Connect with us

Features

GROWING COCONUTS ON ‘COCONUT LANDS’

Published

on

by Chandra Arulpragasam

In 1958 I went to a lecture on coconut cultivation, because I knew nothing of the subject. The lecturer, a well-known coconut planter, started his talk with the platitude: ‘The duty of a coconut planter is to plant coconut, on coconut land’. But this set me thinking. First, who gave him the duty to plant coconuts? From his own point of view, he should be planting the crop that would give him the greatest returns, while from the country’s point of view he should be planting the crops that would provide the greatest return in terms of income, foreign exchange, employment and sustainability. Secondly, who decided that these were ‘coconut lands’? Was this not a terminology (‘tea lands’, rubber lands’, ‘coconut lands’) inherited from the British, who grew these crops because they could be grown on a plantation-scale for export?

A couple of years later (in 1960) when I headed the agriculture sector in the Department of National Planning, and again when I came with the ILO World Employment Mission to Sri Lanka in 1974, I had an opportunity to revisit these questions. If coconut was to be a mono-crop, it was important that it should meet the above criteria of greater employment, greater income and greater foreign exchange earnings compared to other crops. Coconut brings much lower financial returns than tea or rubber. As for employment, figures of 1960 showed that while one acre of tea employed 1.1 persons per acre per year, and one acre of rubber employed 0.4 persons per acre, one acre of coconut employed only 0.1 persons per acre per year. That is, only one worker was employed for every 10 acres of coconut, which was four times less than that employed in rubber and 10 times less than that employed in tea. This meant that the so called ‘coconut lands’ were under-utilizing the land not only in terms of income but also in terms of employment.

In physical terms, assuming that the coconut trees are planted in the usual spacing of 8m x 8m apart (which is accepted by the CRI as standard) and that their root system spreads only two metres around each tree (CRI stsndard), this would still leave 78 per cent of the land untouched and unutilized – the best lands in the ‘coconut triangle’.

This brings us back to the previous question. Why should these lands be called ‘coconut lands’? Is coconut the best or only crop that can be grown on them? Undoubtedly these lands are well suited for coconut, while coconuts are much in demand by our people. Not for nothing has the coconut tree been called ‘the tree of life’. But is it wise to relegate so much of our fertile lands to a relatively low-paying mono-crop? The British probably originated the nomenclature of ‘coconut lands’ when they grew coconut as a monocrop on a plantation scale, thus making it a land-extensive and labour-extensive crop, as opposed to the land-intensive and labour-intensive crops dictated by our factor endowments. Hence, this article is not against the planting of coconut: it is only against the planting of coconut as a monocrop on lands capable of yielding much more by way of intercropping.

The system of management of ‘coconut lands’ in the period 1960-1980 speaks for itself. Whereas tea and rubber estates were managed by resident estate superintendents or managers, coconut estates were ‘looked after’ by a ‘conductor’ or by a ‘watcher’, armed only with a torch and gun. The latter showed that the focus was on preventing the theft of coconuts, rather than on increasing yields or output. This locked large extents of these ‘coconut lands’ in a cycle of low expectations, low investment, low-level management, low income and low employment.

The Coconut Research Institute (CRI) in 1974 insisted that the optimum stand of coconut was 64 trees per acre, with an adequate distance (8 metres) between the individual trees and the coconut rows. It argued, on the one hand, that the growth of the intercrop would be stunted by the shade of the coconut, while insisting on the other, that the intercrop would deprive the coconuts of needed soil nutrients. After long discussions, the CRI experts ultimately agreed to the following propositions made by me in 1974.

First, it would be technically possible to inter-plant other crops during the first five years of replanting/new planting coconut without any adverse effects, since the coconut palms would be too small to block out the sunshine from the intercrop. This in itself was a big breakthrough, since an average of 9,300 acres was replanted or newly planted to coconut each year in Sri Lanka. Since intercropping would be possible for the first five years, the total acreage available for intercropping in the newly planted/replanted acreage in any particular year would be 46,500 acres (9300 acres x 5 years).

From this total should be deducted the 22 per cent of land that is actually occupied by the newly planted coconut, which would leave a net acreage of 36,000 acres for planting other crops. For purposes of comparison, this annually available acreage is more than double the extent of land opened up under land development/colonization schemes in each year, prior to the Mahaweli Scheme.

Secondly, the CRI ultimately agreed that in older stands of coconut (more than 25 years old), the trees would have grown so tall that they would not block out the sun from an inter-planted crop. It further now agrees that intercropping is possible without detriment to the coconut or its yields for 35 years of the trees’ 55 years of productive life. It is a pity that it has taken about 30 years for technical thinking to reach this conclusion!

But, thirdly, it was necessary to push the thinking even further. I argued that wider spacing between the coconut rows would result in less shade between the rows, thus enabling intercropping. The CRI in 1974 initially objected to this on the grounds that it would reduce the total number of trees per acre. But they ultimately agreed to my suggestion that if we increased the space between the rows but planted closer along the rows, the number of 64 trees per acre could still be attained, without any decrease in total production. Such further-apart spacing of coconut rows is now (40 years later) actually practised in Kerala and the Philippines, combined with intercropping. However, in Sri Lanka, although this was technically accepted in 1974, there has been little action along these lines by the Coconut Development Authority.

There remained the question of what could be grown as an inter-crop. When I travelled for FAO in Asia in the 1970s, I found pineapple, bananas, sisal, maize and manioc already inter-planted with coconut in the Philippines, and even cocoa under coconut in Indonesia, while livestock was common in most countries. Thus Sri Lanka lagged behind other South East Asian countries in this regard not only in the 1970s, but even so today.

Despite the government’s neglect, private planters in Sri Lanka have recently been adopting intercropping at an increasing pace. According to a survey done by the Coconut Research Institute in 2006, cashew was the most popular intercrop in the Dry Zone, while pineapple, betel and pepper were most popular in the Intermediate Zone. Tea, cinnamon and ginger were most popular in the Wet Zone, while bananas and livestock were common in all regions. Agro-forestry using tree crops (such as glyricidia) has also been recently recommended as a means of providing fodder for livestock, wood for fuel, biomass for fertilizer, control of erosion and soil moisture retention.

Obviously the possibilities of intercropping would be more limited in drier parts of the country with poorer soils. The inter-planting of cashew trees (pruned low) between the rows of coconut has now been adopted in the drier areas. I had also suggested (in the Short Term Implementation Programme of 1961) that groundwater was likely to be available at fairly shallow levels in the coastal areas north of Puttalam, which could be pumped up for higher value crops. I had also suggested the possibility of using windmills for such irrigation, which could be powered by the steady winds that blow during the dry season in these areas.

In 1994, I was able to revisit this question of inter-cropping under coconut in the drier areas. A women’s micro-credit in the dry north of the Puttalam District had used its loan to purchase a pump to irrigate an inter-crop on land newly planted to coconut. The women found groundwater at a depth of only four feet, which they pumped to irrigate chillie plants cultivated between the newly planted coconut rows. Their net return was Rs. 30,000 per acre within a four month period in 1994, which was more than treble the return from the adjoining coconut land for the whole year. Meanwhile, the fertilizer and water that they used for the intercrop were found to benefit the newly planted coconut too, in a win-win synergy. In the long run, the possibility of drip irrigation for coconut needs also to be considered. Such irrigation is needed only at the height of the dry season (cheap systems are now available) in order to reduce stress and increase yields.

To sum up, the Coconut Research Institute has now agreed to the following propositions that I proposed in 1961 and reiterated in 1974 (ref. ILO World Employment Mission, 1974).

· Inter-cropping between newly planted or replanted coconut can be done without prejudice to the newly planted coconut palms for the first five to six years of their life.

· In new plantings, the coconut rows could be planted farther apart, but with more trees per row, such that the total number of trees per acre will not be reduced. This would enable an inter-cop between the rows.

· Inter-planting among older coconut stands of over 25 years can be undertaken without detriment to the coconut trees or to the intercrop.

· Such intercropping can be done even in the drier regions using intercrops suited to the drier conditions, while irrigation would provide an added bonus.

· The yields of coconut actually increase because of the fertilizer and water used in the intercrop.

· There are other advantages of intercropping, such as providing biomass for fertilizer, increasing soil moisture and reducing erosion.

· The inter-crop (depending on the crop) is capable of yielding more than double the value of all the coconuts that could be produced from the same land.

Despite intercropping being both feasible and profitable, it was reported as late as 2007 that ‘in Sri Lanka, most of the coconut holdings are maintained as monocultures’ (Gunathilake, 2007). The question is why intercropping has not been more widely adopted when its feasibility and desirability were highlighted as early as 1974. The answers, in the opinion of the writer, are mainly structural and institutional.

The advantages of intercropping arise from its more intensive use of land and labour, with resultant higher returns per acre. However, the pattern of absentee ownership and management of larger estates raises the problem of supervising the casual, non-resident labourers needed for intercropping. Faced with this question, one of my estate-owner friends exploded: ‘Are you mad? The fellows (the labourers) will steal my coconuts’! Thus, although intercropping is recognized as feasible and profitable, the prevailing agrarian structure (with large holdings and absentee landlords not prepared to accept outside labour) seems to be the major factor inhibiting the wider adoption of inter-cropping on larger estates. Such estates (over 20 acres) occupied 18 per cent of the total area under coconut in 2002 (Agricultural Census of 2002).

Coconut, however, is mainly a smallholder crop in Sri Lanka, with 80 per cent of all ‘coconut lands’, covering almost 800,000 acres being made up of small holdings; 54 per cent of these are less than three acres in extent. Inter-cropping is gaining ground in this area, using mainly family labour. Although figures of comparative coconut yields between large and small coconut farms are not available for Sri Lanka, it is very likely that the coconut yields are higher in these small holdings compared to larger holdings, as proved in other countries. More importantly, the total value of agricultural production per acre in such small holdings is likely to be much higher than that in the large, well-managed coconut estates.

This is because the coconut smallholder invests more labour per unit of land to intensify and diversify his production by intercropping, in order to maximize his income. Most small coconut holdings are likely to include a papaya, banana or lime tree, some betel or pepper vines, some home-grown vegetables and some livestock. In fact, the small holder actually attains this higher level of total productivity per acre only by treating his land as much more than a ‘coconut land’.

Fortunately in more recent times, individual coconut planters in Sri Lanka have started to inter-crop on their own initiative, with encouraging results. The Coconut Research Institute has also helped by useful research into types of crops and land practices for intercropping. There has also been more forward-looking research and development abroad, in terms of ‘coconut based farming systems’ (CBFS) – a concept which is gaining ground in South India (Kerala) and some other South East Asian countries.

The purpose should not be merely to increase coconut yields, but to maximize the total productivity of these lands on a sustainable basis. This can best be achieved by a more holistic approach which seeks to develop the farming system as a whole, with each component synergistically supporting the other. While coconut would provide the pillars of such a farming system, inter-cropping would enhance its total productivity and ecological sustainability. Since coconut would still be the foundation of such a system, perhaps we could even be forgiven for referring to these lands affectionately as ‘coconut lands’!

(The writer who was a member 0f the old Ceylon Civil Service thereafter had a long career with FAO)



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

True Santa & Fake Santa in the US. NPP underwhelmed by Square-toed Critics

Published

on

Fake Santa deporting real immigrant

A telling Christmas cartoon in a Canadian newspaper (The Globe and Mail) shows the American Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents apprehending and attacking Santa Claus as he lands in the US presumably without a visa. For their part, ICE agents have gone a step worse and got one of their men to be a fake Santa, with an ICE logo, in an advertisement that promises US immigrants a payment of $3,000 and free flight ‘home’ for Christmas if they would voluntarily turn themselves in. The overexcited and out-of-depth Department of Homeland Secretary Kristi Noam has added her two cents: “Illegal aliens should take advantage of this gift and self-deport.”

That is Trump’s America and it is at terrible odds with the historical image of America that the first American Pope in Vatican devoutly cherishes and is unabashedly defending. Paraphrasing the gospel of Matthew, the Pope had pointedly admonished, “Jesus says very clearly, at the end of the world, we’re going to be asked, ‘How did you receive the foreigner?” The American Bishops followed suit and in a rare rebuke of the Administration, have expressed their “concern for the evolving situation impacting immigrants in the United States”.

But not all American Catholics are with the Pope and their Bishops. Sixty percent of white American Catholics are said to be in favour of Trump’s vicious crackdown on immigrants. They and their voluble intelligentsia are a bulwark of Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) bandwagon. Five of the nine Supreme Court judges are conservative white Catholics. They are aided and abetted by Clarence Thomas, the lone male African-American and conservative judge on the bench. The six judges, ignoring the dissenting liberal judges, have been giving judicial cover to practically all of Trump’s controversial second term initiatives.

The new bullhorn foreign policy towards Europe is the speciality of Vice President JD Vance, a late convert to Catholicism and married to a Hindu Indo-American. The oversight of Central and South America is the responsibility America’s new neocons, the Cuban neocons, led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Catholic Cuban American with a ton of chips on his shoulders. Trump used to deride him as “little Marco.” Marco Rubio wants the US to browbeat Venezuela and use it as an example to other Latin American countries.

But Trump’s support is falling and almost all of his new initiatives are beginning to unravel even before he has finished the first year of his second term. Even among Catholics who are 20% of the population numbering 50 million, the 60% support of white American Catholics is negated by the opposition of 70% Hispanics to Trump’s deportation program even though Trump made significant inroad among Hispanics in the 2024 election. Among all Americans Trump has a negative approval rating with nearly 60% of Americans dissatisfied with his policies and performance across the board.

At 79, Trump is beginning to walk and talk like Biden when the latter was in office as the oldest American President. Trump is not losing his grip on power but he cannot keep tab on his zealous acolytes as they rush to further their own agendas on immigration, controlling Latin America and jettisoning Europe. It is the economy that is his business. It is literally so insofar as his family is enabled to make as much hay as they can before the curtain crashes. And the country’s economy will be his Achilles Heel just as it was for Biden. Trump will be considerably deflated should the Supreme Court rule against him on the constitutionality of his idiosyncratic tariff scheme. On the other hand, if the Court’s conservative judges were to rule in his favour it will do lasting damage to their already tattered credibility.

True Santa under arrest

Regardless, the Trump presidency is not going to end all of a sudden like in so many other countries including Sri Lanka in 2022. The built in inertia of the US system will provide for the Trump presidency to peter out and for the country to take an even longer time to be rid of the damages he has done to the institutions and to restore them slowly. In the meantime, one would hope that the carnage in Ukraine will be soon brought to an end. And, as Pope Leo XIV said in his Christmas homily, the people “in the tents in Gaza, exposed for weeks to rain, wind and cold, ” should be soon helped out of the “rubble and open wounds.”

While it is too soon to speculate about post-Trump America, Trump’s impact on the American political system over the last 10 (to be 15) years in politics is obvious. First, he was able to instigate a critical mass of people into believing that the mainstream political discourse is a fake enterprise. That was his route to victory in 2016 and much of his first term was about consolidating the belief of his followers that everyone who was opposing him were fake and un-American. He took the next step and made them believe that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him by the political establishment and was given to Joe Biden. The Trump’s playbook is being adapted by like-minded leaders in other countries to score their own political victories. Accusations of fake news, allegations of stolen elections, and widespread disinformation – i.e. intentionally spreading incorrect information – have now become the stock of politics in a number of countries. Sri Lanka is not one of them but it does manifest symptoms of this new malaise.

The NPP and its Square-toed Critics

Allegations of election fraud have always been a fact of political life Sri Lanka. A sizeable forensic industry grew out of petitioning courts to challenge the results of individual constituency elections based on allegations of fraud and corruption. The two old Left Parties would have none of it and would accept the results of the election based on the official counts. They never challenged the results of any election that was lost by any of its candidates. When the Left was shut out of parliament in 1977, NM Perera wrote for the LSSP that the Party had been shut of the legislature twice in its history. First, from the State Council by colonial Order in Council, and in 1977 by the people themselves. It fought the colonial expulsion but accepted the verdict of the people.

Allegations of foreign interference are also not new. The Left had its routine rhetorical flights to warn of the circumambient presence of imperialism. The UNP countered with homemade stories of Chinese spies. But the first serious questioning of an election result and the accusation of foreign interference came after the 2015 presidential election that saw the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa when he tried to win an illegitimate third term in office. It was also the first defeat of a sitting president. The first reaction was to blame Tamil treachery. The second was to blame the long hand from New Delhi. Neither took serious traction but they created a local genre of political punditry that keeps itself busy.

The Rajapaksas have grown out of it. Their elders have no time for it and their next generation is desperate about finding a future foothold. But their loyal pundits keep churning. The latest addition to this genre of commentary is the finally revealed revelation about the supposedly sensational proposition made by former Indian High Commissioner Gopal Baglay to former Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, on the morning of that fatefully eventful day of 13 July 2022, that Mr. Abeywardena should immediately become Sri Lanka’s new President.

Obviously, this meeting would have taken place after Gotabaya Rajapaksa had fled the country in the wee hours of that same morning. But what is not clear is whether GR’s letter of resignation was already official and whether GR’s appointment of Ranil Wickremesinghe as Acting President had already come into effect. Mr. Wickremesinghe himself has revealed the circumstances of his taking oath as president after GR’s fleeing – that the oath was taken in secrecy in a Colombo Temple – in an interview with former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, after a meeting of the International Democracy Union (IDU) in London. The UNP is an IDU member and Harper its Chairman.

There is no reason to question the veracity of Speaker Abeywardena’s account of his meeting with the then Indian High Commissioner, in the Speaker’s parliamentary office. But what is amusing is the use of this single data point of a meeting between the High Commissioner and the Speaker – to draw a line of conclusion in two directions: (1) a causal line going backward to suggest that the entire Aragalaya phenomenon was potentially orchestrated by India and America; and (2) a consequential line going forward to the election of the NPP government with the assertion that the new government came into office after displacing Gotabaya Rajapaksa to serve Sri Lanka’s two masters – India and the US. The people of Sri Lanka are reduced to doormats in this political theatre and their votes were political counterfeits to elect a government of fake Marxists. Even Trump would be impressed by this creativity.

As amusements go, this genre of political punditry is fully supplemented by the NPP’s current critics and quondam comrades from the bookish left (as Philip Gunawardena used to scoff). They take NPP to task for any and all of its actions and non-actions – from its apparent ambivalence towards Israel to its alleged foot dragging on the Prevention of Terrorism Act, not to mention its similarly alleged kneeling before the IMF.

The criticisms themselves are not inaccurate, but their tone and timing do not appear to be intended for any positive outcome. They are also esoteric and out of place in a situation when the country has been ravaged by a torrential cyclone. I will conclude by paraphrasing a witty response to a recent online critique of the NPP on the PTA matter: in blaming the NPP government for not repealing all the bad laws enacted by every previous government, are we not forgetting that the NPP is the only government that is – not only against making use of bad laws enacted by others, but also against enacting any new bad law of its own.

by Rajan Philips ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

2025: The Year We Let It Happen

Published

on

Donald Trump

“I was saved by God to make America great again,” Donald Trump said, a line that circulated widely during his political comeback rallies. “The golden age of America begins right now,” Trump declared as he was inaugurated for a second term on 20 January 2025, marking a major shift in US politics with consequences likely to extend across generations. Trump’s appeal lay not in moderation but in confrontation, rooted in the assertion that democracy works best when it produces winners unencumbered by restraint. He rewarded many who delivered him power, while leaders in other democracies often spent their mandates managing survival and retreating from pledges once deemed non-negotiable. The old Marxian line about history repeating itself as tragedy and farce felt newly apt as elections continued to produce both at once.

While deteriorating democratic systems grappled with their contradictions, quasi-democratic and openly authoritarian administrations pursued power with less ceremony. Beijing tightened its hold over Taiwan, Tibet, and Hong Kong while projecting its global power with mixed success, and Moscow prosecuted its war in Ukraine with brutal persistence, accepting sanctions and isolation as the cost of imperial memory. The EU’s plan to use frozen Russian funds for Kyiv stalled and was replaced by a €90 billion loan package, which will cost taxpayers around €3 billion annually in interest. Pyongyang continued its missile testing, while its state-linked hackers reportedly stole an estimated $2.02 billion in cryptocurrency in 2025 alone. Tehran, for its part, passed another turbulent year, marked by a 12-day military confrontation with Israel in June 2025 that inflicted significant damage on both countries. Power in these systems remained centralized and unapologetic, justified by security and sustained by fear.

Across the globe, 2025 witnessed a wave of Gen Z-led protests that challenged authority and disrupted the social order in ways reminiscent of the Arab Spring, yet carried their own perils. From climate strikes in London and Berlin to anti-corruption demonstrations in São Paulo, Mexico City, Dhaka, and Kathmandu, young activists confronted entrenched elites with unprecedented energy and digital coordination. In Morocco, Madagascar, Tunisia, Indonesia, and the Philippines, student-led and youth-driven uprisings rattled governments, while in the United States, marches over climate action and student debt repeatedly clashed with authorities.

Even in authoritarian countries such as Iran, Vietnam, and, to some extent, Thailand, clandestine movements mobilized online and in the streets, forcing concessions while provoking brutal crackdowns. Yet these eruptions of youthful revolt, as electrifying as they were, revealed a dangerous pattern: like the Arab Spring, the protests often destabilized societies without delivering durable reform, leaving governments weakened, institutions strained, and political vacuums that could be exploited by opportunistic elites. The Gen Z moment in 2025 was a showcase of idealism and impatience, but also a warning that the seductive energy of revolt can become the architect of new disorder and unfulfilled promise. The question remains: who will have the last laugh?

The dissonance between public display and private conclave became starkly visible in Beijing in September 2025 during the 80th-anniversary commemorations of the end of the Second World War. State television followed Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin as they approached the parade ground, and microphones accidentally left live picked up a fragment of conversation that ricocheted around the world. According to reports, Putin’s interpreter was heard saying, “Human organs can be continuously transplanted. The longer you live, the younger you become,” to which Xi replied, “Some predict that in this century humans may live to 150 years old.”

The Kremlin later confirmed the exchange, insisting it was a casual discussion about medical advances, not a policy statement. Yet the symbolism was hard to miss: two leaders whose authority rests on longevity speculating, however lightly, about defeating mortality itself. In a century marked by demographic decline in both Russia and China, the fantasy of extended life carried political weight.

That moment intersected with a broader obsession that cut across systems: the promise and threat of artificial intelligence. Governments unable to agree on climate targets found common urgency in machine learning, particularly its military and medical applications. The United States National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence warned in 2021 that AI would “accelerate the speed of warfare beyond human comprehension”. By 2025, the Pentagon had embedded AI across military operations, deploying commercial models and prioritizing generative tools to maintain America’s technological edge.

Project Stargate, a high-profile initiative with commitments from OpenAI, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, and SoftBank, was said to involve hundreds of billions of dollars in public-private investment to expand AI infrastructure and research across sectors. In parallel, China’s state and corporate ecosystems together channeled tens of billions into AI development, sustaining the world’s second-largest cluster of AI firms and an expanding suite of generative tools. Critical minerals remained a strategic fulcrum, with China controlling more than 90 per cent of global rare-earth processing capacity and wielding that dominance as leverage over technology and defence supply chains.

Space in 2025 saw competition in orbit intensify rather than abate. The number of active satellites in low Earth orbit surpassed 9,350, led by SpaceX’s Starlink constellation, which accounts for the largest share of operational spacecraft. The Space Development Agency awarded US$3.5 billion in contracts for 72 new infrared tracking satellites to strengthen missile-warning and defence architecture. China’s on-orbit presence also expanded markedly in 2025, with Beijing conducting a record number of launches and placing hundreds of satellites into space to advance communications and surveillance networks, including early deployments for its ambitious Guowang low Earth orbit mega constellation. Close encounters between Chinese, Russian, and Western satellites exposed weak space-traffic coordination, with orbit increasingly framed in martial rather than peaceful terms.

On the ground, the uglier side of power refused to remain hidden. In the United States, the Epstein Files Transparency Act compelled the Department of Justice to disclose federal records by mid-December, but heavy redactions and omissions drew bipartisan criticism from lawmakers who argued the release undermined the law’s intent and shielded powerful individuals. Thousands of pages referenced disturbing allegations and reinforced a widely held sense that wealth and influence can insulate the well-connected from scrutiny or accountability. Elsewhere, established democracies continued to confront systemic failures: France grappled with unresolved clerical abuse scandals; Britain faced renewed criticism over policing gaps in handling grooming gangs; and India’s chronic under-reporting of sexual violence remained a persistent human rights concern.

Meanwhile, the language of peace was deployed with similar cynicism. Trump repeatedly suggested he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, citing what he described as a series of peace initiatives in which he claimed to have played a decisive role. These included the Abraham Accords of 2020, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab states, and the 2025 United States-brokered ceasefire in Gaza, under which all remaining living Israeli hostages held by Hamas were released and hostilities were paused through a phased arrangement.

Trump further asserted that his administration had “settled” or eased a widening range of conflicts, pointing to diplomatic efforts aimed at initiating talks towards a negotiated end to the Russia–Ukraine war, although substantive peace terms remain elusive and negotiations continue amid resistance from Kyiv, Moscow, and key European Union states. He also publicly referenced conflicts or diplomatic tracks involving India and Pakistan; Thailand and Cambodia; Kosovo and Serbia; the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda; Israel and Iran; Egypt and Ethiopia; and Armenia and Azerbaijan as evidence of his claimed peacemaking credentials, despite the absence of durable or comprehensive peace settlements in any of these cases.

Trump did not receive the Nobel Prize, whose awards have often favoured aspiration over results. Instead, it went to María Corina Machado, a Venezuelan opposition leader who told me in 2020 that “a mafia group has destroyed my beloved nation, Venezuela”, and whom Washington now treats as a key ally. Meanwhile, the United States has reportedly sought to seize another oil tanker linked to Caracas while pursuing an alleged drug cartel, amid claims that the Secretary of War ordered forces to “kill them all”. At the same time, Latin America has seen a significant rise in right-wing politics, with Argentina’s Javier Milei consolidating power, Chile electing far-right leader José Antonio Kast, and conservative presidents such as Daniel Noboa in Ecuador and Nayib Bukele in El Salvador gaining influence amid broader regional shifts to the right.

Africa was not immune to global disorder. In Sudan, a brutal civil war between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and rival factions continued throughout 2025, marked by repeated mass atrocities, including ongoing killings around El Fasher in North Darfur that left tens of thousands dead and displaced millions, making it one of the world’s most devastating humanitarian crises. The United Nations and humanitarian agencies reported widespread executions, sexual violence, and attacks on civilians and health facilities. Meanwhile, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, fighting between the Congolese army and the Rwanda-linked M23 rebel group forced thousands to flee, with more than 84,000 refugees crossing into neighbouring Burundi in 2025.

Nigeria’s security situation also deteriorated, with jihadist factions, including Boko Haram and Islamic State West Africa Province, expanding operations and causing civilian casualties and displacement. Across West Africa, political realignment followed coups in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, which jointly withdrew from ECOWAS and formed the Alliance of Sahel States, commonly dubbed the “African NATO”. The bloc has announced plans to establish a shared central bank and investment fund aimed at economic autonomy and reducing reliance on traditional financial systems, but it remains too early to assess its capacity to curb the continent’s growing Islamic extremism and militant gangs.

Through all this, inequality hardened. The latest World Inequality Report 2026 showed that the richest 0.001 per cent of adults — fewer than 60,000 individuals — now control three times more wealth than the poorest half of the global population combined, while the richest 10 per cent own around three-quarters of global wealth. While leaders speculated about extended lifespans and investors poured money into longevity start-ups, life expectancy stagnated or fell in several countries: in the United States it remained lower than a decade earlier, and in parts of sub-Saharan Africa gains were erased by conflict and weak health systems.

Orwell’s line continues to resonate, even at the risk of banality: “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” The events of this year have not disproved it; they have updated it with satellites, algorithms, and offshore accounts. Power now moves faster and hides better, but it still feeds on the same asymmetries. As another year closes, the temptation is to wish for renewal without reckoning. That wish has become a luxury. The facts are stubborn: inequality widens, wars persist, technology accelerates without consensus, and leaders speak of salvation while tolerating cruelty. New Year greetings sound hollow against that record, but perhaps honesty is a start. The age we are entering will not be golden by proclamation; it will be judged, as ever, by who is allowed to live with dignity — and who is told, politely or otherwise, to wait. To the New Year — hopefully wiser.

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

After Christmas Day

Published

on

We are in this period – the days immediately following Christmas – December 25. The intense religious and festive two days are over, but just as the festive season precedes Christmas Day, it follows it too, notwithstanding the day that marks the beginning of the new year.

Christmas is significant, I need not even mention, as the celebration of Jesus Christ’s birth in Bethlehem in a manger as there was no room at the inn. It however symbolizes God‘s love and salvation for his ‘children’. People make merry with traditional gift giving (custom from the three kings), carols, bright lights concentrated in indoor fir trees and general goodwill epitomized by jolly old Santa. It is also a time of spiritual reflection on God’s love of people by his giving his son to their will.

The day after Christmas – 26 December – is also a day marked in the calendar of the festive season. Named Boxing Day, it too is a holiday of fun. Originally a day of generosity and giving gifts to those in need, it has evolved to become a part of Christmas festivities. It originated in the UK and is observed by several Commonwealth countries, including Ceylon.

It is concurrent with the Christian festival of Saint Stephen’s Day, which in many European countries is considered the second day of Christmas. It honours St. Stephen who was the first Christian martyr who was stoned to death for his faith. More commonly, it is called Boxing Day, also known as Offering Day, for giving servants and the needy gifts and financial help. The term boxing comes from the noun boxes, because alms were collected in boxes placed in Churches and opened for distribution on the day after Christmas. This day is first mentioned in the Oxford English Dictionary on 1743.

The Twelve Days of Christmas follow the 25th and make up the Christmas Season. It marks the days the kings of Orienta –Magi – took to visit the infant Jesus with gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense, symbolizing Christ’s royalty, future suffering and divinity/ priesthood respectively.

The “Twelve days of Christmas” we know as a Christmas carol or children’s nursery rhyme which is cumulative with each verse built on the previous verse. Content of the verses is what the lover gives his /her true love on each of twelve days beginning with Christmas day, so it ends on January 6, which marks the end of the Xmas season. The carol was first published in England in the late 18th century. The best known version is that of Frederic Austen who wrote his rhymes in 1909.

“On the first day of Christmas my true love sent to me

A partridge in a pear tree.

On the second day of Christmas my true love sent to me

Two turtle doves

And a partridge in a pear tree.”

And so on with three hens, four calling birds; five gold rings, six geese a-laying, seven swans a-swimming, eight maids a-milking, nine ladies dancing, ten lords a-leaping, eleven pipers piping, twelve drummers drumming. But the most important fact is that each animal or human represents a Christian object or key tenet of the faith, serving as a religious tool where each gift depicts a religious concept.

For instance, it is believed the partridge symbolizes Jesus and two turtle doves represent the Old and New Testaments. Doves are symbols of truth and peace, once again reinforcing the tie to Christ and Christmas. Reference is also made to the Ten Commandments, the 12 Apostles and the Creed. However, this is a popular theory and not a historic fact with some believing it is a love song pure and simple.

And so 2025 draws to an end. One cannot but throw one’s thoughts back to when one was an eager beaver child. Buddhist though I was, I attended a Christian school from Baby Class and was very influenced by the Christian faith. In fact, an older sister was so indoctrinated she wanted to convert to Christianity. Our Methodist missionary school did not encourage conversions.

Mother was unaware of this great attraction; her emphasis was on an English education for her children,. But being so drawn to the Christian religion with all its celebration and merriment was no surprise, added to the fact that Vesak was such a solemn occasion with sil redi restraint and the death of the Buddha too commemorated.

It is a very heartening fact that in this country Buddhists too join in the pleasures of Christmas. Many go for Midnight Mass on 24th because of religiously mixed marriages or merely to enjoy that experience too. Our family, when the children were young, invariably celebrated with the traditional XMas tree in the house with my husband taking great pleasure in buying a branch of a cypress tree sold in Colombo, and decorating it. We often spent the holiday in Bandarawela and so Christmas became extra special with the strong smell of the tree branch bought indoors. Santa visited my young one for long years; he being a strong believer in the delightful myth.

Delightful memories are made of these…

I wish everyone a wonderful Christmas. Let’s substitute the sorrows and despair of the aftermath of the cyclone and give ourselves, all Sri Lankans, a break and renew our togetherness and one-ness as a nation of decent people..

Continue Reading

Trending