Midweek Review

General election:The Northern vote

Published

1 year ago

2024/11/6

Members of the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) paying tribute at the Thileepan memorial in Nallur before officially filing their nomination papers, a stark reminder of war and the deployment of Indian Army here. TNPF leader Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam (extreme left) with other members. (pic courtesy Tamil Guardian)

The northern vote should be examined against the backdrop of expulsion of the entire Muslim population from that province in Oct. 1990. The LTTE expelled approximately 20,000 Muslim families from the administrative districts of Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu and Vavuniya with literally only the clothes on their backs. They consisted of as many as 75,000 to 100,000 persons. Over the years, some have returned to their villages but the failure on the part of Tamil political groups to condemn the LTTE’s strategy caused irreparable damage to the relations between the Tamils and Muslims. Removal of the Muslim community at gunpoint received unprecedented international attention when a far-right extremist Anders Behring Breivik who killed 77 people, mostly children in two separate attacks on Norwegian soil, in 2011, made reference to the LTTE’s action. One of those who escaped the massacre ended up in the Norwegian Parliament.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The National People’s Power (NPP) is in the fray in the Northern and Eastern Provinces at the forthcoming parliamentary elections.

The ruling party, on its own, is contesting all five electoral districts in the war-torn region, namely Jaffna and Vanni in the North and Trincomalee, Batticaloa and Digamadulla in the East.

The NPP is confident that the Northern and Eastern electorates are likely to be influenced by Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s (AKD) victory at the Sept. 21 Presidential Election though he couldn’t secure 50% plus one vote. AKD managed to garner 5,634,915 votes (42.31 %) and was well short of the required percentage.

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe recently declared that both he and AKD lacked a majority in an obvious bid to devalue the NPP leader’s victory. AKD is also the leader of the Janatha Vimukthi Peremuna (JVP). Therefore, AKD is the leader of two registered political parties. Regardless of such attacks, the NPP has sought to increase its share of the votes in the N&E in a bid to enhance its national tally, thereby aiming at the highest number of National List slots. The Parliament consists of 196 elected and 29 appointed members.

Having staged two abortive violent insurgencies to grab power through extra-parliamentary means in 1971 and 1987-1990, the JVP entered the political mainstream and worked with the SLFP and later with the UNP before the formation of NPP in 2019 to contest the presidential election that year. AKD, having led it in its inaugural national election emerged as a distant third securing just 418,553 votes (3.16%).

Among the NPP contestants in the N&E are only two recognised politicians. They are Marungan Mohan and L.P.G. Wasantha Piyathissa on its Jaffna and Digamadulla lists, respectively. The five lists do not include at least one former parliamentarian, Provincial Councillor or Local Government member as per information provided by the NPP in its website regarding the contestants.

The Election Commission received a total of 690 nomination lists from political parties and independent groups. Seventy four lists, however, were rejected for not meeting the required criteria.

As the party in power, the NPP has an opportunity to influence the voters of a particular district. The re-opening, recently, of the 1.6 km long Palali-Atchuvely road that had been closed for 15 years, after the conclusion of the war, on a directive given by President AKD, may boost the NPP’s image. Sri Lanka brought the war to a successful conclusion in May 2009.

The Palali-Atchuvely road remained closed, though many roads, once located within the Jaffna High Security Zones, were re-opened. The Atchuvely-Point Pedro main road, running via Thondamanaru, which had been closed for nearly 28 years, was reopened to the public by the then Minister of Economic Development Basil Rajapaksa in 2011. The re-opening of the 4.5 km long road reduced the travelling distance by about 10 km.

Some have found fault with President AKD for re-opening of the Palali-Atchuvely road, asserting the move posed a threat to the Security Forces Headquarters, in Jaffna. As alleged the Palali-Actchuveli road, however, does not go through the Headquarters. Since the end of the war, successive governments had scaled-down the deployment there, once home to three Infantry Divisions, including the 53 aka the Reserve Strike Force.

In the run-up to the presidential election, AKD caused controversy when he declared, in Jaffna, that the South had decided to vote for a change and the North, too, should follow suit or face the consequences. AKD questioned what the attitude of the South would be if the North went against the wishes of the South.

AKD’s Jaffna declaration was quite rightly interpreted as a veiled threat directed at the North. Many condemned AKD’s statement. Among those who censured AKD was then President Wickremesinghe.

Since AKD’s triumph at the presidential election, the N&E electorate may have undergone a significant change, though the NPP may find it extremely difficult to secure sufficient support required to obtain at least one seat in the North. There had been only one instance of a national political party winning a seat in the North in the post-war period. Angajan Ramanathan entered Parliament on the SLFP ticket at the 2020 general election. But, now he is contesting Jaffna again on the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), under the postbox symbol, once led by ex-war-winning Army Commander General Sarath Fonseka. That was in 2010 though the symbol had been different then.

ITAK on its own

Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), aka the Federal Party (FP), is in the fray on its own at the forthcoming general election. With the demise of political veteran Rajavarothiam Sampanthan, 91, in late June this year, the ITAK-led Tamil National Alliance (TNA), formed during Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s presidency at the behest of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), faced an uncertain future. In fact, the TNA has been in decline since the eradication of the LTTE and never recovered from losing its major sponsor in 2009.

At the 2004 general election, ITAK fully backed by the LTTE won 22 seats, including two National List slots, while the Tamil United Liberation Front (TULF) that had 15 seats in the previous Parliament, simply disappeared from the scene. The Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP) that won two seats at the previous general election, conducted in 2001, was reduced to one seat. It would be pertinent to mention that under the ITAK’s leadership the EPRLF, TELO and PLOTE, three former left leaning terrorist groups, too, contested under the ITAK’s ‘House’ symbol. The Parliament recognized the ITAK whereas the grouping was widely identified as the Tamil National Alliance (TNA).

At the 2001 general election, in addition to the TULF’s tally of 15 seats, including one NL seat, the EPDP and the Democratic People’s Liberation Front (DPLF/political front of the PLOTE, one of the terrorist groups sponsored by India), secured two and one seat, respectively.

The LTTE-TNA combine, in 2005, made a fundamental mistake of facilitating Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory at the 2005 presidential poll by ordering Tamil voters to boycott the election, thereby engineered Ranil Wickremesinghe’s defeat. The end result was the annihilation of the LTTE by May 2009. Just two weeks after Mahinda Rajapaksa’s victory, the LTTE resumed claymore mine attacks followed by the Mavil-aru incident. Finally, an all-out war broke out in the second week of August with massive LTTE attacks on the Jaffna frontlines. The armed forces decimated the LTTE within three years. That freed the TNA to engage in politics free of LTTE dictates. The people have conveniently forgotten the circumstances the TNA had to recognize the LTTE as the sole representative of the Tamil speaking people. That should be examined taking into consideration how the LTTE assassinated the people’s representatives, including ITAK/TULF Leader Appapillai Amirthalingam in July 1989 in Colombo.

The ITAK suffered quite a setback at the 2010 general election, the first since the eradication of its patron. The TNA’s tally of 22 seats at the 2004 general election was reduced to 14 seats, including one NL slot. No other Tamil party was represented in that Parliament.

At the 2015 general election, the ITAK increased its tally to 16, including two NL slots while the EPDP secured one seat.

During the 2015-2020 period, the ITAK has been beset by internal strife with lawmakers pulling in different directions. The party deteriorated over the 2015-2020 period. It couldn’t at least reach a consensus on the accountability issue. In fact, the party couldn’t have raised the issue after having voted for war-winning Army Commander Gen. Sarath Fonseka. Despite war crimes allegations, the N&E overwhelmingly voted for Fonseka thereby contradicting the ITAK’s accusations.

There had never been a proper assessment of the TNA joining a UNP-led coalition, that included the JVP, in backing retired General Sarath Fonseka at the 2010 presidential election. The TNA ensured Fonseka’s victory in the N&E though Mahinda Rajapaksa routed the war winning Army Chief in the South. Fonseka lost by a margin of 1.8 mn votes, despite garnering a majority of minority votes.

At the 2020 general election, the number of Tamil political parties represented in Parliament increased to five from two at the previous election while the ITAK was reduced to 10 seats, its worst performance since its superlative victory in 2004.

The ITAK secured the third position in the 2020 Parliament by winning 10 seats, including one NL slot, while four other parties, namely the EPDP (02), Ahila Illankai Thamil Congress (AITC 02), Thamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal (TMVP 01) and Thamil Makkal Thesiya Kuttani (TMTK 01) shared six seats among them.

In the run-up to this year’s presidential election, the TNA suffered another setback when a section of the parliamentary group declared its support for Tamil common candidate Pakkiyaselvam Ariyanenthiran, who had served as a TNA MP during the 2004-2015 period. The TNA backed Sajith Premadasa’s candidature at the presidential poll. M.A. Sumanthiran, PC, who is on ITAK’s Jaffna list, has been accused of maneuvering the party to back Premadasa at the presidential, a charge denied by the top lawyer.

During a recent interview with the writer ITAK Batticaloa District contestant and ex-MP Shanakiyan Rajaputhiran Rasamanickam, having explained the circumstances ex-militant groups quit the grouping, emphasized the they could easily retain 10 seats as in the last Parliament but aimed for 13 seats ( https://island.lk/itak-sans-eprlf-telo-and-plote-confident-of-securing-majority-of-seats-in-ne/)

ITAK vs DTNA

Those who quit the ITAK-led alliance have fielded candidates on the Democratic Tamil National Alliance (DTNA/’conch’ symbol) ticket. The DTNA that hadn’t been represented in Parliament since its formation way back in late’80s is expected to pose a challenge to the ITAK and other political parties in the fray, even though ITAK has literally dismissed any threat from them, perhaps due to the conservative nature of the Northern voter in general.S.J.V. Chelvanayagam’s grandson Elango Chandrashan is contesting Jaffna on the ITAK ticket. G. G. Ponnambalam’s grandson Ganjrendrakumar Ponnambalam, former parliamentarian, is on the Jaffna list of TNPF (‘Cycle’ symbol). Shashikala, wife of assassinated ITAK MP Nadarajah Raviraj, is also contesting Jaffna on the DTNA ticket. The Mahinda Rajapaksa government has been widely blamed for the early Nov. 2006 Raviraj’s assassination in Colombo.

Regardless of the breakup of the TNA alliance that contested elections under the ITAK symbol, all political parties in the fray, without exception, are careful not to disapprove of the LTTE. Among the contestants are two prominent ex-LTTE personnel, who later rebelled against it and survived, including Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan alias Karuna Amman, perhaps one of the most capable battlefield commanders produced by the group during the conflict.

Karuna and his estranged one-time sidekick Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan aka Pilleyan are contesting Batticaloa from different parties. Pilleyan, one-time Chief Minister of the eastern Province and suspect in MP Joseph Pararajasingham’s Christmas Day murder leads the TMVP Batticaloa district list, while Karuna, who had represented the UPFA in Parliament, is contesting on the National Democratic Front (NDF) ticket under the ‘Car’ symbol.

The Island sought clarification from DTNA NL member Kanthar Nallathamby Srikantha regarding the DTNA and TNA submitting a joint nominations list for the Trincomalee district. Lawyer Srikantha, who had served Parliament during 2006-2010 period,as a representative of ITAK, explained that they wanted to ensure election of an MP from that district. Various interested parties, including the Catholic clergy, had intervened to facilitate an understanding between the two groups. The late R. Sampathan, who had no option but to serve the LTTE’s interests, represented Trincomalee district in the last Parliament.

The issue at hand is whether Tamil political parties, altogether, can secure at least 16 seats in the N&E as they did at the last parliamentary election. Perhaps, the ITAK may perform better sans nominees of former terrorist groups. They grew weary of violent politics, gave up Eelam and entered the political mainstream in the ’80s following the signing of the Indo-Lanka accord in July 1987.

The PLOTE caused an international furor when it carried out an amphibious assault on the Maldives in early Nov. 1988 in a bid to remove the then President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom from power. That action earned the PLOTE instant notoriety even though neither India nor Sri Lanka took any specific action against the group though those that raided the Maldives were either captured or killed.

The overall deterioration cannot be examined without taking into consideration the second presidential election conducted in Dec. 1988 and parliamentary election in Feb. 1989 in the then temporarily merged NE province, under IPKF supervision, and the first Provincial Council rigged by the IPKF for the benefit of the EPRLF during that period. There has never been a proper assessment of Indian intervention here from the inception of the conflict that caused all types of upheaval here in addition to fueling a full blown conflict, especially in the local political setup. The formation of a special militia, called ‘Tamil National Army’ before the Indian withdrawal, sent shock waves through Sri Lanka at that time, the Premadasa government obsessed with Indian interference provided its tacit support to the LTTE to eradicate the TNA.

Did PLOTE leader Uma Maheswaran die in a hail of bullets at the top of Frankfurt Place, Bambalapitiya, a few months after the raid on the Maldives over his direct role in the operation?

The contest between the TNA and DTNA may cause a drop in support in terms of voters for the former but the real fear among established Tamil politicians is that NPP triumph at the presidential election may influence at least to a certain extent the Tamil speaking electorate not only in the N&E but upcountry region as well.

The NPP is under fire for repeatedly calling for the annihilation of established political parties to pave the way for its members to dominate the Parliament. President AKD doesn’t mince his words when he repeatedly emphasized the responsibility on the part of the electorate to clear Parliament of other political parties.

However, President AKD has signalled his readiness to work with elected representatives of Tamil political parties. Among those who had already met the President are Douglas Devananada of the EPDP and former MP S. Sritharan of the ITAK though the status of the negotiations between the government and Tamil political parties remain unclear. Devananda has already publicly announced his backing for the NPP.

Former Minister and Pivithuru Hela Urumaya (PHU) leader Udaya Gammanpila, contesting the Gampaha district on Sarvajana Balaya ticket, has claimed a secret understanding between the ITAK and the NPP.

Voters are unlikely to be swayed by the Attorney-at-Law’s declaration that the NPP promised a federal structure in the N&E, resume war crimes investigations under the leadership of SSP Shani Abeysekera and Senior DIG Ravi Seneviratne, both recalled by the NPP government, and finally appoint M. A. Sumanthiran, PC, as the Foreign Affairs Minister under the proposed new government. The claim that the government needed Abeysekera and Seneviratne to resume war crimes investigations in terms of the accountability resolution adopted at UNHRC in 2015 is baseless. Sumanthiran, however, during a press conference in Jaffna declared the ITAK should consider if the party received an offer from the NPP to accept ministerial portfolios.

In spite of Gotabaya Rajapaksa government’s declaration in 2020 that Sri Lanka quit the Geneva-led accountability process the actual situation is quite the opposite. That process continued over the years without hindrance and now has reached a crucial juncture.

The NPP’s recent declaration that it didn’t accept Geneva intervention is irrelevant. Sri Lanka cannot side-step the accountability process by refusing to accept Geneva interventions. The lies and exaggerations have to be countered and the record set straight. The NPP government cannot under any circumstances absolve its responsibility to defend the war-winning armed forces in Geneva. Unfortunately, that issue seems to be discarded by treacherous national political parties. Let me appreciate the services rendered by patriotic groups, particularly the Global Sri Lanka Forum (GSLF) to highlight and emphasise the responsibility on the part of the government whoever is in power to defend our armed forces.

IF UNHCR continues to insist on a pound of flesh from Sri Lanka’s then leaders and the military for the most unlikely war victory in 2009 against the LTTE, dubbed by the FBI as the world’s deadliest terrorist group, going against the contrary predictions of all the so-called pundits essentially hired by the West, it will be the UN that will be on trial before the whole world for staging such selective and one-sided justice, after literally turning a blind eye to all the unimaginable atrocities that are continuing to be committed against the Palestinians. UNHCR Chief Austrian Volker Türk what about dropping 2000 pound bombs on hapless civilians taking shelter even in designated safe zones, literally cutting off all their food supplies, destroying whatever meagre water sources.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Aragalaya: GR blames CIA in Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s explosive narrative

Published

2 days ago

2026/02/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

Asanga

Did CIA chief William Burns visit Colombo in Feb 2023? Sri Lanka and the US refrained from formally confirming the visit. The Opposition sought confirmation of the then CIA Chief’s visit to Colombo in terms of the Right to Information Act but the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government sidestepped the query. A former Republican congressman from Texas and Director of National Intelligence (2020–2021) John Ratcliffe succeeded Burns in late January 2025.

On the sheer weight of new evidence presented by Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s ‘Winds of Change’, readers can get a clear picture of the forces that overthrew President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2022.

Even five years after the political upheaval, widely dubbed ‘Aragalaya,’ controversy surrounds the high-profile operation that forced wartime Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa to literally run for his dear life.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa, formerly of the Army but a novice to party politics, comfortably won the 2019 November presidential election against the backdrop of the Easter Sunday carnage that caused uncertainty and suspicions among communities. The economic crisis, also clandestinely engineered from abroad, firstly by crippling vital worker remittances from abroad, almost from the onset of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency, overwhelmed the government and created the environment conducive for external intervention. Could it have been avoided if the government, that enjoyed a near two-thirds majority in Parliament, sought the help of the International Monetary Fund (IMF)?

The costly and well-funded book project, undertaken at the time Abeyagoonasekera was working on a governance diagnostic report for the IMF, in the wake of the change of government in Sri Lanka, meticulously examined the former Lieutenant Colonel’s ouster, taking into consideration regional as well as global developments. Abeyagoonasekera dealt efficiently and furiously with rapidly changing situations and developments before the unprecedented 03 January, 2026, US raid on Venezuela.

Lt. Col. (retd) Gotabaya Rajapaksa, for some unexplainable reason and a considerable time after the events, has chosen to blame his ouster on the United States. We cannot blame him either, by the way we have seen how other regime changes had been engineered, in our region, by Washington, since and before Gotabaya’s ouster. The accusation is extraordinary as Gotabaya Rajapaksa in his memoirs ‘The conspiracy to oust me from presidency’ refrained from naming the primary conspirator, though he clearly alluded to an international conspiracy.

April 8, 2019 meeting

Launched in March 2024, in the run-up to the presidential election that brought Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) to power, almost in a dream ride, if not for the intervening outside evil actors, ‘The conspiracy to oust me from presidency’ discussed the international conspiracy, but conveniently failed to name the primary conspirator. What made the former President speak so candidly with Abeyagoonasekera, the founding Director-General of the national security think tank, the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka (INSS), under the Ministry of Defence, from 2016 to 2020?

Abeyagoonasekera also served as Executive Director at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute (LKI), under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2011–2015), during Mahinda Rajapaksa’s second term as the President. The author, both precisely and furiously, dealt with issues. Readers may find very interesting quotes and they do give a feeling of the author’s general hostility towards the US, India, as well as to the US-India marriage of convenience. Those who sense so may end up thinking ‘Change of Winds’ being supportive of the Chinese strategy. Among the highly sensitive quotes that underlined the Indian approach were attributed to Indian Defence Secretary Sanjay Mitra. The author quoted Mitra as having declared: “We need the MRCC centre [Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre], and you cannot give it to another nation.” As pointed out by the author, it was not a request but an order given to Sri Lanka on 8 April, 2019, meant to prevent Sri Lanka from even considering a competing proposal from China. Against that background, the author, who had been present at that meeting at which the Sri Lanka delegation was led by then Defence Secretary Hemasiri Fernando, questioned the failure on the part of the delegations to take up the Easter Sunday attacks. Terrorists struck two weeks later. Implications were telling.

That particular quote reveals the circumstances India and the US operated here. No wonder the incumbent government does not want to discuss the secret defence MoUs it has entered into with India and the US as they would clearly reveal the sellout of our interests.

The following line says a lot about the circumstances under which Gotabaya Rajapaksa was removed: “In Singapore, a senior journalist recounted how Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s resignation was scripted, under duress, at a hotel, facilitated by a foreign motorcade.”

In the first Chapter that incisively dealt with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the author was so lucky to secure an explosive quote from the ousted leader in an exclusive, hitherto unreported, interview in June 2024, a few months after the launch of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s memoirs. The ex-President hadn’t minced his words when he alleged that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) orchestrated his removal. He also claimed that he had been under US surveillance throughout his presidency.

The ousted leader has confidently cleared India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) of complicity in the operation. What made him call Indian National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval ‘a good man,’ in response to Abeyagoonasekera’s pointed query. Abeyagoonasekera quoted Gotabaya Rajapaksa as having said: “… he would never do such things.” The ex-President must have some reason to call Doval a good friend, regardless of intense pressure exerted on him and the Mahinda Rajapaksa government by the Indians to do away with large scale Chinese-funded projects. (Doval in late October last year declared “poor governance” was the reason behind uprisings that led to change of governments in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka over the period of past three-and-a-half years. The media quoted Doval as having said, during a function in New Delhi, that democracy and non-institutional methods of regime change in countries, such as Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal, created their own set of problems. That was the first time a senior Indian government official made remarks on Nepal’s government change, followed by the Gen Z uprising in early September, 2025.)

Gotabaya Rajapaksa also cleared the Chinese of seeking to oust him. It would be pertinent to mention that China reacted sternly when at the onset of the Gotabaya presidency, the President suggested the need to re-negotiate the Hambantota Port deal.

During the treacherous ‘Yahapalana’ administration (2015 to 2019) Gotabaya Rajapaksa told me how Doval had pressed him to halt not only the Colombo Port City project but to take back Hambantota Port as well. By then, the Chinese had twisted the arms of the Yahapalana leaders Mairthpala Sirisena and Ranil Wickremesinghe and secured the Hambantota Port on a 99-year lease in a one-sided USD 1.2 bn deal. The Colombo Port City project, that had been halted by the Yahapalana government, too, was resumed possibly under Chinese threat or for some money incentive.

Once Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, declared, at a hastily arranged media briefing at Sri Lanka Foundation (SLF), that Sri Lanka would be relentlessly targeted as long as the Chinese held the Hambantota Port. The writer was present at that media briefing.

Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe said so in the aftermath of the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, while disclosing his abortive bid to convince the Yahapalana government to abrogate the Hambantota Port deal. Did the parliamentarian know something we were not aware of? The author’s assessment, regarding the Easter Sunday attacks, based on interviews with Chinese officials and scholars, is frightening and an acknowledgement of a possible Western role in Sri Lanka’s destabilisation plot.

The ousted leader, in his lengthy interview with Abeyagoonasekera, made some attention-grabbing comments on the then US Ambassador here, Julie Chung. The ex-President questioned a particular aspect of Chung’s conduct during the protest campaign but his decision not to reveal it all in his memoirs is a mystery. Perhaps, one of the most thought-provoking queries raised by Abeyagoonasekera is the rationale in Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s claim that he didn’t want to suppress the protest campaign by using force against the backdrop of his own declaration that the CIA orchestrated the project.

Author’s foray into parliamentary politics

Gotabaya

For those genuinely interested in post-Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga developments, pertaining to international relations and geopolitics, may peruse ‘Winds of Change’ as the third of a trilogy. ‘Sri Lanka at Crossroads’ (2019) dealt with the Mahinda Rajapaksa period and ‘Conundrum of an Island’ (2021) discussed the treacherous Sirisena–Wickremesinghe alliance. The third in the series examined the end of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna’s (SLPP) President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s rule and the rise of Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) whom the author described as a Marxist, though this writer is of the view the JVP and NPP leader AKD is not so. AKD has clearly aligned his administration with US-India while trying to sustain existing relationship with China.

Among Asanga Abeyagoonasekera’s other books were ‘Towards a Better World Order’ (2015) and ‘Teardrop Diplomacy: China’s Sri Lanka Foray’ (2023, Bloomsbury).

Had Abeyagoonasekera succeeded in his bid to launch a political career in 2015, the trilogy on Sri Lanka may not have materialised. Abeyagoonasekera contested the Gampaha district at the August 2015 parliamentary election on the UNP ticket but failed to garner sufficient preferences to secure a place in Parliament. That dealt a devastating setback to Abeyagoonasekera’s political ambitions, but the Wickremesinghe-Sirisena administration created the Institute of National Security Studies Sri Lanka (INSS), under the Ministry of Defence, for him. Abeyagoonasekera received the appointment as the founding Director-General of the national security think tank, from 2016 to 2020.

Several persons dealt with ‘Aragalaya’ (the late Prof. Nalin de Silva used to call it (Paragalaya) before Abeyagoonasekera though none of them examined the regional and global contexts so deeply, taking into consideration the relevant developments. Having read Wimal Weerawansa’s (Nine: The hidden story), Sena Thoradeniya’s (Galle Face Protest; Systems Change or Anarchy?). Mahinda Siriwardena’s (Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival – Reflection on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery) and Prof. Sunanda Maddumabandara’s (Aragalaye Balaya), the writer is of the opinion Abeyagoonasekera dealt with the period in question as an incisive insider.

Abeyagoonasekera, as a person who left the country, under duress, in 2021, painted a frightening picture of a country with a small and vulnerable economy trapped in major global rivalries. The former government servant attributed his self–imposed exile to two issues.

The first was the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage. Why did the Wickremesinghe-Sirisena government ignore the warning issued by Abeyagoonasekera, in his capacity as DG INSS, in respect of the Easter Sunday bombing campaign? There is absolutely no ambiguity at all in his claim. Abeyagoonasekera insists that he alerted the government four months before the National Thowheed Jamath (NTJ) bombers struck. The bottom line is that Abeyagoonasekera had issued the warning several weeks before India did but those at the helm of that inept administration chose to turn a blind eye.

The second was the impending economic crisis that engulfed the country in 2022. Abeyagoonasekera is deeply bitter about his arrest on 21 July, 2024, at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) over an alleged IRD –related offence as reported at that time, especially because he was returning home to visit his sick mother.

Asanga’s father Ossie, a member of Parliament and controversial figure, was killed in an LTTE suicide attack at Thotalanga in late Oct. 1994. The Chairman and leader of Sri Lanka Mahajana Pakshaya had been on stage with then UNP presidential election candidate Gamini Dissanayake when the woman suicide cadre blasted herself. The assassination was meant to ensure Kumaratunga’s victory. The LTTE probably felt that it could manipulate Kumaratunga than the experienced Dissanayake who may have had reached some sort of consensus with New Delhi on how to deal with the LTTE.

Let me reproduce a question posed to Asanga Abeyagoonasekera and his response in ‘Winds of Change’ as some may believe that the author is holding something back. “Didn’t they listen?” a US intelligence officer had asked me incredulously after the bombings. Years later, during my role as a technical advisor for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) amid Sri Lanka’s collapse, the question resurfaced: “How did you foresee the collapse of a powerful regime with a majority in parliament?” My answer remained the same—patterns. Rigorously gathered data and relentless analysis reveal the arcs of history before they unfold.

Perhaps, readers may find what former cashiered Flying Officer Keerthi Ratnayake had to say about ‘Aragalaya’ and related developments (https://island.lk/ex-slaf-officer-sheds-light-on-developments-leading-to-aragalaya/)

Bombshell claim

Essentially, Abeyagoonasekera, on the basis of his exclusive and lengthy interview with former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, confirmed what Wimal Weerawansa and Sena Thoradeniya alleged that the US spearheaded the operation.

But Prof. Maddumabandara, a confidant of first post-Aragalaya President Ranil Wickremesinghe has bared the direct Indian involvement in the regime change operation. In spite of Gotabaya Rajapaksa confidently clearing Indian NSA Doval of complicity in his ouster, Prof. Maddumabandara is on record as having said that the then Indian High Commissioner here Gopal Baglay put pressure on Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to take over the government for an interim period. (https://island.lk/dovals-questionable-regional-stock-taking/)

Obviously, the US and India worked together on the Sri Lanka regime change operation. That is the undeniable truth. India wanted to thwart Wickremesinghe receiving the presidency by bringing in Speaker Abeywardena. That move went awry in spite of some sections of both Buddhist and Catholic clergy throwing their weight behind New Delhi.

The 2022 violent regime change operation cannot be discussed without taking into consideration the US-led project that also involved the UNP, JVP and TNA to engineer retired General Sarath Fonseka’s victory at the 2010 presidential election and their backing for turncoat Maithripala Sirisena at the 2015 presidential election.

The section, titled ‘Echoes of Crisis from Sri Lanka to Bangladesh: South Asia’s Struggle in a Polycrisis’, is riveting and underscores the complexity of the situation and fragility of governments. Executive power and undisputable majorities in Parliament seems irrelevant as external powers intervene thereby making the electoral system redundant.

Having meticulously compared the overthrowing of Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Bangladesh’s Premier Sheikh Hasina, the author condemned them for their alleged failures and brutality. Abeyagoonasekera stated: “When the military sides with the protesters, as it did in Sri Lanka and now in Bangladesh, it reveals the rulers’ vulnerabilities.” The author unmercifully chided the former President for seeking refuge in the West while alleging direct CIA role in his ouster. But that may have spared his life. Had he sought a lifeline from the Chinese so late the situation could have taken a turn for worse.

The comment that had been attributed to Gotabaya Rajapaksa seemed to belittle Ranil Wickremesinghe who accepted the challenge of becoming the Premier in May 2022 and then chosen by the ruling SLPP to complete the remainder of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s five-year term. Ranil was definitely seen as an opportunistic vulture who backed ‘Aragalaya’ without any qualms till he saw an opening for himself out of the chaos.

On Wickremesinghe’s path

Abeyagoonasekera discussed the joint US-Indian strategy pertaining to Sri Lanka. Whatever the National People’s Power (NPP) and its President say, the current dispensation is continuing Wickremesinghe’s policy as pointed out by the author. In fact, this government appears to be ready even to go beyond Wickremesinghe’s understanding with New Delhi. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on defence and the selling of the controlling interests of the Colombo Dockyard Limited (CDL) to India, mid last year, must have surprised even those who always pushed for enhanced relations at all levels.

The economic collapse that resulted in political upheaval has given New Delhi the perfect opportunity to consolidate its position here. Uncomplimentary comments on current Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha in ‘Winds of Change’ have to be discussed, paying attention to Sri Lanka’s growing dependence and alleged clandestine activities of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). Abeyagoonasekera seemed to have no qualms in referring to RAW’s hand in 2019 Easter Sunday carnage.

Overall ‘Winds of Change’ encourages, inspires and confirms suspicions about US and Indian intelligence services and underscores the responsibility of those in power to be extra cautious. But, in the case of smaller and weaker economies, such as Sri Lanka still struggling to overcome the economic crisis, there seems to be no solution. Not only India and the US, the Chinese, too, pursue their agenda here unimpeded. Utilisation of political parties, represented in Parliament, selected individuals, and media, in the Chinese efforts, are obvious. Once parliamentarian Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe raised the Chinese interventions in Sri Lanka. He questioned the Parliament receiving about 240 personal laptops for all parliamentarians and top officials. The then UNPer told the writer his decision not to accept the laptop paid for by China. Perhaps, he is the only Sri Lankan politician to have written a strongly worded letter to Chinese leader Xi warning against high profile Chinese strategy.

Winds of Change
is available at
Vijitha Yapa and Sarasavi

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

Beginning of another ‘White Supremacist’ World Order?

Published

2 days ago

2026/02/4

Sahan Weerasooriya

Donald Trump’s complete lack of intelligence, empathy and common sense have become more apparent during the current term of his presidency. Ordinarily, a country’s wish to self-destruct as the United States seemingly does at present, and as the violence against US citizens and immigrants alike at the hands of federal authorities have shown in Minnesota, can be callously considered the business of that country. If the Trumpian imbecility was unfolding in Sri Lanka, anywhere else in South Asia or some other country of the purported Third World, the so-called World Order, led by the United States, would be preaching to us the values of democracy and human rights. But what happens when the actions of a powerful country, such as the United States, engulfs in the ensuing flames the rest of us? Trump and his madness then necessarily become our business, too, because combined with the military and economic power of the United States and its government’s proven lack of empathy for its own people, and the rest of the world, is quite literally a matter of global survival. Besides, one of the ‘positive’ outcomes of the Trumpian madness, as a friend observed recently, is that “he has single-handedly exposed and destroyed the fiction of ‘Western Civilisation’, including the pretenses of Europe.”

It is in this context that the speech delivered by the Canadian Prime Minister, Mark Carney, at the World Economic Forum, in Davos, on 20 January, 2026, deserves attention. It was an elegant speech, a slap in the face of Trump and his policies, the articulation of the need for global directional change, all in one. But, pertinently, it was also a speech that did not clearly accept responsibility for the current world (dis)order which Carney says needs to change. The reality of that need, however, was overly reemphasised by Trump himself during his meandering, arrogant and incohesive speech delivered a day later, spanning over one hour.

My interest is in what Carney did not specifically say in his speech: who would constitute the new world order, who would be its leaders and why should we believe it would be any different from the present one?

Speaking in French, Carney observed that he was talking about “a rupture in the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a harsh reality, where geopolitics, where the large, main power, geopolitics, is submitted to no limits, no constraints.” He was, of course, responding to the vulgar script for global domination put in place by the Trumpian United States, given Trump’s declared interest in seeing Canada as part of the United States, his avarice for Greenland, not to mention his already concluded grab for Venezuelan oil. But within this scenario, bound by ‘no limits’ and ‘no constraints’ he was also talking of Russia and China albeit in a coded language.

He reiterated, “that the other countries, especially intermediate powers like Canada, are not powerless. They have the capacity to build a new order that encompasses our values, such as respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the various states. The power of the less power starts with honesty.”

Who could disagree with Carney? His words are a refreshing whiff of fresh air in the intellectual wasteland that is the Trumpian Oval Office and the current world order it prevails over. But where has been the ‘honesty’ of the less powerful in the specific situation where he equates Canada itself within this spectrum? He tells us that “the rules-based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.”

That is stating the obvious. We have known this for decades by experience. Long before Canada’s relative silence with regard to Trump’s and US’ facilitation of the assault on Palestine and the massacre of its people, and the US President’s economic grab in Venezuela and the kidnapping of that country’s President and his wife, Canada’s own chorus in the world order that Carney now critiques has been embellished by silence or – even worse – by chords written by the global dominance orchestra of the United States.

He says the fading of the rules-based order has occurred because of the “strong tendency for countries to go along, to get along, to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.” Canada fits this description better than most other nations I can think of. But would Canada, along with other nations among the silent majority within the ‘intermediate powers’ take the responsibility for the mess in the world precisely that silence has directly led to creating? Who will pay for the pain many nations have endured in the prevailing world order? Will Canada lead the way in the new world order in doing this?

Carney further articulates that “for decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.”

But this is not true, is it? Countries like Canada prospered not merely because of the stability of rules of the world order, but because they opted for silence when they should not have. The rupture and the chaos in the world order Carney now critiques and is insanely led by Trump today is not merely the latter’s creation. It has been co-authored for decades by countries such as Canada, France, the United Kingdom to mention just a few who also regularly chant the twin-mantras of human rights and democracy. Trump is merely the latest and the most vocal proponent of the nastiness of that World Order.

It is not that Carney is unaware of this unpleasant reality. He accepts that “the story of the international rules-based order was partially false, that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.”

While Canada seems to be coming to terms with this reality only now, countries like Sri Lanka and others in similarly disempowered positions in this world order have experienced this for decades, because, as I have outlined earlier, Canada et al have been complicit sustainers of the now demonised and demonic world order.

It is not that I disagree with the basic description Carney has painted of the status of the world. But from personal experience and from the perspective of a citizen from a powerless country, I simply do not trust those who preach ‘the gospel of the good’ not as a matter of principle, but only when the going gets tough for them.

At this rather late stage, Carney says, Canada is “amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture.” Unfortunately, we, the people of countries who had to dance to the tunes of the world order led by the First World, have heard it for years, with no one listening to us when our discomforts were articulated. Now, Carney wants ‘middle powers’ or ‘intermediate powers’ within which he also locates Canada, “to live the truth?” For him, the truth means “naming reality” as it exists; “acting consistently” towards all in the world; “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” and “building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored.” This appears to be the operational mantra for the new world order he is envisioning in which he sees Canada as a legitimate leader merely due to its late wakeup call.

He goes on to give a list of things Canada has done locally and globally and concludes by saying, “we have a recognition of what’s happening and a determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.” He goes on to say Canada also has “the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home and to act together.” He notes this is “Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently, and it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.” Quite simply, this a leadership pitch for a new world order with Canada at its helm.

Without being overly cynical, this sounds very familiar, not too dissimilar to what USAID and Voice of America preached to the world; not too dissimilar to what the propaganda arms of the Soviet Union and the Chinese Communist Party used to preach in our own languages when we were growing up. It is difficult to buy this argument and accept Canadian and middle country leadership for the new world order when they have been consistently part of the problem of the old one and its excuses for institutionalised double standards practiced by international organisations such as the likes of the United Nations, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other hegemonic entities that have catered to the whims of that world order.

As far as Canada is concerned, it is evident that it has suddenly woken up only due to an existential threat at home projected from across its southern border and Trump’s threats against the Danish territory of Greenland. When Gaza was battered, and Venezuela was raped, there was no audible clarion call. Therefore, there is no real desire for democracy or human rights in its true form, but a convenient and strategic interest in creating a new ‘white supremacist’ world order in the same persona as before, but this time led by a new white warrior instead. The rest of us would be mere followers, nodding our heads as expected as was the case before.

As the 20th century American standup comedian Lenny Bruce once said, “never trust a preacher with more than two suits.” Mr. Carney, Canada along with the so-called middle powers and the lapsed colonialists have way more than two suits, and we have seen them all.