I was perplexed by the absurd claim made by G. A. D.Sirimal that China has been purposely trying to place Sri Lanka in a debt trap. This myth, most probably invented by Sinophobia groups, has been circulating in the media for some time. In Sri Lanka, certain political groups have picked it up when they ran out of other issues.
Let us look at some of the arguments.
(1) China’s overseas investments have a geopolitical motive: This is what an unnamed ‘African Research Assistant’ says. There is no clear evidence presented. At most this is no more than a private opinion.
(2) Most consequent investments are undertaken by the Chinese state-owned companies: What is wrong with that? We must remember that until recently China had a state run economy, and the financial organisations capable of investment in foreign countries are partly or fully owned by the state. Besides this, who said that all the funds invested in Sri Lanka in the past by the other countries, including several Western Countries in major development in projects, came from private sources? If that is the case, those countries must be having wonderful, highly philanthropic private investors.
(3) China has been ready to fund projects which were not financially viable (presumably with a view to keep Sri Lanka under debt obligations for long periods so that the investor can dictate its own terms): This is perhaps the strangest assertion made by Sinophobiacs.
The choice of capital projects, their study and formulation is always the function of the recipient country. The investor comes into the picture only after that. Unless Sri Lankans are a set of idiots who cannot decide, by themselves, on what to do about the economic development of the country, that work will not be entrusted to a prospective investor. If so, accusing China of deliberately choosing financially non-viable projects to fund is highly untenable. If someone has to take the blame for choosing financially non-viable projects, it is the recipient country authorities who have to take the blame. In any case, whether the major projects funded by China are non-viable is in my view a debatable issue. As far as we can see, most if not all China funded major projects (mentioned in Mr Sirimal’s letter) are infrastructure projects with long gestation periods. Their financial viability depends on the time horizon considered. In any case, their social benefits are usually much higher than their social costs. It is a great mistake to say that they will make the country poorer.
In this connection, it is necessary to point out a fact that has been often overlooked. If a proper planning procedure is in place, a public sector project will be subjected to a thorough technical study, which invariably shows the future cash-flow, and answers the question how the loan will be repaid (in the case of a loan funded project). Then a situation where a future owner comes along and declares his inability to amortize the debt cannot arise. If such a situation has arisen in the case of some of the large public sector infrastructure projects, it strongly suggests that the government of the day did not bother with the project planning part, rushed the project, by-passing the established good planning practices.
I am aware, through my long association with the National Planning Department, that there was a time-tested project approval procedure in operation, under which no capital project got included in the Government Budget unless it was first included in the Government’s Public Investment Programme. This means that the project would have been subjected to a good technical study and appraisal. In such a scenario, it will be a great mistake to blame the lender for funding non-viable projects. The lender came in because it trusted the borrower – a sovereign government guarantee about its repayment.
Those who blame China for certain ulterior motives in coming out to assist Sri Lanka should remember that China had always been a good and consistent friend of Sri Lanka – a country which has not asked for anything in return. The earliest instance which comes to our mind is the Rubber-Rice-Pact during the 1960s. The Government of the day faced a serious problem of supplying enough rice to the people, because the traditional suppliers failed to meet their obligations at a time when our country faced severe foreign exchange shortages. When we asked China to help, they came up with a brilliant proposal involving a barter arrangement: to exchange our rubber for Chinese rice. The older generation in our country will remember how some powerful Western countries strongly opposed this arrangement and did many things to sabotage it. (The barter arrangement was to pre-empt a powerful country from using its influence to intercept the flow of payments.) They also found some strong allies in Sri Lanka who, like the present day Sinophobia crowd, warned of dire consequences. But Mr R.G. Senanayaka, as Minister of Trade, gave bold leadership to implement the proposal. He had to wage a great struggle even against some members of his own Government. However, he somehow pushed it through. In the end, we avoided a serious shortage of food in this country and the rubber industry received a substantial boost, which lasted a number of years, perhaps a decade.
We also remember that during our struggle against the vicious terrorist outfit – the LTTE, most of our so-called special friends refused to sell us urgently needed arms. That is understandable, because one of them had a history of helping the LTTE terrorist group to establish itself by opening up training camps within its territory, and openly supplying them funds needed for their criminal activities.It was only China that came to our assistance at that time, and offered us whatever we asked for. Some people in this country seem to have already forgotten the fact that friendship with China was a critical factor in our success in the war against terrorism.
During the period following the defeat of terrorism, the LTTE Rump managed to organise a highly effective anti-Sri Lanka campaign in some of the Western countries, to punish us for winning the war and ending the life of the most dangerous terrorist leader. They were actively supported by the Darusman, Moon and Pillai group, and the Tamil diaspora crowd at the Geneva UNHRC. While all our traditional friends deserted us at Geneva meetings, and Sri Lanka’s own official response to the wild accusations of war crimes remained lukewarm and timid, it was China and Russia who unwaveringly stood by us.
Unlike some other powerful countries which try to enter into various kinds of cleverly drafted agreements with small countries, such as ours, by offering bribes (deceptively labelled development assistance) for the purpose of converting them eventually into military bases, China has never tried to draw us into great-power political conflicts in a similar manner.
There are several more such instances when China came to help Sri Lanka, and perhaps other similarly placed countries, displaying that country’s sincerity and maturity in conducting its foreign policy. Therefore, it is necessary to find every opportunity to express our gratitude to the great country – China, instead of pretending to find ways to extricate ourselves from non-existing traps.
Need to save the Sangha
May I commend S. M. Sumanadasa for the thought-provoking and timely message to articulate Buddhists, now in deep slumber, on the grave crisis knocking at the door which sadly has escaped the attention of all. The dismal truth is that the revered Sasana is getting destroyed from within.
It is evident with the many problems the lay people have to face in these times this all-important fact had escaped their attention. They blindly pay obeisance to all who don robes as tradition made all of us to believe what “DUSSEELAS ” propagated to respect the robe. I must emphatically say that there are exemplary monks and they are helpless since it is the responsibility of the Maha Nayakes to voice their concerns and initiate corrective measures. However, the Mahanayakes other than their meetings with politicians who come with gifts, obviously paid for by the people, nothing of importance had been achieved.
The country should know what advice they gave and also whether they followed the advice proffered. It’s a common sight to see politicians rushing to speak to the media and this is to satisfy their ego.
It’s common knowledge that the present situation is most unacceptable and remedial action needs high priority and this must originate from the Sangha.
The first step in my view, is for the heads of the three Nikayas and a few senior monks comprising about 10 or 15 to get together and address this issue seriously without further delay.
The Buddha never CREATED caste based sects or preached the pristine Dhamma to select groups. Prince Siddartha born to King Suddodana gave up all worldly pleasures and traversed a tortuous path to end suffering and after attaining BUDDHAHOOD proceeded to indicate the path to end suffering and in doing so clearly left with those who listened to him to accept or reject what he preached. While commending SMS, let me start from where he ended by saying that a great responsibility is with SENIOR LAY BUDDHISTS to ensure that the pristine Dhamma does not fade away due to neglect from both the clergy and laity.
For reasons of brevity I will take a few points from his article and comment.
The Buddha Sasana is nourished by those who gave up lay life and donned the sacred robe and the lay people. I quote from the Dhammapada which the late most Venerable Narada personalised and gave me.
“THE PURE ARE WORTHY OF THE ROBE BUT NOT THE IMPURE ” Hence its abundantly clear that the Buddha expected the robe not to be used TO GO PLACES and that those who don the sacred robe must conduct themselves within the vinaya, there is no ambiguity there.
Once a person gives up lay life, it is incumbent on him to devote his full time to enrich his knowledge of the Dhamma and impart such knowledge to the lay people to lead a life within the Dhamma which essentially is free of GREED, POWER INCLUDED.The lay people look up to them for guidance and work towards emancipation and they in turn provide the needs of monks.
A. While acknowledging that majority of the monks live within the teachings of Buddha many have strayed out of their main task and dabble in lay activity. There is no dispute that the ” voice cut of men in robes ” have brought shame and ridicule on all bhikkus. We do not see such conduct coming from the clergy of other faiths.
B. I have to, without reservation agree with the comment of SMS that a person who is much in the news accepted by one ,but cold shouldered by another leads a trade union of nurses. It’s common knowledge that at a time when a pandemic of epic proportions had hit the beleaguered country he influenced the union to strike causing incalculable harm to a badly stretched health system battling to save lives. He would never have resorted to that course if he was within the inner circle like the permanent President of another Health sector union. Such conduct was far from the teachings of the Buddha as COMPASSION AND WISDOM ARE GUIDING PRINCIPLES. I guess most are unaware that this person is accused of invading some others temple with political backing and is now facing litigation where the case appears never to end.This monk unquestionably tarnishes the image of all Buddhaputhras who live within the VINAYA indicated by the Thatthagatha.
I think it is not out of place if I mention that the much maligned man who is the architect of the draconian legislation which exists today refused to meet him as such a position was not meant for a person who wore the sacred robe.
SMS who pioneered this wake up call mentioned what a Katina Pinkama was for and what the Sangha had to do during the VAS SEASON OR THE RAINY SEASON. The lay people know well that most temples do not follow the edicts but await the Pinkama with much fanfare .
He also touched on the Mercedes BMW phobia. My mind raced to a prelate who lived within the vinaya whom I knew closely. He is the late Ven Madihe Pannasiha. He mentioned to me how the politicians of all hues who rush to the hills who await their Mercedes cars had reached him with an offer. He had declined and told him that a dayaka had placed an Austin for him to get about and that he would prefer to get some repairs done since that needed attention.
I must also mention my experience with the late Ven Madulwave Sobitha Thera. The family invited him for a bana preaching and as is customary, a pooja is offered. Without giving him something that he may not require I inquired and his response gladdened me no end. He said I have enough for my needs, however if you can it is expensive please get me a OLA LEAF PIRITH POTH WAHANSE to be given to a rural temple where they do not have this most useful item. To this day I rejoice at the opportunity he gave me to perform that meritorious deed. May he attain the supreme bliss of Nibbana, SMS also touched on yet another disaster, namely the two renowned Pirivenas getting converted as state Universities. I recall how the maverick of Galle rejoiced having performed that task, perhaps with good intentions but the fall out was disastrous.
While thanking SMS for having set the ball rolling I thank the Editor too for providing some space to highlight this all important need where learned monks will give high priority and save the destruction of the SASANA from within.
The protection of Theravada BUDDHISM IS A FUNDAMENTAL DUTY OF ALL BUDDHISTS IN SRI LANKA.
Teachers paid lower than unskilled casual labour!
I was shocked and ashamed by the information about wages paid to teachers that was revealed, on July 20, by a leader (Mahinda Jayasinghe?) of a trade union of school teachers. A graduate teacher is paid some Rs.33,000 a month on initial appointment and some Rs. 45, 000 a month after 15 years in service. A teacher fresh from a Teacher’s College receives even a lower salary. A friend of mine, a graduate in science from the Colombo University, who retired from teaching after 32 years, receives a princely monthly pension of Rs.48,000. They accept these low wages because there is widespread unemployment in the country and any employment with superannuation benefits is a bonus. The alternative is often domestic service in West Asia. In 2020, the income, per person, in this country, was about Rs. 60,000, a month. The last year for which data is available (2019) gives the income of per person income in Sri Lanka as Rs.57,400 per month month. (Take the total income in the country; divide that among the total population, including infants and old men and women and you get income per person in the country. These figures are a rough assessment.) A graduate teacher in school is paid a little more than half the income of an average person in this country. It is hard to imagine that and far harder to believe that. Believe that, you had better. They live, at best, in genteel poverty. Is that fair, is that just and is that productive? Some years ago, in this newspaper, I showed that in 1960, a graduate teacher in this country, on first appointment, was paid three times the per capita income at that time and university teachers double that. Imagine a young family of two university graduate teachers and a child, today. The monthly income of all three of them would be about Rs. 66,000, a bit above the average income of one person in the country. Then the income per capita income of this family is Rs.22,000, (divide 66,000 into three and you get 22,000.) about $7 a day-not far above the poverty income. An MP legally earns roughly about Rs.500,000 a month. Many politicians come to Parliament with debt payable to banks. Within two or three years they are rich men. They send their children to expensive elite private schools and have no interest in public schools. Graduate teachers, even after 15 years in service, earn ¾ of today’s average income per person. How dare anyone find fault with school teachers who earn an extra rupee giving private tuition to their own pupils? I should not be surprised if some teachers earned extra money driving a three-wheeler. A member of Parliament with no university degree, who becomes a minister supplements his legal income with millions of dollars, which enables him to live in much opulence and conspicuous grandeur. Governments that pay school teachers so niggardly, and the public who approve of that action, must take responsibility for poor outcomes in schools. Politicians, the bureaucracy and the public at large (We went to public schools and our children and grandchildren go to them now.) all must stand with teachers to get them a decent wage.
The portfolio of education has been held by some brilliant men and women: Bathi-ud-Din Mohammed, Ranil Wickremasinghe, Lalith Athulathmudali, Bandula Gunawardena and G.L.Peiris, all who nevertheless inexplicably allowed teachers wages to fall so low as now. Perhaps politicians, as a whole, found the employment of young people at sub-living wages a convenient way to collect votes at elections. This façade of 18 students per teacher is part of the cheating and hoodwinking that is characteristic of our politicians. How can MPs earn a minimum of Rs.500,000 a month, a rich pension after, as short as, five years in Parliament, travel about in most comfortable tax-free vehicles, eat so sumptuously in Parliament at ridiculously low prices and yet pay teachers beggarly wages? Politicians, and the bureaucracy, especially, must not play games with teachers in our schools. The public must not allow this indecency to continue beyond this year. They must stand with and not against teachers. It is not fair; it is not just; and it is ignominious to debase our teachers with hobbling low wages, as now. Let there be 30 students per teacher. Transfer excess teachers out. Teachers and parents in many rich countries bear with higher student loads and students come out fine. Double teachers’ wages, now. Do not postpone doubling teachers’ wages declaring that such is your intention, as Bandula Gunawardena, who was the minister of education for five years, did on 24 July. Do it now and arrange for its payment in a government strapped for cash at every turn. The public must find the extra resources because the government is a mere agent who disguises itself as a principal. If the public stops paying taxes government must cease functioning. By the same token a public that keeps government on a short leash must have it run as the public wants. Do not let the dog put the leash on the public.
I am astonished how elegantly our female teachers dress to school and how decently male teachers do, on those measly wages. How well they feed their children and themselves, only the kitchen sink knows. (apa kana hati lipa dani.)
Extricating Ourselves from China’s Grip – A further Response
I refer to Mr G. A.D Sirimal’s response, to my earlier comments on subject of China’s Grip. While thanking Mr Sirimal (Mr S) for his response I also wish to say that I am sorry for failing to read his earlier letter where he named the African Research Assistant. Let us leave that failing on my part aside.
I am somewhat puzzled by Mr S’s and this African Research Assistant’s claim that China tried to ‘gain a foothold in the affairs of a country’. I assume that what is meant here is not gaining a foothold in a country physically, but making use of the opportunity to influence a country’s policies and activities in some way. If that is accepted, can we hear of some specific instances of attempts by this country to to do that? To my knowledge, there have been no such instances reported in Sri Lanka. Please correct me if I am wrong.
However, I can think of numerous instances of other foreign countries, specially, those in the Western Hemisphere, which have been trying to interfere in our affairs all the time. Some countries have tried and even succeeded in amending our Constitution without our consent (What happened to the Constitutional provision of the 2/3 majority and a Referendum?). Here, I am having in mind the 13th Amendment and the merger of two provinces. Some other countries are pressurising us even right now, to abolish an important law enacted by our Parliament intended to prevent terrorist activities: the PTA. What about the attempt to bring in foreign judges to try some of our own soldiers who fought to defend our country against a vicious terrorist movement? The European Union once withdrew the GSP Plus facility and is now maintaining a constant threat of withdrawing it if we do not fall in line with their thinking on political issues quite unrelated to trade. Our largest market for the Garment Products – the US is also keeping its options open on the GSP Plus in order to influence our policies. This country once reprimanded us for failing to stop oil purchases from Iran when they imposed trade sanctions on that country. There is a long list of such instances of ‘gaining footholds’ which need not be mentioned for the present. I would like to ask Mr S again whether there is any evidence of China trying to influence policies and activities of other countries like that. Assuming for the time being what the African Research Assistant and Mr S believe is right, one comment seems appropriate. When China wanted to get a foothold in a country, it at least offered a loan to finance a project considered important by the same country. However, the countries mentioned above offered nothing in return. Furthermore, it is significant that the myth about China’s secret motives was invented by these same countries following the mischievous Trump tradition.
Now, the question that arises is Which grip should we try to extricate ourselves from? the Geneva (European-American) Grip or the Imagined China’s Grip ?
Let me add a comment about what Mr S chooses to call ‘Vanity Projects’ and those capital projects that make the country poorer (according to his thinking). As I pointed out in my earlier letter this is a highly debatable issue. If we leave out what may be called purely ‘Vanity Projects’, and those in the government sector proper, what remains are those intended to earn incomes by selling services to the public. These are the State Owned Enterprises (SOEs). Many of these may be important to the country in a national sense, but may not attract private investment because the initial capital requirements are large and the returns on investment are earned only in the long run.
It is true that many SOEs have failed to earn profits and have become burdens on the Government Budget. But that does not mean that these are total failures and the country would be better off if they are closed down. As investment projects, there was nothing wrong with these, and at that stage were even considered essential to bring about economic development. However, these eventually became failures, the reasons being invariably, poor management and corruption. This is the common story of many of our failed SOEs as confirmed by the findings of the Parliamentary Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE). If that is the case, there is no justification in accusing the foreign lender for choosing non-viable investment projects. As I pointed out earlier, the problem is something of our own making.
There are several other possible comments on certain misconceptions regarding projects that ‘make the country poorer’, but I prefer to skip them for the sake of brevity.
Hemas collect discarded carbon pens, toothbrushes from schools
Altair on track
A cheering campaign to support Team Sri Lanka at TOKYO 2020
7-billion-rupee diamond heist; Madush splls the beans before being shot
The Burghers of Ceylon/Sri Lanka- Reminiscences and Anecdotes
Unfit, unprofessional, fat Sri Lankans
Sports7 days ago
Features6 days ago
Dual citizens; shocking rape cases going unpunished
Sports5 days ago
Sri Lanka’s contingent prior to the opening ceremony
Life style4 days ago
Durian prevent cancer and improve digestion
Features4 days ago
Kumar David at 80: Engineer, Scholar, Socialist
Sports3 days ago
Killi Rajamahendran, Kerry Packer of Sri Lankan cricket
Sports4 days ago
What you can learn from Sidath
Features6 days ago
How rebirth takes place