Midweek Review

Genealogy of Concept and Genesis of 13th Amendment-1

Published

4 years ago

2020/09/16

By Prof. Gamini Keerawella

Those who oppose devolution of power are up in arms now against the 13th Amendment, believing that the Provincial Council system has created a political space for the sub-national groups in the North and East to share power at the regional level. They allege that the 13th Amendment was an externally engineered move, and the Provincial Council system is a parasitic organ planted in the body politic of Sri Lanka by India and, therefore, they should be abolished without delay.

When one traces the chain of dramatic events leading to the 13th Amendment, it is clear that the immediate compulsion that forced President J.R. Jayewardene to present the 13th Amendment to the Parliament was India’s coercive diplomacy against Sri Lanka, which was known as ‘Parippu Diplomacy.’ However, the concept of devolution of power and the idea of Provincial Councils as a unit of devolution had been at the centre of political discourse well before the Indo-Sri Lanka Peace accord, at least from the 1920s. The Provincial Councils did not come from the blue sky with the Indian dhal cannon in 1987. The concept of devolution had surfaced again and again in the post independent political discourse in the course of sporadic attempts to accommodate political interests of sub-national groups. However, the manner in which the Provincial Council system was established in 1987 and the presence of the IPKF destroyed the legitimacy of the provincial council system at its inception. It does not negate the validity of devolution of power as a devise of unity in a fractured society. This essay intends to debunk certain misperceptions relating to the origins of the Provincial Council system by tracing the genealogy of the political discourse on devolution of power embodied in the 13th Amendment.

The conceptual origins of the Provincial Councils could be traced back to the Donoughmore Report in 1928. Conceptualizing it within the framework of local government, it presented a proposal to establish Provincial Councils to delegate certain administrative functions of the Central Government. More important is the rationale presented by the Donoughmore Commission for Provincial Council in 1928.

The argument in favour of the establishment of a Provincial Council in each Province is that such a scheme might result in a large part of administrative work now carried out in the Legislative Council coming into the hands of persons permanently resided in the country districts and thus more directly in contact with their needs; in the relief of the departments of the central government of much detailed work and in their being thereby set free to consider and advise on the larger affairs of the country: in the special views of the different races predominant in the different part of the Island having effects in the administration of these parts; in members of growing body of politically-minded persons in the country being placed in an honourable position to render real assistance in administration.

The Commission recommended that the new department without delay should explore the possibility of establishing Provincial Councils. Further it proposed that ‘an experiment with a council of this nature may be made in a more highly developed province within the next few years, and if that should prove successful, the system rapidly extended throughout the island’. The Issue of Provincial Councils came to discussion at the State Council in 1940 when R.S.S. Gunawardena proposed a motion on 10 July 1940. The The motion declared, “This Council is of the opinion that immediate effects should be given to the recommendation of the Donoughmore Commission with regard to the establishment of Provincial Councils”. Following the Motion, S.W. R.D. Bandaranaike as the Minister of Local Administration placed a detailed report of the Executive Committee of Local Administration on Provincial Councils before the State Council. It identified functions of proposed Provincial Councils in three main classes: supervisory, direct executive and advisory. The proposal was soon overtaken by other developments relating to the transfer of power and the issue of representation. Referring to the Provincial Councils, S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike stated in December 1947 during the Budget Debate that: “I do not think I shall be able to introduce the Bill relating to Provincial Councils before January next year. The Bill is ready, but as it impinges on the functions of my colleagues in the Cabinet, I have to obtain their consent to all the implications of the Bill before I can introduce it in this House”. It is important to note that even in the 1940s the Tamil leadership had not taken the issue of Regional Councils and devolution of power to regions into their hands.

When the transfer of power to Sri Lanka was in sight after the 1943 Declaration, the issue of how to reconcile the competing claims to present a constitutional arrangement satisfactory to all stakeholders came to the forefront. The 1943 Declaration requested the Board of Ministers to proceed with the framing of their constitutional proposals. At the same tine it emphasized that the proposals should obtain a three-fourth majority. One of the key issues that cropped up in this process was the basis of representation. Both, the purely population basis as well as communal representation were found to be not acceptable. Accordingly, the method of one seat for every 75,000 of population and one seat for every 1,000 square miles of territory in each province was worked out. It was at this point the British Government appointed the Soulbury Commission. The Tamil Congress under G.G. Ponnambalam was not prepared to accept the Ministers’ proposals and presented their own instead. After the experiences of the Donoughmore Constitution, the main Tamil leadership insisted on balanced representation, i.e. fifty percent of the seats for minorities including ‘Ceylon Indians’ – term used then to identify the Tamils of Indian origin. As I. D. S. Weerawardena pointed out when the Ministers drafted their proposals they pledged to give some weightage to all the minorities. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike offered a scheme of 60:40 as a basis of representation. The proposals of the BOM were accepted by the Soulbury Commission and incorporated into the new constitution. In I. D.S. Weerawardena’s words, “From the point of view of the minorities, the new Constitution of Ceylon was the point of balance among the various conflicting communal claims”. Ultimately, the Tamil Congress of G.G. Ponnambalam agreed to settle for the unitary form of constitution with balanced representation based on 60:40 formula negotiated by S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike on behalf of the Ceylon National Congress. The one of very first acts of the rulers of Independent Sri Lanka disrupted this balance setup by the Soulbury Constitution ‘among the various conflicting communal claims’. The Citizenship Acts of 1948 and 1949 changed the political scenarios. This move not only made the earlier formula of distributing seats to provinces meaningless but also created an unresolved issue between Sri Lanka and India, leaving room for India to intervene. “The Soulbury Constitution received minority support (without which it could not have been implemented) because it arranged to enable the minorities to win a certain number of seats. The Ceylon Indians were among these minorities. To deny them the vote is to deny them the seats. One moral undertaken has been done away with. To deny the vote to Ceylon Indian is also to reduce the total number of seats available to all minorities. That is a broken pledge to all minorities…. The moral basis of the Soulbury Constitution has been wiped away. To attempt to prove the constitutionality of the position is not to attempt to prove its justice”.

Its implications for the new political environment as well as for Tamil political circles were far reaching. Within the Ceylon Tamil Congress a group led by S.J.V. Chelvanayakam left the party to form the Federal Party on a regional agenda. At first, however, the regional agenda put forward by the Federal Party did not have any serious impact on Tamil politics and in the 1952 general elections the regional agenda was clearly rejected by substantial margins in the North and East in favour of the Ceylon Tamil Congress candidates. This situation rapidly changed in the period 1952-1956.

In 1955 the Commission of Local Government was appointed with N.K. Choksy as its Chairman. In its report the commission admitted that there was a strong support in favour of the establishment of Regional Councils in the country. However, the Commission strongly presented the case in favour of the Provincial Committees and not Regional Councils.

The phenomenon of regional councils based on existing provinces came into political discourse once again in the history of post-Independence Sri Lanka in 1957, with the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact, three decades prior to the 13th Amendment. Part –B of the Pact contained the Joint Statement on Regional Councils. According to the provisions of the agreement regional areas were to be defined in the Bill and the Northern Province was to form a regional area but the Eastern Province was to be divided into two or more regional areas.

Provision was to be made in the Bill to enable two or more regions to amalgamate beyond the provincial limits and for one region to divide itself subject to ratification by Parliament. Parliament was to delegate powers and specify them in the Act. The Central government would provide block grant to the Regional Councils. At the same time, the Regional Councils would have powers of taxation and borrowing.

The unilateral abrogation of the B-C Pact in the face of articulate small group of political activists belied an early opportunity of accommodating the interests of sub-national groups. Bandaranaike did not address the broader constituency over the heads of these elements using his mass appeal to save the B.C. pact. In the face of a lack of support within the government quarters itself, Bandaranaike did not have courage to confront the anti-Pact forces. What happened to the B-C Pact is now well known. However, the political dynamics of post-colonial Sri Lanka linked with multi-ethnic social reality did not allow burying the basic principles embodied in the B-C Pact and they conjured up again and again in different garb.

The UNP, which took to the streets in opposing the B-C Pact was forced to come to terms with the Federal Party in 1965. The Senanayake-Chelvanayakam Agreement of 1965 covered three issues: the language rights of the Tamil people, granting of land in colonization schemes and regional devolution of power. According to Article 3 of the Agreement, “Action will be taken to establish District Councils in Ceylon vested with powers over subjects to be mutually agreed upon between the two leaders. It was agreed, however, that the Government should have power under the law to give directions to such Councils under the national interests”.

The main Left parties (the CP and the LSSP) who were the champions of equal language rights in their good old days now joined hands with the SLFP to oppose the Tamil Language (Special Provisions) Regulations. In the light of the antipathy created by the opposition in the country, the UNP-led coalition government was faltering in presenting District Councils provisions to the Parliament. Ultimately a White Paper on proposals for the establishment of District Councils under the control of the central government was presented to the Parliament in 1968. The SLFP boycott the debate at the Parliament and campaigned against it outside. In view of a possible backlash on the part of the Government caucus itself, Prime Minister Senanayake decided not to go ahead with the White Paper.

It is important to note that Mrs. Bandaranaike also had to grapple with the issue of regional devolution of power. S.J.V. Chelvanayakam resigned his seat in protest following the adoption of the first Republican Constitution. After much delay the UNF government decided to have s bye-election in1975. The United Front decided to field V. Ponnambalam, a veteran Communist Party member against Chelvanayakam. Despite the unfavourable political climate in the country in general and in the region in particular, V. Ponnambalam fared comparatively well (9457) vis-à-vis Chelvanayakam (25,927). After the bye-election, V. Ponnambalm resigned from the C.P. It was later revealed that Ms Bandaranaike had promised V. Ponnambalam that a statement will be issued before the Election Day promising regional devolution. Santasilan Kadirgamar refers to the book Senthamilar Ahuvom written by V. Ponnambalam in which he reasoned out why he resigned from the C.P. According to Kadirgamer, “he revealed how he and the Tamil supporters of the left movement who had worked hard at the 1975 bye-elections had been severely let down. The United Front had given him the assurance that 48 hours before the poll the Kankesanturai electorate would be flooded with pamphlets promising a substantial degree of autonomy to the North and East, that would gone beyond the abrogated Bandranaike-Chelvanayakam Pact of 1957. At the last minute the SLFP high command went back on this promise and the CP leadership succumbed to this betrayal”. (To be concluded)

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

With somewhat muddled foreign policy where are we heading?

Published

5 days ago

2024/10/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

U.S. and Sri Lankan Marines conduct Visit, Board, Search, and Seizure (VBSS) drills during Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) exercise in 2023. CARAT Sri Lanka is the largest bilateral military exercise meant to enhance US-Sri Lanka relationship. (Pic courtesy US embassy, Colombo)

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The Sri Lanka Navy will take command of Combined Task Force (CTF) 154 from the Egyptian Navy soon. Since its establishment in May 2023, US (Capt. Oliver Herion), Jordan (Capt. Ayman Al Naimat) and Egypt (Commodore Haytham Elsayed Khalil), respectively, commanded the unit, one of the five Task Forces that operated under the purview of the US-led Combined Maritime Forces (CMF).

The whole operation is spearheaded by Bahrain headquartered US Fifth Fleet. SLN, under the previous regime led by Ranil Wickremesinghe, joined the CMF in 2023 as its 39th member. Meanwhile, strange bedfellow Argentina is the latest addition to it. To make matters worse for that country, Buenos Aires, under eccentric right wing President Javier Gerardo Milei, wants to make the US dollar its official currency..

SLN disclosed the CMF’s move in a press release dated Oct, 02 under the new JVP/NFF regime that dealt with CTF commander Commodore Haytham Elsayed Khalil of the Egyptian Navy meeting Sri Lanka Navy Commander Vice Admiral Priyantha Perera.

CTF 150 focuses on maritime security in the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean, CTF 151 leads regional counter-piracy efforts, CTF 152 handles maritime security in the Arabian Gulf, CTF 153 is responsible for operations in the Red Sea, and CTF 154 is tasked with training, thereby improving operational capabilities to enhance maritime security in the Middle East.

The CMF’s overall strategy should be examined taking into consideration the widening of the Middle East conflict, with Israel simultaneously taking on Hamas (Islamic Resistance Movement) in Gaza, Hezbollah (Party of God) based in Lebanon and Iran widely accused of financing Hezbollah. In the wake of further destabilization of the region as a result of Israeli ground forces entering Lebanon and Iran firing missiles at the Jewish State in retaliation for terrorist acts committed against it, inside Iran, and elsewhere, the US and the UK bombed Yemen where Iran backed Houthis are trying to disrupt ship movements in the Red Sea. Since Israel launched a war against Hamas, in Gaza, and using that as an excuse, is committing acts of genocide against the Palestinians to create a homogeneous Jewis state, Houthis have meanwhile targeted nearly 90 merchant vessels in the Red Sea to force a halt to Israeli terror tactics to drive out or kill the Palestinians. Hezbollah and other resistance groups from Yemen, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq, too, are stepping up attacks to turn the tide against the extremist Jewish state.

Sri Lanka is now ironically among the coalition backing Israel battling Iran and Tehran-backed groups on multiple fronts and thousands of our workers are now employed in the Jewish state because of the extreme poverty here. Did Israel, in spite of knowing the impending Oct. 07, 2023 Hamas raid, targeting Southern Israel, conveniently turn a blind eye to pave the way for a sustained offensive? In other words, did Iran backed groups walk into an Israeli trap. The Israeli onslaught appeared to have been a meticulously planned response. The triggering of explosions in pagers used by Hezbollah, or those in some way connected to it in Lebanon and Syria, in the third week of September, before the killing of Hezbollah Chief Hassan Nasrallah, in Beirut, and the Israeli ground invasion, suggested the Jewish State planned a knockout blow against the Iran-led coalition. What Netanyahu did not bargain for is that the present day resistance is made up of committed fighters unlike the Arab armies that met Jewish state’s terror tactics in earlier wars as in 1948 and 1967. Though the Western media tries to paint Iran as the villain over the whole issue, Iran, nor its proxies, have caused needless bloodletting among Israeli civilians. Two major missile attacks that Teheran has so far carried out against the Jewish state had taken extraordinary measures not to target civilian infrastructure thereby hardly harming any noncombatants there. This is unlike Israel that has caused unimaginable harm to Arab civilians.

Outgoing US President Joe Biden’s suggestion that Israel shouldn’t hit Iranian oil or nuclear sites in response to a massive missile strike but consider other alternatives underscored the gravity of the rapidly developing situation.

Whether the world likes it or not, the war in the Middle East, as well as Ukraine, where the US and its major allies (all part of CMF) are trying to wear down Russia, is being politicized. There cannot be a better example than Republican White House hopeful Donald Trump’s declaration that he believed Israel should strike Iranian nuclear facilities in response to the recent Iranian missile barrage.

Those who had compared the decimation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in 2009 by the Sri Lanka military and the war between Hamas and Israel in the aftermath of the Oct. 07 raids, included New Delhi based Narayan Swamy, who served UNI and AFP during his decades long career. While acknowledging that no two situations were absolutely comparable, Swamy, who currently serves as the Executive Director of IANS (Indo-Asian News Service) declared: “Oct 7 could be a turning point for Hamas similar to what happened to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka in 2006. Let me explain. Similar to Hamas, the LTTE grew significantly over time eventually gaining control of a significant portion of Sri Lanka’s land and coast. The LTTE was even more formidable than Hamas. It had a strong army, growing air force and a deadly naval presence. Unlike Hamas the LTTE successfully assassinated high ranking political figures in Sri Lanka and India. Notably LTTE achieved this without direct support from any country??? Well Hamas received military and financial backing from Iran and some other states [emphasis is mine]. The LTTE became too sure of their victories overtime. They thought they could never be beaten and that starting a war would always make them stronger. But in 2006 when they began Eelam War 1V their leader Velupillai Prabhakaran couldn’t have foreseen that within three years he and his prominent group that the world was led to believe as being virtually invincible, especially by the Western media and so-called military experts, would be defeated. Prabhakaran believed gathering tens of thousands of Tamil civilians during the last stages of the war would protect them and Sri Lanka wouldn’t unleash missiles and rockets. Colombo proved him wrong. They were hit. By asking the people not to flee Gaza, despite Israeli warnings, Hamas is taking a similar line. Punishing all Palestinians for Hamas’ actions is unjust just like punishing all Tamils for LTTE’s actions was wrong. The LTTE claimed to fight for Tamils without consulting them and Hamas claimed to represent Palestinians without seeking the approval for the Oct.7 strike. Well two situations are not absolutely comparable. We can be clear that Hamas is facing a situation similar to what the LTTE faced shortly before its end. Will Hamas meet a similar fate as the LTTE? Only time will answer that question.”

In a way, the circumstances of the ongoing Middle East conflict and the emergence of Tamil terrorism here is so dissimilar, the situations cannot be compared at all.

GoSL stand on ME conflict

In the first week of January, this year, the then President, who is also the Commander-in-Chief, in addition to being the Defence Minister, Ranil Wickremeisnghe, declared his intention to deploy an SLN vessel in the Red Sea in support of the ongoing CMF operations. The specific US-led effort meant to overcome the Houthi challenge was called ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian.’ In spite of statements attributed to various spokespersons at that time, we are still in the dark as to the actual implementation of Wickremesinghe’s directive.

How could Sri Lanka undertake such a costly deployment in the absence of at least one properly equipped vessel to operate in missile and drone environments at a time the Wickremesinghe administration claimed it couldn’t hold Local Government polls for want of sufficient funds?

Why on earth Wickremeisnghe wanted a role for SLN in ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian’, launched in Dec. 2023, when some of Washington’s allies were skeptical about the initiative?

With the further deterioration of the Middle East situation, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government should take stock of the situation. Jathika Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and Jathika Jana Balawegaya (JJB) leader AKD, in his capacity as the Commander-in Chief of armed forces and Defence Minister, should receive a comprehensive briefing regarding the current situation.

In the absence of a properly constituted foreign policy, Sri Lanka found itself in a deepening quandary. The armed forces, as well as the JVP that had been at the receiving end, in 1971 and 1987-1990, of the counter-insurgency campaigns, need to work together in an environment caused by AKD’s unexpected triumph over the two-party system.

Let me examine the JVP/JJB stand on the SLN’s Read Sea deployment as desired by Wickremesinghe. It would be pertinent to mention that the SLN joined the CMF during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President.

On behalf of the JVP/JJB, Sunil Handunetti strongly condemned Wickremesinghe’s declaration on the Red Sea deployment. The former JVP parliamentarian questioned the rationality of Wickremesinghe move while warning of dire consequences. The one-time head of the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE), a vital parliamentary watchdog committee, accused Wickremesinghe of joining a US-led effort supportive of Israel. Warning Sri Lanka could earn the wrath of certain countries by participating in such US-led endeavours, Handunetti asked whether President Wickremesinghe could decide on active participation in an international operation.

Against that background, President AKD and his Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath should make Sri Lanka’s position clear in respect of the Middle East conflict. Regardless of the country heading towards parliamentary elections in a couple of weeks, the President will have to keep an eye on developments as various interested parties pursue strategies which may not align with our own.

The developing situation in Lebanon, as well as Syria, compelled the Foreign Ministry to issue travel warnings in respect of both countries while keeping its options open on Israel. The second Iranian missile barrage carried out against Israel in October obviously didn’t influence Sri Lanka to issue a travel warning. Iran mounted its first bombardment in April also this year. Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic missions both in Tel Aviv and Beirut.

Developing dilemma

One can easily understand bankrupt Sri Lanka’s dilemma when India finds itself in an unenviable situation. In spite of denials at different levels, India made ammunition, explosives and other equipment that are used by Israel and Ukraine, with the latter using them against Russia, one-time major supplier of armaments to India. The late Indian Foreign Secretary J.N. Dixit, who at times behaved like a Viceroy when he was their High Commissioner in Colombo in the ’80s, in his memoirs ‘Foreign Policy Makers of India’ defended Indira Gandhi’s controversial decision not to condemn the 1979 Soviet intervention in Afghanistan due to their heavy dependence on the Soviet Union for defense needs.

New Delhi obviously cannot ignore Washington’s requirement to ensure a steady supply of ammunition to Israel and Ukraine alike.

Reuters declared on Sept. 19, 2024, following the publication of a New Delhi datelined exclusive headlined “Ammunition from India enters Ukraine, raising Russian ire,” India’s Foreign Ministry described the report as ‘speculative and misleading.’

The news agency quoted Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal as having said: “It implies violations by India where none exist and, hence, is inaccurate and mischievous.”

“India has been carrying out its defence exports taking into account its international obligations on non-proliferation and based on robust legal and regulatory framework, which includes a holistic assessment of relevant criteria, including end user obligations and certifications,” Jaiswal said.

The bottom line is that even strategic alliances are changing or done away with. India-Russia relationship, built largely on defence ties, can be cited as an example. Indian’s backing for Ukraine and Israel meant that the former’s role in the world stage has undergone a drastic change. That is the undeniable truth.

India skipped the U.N. General Assembly vote on February 23, 2023 on a resolution that underscored the need to reach as soon as possible a “comprehensive, just and lasting peace” in Ukraine in line with the principles of the U.N. Charter. India won’t condemn Russia over the war in Ukraine either. But, that wouldn’t prevent New Delhi from supplying Israel and Ukraine while Indians serving with the Russian Army battling Ukraine remains an issue. New Delhi, too, is obviously playing both sides like most of the Arab regimes when dealing with Israel and the issue of hapless Palestinians as we have explained earlier.

In the run-up to the presidential election here, the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government was accused of turning a blind eye to ex- and serving military personnel joining Russia. Although both Russia and Sri Lanka promised to address the concerns of men on the Ukrainian-Russia front, as well as their families, the current situation is not known.

The former Foreign Minister Ali Sabry, PC, intervened in this matter and ex-Defence Secretary General (retd.) Kamal Gunaratne, especially, visited Moscow to explore ways and means of reaching consensus on the issue at hand. However, the AKD administration should examine the whole issue afresh as combat experienced Sri Lankans serving with foreign forces can be a social issue.

We know Sri Lanka paid a heavy price for failing to take remedial measures after Sri Lankans reached Syria during the Yahapalana administration (2015-2019). Had the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government acted on a warning issued by its own Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, PC, as advised by the intelligence services, the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage may have been avoided.

At that time, some speculated that 45 persons of nine families joined ISIS – the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.

Taking into consideration the arrest of four Sri Lankans by Gujarat police on terrorism charges during the general election in India, the new government should also pay attention to emerging threats. The arrests, last May, proved that security concerns remain. However, the All Ceylon Union of Muslim League Youth Fronts (ACUMLYF) repeatedly questioned the failure on the part of the previous administration to take up this issue with India.

In response to The Island queries, the grouping’s President Sham Nawaz said that though they had made representations in this regard to the then State Foreign Minister Tharaka Balasuriya in the first week of June, the Foreign Ministry at least didn’t bother to respond. In fact, there hadn’t been any response whatsoever until the change of the government in September. Perhaps, Nawaz should make representations to new Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath.

Another US ship

Sri Lanka will receive another mothballed US Coast Guard Cutter, gratis, courtesy the USA. Over the years, the US transferred three Coast Guard Cutters to Sri Lanka, also gratis. The transfer of the fourth US Coast Guard Cutter will take place during President Dissanayake’s tenure, perhaps mid next year and marks a significant development in bilateral relations. The US intention to transfer the vessel was announced in late February this year during Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Richard Verma’s visit. Verma also visited the site of the West Container Terminal (WCT), a deep-water shipping container terminal in the Port of Colombo. The WCT, is being constructed by Colombo West International Terminal (CWIT) Private Limited with $553 mn in financing from the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation. But the real danger is we are being increasingly dragged into a quagmire of American making vis-à-vis the bloc led by Russia and China. As the old saying goes there is no such a thing as a free meal. Let us hope comrades who are leading us now realise it as well before it is too late.

The CWIT is a consortium consisting of India’s largest port operator, Adani Ports & SEZ Ltd., Sri Lanka’s major listed conglomerate, John Keells Holdings PLC, and the Sri Lanka Ports Authority. The consortium is set to develop the CWIT on a Build, Operate, and Transfer agreement, for a period of 35 years.

The US investment at the Colombo Port should be viewed against the backdrop of Chinese presence at the Colombo Port, in addition to China having Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease and other projects. India is keen to expand its influence here and, as a Quad member, seems to be working with others (the US, Australia and Japan) to bolster defence ties.

The expansion of China Bay, the Trinco-based No 03 maritime squadron, is a case in point. The squadron that had been moved to China Bay five years ago consists of Beech King Air B-200 and Dornier 228. A Beechcraft King Air 360ER equipped with cutting-edge technology is to be inducted to the squadron tomorrow (10) to further boost SLAF’s ability to patrol its waters and address maritime threats. The US is the donor of Beechcraft King Air 360ER.

Another maritime surveillance aircraft is expected to join the squadron before the end of this year. The donor is Australia that provided two patrol boats to SL years ago and paid for fuel for vessels engaged in anti-human smuggling operations. What we need to understand is the support received as part of the often repeated free and open Indi-Pacific strategy pursued by Quad. Valuable support received/offered for enhancement of Sri Lanka’s hydrographic capabilities from Australia and Japan should be considered accordingly.

Midweek Review

Ahambakaraka : A postscript

Published

5 days ago

2024/10/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Ashanthi Ekanayake

Liyanage Amarakeerthi’s Ahambakaraka, received much attention when it was first published and then went on to win many accolades. The most recent among them was the Vidharshana Literary Prize for best translation in 2024. It is a novel with immense possibilities and offers multiple readings and interpretations. When it first came out, it received the attention of Captain Elmo Jayawardena, who is also a writer of some substance. He wrote a comprehensive review of the novel in The Daily News of 19 October 2016.

In his review Captain Jayawardene describes the protagonist of the novel, Bandula Balagalla, using a somewhat unfortunate turn of phrase, and twists the “born with a silver spoon in the mouth” into a different expression which will not be quoted here. It must be said that a reader’s take on what is read depends entirely on their world views, the theories of reading they encounter, and also mainly the experience they gain as readers.

As the translator of the novel under discussion of which the English title reads as The Maker of Accidents, I must say that what motivated me to translate the novel was these very same possibilities for multiple readings. The novel offered among other things a reading which aligned closely with Pierre Bourdieu’s theories of habitus, capital and power. This brief attempt is simply an opening to the immense possibilities of the novel. I will unfortunately not be able to deal with the topic adequately and do it justice but I will try my best and leave a deeper exploration for another occasion.

In many of his works Bourdieu describes these notions as that which inscribe in us a certain social status. Amarakeerthi’s novel while dealing with the socio-political upheavals which span a wide period of time also brings out these aspects of society as presented by Bourdieu.

Bandula Balagalla is an affluent man and his conduct and his aspirations, or lack thereof, create in the mind of the reader the image of someone who has everything in life and can live without being burdened by new ambitions. He can simply live a contented, if self-centered life. The novelist creates some doubt in the reader’s mind by making the reader challenge the notion of BB as the protagonist because the narrative describes him as a smug, self-satisfied person in contrast to Vijaya Wickramasinghe who in addition to all other drawbacks has to also resort to being mute for simple survival and thus be denied language and the use of it to his advantage.

Language and the “symbolic power” languages have, as discussed by Bourdieu is a primary if mostly ignored theme in this novel. Balagalla strives to create a space for language in his township as does the novelist by giving prominence of place to the different languages the characters resort to. Radha is a teacher of language and performance. For her language is performance. Language is in the Marxist sense a commodity in the novel as described by the narrator. When engaging in the translation, too, I made a conscious effort to use language suited to the different characters. Some were anglophiles, and they might not code mix or code switch easily, and they would attempt to sound more “English.” Some were more at ease with the Sri Lankan English variety. Some would use “broken English.” As a teacher of language this was partly my fascination with the novel.

Translating some Sinhala turns of phrase turned out to be a gratifying exercise because of the novelist’s natural playfulness with Sinhala and language as a whole. Just as the protagonist made up the rules of his game similarly the novelist too played with language. Rather than being obstacles, the quaint expressions and the intricate plot made me realize how correct I was to see the immense potential it offered for a “Bourdieusian” reading.

To put it simply Bandula Balagalla through his upbringing and privileged position is always at ease in any situation. This is a clear manifestation of habitus as explained by Bourdieu. He has symbolic, cultural and linguistic capital. He in fact has everything Wije does not have. Radha, who is from a more middle class upbringing and background is also somewhat “vulgar” in her aspirations in comparison. A case in point is her venture “to make ladies” of the lady-doctors of Kurunegala. Balagalla has good taste in food, music, other matters of life-style and also literature. The first narrator attempts to compete with Balagalla’s taste in literature in this sense. The ironical choice of name for the bookstore i.e. Tower of Babel is a case in point of the sense of power Balagalla wields. He has cultural, and social capital. He is well connected and he is almost native like, not simply in his use of English but also by disposition. He has the right connections as the occasion calls for. In contrast Wije with his rags to riches back story has economic power but is lacking in all other aspects. This is what he pursues and hankers after. Although he is good at “hustling” he is lacking in other ways. Here the question of class and social prestige also come into question. The Balagalla Wallauwa provides Bandula Balagalla with social standing and the right type of connections and also an inbred (in the sense of innate), or even inculcated cultural awareness which helps him navigate society. Social, cultural and symbolic capital need to be accompanied by the “economic” to help a person gain distinction. The crowns and swords that Wije seeks are but symbols of prestige which he is continuously denied. He seeks social mobility and believes that he will gain it by being in possession of these symbols which are part of what the Balagalla estate entails.

This is in fact the most thrilling aspect of the novel. One does not have to be limited to Bourdieu’s theories. However, it cannot be denied that Ahambakaraka, which means the maker of accidents or alternately the planner of coincidences is a rich novel as it offers multiple readings.

There is an interesting plot, full of twists and turns which will be gratifying for any reader. However, if one seeks to read deeper and engage with theory it does not disappoint. The three women for whom the novel is initially written are also a fascinating aspect of the story. The characters are so intricately developed and thought out that a feminist reading of the female characters also proves to be a fruitful endeavor.

My ultimate aim was to highlight these very obvious aspects of the work which were not addressed in the earlier reviews.