In 2008, the housing crisis in the United States caused a global credit crunch that was felt all around the world including the US and the UK but also Russia, Ireland, Mexico and several Baltic states. The crisis was truly global, yet Sri Lanka was spared the worst effects of the crisis for various reasons primarily due to the regulatory structure which restricted exposure to high risk financial assets. The financial crisis did create issues for Sri Lanka’s exports, and, generally speaking, there was a drop in both the prices of and demand for commodities. Sri Lanka nonetheless survived the financial crisis and even thrived for a few years following the defeat of terrorism.
Yet, Sri Lanka may have another looming crisis and it is not the property ‘bubble’. While the property market is currently lacking in liquidity, there is adequate room for upward social mobility from the working classes and there is demand in many sub-sectors of the property market. Perhaps, there will be an oversupply of luxury condominiums sometime in the near future, but this too is a small market segment when compared to the property market as a whole. Further, the mortgage industry is also heavily regulated and banks generally discount the value of a property it is lending against.
Sri Lanka may however face more severe issues in the near future with the level of personal debt that many Sri Lankans have taken on. From the point of view of the financial institutions, unsecured credit card debt is perhaps the major threat to the stability of the system. As per a report from October 2018, Sri Lanka’s total credit card debt stood at Rs. 101 Bn. A report in April 2019 showed that total credit card debt had increased further to Rs. 109 Bn, which is an Rs. 8 Bn increase in 7 months. Since April 2019, the overall economic performance of Sri Lanka has suffered at least two major setbacks. First, the Easter Sunday Attacks, which created a dramatic drop in tourist arrivals, a major income earner for Sri Lanka and an industry that employs millions directly and indirectly. Second, just as the country’s economy seemed set for a revival, the Covid19 pandemic struck, affecting tourism specifically but virtually every other industry as well.
Many Sri Lankans had no choice but to resort to utilising any debt instrument available to them in order to make ends meet. There is little doubt that many Sri Lankans would have opted to utilise the available balances on their credit cards, plunging them further into debt with even higher interest rates and expensive penalties and charges.
Even if we assume that credit card debt in total would ‘only’ be around Rs. 120 Bn at this point in time, we have to also consider other forms of personal debt. Most mortgages are well secured due to the discounting requirements from the CBSL; thus even in the unlikely event that there would be a crash in the property market, most lenders will be well collateralised. This is not the case with credit cards, and exposure to the credit card sector is significant across banks of all sizes at all tiers.
Yet, this still only part of the problem. Consider personal loans, though quantums are smaller, the risk is high for the lending institutions as more often than not, personal loans are unsecured and usually borrowed for consumerist purposes. Most people in Sri Lanka buy durables including televisions, washing machines, etc., on consumer finance schemes, and again some of this risk is taken by banks and other lending institutions. The durable item will often be obsolete in a year or two, so any default is unlikely to be covered by the value of the goods. Education loans are another instrument which many consumers use to fund their educational pursuits or those of their children. Often these too are unsecured and only linked to monthly income. Thus, considering credit card debt plus other forms of unsecured personal debt, both Sri Lankan borrowers and the lending institutions might well be engaging in an unstoppable ‘snow-ball’ effect.
Against this backdrop, it is with some consternation that we note the comments made by the Minister of Industries Wimal Weerawansa, at a business conference, held at the BMICH, a few days ago. During the event he stated that he has “not seen such rigid policies when lending to entrepreneurs or industry like in this island” while also alluding to the annual profits of some banks which are over Rs. 3 Bn in some cases. Mr. Weerawansa did not, however, point out that Sri Lanka’s largest state bank, the Bank of Ceylon reported a loss of Rs. 300 Mn for the quarter ended June 2020. Sampath Bank saw its profits drop by 36% for that same quarter. Cargills Bank made a 64 Mn loss in Q2 2019 and the June 2020 quarter also saw non-performing loans (NPL) increase to 5.3% of total loans industry wide. This is all before the worst effects of the pandemic driven lockdown can be baked into the numbers. Indeed, many banking professionals expect further provisioning and write-offs in the coming year.
The Minister also stated that the banks in Sri Lanka were less interested in lending to industries. What he perhaps meant to say was that lending on industrial projects was restricted. However, economists agree that many of Sri Lanka’s major industries; tourist hotels, hydro-power, garments and other manufacturing related projects have all been heavily backed by bank finance. He went on to say that the CBSL “has developed a lot of monetary policy for the benefit of the bankers and not for the benefit of the clients…” This once again is a mischaracterisation of the structure of the system. Banks are run through depositors’ funds and the depositors are Sri Lankan citizens; it is their money that the banks lend with margins under strict guidelines. The CBSL’s main duty is to protect the hard earned money that citizens deposit in the banks.
It is very important that we understand the current predicament in its entirety before making such comments which are quite clearly meant to put pressure on financial institutions to lend more funds. Veterans of the banking industry are well aware that banks are one of the key drivers of economic activity in any economy, but more so in Sri Lanka where FDI has been lagging for many years.
The shareholders of banks do not own the funds that are being lent; it is the citizen’s deposits that are being lent. In basic terms, banks take funds as deposits; on demand, on short-term tenors and on medium to long term tenors. Banks must be cautious about lending funds even on a short term basis if their funding structure is tilted towards demand deposits. Capital adequacy will not be anywhere near enough if ad hoc lending strategies are given priority. A lender’s major task is to identify the borrower and their risk profile verses the steps that can be taken to mitigate risk. The important term here is to mitigate risk, not to altogether absolve yourself from the risk.
There are three broad categories of borrower:
1. Those who borrow with a genuine desire to repay
2. Those who borrow on the basis of repaying ONLY if the project or investment becomes a success
3. Those who borrow with the idea of not repaying no matter the circumstance.
Once you identify your customer and what category he falls into, you must then take a view on the risk proposition versus the profit motives and act accordingly. This is no easy task. At this current stage in our country’s recovery from the Easter attacks and the pandemic, increased lending even at lower interest rates can lead to serious instability in the system. In fact, the worst is likely still to come, considering that moratoriums are expiring at the end of September and the country’s economy has yet to show signs of a sustained recovery. Wages have fallen due to the lack of business activity, disposable incomes are non-existent, personal debt is on the rise, and non-performing loans are also increasing.
Yes, the banks in Sri Lanka have been very successful in the past and the industry is perhaps one of the most stable and dynamic in the country’s history. However, this is as a result of very carefully crafted policy and strict regulations. If anyone goes back a few decades to the height of terrorism in the nation, it is the banks that guaranteed some form of economic progress to the country’s people and its industry. Thus I urge the Minister and his colleagues not to be so brash as to think that the country, its people and its industry can survive and thrive on borrowings alone. The state and its institutions should provide a framework for success, beyond tax holidays and low interest rates. Consistency of policy, stability of currency, multi-stakeholder planning of key industries and attracting both FDI and foreign talent to the country are just some of the facets that must all come together before we start looking at enhancing lending portfolios to spur economic growth.
Rienzie Wijetilleke & Kusum Wijetilleke
– Colombo 7
US vs China as aid givers
Aid is a necessary evil for Sri Lanka at this juncture, as it grapples with a declining economy, while in the grip of the Covid pandemic. Our economy was good in 2014, and we could have survived without much aid if not for the pandemic and the five years of ‘yahapalana’. The latter ruined the economy and brought down the GDP from a healthy 5-6%, in 2014, to 1-2%, in 2019. It robbed its own bank, opened the doors to the West to interfere in our internal affairs, antagonised China, and adopted a pro-West policy — without receiving anything in return from the West. The pandemic has further destroyed the economy and now it is tottering with a minus GDP. If a man is dying of respiratory failure, due to Covid, he has to be given oxygen, via a ventilator, nothing else would work. Similarly, Sri Lanka needs substantial financial aid if it is to survive. We are fortunate in that now there is a choice of aid givers, there was a time when we had no choice but get into the aid trap of the Western powers, via Bretton Woods twins.
The ‘yahapalana’ government, in order to come out of its economic woes, almost signed the MCC, SOFA and ACSA agreements with the US, and the then Prime Minister wanted to sign them before the elections in 2019. The present government refused to sign the MCC but is being helped by China in a big way. Do we have a choice? Only alternative is to align with the US and sign the MCC. If ‘yahapalana’ had signed the ACSA, SOFA, and MCC Sri Lanka would have been in a situation where it could be converted into a military base at the whim of the US. ACSA and SOFA are designed to give the US military visa-less entry into Sri Lanka, and do as they please without coming under the jurisdiction of the country. MCC would have given them access to land and opened the doors for economic exploitation.
There seems to be a well-orchestrated opposition to the Chinese involvement in Sri Lanka. It is being said that the proposed Colombo Port City Commission would make the tiny piece of land, that has been reclaimed from the sea, a colony of the Chinese. If one compares the ACSA, SOFA, MCC combination with the Colombo Port City project, it would be like comparing a multi-barrel rocket launcher with a hand pistol. That is if what the detractors say about it is true. What is envisaged in the Bill to establish the Colombo Port City Commission is mainly facilitation of foreign direct investment into the project. For this purpose, most of the red tape involved in the approval of investment has been done away with, in order to expedite the process and avoid delay. The Commission would exercise the powers and functions of relevant regulatory authorities, such as the UDA, Municipal Council, etc. The Commission would also be granted exemption from the Inland Revenue Act, Betting and Gambling Act, Foreign Exchange Act and Customs Ordinance.
Constitutional experts, who made a mess of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution, have said the Colombo Port City Commission Bill is unconstitutional. Well that would be decided by the Supreme Court. However, from a layman’s point of view, the UDA and Municipality rules, for instance, are an impediment to rapid development and would discourage FDI. Similarly, tax concessions are a necessary evil to attract foreign investment. Whether a relaxation of these rules and regulations, within the confines of the Colombo Port City, would be a violation of the Constitution and the fundamental rights of the citizens, will have to be decided by the courts. Perhaps the courts may suggest necessary modifications to the Bill so that it conforms to the requirements of the Constitution. Of course, the people of Sri Lanka would want the CPC to come under the writ of the government and the law of the country. It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to ensure that the Colombo Port City does not breach the sovereignty and independence of the people and the territorial integrity of the country.
If, on the other hand, investment does not flow into the CPC, all that effort and expense would be wasted, and what is worse Sri Lanka may not be able to recover from the economic abyss it has fallen into. The CPC is the only viable major project that we have at present, which has the potential to give a much-needed boost to the economy. We cannot do without foreign funds at this juncture, as our foreign debts are huge and we have to earn foreign exchange to service them. We cannot keep on taking loans to pay the existing loans, as successive governments have been doing. China has already given us a huge loan.
As Sri Lanka badly needs foreign aid, it has to make the correct choice in picking its aid givers. It must know that aid does not come without strings – there is nothing called a free lunch. It must look at the strings, how bad are they, how would it affect the people, the independence of the country and its resources. We must look at the aid giving profile of the major donors. Researchers, like Emma Mawdsley (2007), Mark Engler (2006), Susanne Soederberg (2004), have commented on the real intentions of the US in pushing countries to accept MCC on their terms. For instance Mawdsley says that the first five MCC compacts in Cape Verde, Honduras, Madagascar, and Georgia is using a new security development paradigm to legitimate more spending on “development” programmes, which are primarily intended to serve the interests of US consumers, manufacturers and investors, and that poverty reduction at best is a secondary objective. These researchers say that security improvement projects in recipient countries are really intended to serve US defence and military goals. Further, they reveal how the World Bank contrives to show bad business of these projects as good business.
Dreher A. et al (2017) in a study has found that Chinese aid was effective at producing economic growth in recipient countries. China’s aid during the period from 2000 to 2014 amounts to USD 350 billion (AidData 2017). One fifth of this had been outright grants. 45% of their aid goes to African countries which have benefited enormously from Chinese aid in recent times. For instance, Rwanda which was a country torn apart by a civil war, is now recording a GDP of 12 % and there is peace as well. Several African countries are recording similar growth rates with Chinese aid at present. Let me quote from the White Paper, China Foreign Aid (2014) “China adheres to the principle of not imposing any political conditions, not interfering in the internal affairs of the recipient countries and fully respecting their right to independently choosing their own paths and models of development. The basic principles China upholds in providing foreign assistance are mutual respect, equality, keeping promise, mutual benefits and win-win”
Could we say the same thing about the Western aid givers? They helped to bring ‘yahapalana’ into power but did not give a cent, though they grossly interfered in our internal affairs, going to the extent of meddling in constitution making. They wanted to punish the leaders and armed forces responsible for the victory in the war against the LTTE, based on unsubstantiated evidence. At present they are busy in the UNHRC gathering fabricated evidence in support of non-existent human right violations in Sri Lanka. Could we take the grave risk of accepting financial assistance from such donors? Do we have a choice in this matter, but turn to our good friend China in this hour of need?
N. A. de S. AMARATUNGA
Rise of Cheena Saubhagya
Before the Aluth Avurudda dawned, we were talking about the lost crown of Ranjan Ramanayake and the grabbing and fighting over the crown of Mrs. Sri Lanka.
The auspicious time for the dawning of the New Year would have brought joy to those who were able to get enough rice, coconut oil and honey to make kiri buth, kevun, kokis and other delights, and even enjoy some of the avurudu games, although without elevated pillow fights and tugs-o-war.
But the reality facing us all, with songs of the cuckoo and other birds, is a push into an inauspicious era in the country, with democracy getting its biggest blow from a government that pledged to strengthen the democratic rights of the people.
We now face the reality of the Bill for the Colombo Port City Economic Commission, which, if enacted, would take us far away from the goals of democracy that our people, and most political leaders and parties were committed to, from many years before independence. The proposed Colombo Port City has all the promise and assurance of being a new colony in South Asia, with the colonisers, as seen today, being the Chinese.
Is this the reality of the Rajapaksa dream and goal in politics and governance?
We do remember that when the work on the Colombo Port City was ceremonially launched in September, 2014, by President Mahinda Rajapaksa and the Chinese President Xi Jinping, the entire project – the artificial island to be constructed by the Chinese – was written off to China. A permanent Chinese holding.
It was left to the Yahapalana government, which followed in 2015, to have serious negotiations with China, and change the full ownership to a 99-year lease given to China.
What we now see is that the Saubhagye Dekma of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa is, in fact, the rise of the Cheena Saubhagya in Sri Lanka.
A country that has had free elections since 1931, even before independence, and has had a functioning parliament, since 1948, is seeking to do away with the very concept of parliamentary democracy. The Colombo Port City Economic Commission is the display of nondemocratic governance, where the nominees of the President, will be answerable to him and not to the country and people on the functioning of the Port City, its income and expenditure, and all facilities in the new Dictatorial City, inside the Democratic Sri Lanka.
The Sri Lankan voters have much to do with the threat that democracy faces today with the Port City exercise. The 69 lakhs that voted Gotabaya Rajapaksa to office as President, the somewhat smaller vote that gave a parliamentary majority to the SLPP – Pohottuva – alliance in the general election, and the two-thirds majority the government gained in the passage of the 20 Amendment, are core values of the Rajapaksa-Port City strike at democracy.
Mahinda Rajapaksa may have been a strong supporter of democracy, in his early years in politics, and his first election as President but the dictatorial trend in Rajapaksa politics has been clearly seen in the post-war Sri Lanka. Today’s dictatorial policies coming with the Port City Commission, began with Mahinda Rajapaksa drawing MPs from the Opposition and passing the 18th Amendment, which curbed the democratic trends of the 17 A.
After that, the 19 A of the Yahapalana, restored democracy and expanded the provisions and facilities of democracy with Independent Commissions, and considerable independence in the appointment of members of the judiciary.
The Rajapaksas came again, after the Easter Sunday carnage, with their full strength, and popular support to remove the values of democracy that were brought into the Constitution from the 19A, to full and shameful strides into dictatorial governance, with the 20A.
The massive threat to democracy that comes from the Port City Commission is also backed by the draft legislation to remove the court cases on crime and corruption against members and supporters of this government. This dictatorial move is also supported by the removal of the many cases filed in the courts by the Bribery Commission, on technical errors – which can certainly be corrected — but not thought necessary by a corrupt regime.
The Port City Commission is the complete flowering of corruption and dictatorial trends in this country. This is the show of majority dominance, not to serve the people, but to serve a large and powerful family, and the catchers that serve and benefit from it, with claims of ViyathMaga or any such crooked players.
We now have a member of Parliament of the government, but not holding any portfolio or even a state ministry, come out in a loud criticism of the Varaya Nagara Keliya. Such critics were once very supportive of all the corrupt moves by the Avant Garde players, exposed by Yahapalanaya; but things do change. The Varaya Nagara Keliya is the display of the realities of Rajapaksa Balaya. It is in keeping with the Basil Rajapaksa call to learn more of the Chinese system of governance.
What we see with the Port City is the vast abandonment of democracy. Such political thinking will not be limited to the Port City, but will soon extend to the entire island. It is the realisation of Rajavasala Thinking, where memorials for deceased parents could/should be built at State/People’s expense.
What the people are told to accept today is the Cheena Saubhagya. It is just one display of Apey Pavul Saubhagya, which is the reality of Port City crooked governance.
Let us see how much the judiciary can help the people of Sri Lanka safeguard its longer commitment to democracy, beyond the crooked and deadly impact of the 20A.
Cheena Saubhagya, Bunga veva!
First reign of terror by the JVP
By MANO RATWATTE
I have been reading your articles on the 1971 JVP insurrection, quite avidly. A lot has been narrated about the fateful night of April 5th and the events that followed.
It was fascinating to read the accounts by the retired DIG. Thank you for all the articles. It brought back some vivid memories from my childhood.
My personal story from
that fateful period
I was a young boy, just past my 11th birthday and attending Royal College at the time. I was oblivious to the fact that, my father was the Private Secretary to the Prime Minister, and my maternal grandfather was the Governor General (Ceylon had not become a republic yet – that would happen later), our family would be under attack. I remember the very tense period, and how my parent’s home had been marked for attack. The markings were faint, a crude “X” made with red brick. This was repeated at the homes of some other relatives of the Prime Minister, as well. We were oblivious, never noticing the ominous markings.
I have no doubt if the JVP had succeeded they would have executed Mrs. Bandaranaike and probably my father, who was her brother, as well. The PM’s Private Secretary is a position equivalent to a White House Chief of Staff. My grandfather, as the GG and nominally Head of State, would probably have been a victim, too. It is more than likely that the JVP would have massacred my entire family, emulating what their heroes, the Bolsheviks did to the Czar’s family in Yekaterinburg, after the Russian Revolution.
When the severity of the threat became apparent, we were whisked away on the night of April 4th to the GG’s residence, Queen’s House, because the Army Commander felt it wasn’t safe for us to remain in our home. My grandfather had been the Governor General, since 1962, so luckily, we had a safe haven that was familiar to us. As a kid I thought it was “cool” to be escorted by armed soldiers. But, looking back, I realise I may not be alive today, if the JVP revolt had succeeded.
The timing of the JVP’s 1971 rebellion was very poor. The United Front government, which had won a massive landslide electoral victory, in 1970, hadn’t been in power for even an year and had not been able to implement many changes. The economic hardships, food queues and rationing, which were to come in the aftermath of the global energy crisis of 1973, weren’t on the horizon yet. Ceylon was a pleasant place with a vibrant democracy; the exception being the notorious coup attempt of 1962. A violent overthrow of the recently elected government wasn’t something likely to gain much support with the populace.
However, it is likely that, not for the serendipitous incidents in March, reported in this newspaper previously, with the JVP’s bombs exploding prematurely, the security forces would have been far less prepared and the rebellion may well have succeeded.
The situation in the early days of the revolt was very tense. My father was very active in the discussions, and was part of the National Security Council at Temple Trees. It seemed ‘touch and go’ for a while, but my father said that the Prime Minister never panicked. I know my father definitely didn’t, remaining calm despite the initial flood of bad news.
My father never panicked, no matter what the threat was. He had previously faced down the Air Force guard that threatened to open fire on my aunt, in January 1966, along with the late Dr. Baduiddin Muhammed, at a political rally. Before that, in September 1959, he had helped prevent the domestic staff at Tintagel, the PM’s private residence, hack, murderer Somarama to death, after SWRD’s assassination on the front lawn of the property. If the assassin had been killed that day, the right wing conspiracy behind it would have never been uncovered.
Reminiscing o 1971, he told us much later, with a chuckle about the ashen-faced (his words) Army Commander who was at the NSC meetings held at the Temple Trees annexe. The General wanted the PM to ask Yugoslavian leader Marshal Tito for military help. I’m not sure if the request was ever made or whether Mrs. B refused as she had faith in country’s military.
Lanka’s innocence was lost forever that day. Suddenly security and protection of VIPs became a thing in Ceylon. Prior to April 1971, the Prime Minister would have just a token escort, with a pilot-car containing a couple of armed guards and one personal bodyguard, typically a Police officer. The Governor General hardly had any security. A sleepy police Sergeant would be posted at Queen’s House. No bulletproof cars or decoy convoys like today. All that began during the war against the LTTE terrorists and suicide bombers.
I didn’t realize the gravity of the situation, until I saw guard points manned by armed sailors from the Navy, between Temple Trees and Queen’s House, during the curfew.
I remember riding in the GG’s vehicle to Temple Trees, and seeing Navy sailors in their blue uniforms and helmets with rifles and lights pointed towards the car, shouting “Halt” at the vehicle. They were mostly armed with obsolete WW1 vintage Lee Enfield Rifles, or the small Sterling ‘Sten’ submachine guns. I still remember their smart blue uniforms and the white garters (boot covers) around their boots. I also remember seeing a fleet of Indian Navy ships in Colombo, anchored facing Galle Face Green.
I remember my father, and the late Anuruddha Ratwatte (his cousin, then a Colonel), flying on Indian Air Force helicopters from the Royal Ceylon Air Force ground, that the retired DIG referenced. I tagged along in the vehicle that was used to drop them off there. They were overseeing the airdropping of surrender leaflets; an idea my father is believed to have thought of and proposed to the NSC. It offered amnesty and rehabilitation to JVP cadres who surrendered. The leaflets were dropped over the thick jungles where the remnants of the JVP were hiding. It may have been later in April or much later in May. I hope the DIG throws some light. The idea was a success with many fugitive JVP-ers surrendering to the security forces as a result of the campaign.
I have a lot more memories of those scary and sad days. The JVP has never apologized for the disruption of Ceylon’s society. Their actions were far worse in their second incarnation, but by then we were inured to violence. In 1971 we were still a peaceful and innocent country.
What if the 1971 rebellion had succeeded?
What if the JVP had seized power that April, 50 years ago? What would a Ceylon look like? A beautiful socialist utopia with complete state control of the economy? Thousands of grey Mao-suited robots with a little red book goose-stepping to herald a strongman similar to North Korea, who were supporters of the JVP? Would Wijeweera have been a Dear Leader and great benefactor? Or an Oliver Cromwell, a Gandhi, or a Pol Pot?
Act 2: Policy mistakes
Harping back to the 1971 insurgency; it shocked the leftist coalition government, headed by my aunt. As a result, some of the radical policy reforms, such as the Land Reform Act, were rushed through to assuage the anger demonstrated by the insurgents.
Land Reform, as my father later used to say, was one of the “most iniquitous” acts of policy. Think about it. Landholdings were restricted to 50 acres per adult. So if a family had adult children they could have 50 acres each, but even if a family had four young children, they lost most of their lands and six people would all have 50 acres in total ! It defied common sense and economic logic.
Did they assume the kids wouldn’t grow up to become adults? Or perhaps it was deliberately written to favour some, with thousands of acres of land and adult children, over others with young families or no children. Either way it was an absurd policy, which destroyed many viable plantations, reducing them to economically unviable smallholder status.
Housing ownership policies also were also rushed as a result of the 1971 rebellion. The implementation of this, too was botched and much wealth was destroyed. If the JVP had been more patient, they could have had a much better chance of wreaking even greater mayhem, when people were angry and tired of the stagnant economy post-1974.
But, indeed, it was serendipitous that those two premature bomb explosions happened in March. The second one happened the day my family was spending time with our uncle to celebrate his birthday.
Act 3 – The next JVP
Their reign of terror and counter terror by the Government, in 1987- 89 was far worse for the entire nation. I was by then out of the country and did not experience any of it. My father wrote to me and asked me to stay in the USA as long as possible. An uncle of mine (a first cousin of my father’s) was burnt alive in Matale, during the hell the JVP unleashed in the aftermath of the Indian “invasion by invitation” after J.R. Jayewardene erred in handling relationships with India. Another good friend’s relative was chased down and killed at his estate, because he had raised the national flag on Independence Day as the government had requested. A respected scholar was assassinated on the University of Colombo campus – Professor Stanley Wijesundere. His son and I were good friends and classmates.
And no one should forget nor forgive the brutal murder of a great humanist and charismatic leader Vijaya Kumaranatunge, the leader of the SLMP and most popular celebrity actor. Why did the cruel assassins shoot him in the face after he was already dead and fallen? Was it because of sheer envy and evil thoughts of their leader who could not stand a good-looking popular rival?
My issue with all these lame excuses and talk about a ‘people’s struggle’, is that the JVP never sincerely apologized for the violence they unleashed, and keep celebrating their leader as if he’s a local Lenin; when he and his then generation of combatants had more in common with the Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot, than Marx.
Harping back to the successful victory over the JVP, in 1971, it must be mentioned how quickly almost every major nation in the world came to help Sri Lanka. Because of the excellent relationship between Ceylon and India, they were the first to rush in help. I remember they even supplied the Army with SLR 7.62 automatic weapons, much more capable weapons than the ancient rifles and inaccurate Sten guns which was all they had. The Ceylon military, which up to that point was a well-disciplined force but mainly a ‘parade-ground army’, was called upon to quell a domestic armed insurrection while armed with vintage bolt action rifles.
The tiny Armoured Corps, equipped with a few Daimler armoured cars, (the largest of which had a 2-pounder gun) was used to secure Kegalle and Mawanella, which had been seized by the JVP. A few vintage Ferret Scout cars armed with WW2 era Bren guns, were deployed at Temple Trees. Later one of the Saladin six-wheeled armoured cars, with a bigger 76mm gun was also deployed facing Galle Road.
Ceylon’s tiny military, led by professional leaders, acquitted themselves really well. While there were sad incidents like the Premawathi Manamperi incident, they deserve gratitude and thanks of the entire nation. Especially a then 11-year old boy’s sincere thanks for protecting him and his family.
All is not hopeless. The new younger and more educated leaders of the JVP have embraced democratic politics and their performances in Parliament exposing corruption of governments (whichever government is in power), and their well informed and educated analysis and criticisms, are a fresh positive contrast to the adi-pudi abuse laden politics of everyone else. But they will remain a less than 5% party if they keep celebrating a man who twice took our nation down a path that was disliked or hated by most. Clearly, the UNP could also apologize for the counter terror they unleashed.
Geo political friends
India was the most important ally in 1971. Indian-Lanka relations deteriorated because of President J. R. Jayewardene’s hostile views and his foolish attempts to align himself with the US and ASEAN, totally oblivious to who the regional power was. This is something to be cognizant of today, in post cold-war realignment of alliances. The USA, which was once hostile to India, is now totally aligned in the QUAD coalition against China. India has justifiable fears and concerns about China. It stems from having been humiliated by China in the1962 border war which led to a loss of territory.
Sri Lanka really needs to nurture its friendship with India so that they will be like the 1971 ‘Dhosthi India’ and not the ‘Dushman/badamaash India’ following the gory Black July of 1983. Same country – two different postures.
The paradigm shift about security, in 1971, was significant and permanent.
GL: Colombo Port City Bill received AG’s sanction
A Policy Science Analysis
Hemas Consumer strengthens portfolio with L’Oréal partnership in Sri Lanka
7-billion-rupee diamond heist; Madush splls the beans before being shot
Unfit, unprofessional, fat Sri Lankans
The Burghers of Ceylon/Sri Lanka- Reminiscences and Anecdotes
Opinion7 days ago
A Cabinet reshuffle needed
Features3 days ago
Port City Bill Requires Referendum
news7 days ago
Proposed law will turn Port City into a province of China – JVP
news7 days ago
PM intervenes to iron out differences among coalition partners
Sports7 days ago
The brand of cricket we want to play is free and relaxed: – Sangakkara
Sports4 days ago
Sebs’ cricket stalwart Cooray retires after more than three decades of service
Sports7 days ago
Sheran’s back to back half centuries help Joes
Editorial7 days ago
Happy New Year!