists.

It should be clear even to those not familiar with local political chicanery that Gotabaya Rajapaksa benefited from the attack, but there is no proving beyond reasonable doubt that he organized the carnage. So what is the new Channel 4 video about?  On the face of it, it is an attempt by the British public broadcaster (Channel 4 is a British government-owned network) to find the “truth” behind the Easter attacks, a campaign spearheaded by Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith and the Catholic Church. The Vatican too had weighed in with the Pope himself urging Sri Lankan leaders to establish who was behind the most audacious terror attack even for a country used to decades of senseless violence.

The SLPP has been quick to dismiss the documentary arguing that their party was on the ascendancy after the February 2018 local elections when they won a landslide and was anyway on the road to building on that success at the November 2019 presidential polls.

The SLPP stalwarts may have forgotten how unpopular they had become with their 52-day “coup” with the backing of President Maithripala Sirisena. The then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe saw a surge in the support for him during the illegal power grab orchestrated by Sirisena and Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Insiders know that Gotabaya Rajapaksa was taken by surprise when he heard from a friend that elder brother Mahinda had been sworn in as prime minister. His prospects dimmed when public opinion turned against the SLPP with the power grab. Then comes the Easter bombings. There is no denying that Rajapaksa won, thanks to the public anger over the failure of the Wickremesinghe-Sirisena government to prevent the carnage. People were angry that intelligence warnings issued by an agency in neighbouring India had been ignored. Sri Lanka’s own DMI and SIS were oblivious to what was going to happen.

A vocal campaigner who had previously pointed fingers at the state intelligence apparatus, Manusha Nanayakkara, agrees that the allegations should be investigated afresh, but casts aspersions on Channel 4 intentions.  He and other worthies of the SLPP have said that the video was timed for the UN Human Rights Council sessions opening tomorrow (Sept 11) in Geneva.

The British broadcaster had initially announced their documentary was going to be aired on August 15. Then it was pushed back by another week. Finally, it was released on Tuesday British time (Wednesday early morning Sri Lanka time) after Sri Lankan authorities raised issues that had to be legally resolved. The UNHRC has three regular sessions a year — February-March, June-July and September-October. Therefore, to argue that this release is to coincide with a UNHRC session is a stretch.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa has responded to the documentary and denied that he influenced Suresh Sallay or had any dealings with the intelligence operative while he was out of power between 2015 and 2019 and had nothing to do with the intelligence and security apparatus. Looks like Gotabaya has also forgotten about the 52-day government his brother led and that he still had loyalists in the security establishment. In fact, Gotabaya admits in his statement that he promoted Sallay as the head of the SIS, no sooner he became president.

More strangely, Gotabaya remains silent on an equally devastating allegation that he wanted the editor of the Sunday Leader Lasantha Wickrematunge killed. The “insider” quoted in the Channel 4 video, whistleblower Azad Maulana, claims Gotabaya wanted Lasantha killed ASAP (As Soon As Possible). Maulana was the spokesman of the then Eastern province chief minister and current SLPP MP, Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, alias Pillayan. There are allegations that Pillayan was involved with the formation of the infamous “Tripoli” unit of the DMI which is accused of killing Lasantha and attacking several others when Gotabaya was the defence secretary under his brother Mahinda’s presidency.

Thus, the Channel 4 video does not offer any answers, but only raises more questions. As with the three previous investigations, the sum total of the documentary is the need for not only criminal investigation but a broader intelligence probe. MPs from both sides of the House have called for the suspension of SIS chief Suresh Sallay, who is implicated in the documentary. He has denied meeting the Easter Sunday bombers and argued that he was out of the country at the time. However, one of his former bosses, Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka has already cast doubt over those claims saying Sallay, like many other intelligence operatives, would have travelled under several passports.

As Cardinal Ranjith himself articulated on Wednesday, whatever the perceived bias is of Channel 4, it is time for an independent, transparent, internationally acceptable investigation into all aspects of the carnage. The government owes it to its people, not least the victims and survivors of the attacks, because it is the right thing to do.



Editorial

Astrologers’ ire

Published

on

Saturday 14th March, 2026

Some prominent astrologers are up in arms, claiming that the JVP-NPP government has not officially recognised the list of traditional New Year auspicious times or the nekath seettuwa they have submitted. They have been holding press conferences and raking the government leaders over the coals (pun intended) for what they describe as a sinister move to devalue the cultural significance of the Sinhala and Tamil New Year. All previous governments officially endorsed the nekath seettu, according to which New Year activities are usually conducted.

The Department of Cultural Affairs has responded, saying that two groups of astrologers have submitted two different nekath seettu, and it will make a final decision after allowing public and expert views to be expressed thereon. It has also said that it, together with the Ministry of Buddhist and Religious Affairs, will continue to take necessary steps to safeguard and promote the country’s cultural values, including longstanding New Year traditions.

Sri Lankan governments want the public to do as they say, and they do as astrologers say. In the final analysis, the whole country does as astrologers say. There was a time when even military operations in the North and the East were conducted according to auspicious times. Many of them ended in disaster, and ones that were not launched according to auspicious times yielded the desired results in 2009. Interestingly, the President who provided political leadership for the country’s successful war on terror, suffered an ignominious defeat by advancing a presidential election on astrological advice. No astrologer could predict that another President would have to flee the country and resign.

Some critics of the incumbent government have claimed that it is not keen to recognise the New Year auspicious times officially as it is led by a bunch of Marxists who place no value on cultural practices. They have pointed out that Marxists generally treat astrology as superstition or a cultural phenomenon rather than a legitimate system within Marxist theory. However, Karl Marx has not made any specific reference to astrology though some Marxist scholars have taken a critical view thereof. In the 1950s, German philosopher, Theodor W. Adorno, a major Marxist influenced social theorist, wrote about astrology and horoscope columns in newspapers and magazines as part of his critique of mass culture under capitalism. He viewed astrology as a symptom of irrationalism and conformity in capitalist societies, where people are distracted from systemic social problems and instead turn to vague supernatural explanations. This view has gained currency among not only Marxists but many non-Marxist scholars and thinkers. One may recall that Voltaire also famously said, “Superstition is to religion what astrology to astronomy—the mad daughter of a wise mother. These daughters have too long dominated the earth.” This is particularly true of Sri Lanka and some other countries in this region.

If auspicious times are based on mathematically determined planetary positions, how come there are two lists of nekath. How is the government going to decide which list is correct? One can only hope that the government will not favour the group of astrologers backed by NPP politicians. There is hardly anything that Sri Lankan politicians do not politicise. Unless the government handles the nekath issue carefully and resolves it to the satisfaction of both sides, there may be what can be described as an astrologers’ war, and the people who rely on the official nekath seettuwa to conduct the New Year rituals will be confused and the political opponents of the JVP/NPP will surely weaponise the issue.

Continue Reading

Editorial

Heed ominous signs – II

Published

on

Friday 13th March, 2026

US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have not been able to stabilise the global oil market with their rhetoric and assurances. Their airstrikes on Iran’s naval ships, and mine-laying vessels, etc., have not helped make the Strait of Hormuz safe for international navigation. Iran has attacked six ships so far in that vital choke point. Oil prices began to climb again yesterday despite the release of 400 million barrels of oil, as part of a coordinated International Energy Agency action involving several countries. The US announced that it alone would release as many as 172 million barrels of oil to stabilise the market.

Having carried out successful attacks on vessels passing through the Hormuz Strait and sent the global oil market into panic mode, Iran now says it will stop attacks only on several conditions—end of US-Israeli military attacks, a binding guarantee that there will be no future strikes, recognition of Iran’s sovereign rights, and compensation for war damage. The US and Israel have ignored these conditions.

Prudence demands that Sri Lanka brace itself for an energy crisis. But the JVP-NPP government is all at sea, and its response to the crisis appears to be all over the place. It is apparently labouring under the misconception that it will be able to reduce fuel consumption and manage the crisis simply by jacking up prices. There’s no shame in rationing fuel during a global crisis, as we argued in a previous editorial comment. The previous government introduced a QR based fuel rationing system, which helped it not only overcome a crippling fuel crisis but also retain its hold on power. In fact, some economic advisors reportedly pushed for fuel rationing to prevent a crisis in early 2022, but the Rajapaksas ignored their counsel only to head for the hills with angry protesters in close pursuit a couple of months later.

Minister Wasantha Samarasinghe has claimed that recent panic buying and hoarding of fuel led to a depletion of the country’s petroleum reserves. His claim should be taken with a pinch of salt, for he is trying to justify the huge fuel price increases, but the government could have controlled that situation by resorting to QR-based fuel sales. The same method can be used to prevent many people from using extra gas cylinders to stock up on LPG at the expense of others. Some Litro agents themselves are known to hoard gas and sell it at a black market premium.

Thailand has said its energy reserves are sufficient for about 95 days, but it has already adopted emergency measures to curtail energy consumption. Many other countries have done the same. Pakistan has set an example worthy of emulation. The emergency fuel crisis management measures adopted by Pakistan include a four-day work week for state institutions, work from home for about half of employees in public and private sectors, except essential services, temporary closure of schools and universities, the introduction of online learning, 50% cut in fuel allocations for state vehicles besides the removal of around 60 percent of official vehicles off the road, restrictions on official travel and encouragement of virtual meetings in government institutions. Sri Lanka should learn from Pakistan’s fuel-saving approach.

In this country, no opening ceremony is considered complete without the presence of either the President or the Prime Minister or a Cabinet Minister. We have had Presidents, Prime Ministers and ministers travelling all over the country, attending various ceremonies and meetings all these years; the incumbent rulers are no exception. The President, the Prime Minister and ministers can inaugurate projects and attend meetings remotely, and help save a lot of fuel and millions of rupees spent on security arrangements, etc. Why should the President travel all the way from Colombo to faraway places to attend District Coordination Committee meetings when he can address them online? Government politicians and officials ought to stop running around like headless chickens and help save fuel and state funds.

It is high time the government stopped dilly-dallying and introduced QR-based fuel rationing.

Continue Reading

Editorial

ME War and the loser

Published

on

Thursday 12th March, 2026

It is not possible to predict who will emerge victorious in the ongoing war in the Middle East or whether the conflict will end without a clear winner though US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would have the world believe that they will surely be the winners. The US-Israel military power is doubtlessly far superior to that of Iran, but in a war of this nature, military might alone does not guarantee a clear victory.

Difficult as it may be to predict who will win in the current Gulf conflict, the overall loser is already known; it is the world economy. Global markets are heavily reliant on President Trump’s assurance that the war will not last long, and the release of the G7 strategic oil reserves to stabilise the world oil supply. But Trump’s most intense airstrikes on Tuesday have not yielded the desired results. Iran remains defiant and has raised the stakes for the global economy by threatening to bring oil exports from the region through the Strait of Hormuz to a complete halt unless the US and Israel stop attacks. It continues to fire missiles and carry out drone attacks on US interests in the region. Trump has announced that the US will seriously consider providing security to the ships sailing through the Hormuz Strait, but whether the US is equal to the task is the question. It is being argued in some quarters that Trump and Netanyahu have already bitten off more than they can chew.

There is reason to believe that Trump went to war with Iran without a proper assessment of the ground situation. His plan was to make short work of the current Iranian regime with shock-and-awe aerial bombardments and the assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but his plan has apparently gone awry. The slain Iranian leader’s son has been elected the Supreme Leader. Trump may have expected the Iranian anti-government protesters to make the most of the ongoing bombing spree, come out in their millions and bring down their embattled regime, but they are silent today. Perhaps, they are too scared to challenge the beleaguered regime, which has warned that ‘every soldier has his finger on the trigger’ and protesters will be treated as traitors. It is also possible that the protesters are now disillusioned with the US after realising that Washington has sought to use them as a cat’s paw in its efforts to grab Iran’s oil resources.

Has the US made, in Iran, a military miscalculation similar to the one in Afghanistan? The US Intelligence community and the military estimated that Kabul was resilient enough to hold out for several months after the withdrawal of the US troops in 2021. But that city fell to the Taliban in days, causing the then US President Joe Biden to admit that the collapse had happened “more quickly than the US had anticipated”.

Iran may not have anticipated a joint US-Israel military operation of this magnitude. It remains to be seen whether Iran can sustain its missile and drone attacks vis-à-vis the US-Israeli air strikes on its arms stockpiles and military installations. However, what one gathers from the views of military analysts is that it is very unlikely that President Trump will go so far as to deploy ground troops in Iran, with about 59% of Americans opposing his war, according to opinion surveys. In its war for oil in Iraq, the US had the backing of a much broader international coalition.

Nothing could be more humiliating to the US than Washington’s call for help from Ukraine to deal with the Iranian drones. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whom President Trump once showed the door during a White House meeting, has confirmed that the US sought his help to defend its allies in the Persian Gulf against the Iranian drones. Did Trump start a war without a proper assessment of the enemy’s drone capability?

The enormous economic cost of the Middle East conflict will have to be borne by not only the parties thereto but also by the entire world. Trump’s assurances and the G7 responses have prevented panic in global markets, but unless the US and Israel end the war soon and take steps to keep the Strait of Hormuz functional, oil prices will soar again, pushing the world closer to a global recession. If Trump and Netanyahu stop their war midway, they will face a domestic political backlash. Trump and Netanyahu have the Epstein files and corruption charges to contend with, respectively. The Trump administration is facing midterm elections in November. Politically speaking, Trump and Netanyahu are on a tiger ride in the Middle East.

The biggest challenge before the US and Israel in the ongoing conflict is to prevent Iran from shifting the war to the economic front, and make the global economy scream.

Continue Reading

Trending