Midweek Review

Foreign policy quagmire

Published

2 years ago

2023/08/16

Chinese scientific survey and research vessel HAI YANG 24 HAO at the Colombo harbour

During the question-and-answer session, Dr. Dushni Weerakoon questioned the sustainability of Sri Lanka’s non-aligned foreign policy, as it weakened the country’s position in trade negotiations. The expert assertion was certainly not restricted to trade negotiations. Having signed ACSA (Access and Cross Servicing-Agreement) with the US, in August 2017, it would be ridiculous to still talk of non-aligned policy. The fact remains the US also sought o finalize SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) in addition to MCC (Millennium Challenge Corporation) Compact. Sri Lanka first signed ACSA in early 2007 during President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s first term. In the wake of ACSA, the US provided crucial intelligence that helped the Navy to hunt down floating LTTE arsenals on the high seas and accelerate their collapse.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

A scientific survey and research vessel, manned by the Chinese Navy, arrived at the Colombo port on 10 August. HAI YANG 24 HAO was here for a replenishment assignment. Commanded by Commander Jin Xin, the 129 m long vessel, crewed by 138 officers and men, departed Colombo on 12 August. The visit didn’t create controversy the way when Chinese surveillance vessel Yuan Wang 5 visited Hambantota in August last year close on the heels of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ouster.

HAI YANG 24 HAO was the first Chinese Navy vessel here since President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s two-day visit to New Delhi, the first since Parliament elected him in July last year to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term won at the November 2019 presidential election. The next presidential poll is a year away.

The growing Indian concerns over what they call Chinese ‘activity’ here is a huge challenge that has to be dealt with at the highest level. But bankrupt Sri Lanka dependent on the new Extended Fund Facility (EFF) secured with the support of India and the US faced the daunting task of convincing India that Colombo’s relationship with China didn’t pose any threat to their interests. As regards Chinese naval visits, the US, too, has expressed concerns on behalf of its Quad partner. Quad consists of the US, Australia, Japan and India.

Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies recently launched ‘LKI Foreign Policy Forum’ , a fresh initiative for a free and frank discussion on foreign policy matters, as well as related issues. The inaugural session at the LKI Lighthouse Auditorium, on 09 August, featured former Foreign Secretary H. M. G. S. Palihakkara, Executive Director Institute of Policy Studies, Director International Relations, KDU Dr. Harinda Vidanage, Executive Director Policy Studies Dr. Dushni Weerakoon and Executive Director, National Peace Council Dr. Jehan Perera. None of them need any introduction. They dealt with the topic ‘the changing global dynamics: implications for Sri Lanka.’ The Chinese vessel arrived in Colombo the following day.

The launch of ‘LKI Foreign Policy Forum coincided with the 18th death anniversary of former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, which fell on 12 August 2023. The LTTE assassinated Kadirgamar at his Buller’s Road residence. LK was 73 years old at the time he was felled by a sniper. How an LTTE sniper fired several gunshots at LK from the window of a bathroom located on the top floor of a house on Buller’s Lane is still a mystery. The person who resided in that house, the late Lakshman Thalayasingham, denied any knowledge of LTTE operatives being there when the law enforcement authorities rushed in soon after the assassination. Those responsible for LK’s security never explained how the surrounding houses of the man, high on the LTTE’s hit list, were never properly checked.

Ravinatha Aryasinha, career diplomat recently appointed Executive Director of LKI, moderated the inaugural programme which attracted a section of the Colombo-based diplomatic community. At the onset of the discussion, the one-time Foreign Secretary, who served as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Washington (Dec. 2020-Sept. 2021) before retirement, briefly explained the current global and regional status, taking into consideration the ongoing war in Ukraine where Russia is battling US-backed forces. The UK and Germany, among other NATO allies, have thrown their full weight behind American-led efforts to bring the Russians to their knees, using the Ukrainian forces as the battering ram.

Russian Ambassador in Colombo Levan S. Dzhagaryan, who took up the post here four months after President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ouster, was seated on the front row of the audience.

The conflict in Ukraine has sharply divided the world, with Japan campaigning against Russia. Japan has taken up the issue at hand with Sri Lanka, though it knows Colombo is not in a position to take sides. Japanese Foreign Minister Hayashi Yoshimasa who was here in the last week of July, took up Russian actions with Foreign Minister Ali Sabry, PC, on 29 July. Their discussions also covered the situation in East Africa.

Pushing Sri Lanka to back their ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP), Yoshimasa, towards the end of his discussion with Sabry, emphasized the importance of what is called the Black Sea Grain Initiative (BSGI) meant to facilitate grain exports from Ukraine, through the Black Sea, to various parts of the world.

Yoshimasa blamed Russian termination of the initiative, alleging that move ran counter to the international community’s efforts in addressing food insecurity.

Contrary to Western expectations and that of Japan and Australia, India has quite clearly indicated that it wouldn’t back resolutions moved against Russia at the UN. Sri Lanka abstained at the UN vote on Russia. China and Pakistan, too, abstained. But the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government is under heavy pressure to back the Western position. Foreign media reports suggest that the US forced Pakistan to remove their PM Imran Khan over the latter’s refusal to condemn Russia.. Therefore, MP Wimal Weerawansa’s accusations, regarding US and Indian involvement in the change of government here, last year, shouldn’t be dismissed as mere rhetoric.

The writer is of the view that whatever the domestic politics here, and external pressure, Sri Lanka shouldn’t back a UN resolution against Russia. Perhaps LKI, in consultation with all relevant parties, should thoroughly examine this issue, also taking into consideration Asia’s position, in general, and advise the government, accordingly, as an independent think tank, especially against unfair moves by India to smother our independence and sovereignty that we have jealously guarded throughout history, without being a threat to it.

We wonder how those who are still blindly pursuing an Eelam dream and have done every possible thing to wreck this country in the pursuit of that, now feel with India clearly calling the shots everywhere.

Indo-Lanka relations

From left: Dr. Dushni Weerakoon, Dr. Harinda Vidanage, Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, Dr. Jehan Perera and Ambassador H.M.G.S. Palihakkara

During the brief question and answer session, civil society activist Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, the Executive Director of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), called for closer alignment with India. The former board member of the LKI explained why bankrupt Sri Lanka should align herself with India as it struggled to navigate through the developing crisis. Reference was also made to continuing Indian and Chinese roles here and how flagship Chinese project, the Port City, could attract Indian investments. The academic reminded what could have happened if not for India’s swift intervention to meet Sri Lanka’s basic needs, in 2022. Against the backdrop of continuing economic-political-social crisis in Sri Lanka, the Modi administration, seeking a third consecutive term, has paid considerable attention to the developments here. Obviously, their primary objective is to enhance India’s influence here and outdo the Chinese who secured the Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease, and also sustained the flagship Port City project.

The entry of Chinese oil giant Sinopec recently to the Sri Lanka market underscored how they sustained their operations, regardless of the change of government in July 2022. In fact, China appeared to have subtly exploited the crisis, and the political setup here, to secure the best possible terms for their entry as the third player in the retail oil market. Until their entry, the CPC and Lanka IOC shared the market, with the latter gradually expanding its influence at Trincomalee where the strategically located British built oil tank farm is situated. Similarly, the Chinese consolidated the strategic Hambantota Port with subsequent investments.

Sri Lanka needs to take both Chinese and Indian investments here into consideration as the Asian giants sought to further enhance and consolidate their position here. During Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure as the President, the then CEB Chairman M.M.C. Ferdinando caused quite a controversy when he explained how President Gotabaya intervened on behalf of the Adani Group. The declaration, though subsequently denied, cannot be simply dismissed as the close relationship between controversial tycoon Gautam Adani and Indian Premier Narendra Modi, now seeking a third consecutive term, is well established. Gautam Adani had an opportunity to meet President Wickremesinghe during the latter’s two-day July visit to New Delhi where an assurance was given that Adani renewable power projects at Mannar and Pooneryn would be completed in January 2025.

During Wickremesinghe’s visit, an agreement was reached on cooperation on further renewable energy projects and development of Trincomalee as an energy hub. A permit clearing the joint venture between the Ceylon Electricity Board and India’s NTPC for a solar park in the eastern town of Sampur, in the Trincomalee district, too, was also issued in line with overall understanding.

Since the end of the war in May 2009 India has gradually stepped up interest in Sri Lanka. India wants Sri Lanka to fully implement the 13th Amendment to its Constitution. New Delhi has the US backing for the project that some concerned here say would lead to a federal state.

In the wake of Narendra Modi’s election, as Premier, in May 2014, India steadily increased investments here during his two terms and further expansion is likely in his third term. Indian parliamentary elections are scheduled for May 2024.

Following President Wickremesinghe’s visit to New Delhi where he had one-on-one with Premier Modi, the two countries announced an agreement on development of ports and logistics infrastructure in Colombo, Kankesthurai (KKS) and Trincomalee and launch ferry services between Nagapattinam in India and KKS, Rameswaram and Talaimannar and other mutually agreed places, welcoming resumption of flights between Chennai and Palaly, agreed to explore the possibility of expanding air connectivity to Colombo (BIA or Ratmalana) as well as Trincomalee and Batticaloa, development of infrastructure at Palaly.

In addition, enhanced cooperation on the development of the renewable energy sector here, establishment of a high capacity power grid interconnection between India and Sri Lanka to enable bidirectional electricity trade between Sri Lanka and other regional countries, including the BBIN countries, implementation of understanding reached on Sampur Solar power project and LNG infrastructure, development of Trincomalee oil tank farms in line with overall project focused on the eastern port city. As part of this project launch construction of a multi-product petroleum pipeline from South India to Sri Lanka, exploration and production of hydrocarbons in Sri Lanka’s offshore basins with an aim to develop Sri Lanka’s upstream petroleum sector, divestment of state owned enterprises (Indian investments in those selected sectors), fresh discussion on Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA), designation of INR as currency for trade settlements between the two countries and the agreement to operationalise UPI based digital payments, use of India’s Digital Public Infrastructure to meet Sri Lanka’s requirements and, finally, establishment of land connectivity between the two countries.

Let me reproduce the relevant section as released in a joint communique, titled ‘Promoting Connectivity,

Catalyzing Prosperity: India-Sri Lanka Economic Partnership Vision’ issued following talks between Premier Modi and President Wickremesinghe. “To establish land connectivity between Sri Lanka and India for developing land access to the ports of Trincomalee and Colombo, propelling economic growth and prosperity in both Sri Lanka and India, and further consolidating millennia old relationship between the two countries. A feasibility study for such connectivity will be conducted at an early date.”

Those agreements have consolidated Indo-Lanka relationship, regardless of serious concerns in some sections that Sri Lanka’s independence is at stake. The powers that be must realize that Sri Lanka shouldn’t promote a particular relationship at its own expense as well as other powers interested in developing further ties.

There cannot be a better example than the cancellation of tenders awarded to China to execute hybrid renewable energy systems in Delft, Nagadeepa and Analativu, off the Jaffna coast. Having awarded the tenders in January 2021, the Gotabaya Rajapaksa government cancelled those following Indian protests.

India never knew of those projects funded by the ADB until the CEB made the announcement in January 2021.

The Chinese project was going to be carried out with an ADB loan. India offered alternative arrangements to implement the same. In spite of the Rajapaksas making a desperate effort to save the Chinese project, India finally compelled the cancellation of the project about a year after the awarding of tenders. When Sri Lanka pointed out that the ADB funded project couldn’t be cancelled unilaterally, New Delhi is believed to have intervened with the ADB.

However, Premier Modi’s criticism of the late Premier Indira Gandhi over handing over of Katchatheevu to Sri Lanka in 1974 is a grim reminder how fresh issues could be raised ahead of elections. India parliamentary polls are scueduled for next year.

Accountability issues and origins of

terrorism here

Now that there is no question about post-war Indo-Sri Lanka relationship, it would be pertinent to ask how Sri Lanka addressed accountability issues in line with overall measures meant for reconciliation. Of the four panelists, Dr. Jehan Perera emphasized the responsibility on the part of all concerned to ensure those responsible for human rights violations at all levels be dealt with regardless of their standing in society. The peace icon who had been engaged in the peace process over a period of time stressed that the country couldn’t move forward unless accountability issues were addressed, based on the 2015 Geneva Resolution, co-sponsored by the then Yahapalana government. While pressing Sri Lanka on accountability issues, Dr. Perera ironically and with no shame went out of his way to praise the human rights record of US-led powers, regardless of death and destruction caused all over the world in the name of democracy. The civil society activist also didn’t comment on the origins of terrorism here. Obviously, Dr. Perera forgot he was at the LK commemoration and the fact that the much respected leader was killed by an organization, established by India.

Those demanding accountability on the part of Sri Lanka should explain how they proposed to deal with India for (1) launching a terrorist campaign in the early ’80s. In addition to the losses caused to the Sri Lanka military, fighting among rival northern groups claimed the lives of hundreds if not thousands (2) killings blamed on the Indian military during its deployment here, July 1987-March 1990 period (3) killing carried out by Tamil National Alliance, formed by India, in the wake of Sri Lanka’s request for complete withdrawal of its military and (4) Indian trained PLOTE raid on the Maldives in November 1988, if succeeded, could have caused regional instability.

They should also explain in what way the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), now represented in Parliament, could be dealt with. Having recognized the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people in 2001, Trincomalee District MP R. Sampanthan’s outfit under any circumstances couldn’t absolve itself of the complicity for the catastrophic devastation caused by the LTTE, especially to innocent people everywhere. The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government must realize that post-war reconciliation couldn’t be achieved through the South Africa-type Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) examining the Eelam War IV (Aug. 2006-May 2009).

The TNA collaborated with the LTTE to the hilt until the very end. Their relationship was built on 2004 ‘agreement’ that helped the TNA to secure 21 seats in the Northern and Eastern districts at the 2004 general election with the LTTE stuffing ballot boxes on their behalf. The blatant LTTE partnership with the TNA attracted the attention of the European Union Election Observation Mission. The EU mission, in its report, pointed out how the TNA won the lion’s share of the seats in the then temporarily merged North and East with direct LTTE support. Except The Island no other print media and electronic media bothered to report this. The Election Department did nothing.

The Parliament, too, conveniently turned a blind eye to the issue. In the following year, the LTTE set the stage for the final war by ordering the Tamil electorate to boycott the presidential poll. The TNA issued the ‘directive’ on behalf of the LTTE. Again, the Election Department and Parliament did nothing. How could a political party, represented in Parliament, ask the entire northern population to boycott the national election to facilitate the terrorist strategy?

Five years later, the same TNA backed war-winning Army Commander, retired General Sarath Fonseka, after having accused him and his Army of genocide, when he emerged as the common candidate at the presidential election. Fonseka lost badly by over 1.8 mn votes though he handsomely won all electorates in the Northern and Eastern provinces where his Army, over a period of three years, eradicated the LTTE completely.

LKI can certainly examine the entire gamut of issues, including the circumstances leading to the 2015 Geneva Resolution, co-sponsored by the Yahapalana administration. Sri Lanka backed the US led move, regardless of serious concerns expressed by the then Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative in Geneva, Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the incumbent Executive Director of LKI. The Island covered the Geneva issue extensively hence no need to repeat how the then government acted recklessly in that regard and the subsequent declaration made by TNA heavyweight M.A. Sumanthiran in Washington (2016) pertaining to a tripartite agreement involving the US, GoSL and TNA on hybrid war crimes mechanism.

A thorough examination of events and developments is necessary as accountability issues are used to influence the leadership on post-war reconciliation. Sri Lanka struggling with a mountain of debt, both local and foreign, seems to be easy prey for those interested parties.

All News Advertisement

Related Topics:Chinese scientific survey and research vessel HAI YANG 24 HAO HAI YANG 24 HAO at the Colombo harbour

Up Next

Year Three Crisis

Don't Miss

Oases in a Scorched Isle

Click to comment

Midweek Review

Opp. MP’s hasty stand on US air strikes in Nigeria and Sri Lanka’s foreign policy dilemma

Published

6 days ago

2026/01/14

Sahan Weerasooriya

Somaliland's President Abdirahman Abdullahi Mohamed (right), posing for a photograph with Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, at the Presidential Palace in Hargeisa (Pic released by the Somaliland Presidential Office on 06 January, 2026)

Israel’s recognition of Somaliland on 26 December, 2025, couldn’t have taken place without US approval. The establishment of full diplomatic ties with Somaliland, a breakaway part of Somalia, and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar’s visit to that country, drew swift criticism from Somalia, as well as others. Among those who had been upset were Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and the African Union.

The US-backed move in Africa didn’t receive public attention as did the raid on Venezuela. But, the Somaliland move is definitely part of the overall US global strategy to overwhelm, undermine and belittle Russia and China.

And on the other hand, the Somaliland move is a direct challenge to Türkiye, a NATO member that maintains a large military presence in Somalia, and to Yemen based Houthis who had disrupted Red Sea shipping, in support of Hamas, in the wake of Israeli retaliation over the 07 October, 2023, raid on the Jewish State, possibly out of sheer desperation of becoming a nonentity. The Israeli-US move in Africa should be examined taking into consideration the continuing onslaught on Gaza and attacks on Lebanon, Iran, Syria, Yemen, and Qatar.

Many an eyebrow was raised over Opposition MP Dr. Kavinda Jayawardana’s solo backing for the recent US air strikes in Nigeria.

The Gampaha District Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) lawmaker handed over a letter to the US Embassy here last week applauding US President Donald Trump’s order to bomb Nigeria on Christmas Day. The letter was addressed to President Trump

( https://island.lk/kavinda-lauds-us-president-trumps-actions-to-protect-christians-in-nigeria/)

The former UNPer who had been in the forefront of a high-profile campaign demanding justice for the 2019 Easter Sunday terror victims, in an obvious solo exercise praised Trump for defending the Nigerian Christian community. The US bombing targeted Islamic State Terrorists (ISIS) operating in that country’s northwest, where Muslims predominate.

The only son of the late UNP Minister Dr. Jayalath Jayawardana, he seemed to have conveniently forgotten that such military actions couldn’t be endorsed under any circumstances. Against the backdrop of Dr. Jayawardana’s commendation for US military action against Nigeria, close on the heels of the murderous 03 January US raid on oil rich Venezuela, perhaps it would be pertinent to seek the response of the Catholic Church in that regard.

President Trump, in a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times, has warned of further strikes in case Christians continued to be killed in the West African nation. International media have disputed President Trump’s claim of only the Christians being targeted.

Both Christians and Muslims – the two main religious groups in the country of more than 230 million people – have been victims of attacks by radical Islamists.

The US and the Nigerian government of President Bola Tinubu reached a consensus on Christmas Day attacks. Nigeria has roughly equal numbers of Christians – predominantly in the south – and Muslims, who are mainly concentrated in the north.

In spite of increasingly volatile global order, the Vatican maintained what can be comfortably described as the defence of the national sovereignty. The Vatican has been critical of the Venezuelan government but is very much unlikely to throw its weight behind US attacks on that country and abduction of its President and the First Lady.

Dr. Jayawardana’s stand on US intervention in Nigeria cannot definitely be the position of the main Opposition party, nor any other political party represented in Parliament here. The National People’s Power (NPP) government refrained from commenting on US attacks on Nigeria, though it opposed US action in Venezuela. Although the US and Nigeria have consensus on Christmas Day attacks and may agree on further attacks, but such interventions are very much unlikely to change the situation on the ground.

SL on US raid

Let me reproduce Sri Lanka’s statement on US attacks on Venezuela, verbatim:

“The Government of Sri Lanka is deeply concerned about the recent developments in Venezuela and is closely monitoring the situation.

Sri Lanka emphasises the need to respect principles of international law and the UN Charter, such as the prohibition of the use of force, non-intervention, peaceful settlement of international disputes and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states.

Sri Lanka attaches great importance to the safety and well-being of the people of Venezuela and the stability of the region and calls on all parties to prioritize peaceful resolution through de-escalation and dialogue.

At this crucial juncture, it is important that the United Nations and its organs such as the UN Security Council be seized of the matter and work towards a peaceful resolution taking into consideration the safety, well-being and the sovereign rights of the Venezuelan people.”

That statement, dated 05 January, was issued by the Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism Ministry. Almost all political parties, represented in Parliament, except one-time darling of the LTTE, Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), condemned the US attacks on Venezuela and threats on Cuba, Colombia and Iran. The US is also targeting China, Russia and even the European Union.

Dr. Jayawardana requested coverage for his visit to the US Embassy here to hand over his letter, hence the publication of his ‘love’ letter to President Trump on page 2 of the 09 January edition of The Island.

There had never been a previous instance of a Sri Lankan lawmaker, or a political party, endorsing unilateral military action taken by the US or any other country. One-time Western Provincial Council member and member of Parliament since 2015, Jayawardana should have known better than to trust President Trump’s position on Nigeria. Perhaps the SJBer felt that an endorsement of US action, allegedly supportive of the Nigerian Catholic community, may facilitate his political agenda. Obviously, the Opposition MP endorsed US military action purely for domestic political advantage. The lawmaker appears to have simply disregarded the growing criticism of US actions in various parts of the world.

The German and French response to US actions, not only in Venezuela, but various other regions, as well, underscore the growing threat posed by President Trump’s agenda.

French President Emmanuel Macron and German leader Frank-Walter Steinmeier have sharply condemned US foreign policy under Donald Trump, declaring, respectively, that Washington was “breaking free from international rules” and the world risked turning into a “robber’s den”.

US threat to annex Greenland at the expense of Denmark, a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) ,and the grouping itself, has undermined the post WWII world order to such an extent, the developing crisis seems irreversible.

Focus on UAE

Indian Army Chief Gen. Upendra Dwivedi visited the United Arab Emirates on 05 and 06 January. His visit took place amidst rising tension on the Arabian Peninsula, following the Saudi-led military coalition launching air attacks on Yemen based Southern Transitional Council (STC) whose leader Aidarous al-Zubaid was brought to Abu Dhabi.

In the aftermath of the Saudi led strikes on Yemen port, held by the STC, the UAE declared that it would withdraw troops deployed in Yemen. The move, on the part of UAE, seems to be meant to de-escalate the situation, but the clandestine operation, undertaken by that country to rescue a Saudi target, appeared to have caused further deterioration of Saudi-UAE relations. Further deterioration is likely as both parties seek to re-assert control over the developing situation.

From Abu Dhabi, General Dwivedi arrived in Colombo on a two-day visit. Like his predecessors, General Dwivedi visited the Indian Army memorial at Pelawatte, where he paid respects to those who paid the supreme sacrifice during deployment of the Indian Army here – 1987 July to 1990 March. That monument is nothing but a testament to the foolish and flawed Indian policy. Those who portray that particular Indian military mission as their first major peace keeping operation overseas must keep in mind that over half a dozen terrorist groups were sponsored by India.

Just over a year after the end of that mission, one of those groups – the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) -assassinated Congress leader Rajiv Gandhi, the former Premier who sent the military mission here.

India never accepted responsibility for the death and destruction caused by its intervention in Sri Lanka. In fact, the Indian action led to an unprecedented situation when another Sri Lankan terrorist group PLOTE (People’s Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam) mounted a raid on the Maldives in early Nov. 1988. Two trawler loads of PLOTE cadres were on a mission to depose Maldivian President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom on a contract given by a disgruntled Maldivian businessman. India intervened swiftly and brought the situation under control. But, the fact that those who had been involved in the sea-borne raid on the Maldives were Indian trained and they left Sri Lanka’s northern province, which was then under Indian Army control, were conveniently ignored.

Except the LTTE, all other major Tamil terrorist groups, including the PLOTE, entered the political mainstream in 1990, and over the years, were represented in Parliament. It would be pertinent to mention that except the EPDP (Eelam People’s Democratic Party) all other Indian trained groups in 2001 formed the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), under the leadership of Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), to support the separatist agenda in Parliament. Sri Lanka’s triumph over the LTTE, in May 2009, brought that despicable project to an end.

The Indian Army statement on General Dwivedi’s visit here, posted on X, seemed like a propaganda piece, especially against the backdrop of continuing controversy over the still secret Indo-Lanka Memorandum of Understanding on defence that was entered into in April last year. Within months after the signing of the defence MoU, India acquired controlling stake of the Colombo Dockyard Ltd., a move that has been shrouded in controversy.

Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha’s response to my colleague Sanath Nanayakkara’s query regarding the strategic dimension of the India–Sri Lanka Defence Cooperation Agreement following the Indian Army Chief’s recent visit, the former was cautious in his response. Jha asserted that there was “nothing beyond what is included” in the provisions of the pact, which was signed by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and has generated controversy in Sri Lanka due to the absence of public discourse on its contents.

Framing the agreement as a self-contained document focused purely on bilateral defence cooperation, Jha said this reflected India’s official position. By directing attention solely to the text of the agreement, the High Commissioner indicated that there were no unstated strategic calculations involved, aligning with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister’s recent clarification that the pact was not a military agreement but one that dealt with Indian support.

Nanayakkara had the opportunity to raise the issue at a special media briefing called by Jha at the IHC recently.

Julie Chung departs

The US attack on Venezuela, and the subsequent threats directed at other countries, including some of its longtime allies, should influence our political parties to examine US and Indian stealthy interventions here, leading to the overthrowing of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in July 2022.

The US Embassy in Colombo recently announced that Julie Chung, who oversaw the overthrowing of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, would end her near four-year term. Former Indian High Commissioner in Colombo Gopal Baglay, who, too, played a significant role in the regime change project, ended his term in December 2023 and took up position in Canberra as India’s top diplomat there.

Both Chung and Baglay have been accused of egging on the putsch directly by urging Aragalaya time Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, on 13 July, 2022, to take over the presidency. Former Minister Wimal Weerawansa and top author Sena Thoradeniya, in their comments on Aragalaya accused Chung of unprecedented intervention, whereas Prof. Sunanada Maddumabanadara found fault with Baglay for the same.

The US Embassy, in a statement dated 07 January, 2026, quoted the outgoing US Ambassador as having said: “I have loved every moment of my time in Sri Lanka. From day one, my focus has been to advance America’s interests—strengthening our security partnerships, expanding trade and investment, and promoting education and democratic values that make both our nations stronger. Together, we’ve built a relationship that delivers results for the American people and supports a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific.”

The Embassy concluded that statement reiterating the US commitment to its partnership with Sri Lanka and to build on the strong foundation, established during Ambassador Chung’s nearly four-year tenure.

Sri Lanka can expect to increasingly come under both US and Indian pressure over Chinese investments here. It would be interesting to see how the NPP government solves the crisis caused by the moratorium on foreign research vessel visits, imposed in 2024 by the then President Ranil Wickremesinghe. The NPP is yet to reveal its position on that moratorium, over one year after the lapse of the ban on such vessels. Wickremesinghe gave into intense US and Indian pressure in the wake of Chinese ship visits.

In spite of US-India relations under strain due to belligerent US actions, they are likely to adopt a common approach here to undermine Sri Lanka’s relations with China. But, the situation is so dicey, India may be compelled to review its position. The US declaration that a much-anticipated trade deal with India collapsed because Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hasn’t heeded President Trump’s demand to call him.

This was revealed by US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in the ‘All-In Podcast’ aired on Thursday, 08 January. The media quoted Indian spokesman Randhir Jaiswal as having said on the following day: “The characterisation of these discussions in the reported remarks is not accurate.” Jaiswal added that India “remains interested in a mutually beneficial trade deal between two complementary economies and looks forward to concluding it.”

Sri Lanka in deepening dilemma

Sri Lanka, struggling to cope up with post-Aragalaya economic, political and social issues, is inundated with foreign policy issues.

The failure on the part of the government and the Opposition to reach consensus on foreign policy challenges/matters has further weakened the country’s position. If those political parties represented in Parliament at least discussed matters of importance at the relevant consultative committee or the sectoral oversight committee, lawmaker Jayawardana wouldn’t have endorsed the US bombing of Nigeria.

Sri Lanka and Nigeria enjoy close diplomatic relations and the SJB MP’s unexpected move must have caused quite a controversy, though the issue at hand didn’t receive public attention. Regardless of the US-Nigerian consensus on the Christmas Day bombing, perhaps it would be unwise on the part of Sri Lanka to support military action at any level for obvious reasons.

Sri Lanka taking a stand on external military interventions of any sort seems comical at a time our war-winning military had been hauled up before the Geneva Human Rights Council for defending the country against the LTTE that had a significant conventional military capacity in addition to being “the most ruthless terrorist organisation” as it was described by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation. The group capitalised on experience gained in fighting the Indian Army during 1987 July-1990 March period and posed quite a threat. Within five months after the resumption of fighting, in June 1990, the LTTE ordered the entire Muslim population to leave the predominantly Tamil northern province.

No foreign power at least bothered to issue a statement condemning the LTTE. MP Jayawardana’s statement supporting US military action in support of Christian community should be examined in Sri Lanka’s difficult battle against terrorism that took a very heavy toll. Perhaps, political parties represented in Parliament, excluding those who still believe in a separatist project, should reexamine their stand on Sri Lanka’s unitary status.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

Buddhist Iconography

Published

6 days ago

2026/01/14

Sahan Weerasooriya

A Buddha statue from Mathura with a single curl, 2nd cent. CE

Seeing a new kind of head ornament on a recent reproduction of the iconic Avukana Buddha statue, made me ponder how the Enlightened One would have looked in real life, and what relationship that may or may not have with Buddhist iconography. Obviously, there is no record or evidence of any rendering of the Buddha made by an artist who saw him alive, but there are a few references to his appearance in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, that affirms, as he himself has said, Buddha was nothing other than a human being, albeit an extraordinarily intelligent one (Dhammika 2021).

Before enlightenment, Siduhath Gotama was described as having black hair and a beard. One account describes him as “handsome, of fine appearance, pleasant to see, with a good complexion and a beautiful form and countenance” (D.I,114). Venerable Ananda has said, “It is wonderful, truly marvelous how serene is the good Gotama’s presence, how clear and radiant is his complexion. Just as golden jujube fruit in the autumn is clear and radiant … so too is the good Gotama’s complexion” (A.I,181). If Venerable Ananda’s comparison is correct, Gotama must have been of what is called ‘Wheatish’ complexion common in present-day North India, which is described as typically falling between fair and dusky complexions, exhibiting a light brown hue with golden or olive undertones (Fitzpatrick scale Type III to VI).

The Buddha is also described as a slim tall person; slim, perhaps, as a result of practising asceticism before enlightenment and spartan life thereafter. As he aged, he also suffered from back pain and other ailments, according to Sutta Pitaka.

Artists’ imagination

We need not argue that the depictions of the Buddha we see across countries, in various media, are the imaginations of the artists influenced by their local cultures and traditions. The potentially controversial aspect regarding Buddhist iconography is the depiction of his hair, which is almost universal. There are several references in the Sutta Pitaka, where various Brahmin youths derogatorily referred to the Buddha as “bald-pated recluse” (MN 81). There is no reason to believe that he would have been any different from the rest of the Bhikkhus who had and have clean shaven heads. In fact, when King Ajatasattu visited the Buddha for the first time, he had trouble identifying the Buddha from the rest of the sangha, and an attendant had to help the king.

In early Buddhist art, the Buddha was represented by the wheel of dhamma, Bodhi tree, throne, lotus, the footprints, or a parasol. For example, in the carvings of Sanchi temple built in the third century BCE, the Buddha is depicted by some of these symbols, but never in human form. Depiction of the Buddha in human form has started around the first century CE in two places, Gandhara and Mathura. In both places, the Buddha is depicted with hair, and not as a “bald-pated recluse” the way the Sutta Pitaka depicts him.

Figure 1. Bimaran Casket

No scholarly agreeement

So, the question is who started this artistic trend, was it the Gandhara artists under the Greek influence or the Mathura artists following their own traditions? There is no scholarly agreement on this; Western scholars think it was the Greek influence that made presenting the Buddha in human form while Ananda Coomaraswamy presents another theory (Coomaraswamy 1972).

The earliest dateable representation of the Buddha in human form is found on the Bimaran casket found during the exploration of a stupa near Bimaran, Afghanistan in 1834. It has been dated to the first century CE using the coins found along with it, that also depict and refer to the Buddha by name in Greko-Bactrian. This reliquary, a gold cylinder embossed with figures and artwork, is on display at the British Museum (Figure 1). Under the Hellenistic influence, it must have been natural for the Gandhara artists to represent a revered or divine figure in human form; Greeks have been doing it for millennia. The standing Buddha figure is depicted wearing the hair in the form of a knot over the crown. In other carvings from the same period, most male figures are shown with the same hair style. Also, it appears that both Spartan men and women tied their hair in a knot over the crown of the head, known as the “Knidian hairstyle” (Wikipedia). The Gandhara sculpture is famous for the Hellenistic style of realism (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Gandhara statue from 1-2
century CE

Coomaraswamy’s reasoning

Coomaraswamy reasons that the Bhakti movement – the loving devotion of the followers towards the deities, is the reason for the emergence of Buddha figure in Mathura. We cannot say for sure if the Gandhara art induced the Mathura artists to break away from their tradition of aniconic symbolism. What is clear is that they have been influenced by the trend to elevate religious leaders to divinity, to impress the followers and compete or to outdo the practices of other religions. This tradition, which predates the Buddha, has introduced the concept of the thirty-two characteristics or marks of great personalities.

It is this trend that has introduced divine interventions and other mysticisms to Buddhism and culminated in famous poems as Asvagosha’s Buddhacharithaya and exegeses as Lalithavistara a few centuries later and continues to date. Instead of following realism as the Gandhara artists did, Mathura artists have followed this tradition and incorporated the thirty-two characteristics of a great person into their representation of the Buddha figure.

Some of these marks are described as “… there is a protuberance on the head, this is, for the great man, the venerable Gotama, a mark of a great man; the hair bristles, his bristling hair is blue or dark blue, the color of collyrium, turning in curls, turning to the right; the tuft of hair between the eyebrows on his forehead is very white like cotton; he is golden in color, has skin like gold; eyes very blue, like sapphires; under the soles of his feet there are wheels, with a thousand rims and naves, complete in every way…(DN 30, M 91). Thus, the tradition of adding the protuberance referred to as Usnisha to Buddha statues started.

Buddhist traditions in different forms

This practice has been adopted by all Buddhist traditions in different forms. The highly effective outcome of incorporating these great marks into the statuary is that it has created a globally recognisable symbol that is independent of the artist’s skills, cultural affiliation or the medium used. Without such distinct features, we would have difficulty in distinguishing the depictions of the Enlightened One from those of other monks or other religious leaders such as Mahaveera. Nevertheless, in addition to its spiritual aspect, Buddhist iconography has been a flourishing art form, which has allowed human talent and ingenuity to thrive over millennia.

Let us not forget that artistic expression is a fundamental right. Interestingly, the curly hair on the Buddha statues made the early European Indologists to think that the Buddha was an African deity (Allen 2002).

Sri Lankan Buddhist art

Sri Lankan Buddhist art is said to be related to Amaravathi style; all Sri Lankan statues are depicted with curling hair bristles turning to right. The presence and prominence of the usnisha on local statues vary depending on the period. Toluvila statue, prominently displayed at the National Museum, is considered the earliest dateable statue in Sri Lanka. It is dated to 3rd or 4th century CE, has a less prominent usnisha and lacks the elongated ear lobes; it is said to be influenced by the Mathura school.

Since Dambulla temple dates to third century BCE, one wonders if the magnificent reclining statue in Cave 1 could be earlier than the Toluvila statue. There are several bronze statues from Anuradhapura period without usnisha. Towards late Anuradhapura period, usnisha is beginning to be replaced with rudimentary Siraspatha, which represents a flame. This addition evolved over time and became a very prominent feature during the Kandyan period and replaced the traditional usnisha completely (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Kandyan era statue with
Siraspatha

Incomparable workmanship

Then the question is how does the Avukana statue, which belongs to the early Anuradhapura period, have a siraspatha that is not compatible with the style of the period or the incomparable workmanship of the statue itself? I have come across two explanations. According to the Sinhala Encyclopedia, the original siraspatha was destroyed and a cement replacement was installed in recent times, likely in the early 20th century.

The other version is that the statue never had a siraspatha like many other contemporary stone statues. For example, the Susseruwa (Ras Vehera) statue, which is identical in style, and likely a contemporary work, does not have a siraspatha. During the Buddhist revival, a group of devotees from a Southern town felt that the lack of a siraspatha on such a great statue as a major deficiency, and they ceremoniously installed the crude cement ornament seen today.

This raises the question: which is more valuable, preservation and protection of archeological treasures or reconstruction to meet modern expectations and standards? For example, what would have been more impressive, the Mirisavetiya Stupa as it was found before the failed reconstruction attempts, or the current version that is indistinguishable from modern concrete constructs? Even though, one can assume it was done in good faith. What if the Mihintale Kanthaka Chetiya were covered under brick and concrete to convert into a finished product? Would it increase or decrease its archeological value?

Differences between reality and iconography

None of that should matter in following the Buddha Dhamma. In theory. However, when the influence of Buddhist iconography is deeply rooted in devotee’s mind, it is impossible to imagine the Buddha as a normal human being, with or without a clean-shaven head and a brown complexion. The failure to see the difference between reality and iconography or art, poetry, and literature can be detrimental as it could distort the fact that Dhamma is the truth discovered by a human being, and it is accessible to any human, here and now. That is responsible, at least in part, for the introduction of mysticism, myths, and beliefs that are rapidly sidelining of Dhamma.

How often do we think of Enlightened One as a humble mendicant who roamed the Ganges Valley barefoot, in the beating sun, and resting at night on the folded outer robe spread under a tree. Sadly, iconography and other associated myths have driven us too far away from reality and Dhamma.

Up until I was six years old, we lived in a place up in the Balangoda hills that had a kaolin (kirimeti) deposit. The older students in the school used it for various handcrafts, but for the youngsters, it was playdough, even though we had never heard of that term. After witnessing an artist working on a Buddha statue at the local temple, my friend Bandara and I made Buddha statues of all types and sizes. If any of them were to survive for a few thousand years at the site where the schools stood, future archaeologists may wonder if a primitive tribe existed there (of course carbon dating will show otherwise). Like that, looking at some of the thousands of statues that pop up on every street corner, the purpose of which varies, sometimes I wonder if they were made by a civilisation that was yet to finesse the art of sculpture or by kids having access to kirimeti. No wonder birds take liberty to exercise their freedom of expression.

by Geewananda Gunawardana