Midweek Review
How political instability undermined national security

By Shamindra Ferdinando
The Institute of National Security Studies (INSS) recently dealt with the relevance of political stability for national security. Dr. Prathibha Mahanamahewa, and Director/CEO Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Training Institute Malinda Seneviratne, a former colleague of ours at The Island editorial, addressed the issues at hand. Acting Director General of the INSS Rear Admiral Dimuthu Gunawardene, who is also the Director of Communications and Publications of the outfit, moderated the event.
Defence Ministry Media spokesperson Colonel Nalin Herath, in a statement issued on June 09, quoted Dr. Mahanamahewa as having told the gathering that the mismanagement of resources, absence of timely decisions, and corruption, caused political instability. The academic was further quoted as having stressed that political stability would automatically ensure national security. A former Commissioner of the Human Rights Commission asserted that a new Constitution would help maintain political stability.
Political commentator Seneviratne had focused on external threats, primarily the LTTE rump/Tamil Diaspora. Seneviratne had been quite convincing in his arguments. The brief Defence Ministry statement on the event held via zoom on June 07 obviously covered just a fraction of what Dr. Mahanamahewa and Seneviratne had said.
The INSS probably wouldn’t have taken up this particular subject if not for the current economic-political and social crisis that has totally eroded public confidence in the incumbent dispensation. In fact, the public has lost faith in the utterly corrupt entire political party setup with a large segment of the population loudly questioning the dependability of the parliamentary system. The INSS aptly titled the event ‘importance of political stability for national security.’
The INSS can inquire into how the recent Aeroflot drama, at the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA), undermined Sri Lanka’s relations with Russia, thereby impacting the overall stability. Can Sri Lanka afford to antagonize a friendly UN Security Council member, one of the two who have always stood by us, the other being China, always supportive of Colombo, regardless of the party in power here. If not for their veto power, the West would have bulldozed us into accepting their terms through resolutions at the powerful UN Security Council, especially on so-called war crimes where they have been out to nail our victorious security forces on, for unbelievably defeating LTTE terrorists, in the battlefield, against their wishes.
It would be pertinent to ask whether INSS in any way had inquired into the political, economic and social developments in the run-up to the massive explosion of public anger in late March this year. The intelligence services, too, seemed to have completely ignored the swelling up of public anger over shortage of essential items, including food, and the skyrocketing cost of living, until it was too late.
The INSS should have factored in Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena’s declaration that the country is fast heading towards an unprecedented famine. PM Wickremesinghe and many others say the same though they do not provide solutions.
Can the current crisis be simply addressed by restoring political stability? What really caused the current and still worsening crisis that has bankrupted the country? The political as well as the military leadership should realize political stability achieved by a near 2/3 majority in Parliament in the wake of an overwhelming triumph for the same party at the presidential election contributed to the catastrophe. That is the undeniable truth.
Having secured the Nov 2019 presidential election with an overpowering majority, the SLPP won a commanding 145 seats in the 220-member Parliament at the Aug 2020 parliamentary election. The Colombo Port City Economic Commission Bill received 149 votes in May 2021. Seven months before, the 20th Amendment to the Constitution received a staggering 156 votes. The SLPP acted as it didn’t expect any trouble. The electorate was repeatedly told the 20th Amendment would ensure political stability while the passage of the Colombo Port City Commission Bill would attract the required foreign direct investments.
The arrogant and over confident SLPP leadership ignored warning signals. Perhaps the government could have managed to sustain the national economy if the Covid-19 pandemic didn’t almost totally disrupt the tourism sector, with the crippling of international travel, and also caused a sharp drop in foreign remittances, with a large number Sri Lankan migrant workers having to return home. Even those who retained their jobs in West Asia often got their wages reduced or got them after delays. Things were further compounded by the government having to repatriate workers and having to spend valuable foreign exchange to procure vaccines and other related pharmaceuticals.
Now, adding to the country’s woes, is the fallout from Russia’s incursion into Ukraine and the US rather foolishly using that to blead Kremlin to death. That is already endangering world food security and disrupting the supply of other essentials, like oil, coal etc., while also causing record inflation worldwide.
Still, the government could have successfully addressed the growing threat if it responded positively to a warning issued by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in early 2020. But, the Cabinet of Ministers, chaired by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, turned a blind eye to the IMF call for an immediate debt restructuring programme. The IMF response was to Sri Lanka’s request for a Rapid Financing Instrument (RFI) made in early 2020. The outspoken Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe is now on record as having told the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) that Dr. P.B. Jayasundera, the then Secretary to the President, finally decided against the IMF’s intervention.
Who should accept the blame for the current crisis? Would it be fair to hold Dr. PBJ accountable for an utterly irresponsible course of action that has caused immense political instability?
Basil on IMF
Having given up the SLPP National List slot and the finance portfolio, SLPP founder Basil Rajapaksa addressed the media at the Nelum Mawatha party office. The revelation made by Basil Rajapaksa, perhaps unwittingly, showed the SLPP had addressed the economic crisis. At the time, the IMF advised Sri Lanka to undertake a debt restructuring programme and drop plans to grant massive tax cuts, while Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa held the finance portfolio. Basil Rajapaksa, who took over finance in July 2021, in response to a media query last week explained how the IMF divided the government. According to him, when Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman raised the issue, Basil Rajapaksa, turning towards the then Finance Secretary S.R. Attygalle has said that he was among those who opposed seeking IMF intervention. Basil Rajapaksa has pointed out that Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in New Delhi Milinda Moragoda favoured the move.
The government played in what could aptly be termed in local parlance as pandu with the national economy. By the time Basil Rajapaksa took over the Finance Ministry, in July 2021, irreparable damage had been done and the finalization of the Yugadanavi deal, two months later, divided the SLPP. The SLPP and a minority in the CEB hierarchy wielding power, defended the controversial deal struck at midnight to the hilt. CEB Chairman M.C. Ferdinando, on the invitation of the then presidential spokesman Kingsley Ratnayake, sought to paint a rosy picture at a media briefing arranged at the Presidential Media Division (PMD). Kingsley Ratnayake, formerly of Sirasa, has quietly left the PMD. Ratnayake has left the country at the onset of a public protest campaign and is believed to be in Australia. Sudewa Hettiarachchi, who joined the PMD as its Director General, remains as the government continues to struggle on the media front.
The explosion of public anger whether pre-planned or not, at the approaches to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s private residence at Pengiriwatte, Mihihana, on March 31, 2022, should be investigated, taking into consideration the following factors: (1) dismissal of IMF’s advice on the need to go for an immediate debt restructuring programme, the need to drop plans to implement massive tax cuts and fixing the Rupee rate at 203 at the expense of the overall economy (2) ruination of the agriculture sector as a result of unilateral and abrupt decision taken by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa to ban chemical fertiliser and agro chemicals. The unprecedented move resulted in the decimation of the country’s agriculture output (3) Causing irreparable damage to Sri Lanka’s diplomatic ties with Japan by cancelling already agreed projects, including a light trail venture, a strategic foreign policy blunder (4) explosions of domestic gas cylinders caused by change of the formula by foreign suppliers possibly done deliberately to further worsen the situation here (5) disputed Yugadanavi deal. The agreement with the US energy firm divided the SLPP, with three ministers challenging the move in court along with many others (6) turning a blind eye to waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement (7) failure on the part of the government to discipline revenue collection setup, comprising the Inland Revenue Department, Customs and Excise Department and turning a blind eye to illegal money transferring methods, such as Hawala and Undiyal.
Then Finance Minister Basil Rajapaksa, in an interview with Shyam Nuwan Ganewatta of Divaina, foolishly declared his faith in illegal methods, little realizing that it was depriving the country of its precious foreign exchange (8) the continuing dispute over the handling of the 2019 Easter Sunday massacre by Muslim extremists (9) pathetic response to accountability accusations pertaining to Sri Lanka’s triumph over Tamil terrorism.
Can Basil Rajapaksa’s departure from Parliament or business tycoon Dhammika Perera’s entry in his place give overnight boost to a failed economy? Having promised a system change, the SLPP has lost its way and brought in Ranil Wickremesinghe, accused of being the alleged mastermind of the Treasury bond scams by the then Joint Opposition, and Perera, embroiled in tax issues, to manage the political and economic fronts.
Perhaps, INSS should seriously consider receiving a briefing from heads of parliamentary watchdogs, the Committee on Public Enterprises (chaired by Prof. Charitha Herath, MP), Committee on Public Finance (Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, MP) and Committee on Public Accounts (Prof. Tissa Vitharana) regarding the threat posed to political stability and national security by unbridled public and private sector corruption.
The COPE probing into the CBSL and the Finance Ministry appearance before the watchdog by its former members of the Monetary Board comprising Prof. W.D. Lakshman (Dec 2019-Sept 2021/Ajith Nivard Cabraal (Sept 2021-March 2022), Treasury Secretary S.R. Attygalle and nominated members Sanjeeva Jayawardena, PC, Dr. Ranee Jayamaha and Samantha Kumarasinghe caused the current crisis. In addition to the Monetary Board, the then Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa, who served as the Finance Minister (Dec 2019-July 2021) and Dr. P.B. Jayasundera, too, are accountable, with the latter being blamed for blocking the government securing IMF intervention.
Probe on security flop
Sri Lanka witnessed what can be described as a countrywide breakdown of law and order on May 09, following the SLPP goon attack on the Galle Face public protest, demanding the resignation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and the entire Cabinet of Ministers, including Premier Mahinda Rajapaksa.
The month-long campaign had the backing of both external and internal forces hell-bent on a system change. The security forces, as well as the police, failure to prevent it as well as the meticulously organized military type retaliation, should be discussed against the backdrop of the Rambukkana shooting where a person died and two dozen others were wounded.
No one bothered to point out that the police opened fire nearly 15 hours after those protesting against fuel price hike blocked main roads as well as the Rambukkana railway line for 15 hours. Can protesting public block roads thereby inconvenience other ordinary people? And police resorted to use lethal force only after protesters turned violent and nearly blew up a petrol bowser by setting fire to it.
Unfortunately, the rapid deterioration of the economy against the backdrop of the government acknowledging insolvency has given an opportunity to various interested parties to undermine the rule of law. The continuing blockade on the Presidential Secretariat situated at Galle Face signifies a pathetic state of affairs. Dr. Nalaka Godahewa, who held the media portfolio at the time of the May 09 violence, raised the disgraceful failure on the part of the government to thwart organized attacks on a selected group of ruling party lawmakers, numbering over 70. The Gampaha District MP, whose Gampaha home suffered heavy damage, drew the attention of both President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe to the crisis, while warning of a 1987-1990 type insurgent campaign.
Obviously, the incumbent political leadership is furious with the military for not stepping in immediately. They are of the view that retaliatory attacks could have been thwarted if the military acted swiftly and decisively. Naturally, some have found fault with the then Commander of the Army General Shavendra Silva, who also functioned as the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS). The appointment of a three-member committee headed by Admiral of the Fleet (retd.) Wasantha Karannagoda to inquire into the lapses on the part of the military should be viewed in the context of a volatile political-economic-social environment.
Could military intervention have saved Mahinda Rajapaksa’s premiership even at the expense of bloodshed? Had there been a large-scale military response to countrywide retaliatory attacks, the country would have been in a much bigger crisis today. There cannot be any dispute over that. No one would have desired Rathupaswela type incident at a time the government was pleading before the international community for food assistance. The incident in the first week of August 2013 shocked the country. It brought shame on the war-winning Army, though it too was instigated by mysterious forces.
In fact at the onset of the trouble, Gen. Silva, the celebrated GoC of the 58 Division, assured Colombo-based defence attaches that the military wouldn’t intervene. Had that happened, it would have definitely helped those who had been campaigning for the ouster of the Rajapaksas.
The Army earned the wrath of the public for opening fire on people demanding clean water at Rathupaswela. Three died in indiscriminate shooting. It would be pertinent to mention that the public had been protesting against the Dipped Products factory over the alleged releasing of chemicals into the environment. The villagers had been seriously concerned about their water supply for some time as they were dependent on groundwater. Their complaints had fallen on deaf ears. Obviously, those in authority hadn’t been interested at all in inquiring into the issue at hand.
Had they bothered to conduct an investigation in a timely and transparent manner, the accusations could have been ascertained and remedial measures taken. Then, why was it not done? Well, one cannot help but think that it is because the factory is owned by Hayleys controlled by Dhammika Perera, the latest entrant into parliamentary politics. In a way, Perera’s entry into active politics can be compared with Gotabaya Rajapaksa entering national politics at the highest level against the backdrop of widespread criticism of all members of Parliament.
Secretary to the Public Administration Ministry Attorney-at-Law Priyantha Mayadunne recently explained how the political party system ruined the country. Mayadunne didn’t hesitate to declare that the mother of all problems is the oversized public service that has been an unbearable burden on the national economy for a long time. One-time Justice Ministry Secretary Mayadunne asserted that Sri Lanka can manage with half a million strong public service though the actual figure is 1.5 mn. Isn’t it a destabilizing factor? If the INSS is really keen to ascertain the truth, it may undertake a thorough examination of destabilizing factors as the country slips further into foreign debt.
The economic crisis, as explained by Governor of the CBSL Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, is so acute today, Sri Lanka is vulnerable to external machinations. The external threats can be quite deadly as those directly involved in the decision, making process here, too, have been part of various such anti-national projects. Yugadanavi deal can be cited as just one such example.
Midweek Review
Batalanda and complexities of paramilitary operations

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent combative ‘Head-to-Head’ interview with British-American Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera has opened a can of worms. As to why Hasan raised the Batalanda Presidential Commission report, during a 49-minute interview conducted at the London’s Conway Hall, with a clearly pro LTTE audience, remains a mystery. This must be yet another notorious way to show how even-handed they are as in the case of its coverage of Russia, China, Palestine or Ukraine for their gullible viewers.
Recorded in February and aired in March 2025, the interview is definitely the most controversial the UNP leader, who is also an Attorney-at-Law, ever faced during his political career; always used to getting kid glove treatment, especially after taking over the party in 1994.
The continuing public discourse on Batalanda should provoke a wider discussion on Sri Lanka’s response to separatist Tamil terrorism, since the cold blooded murder of Jaffna SLFP Mayor Alfred Duriappah, which signalled the beginning of the LTTE terror campaign that ended in May 2009 with the crushing military defeat of the Tigers on the banks of the Nathikadal lagoon, as well as two southern insurgencies in 1971 and 1987-1990.
As Nandana Gunatilleke (one time JVP General Secretary and ex-MP), Dr. Wasantha Bandara (ex-JVPer and close associate of the slain JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera), Indrananda de Silva (ex-JVPer, incumbent Central Committee member of Frontline Socialist Party [FSP] and ex-military photographer) and Uvindu Wijeweera (Rohana Wijeweera’s son and leader of Dewana Parapura) agreed during the recent Hiru ‘Balaya’ discussion, conducted by Madushan de Silva, the Batalanda operation was in line with the overall counter-terrorist/insurgency strategy of the then government.
The issues at hand cannot be discussed at all without taking into consideration the JVP terrorism that, at one-time, almost overwhelmed the UNP’s unbroken rule, since 1977, carried out while openly brushing aside most of the universally accepted genuine parliamentary norms. The country’s second Republican constitution, promulgated by the UNP regime with a 5/6 majority in Parliament, in 1978, had been amended no less than 13 times by the time they were finally ousted in 1995. This was mainly to facilitate their continuous rule. Unfortunately, all stakeholders have sought to take advantage of Batalanda, thereby preventing a proper dialogue. Quite surprisingly, none of the guests, nor the interviewer, bothered, at least, to make a reference to the JVP bid on President J.R. Jayewardene’s life in Parliament on the morning of July 18, 1987. At the time, JVPer Ajith Kumara, working in the House as a minor employee, hurled two hand grenades towards JRJ, with the then Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa seated next to JRJ. While one government MP lost his life, several others suffered injuries, including then National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali, whose spleen had to be removed.
At one point, Gunatilleke declared that they assassinated UNP MP for Tangalle Jinadasa Weerasinghe on July 3, 1987, in response to the government killing well over 100 people, in Colombo, protesting against the signing of the Indo-Lanka accord on July 29, 1987. The parliamentarian was killed near the Barawakumbuka-Welangahawela bridge on the Colombo-Rathnapura-Embilipitiya Road. The UNPer was killed on his way home after having declined Premier Premadasa’s offer to make an SLAF chopper available for him to reach home safely.
Against the backdrop of MP Weerasinghe’s assassination and the grenade attack on the UNP parliamentary group that claimed the life of Keethi Abeywickrema (MP for Deniyaya), the government had no option but to respond likewise. The operation, established at the Batalanda Housing scheme of the State Fertiliser Corporation, constituted part of the counter-insurgency strategy pursued by the UNP.
Those who called Batalanda complex Batalanda torture camp/ wadakagaraya conveniently forgot during the second JVP inspired insurgency, the military had to utilize many public buildings, including schools, as makeshift accommodation for troops. Of course the UNP established Batalanda under different circumstances with the then Industries Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe providing political authority. Batalanda had been an exclusive police operation though the Army had access to it whenever a requirement arose.
Those who had been suddenly withdrawn from the Northern and Eastern Provinces, to meet the rapidly evolving security threat in the South, required accommodation. FSP CC member Indrananada de Silva had received unhindered access to Batalanda in his capacity as a military photographer and the rest is history.
As to why Indrananda de Silva switched his allegiance to the FSP should be examined, taking into consideration his previous role as a trusted military photographer, formerly a Lance Corporal of the Military Police. An influential section of the JVP, led by Kumar Gunaratnam, formed the FSP in April 2012 though it didn’t receive the much anticipated public support. Both Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke, who aligned himself with the UNP, found fault with the JVP-led National People’s Power (NPP) over its handling of the Batalanada issue.
Paramilitary operations
Paramilitary operations had been an integral part of the overall counter-insurgency campaign, directed at the JVP responsible for approximately 6,600 killings. Among those death squads were PRRA primarily drawn from the SLMP (Sri Lanka Mahajana Party) and SRRA (the socialist Revolutionary Red Army). PRRA had close links with the Independent Student Union (ISU) whose leader Daya Pathirana was slain by the JVP. The vast majority of people do not remember that Daya Pathirana, who led the ISU during the turbulent 1985-1986 period, was killed mid-Dec. 1989. The second insurgency hadn’t started at that time though the JVP propagated the lie that they took up arms against the UNP government following the signing of the Indo-Lanka peace accord on July 29, 1987.
In addition to PRRA and SRRA, the government made use of paramilitary groups, namely Kalu balallu, Ukkusso, Rajaliyo, Kaha balallu, Kola koti, Rathu Makaru, Mapila, Gonussa, Nee, Keshara Sinhayo, Le-mappillu and Kalu koti.
The UNP also involved some elements of Indian trained Tamil groups (not of the LTTE) in paramilitary operations. Such operations, that had been backed by respective Cabinet Ministers, were supervised by local law enforcement authorities. Paramilitary operations had been in line with psychological warfare that was meant to cause fear among the JVP, as well as the general population. Military operations that had been combined with paramilitary actions received the blessings of the political leadership at the highest level. In the case of Batalanda (1988-1990) President J.R. Jayewardene and Ranasinghe Premadasa knew of its existence.
Even after the eradication of the top JVP leadership, by Nov. 1989, police, military and paramilitary operations continued unabated. Former JVPers appearing on ‘Balaya’ agreed that counter-insurgency operations were actually brought to an end only after D.B. Wijetunga succeeded President Ranasinghe Premadasa after the latter’s assassination on May Day 1993.
After the LTTE resumed war in June 1990, just a couple of months after the withdrawal of the Indian Army (July 1987-March1990), the UNP authorized paramilitary operations in the northern and eastern areas. Members of TELO, PLOTE, EPRLF as well as EPDP were made part of the overall government security strategy. They operated in large groups. Some paramilitary units were deployed in the Jaffna islands as well. And these groups were represented in Parliament. They enjoyed privileged status not only in the northern and eastern regions but Colombo as well. The government allowed them to carry weapons in the city and its suburbs.
These groups operated armed units in Colombo. The writer had the opportunity to visit EPDP and PLOTE safe houses in Colombo and its suburbs soon after they reached an understanding with President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Overnight at the behest of President Premadasa, the Election Department granted these Tamil groups political recognition. In other words, armed groups were made political parties. The Premadasa government accepted their right to carry weapons while being represented in Parliament.
It would be pertinent to mention that thousands of Tamil paramilitary personnel served the government during that period. There had been many confrontations between them and the LTTE over the years and the latter sought to eliminate key paramilitary personnel. Let me remind you of the circumstances, the EPRLF’s number 02 Thambirajah Subathiran alias Robert was sniped to death in June 2003. Robert was engaged in routine morning exercises on the top floor of the two-storeyed EPRLF office, on the hospital road, Jaffna, when an LTTE sniper took him out from the nearby Vembadi Girls’ high school. The operation of the Norway managed Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) made no difference as the LTTE removed Robert who led the party here in the absence of leader Varatharaja Perumal, the first and the only Chief Minister of the North-Eastern Province.
In terms of the CFA that had been signed by Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe and LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran, in Feb. 2002, the government agreed to disarm all paramilitary personnel. Many wouldn’t remember now that during Premadasa’s honeymoon with the LTTE, the Army facilitated the LTTE onslaught on paramilitary groups in selected areas.
Muthaliff’s role
During the ‘Balaya’ discussion, the contentious issue of who shot JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera came up. Nandana Gunatilleke, who contested the 1999 Dec. presidential election. as the JVP candidate, pointing to an article carried in the party organ that dealt with Wijeweera’s assassination said that he wrongly named Gaffoor as one of the persons who shot their leader whereas the actual shooter was Muthaliff. The headline named Thoradeniya and Gaffoor as the perpetrators.
Declaring that he personally wrote that article on the basis of information provided by Indrananda de Silva, Gunatilleke named Asoka Thoradeniya and Tuan Nizam Muthaliff of the Army as the perpetrators of the crime. Thoradeniya served as Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in the Maldives during the Yahapalana administration, while Muthaliff was killed by the LTTE in Colombo in late May 2005. The shooting took place at Polhengoda junction, Narahenpita. Muthaliff was on his way from Manning town, Narahenpita, to the Kotelawala Defence University.
The programme was told that the JVP had over the years developed close relationship with Thoradeniya while Indrananda de Silva accused Dr. Wasantha Bandara of duplicity regarding Muthaliff. How could you recognize Muthaliff, slain by the LTTE, as a war hero as he was actually one of the persons who shot Rohana Wijeweera, the latter asked.
At the time of his assassination, Muthaliff served as the Commanding Officer, 1 st Regiment Sri Lanka Military Intelligence Corps. The then parliamentarian Wimal Weerawansa was among those who paid last respects to Maj. Muthaliff.
At the time of Rohana Wijeweera’s arrest, Muthaliff served as Lieutenant while Thoradeniya was a Major. Indrananda de Silva strongly stressed that atrocities perpetrated by the police and military in the South or in the northern and eastern regions must be dealt with regardless of whom they were conducting operations against. The former JVPer recalled the Army massacre in the east in retaliation for the landmine blast that claimed the lives of Northern Commander Maj. Gen. Denzil Kobbekaduwa and a group of senior officers, including Brigadier Wijaya Wimalaratne, in early Aug. 1990 in Kayts.
Dr. Wasantha Bandara warned of the Western powers taking advantage of what he called false narrative to push for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
It would be pertinent to mention that the LTTE also used the underworld as well as some corrupt Army personnel in planning high profile assassinations. Investigations into the assassination of Muthaliff, as well as Maj. Gen. Parami Kulatunga, killed in a suicide attack at Pannipitiya, in June 2006, revealed the direct involvement of military personnel with the LTTE.
Indrananda de Silva disclosed that soon after Anura Kumara Dissanayake won the presidential election last September, the FSP, in writing, requested the JVP leader to inquire into killings during that period, including that of Rohana Wijeweera. The FSPer alleged that President Dissanayake refrained from even acknowledging their letter. Indrananda de Silva emphasized that Al Jazeera never disclosed anything new as regards Batalanda as he exposed the truth years ago. The former JVPer ridiculed the ruling party tabling the Batalanda Commission report in the wake of Wickremesinghe’s Al Jazeera interview whereas the matter was in the public domain for quite some time.
Indrananda de Silva and Nandana Gunatilleke exchanged words over the latter’s declaration that the JVP, too, was subjected to investigation for violence unleashed during the 1987-1990 period. While the FSPer repeatedly declared that those who carried out directives issued by the party were arrested and in some cases killed, Nandana Gunatilleke took up the position that the party should be held accountable for crimes perpetrated during that period.
The interviewer posed Nandana Gunatilleke the question whether he was betraying his former comrades after joining the UNP. Nandana Gunatilleke shot back that he joined the UNP in 2015 whereas the JVP joined UNP as far back as 2009 to promote retired Army Chef Sarath Fonseka’s presidential ambition even though he wiped out the JVP presence in Trincomalee region during the second insurgency.
JVP’s accountability
Nandana Gunatilleke is adamant that the party should accept responsibility for the killings carried out at that time. The former JVPer declared that Vijaya Kumaratunga (Feb. 16, 1988), first Vice Chancellor of the Colombo University (March 08, 1989) Dr. Stanley Wijesundera, Ven. Kotikawatte Saddhatissa thera (Aug. 03, 1988) and Chairperson of the State Pharmaceutical Corporation Gladys Jayewardene (Sept. 12, 1989) were among those assassinated by the JVP. SPC Chairperson was killed for importing medicine from India, the former Marxist aligned with the UNP said, while actor-turned-politician Kumaratunga’s assassination was attributed to his dealings with President J.R. Jayewardene.
According to Nandana Gunatilleke, except for a few killings such as General Secretaries of the UNP Harsha Abeywickrema (Dec 23, 1987) and Nandalal Fernando (May 20, 1988), the vast majority of others were ordinary people like grama sevakas killed on mere accusation of being informants. The deaths were ordered on the basis of hearsay, Nandana Gunatilleke said, much to the embarrassment of others who represented the interest of the JVP at that time.
One quite extraordinary moment during the ‘Balaya’ programme was when Nandana Gunatilleke revealed their (JVP’s) direct contact with the Indian High Commission at a time the JVP publicly took an extremely anti-Indian stance. In fact, the JVP propagated a strong anti-Indian line during the insurgency. Turning towards Dr. Wasantha Bandara, Gunatilleke disclosed that both of them had been part of the dialogue with the Indian High Commission.
It reminds me of the late Somawansa Amarasinghe’s first public address delivered at a JVP rally in late Nov. 2001 after returning home from 12 years of self-imposed exile. Of the top JVP leadership, Somawansa Amarasinghe, who had been married to a close relative of powerful UNP Minister Sirisena Cooray, was the only one to survive combined police/military/paramilitary operations.
Amarasinghe didn’t mince his words when he declared at a Kalutara rally that his life was saved by Indian Premier V.P. Singh. Soft spoken Amarasinghe profusely thanked India for saving his life. Unfortunately, those who discuss issues at hand conveniently forget crucial information in the public domain. Such lapses can be both deliberate and due to negligence.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Midweek Review
Independent Monitor

You may think sloth comes very easy,
To your kingly monitor of the shrinking marsh,
As he lies basking smugly in the morn sun,
But he is organized and alert all the while,
As he awaits his prey with patience infinite,
Free of malice, a professional of a kind,
His cumbrous body not slowing his sprite….
But note, he’s no conspirator spitting guile,
And doesn’t turn nasty unless crossed,
Nor by vengeful plans is he constantly dogged,
Unlike those animals of a more rational kind,
Whose ways have left behind a state so sorry.
By Lynn Ockersz
Midweek Review
Rajiva on Batalanda controversy, govt.’s failure in Geneva and other matters

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent interview with Mehdi Hasan on Al Jazeera’s ‘Head-to-Head’ series has caused controversy, both in and outside Parliament, over the role played by Wickremesinghe in the counter-insurgency campaign in the late’80s.
The National People’s Power (NPP) seeking to exploit the developing story to its advantage has ended up with egg on its face as the ruling party couldn’t disassociate from the violent past of the JVP. The debate on the damning Presidential Commission report on Batalanda, on April 10, will remind the country of the atrocities perpetrated not only by the UNP, but as well as by the JVP.
The Island sought the views of former outspoken parliamentarian and one-time head of the Government Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (SCOPP) Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha on a range of issues, with the focus on Batalanda and the failure on the part of the war-winning country to counter unsubstantiated war crimes accusations.
Q:
The former President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe’s interview with Al Jazeera exposed the pathetic failure on the part of Sri Lanka to address war crimes accusations and accountability issues. In the face of aggressive interviewer Mehdi Hasan on ‘Head-to-Head,’ Wickremesinghe struggled pathetically to counter unsubstantiated accusations. Six-time Premier Wickremesinghe who also served as President (July 2022-Sept. 2024) seemed incapable of defending the war-winning armed forces. However, the situation wouldn’t have deteriorated to such an extent if President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who gave resolute political leadership during that war, ensured a proper defence of our armed forces in its aftermath as well-choreographed LTTE supporters were well in place, with Western backing, to distort and tarnish that victory completely. As wartime Secretary General of the Government’s Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process (since June 2007 till the successful conclusion of the war) and Secretary to the Ministry of Disaster Management and Human Rights (since Jun 2008) what do you think of Wickremesinghe’s performance?
A:
It made him look very foolish, but this is not surprising since he has no proper answers for most of the questions put to him. Least surprising was his performance with regard to the forces, since for years he was part of the assault forces on the successful Army, and expecting him to defend them is like asking a fox to stand guard on chickens.
Q:
In spite of trying to overwhelm Wickremesinghe before a definitely pro-LTTE audience at London’s Conway Hall, Hasan further exposed the hatchet job he was doing by never referring to the fact that the UNP leader, in his capacity as the Yahapalana Premier, co-sponsored the treacherous Geneva Resolution in Oc., 2015, against one’s own victorious armed forces. Hasan, Wickremesinghe and three panelists, namely Frances Harrison, former BBC-Sri Lanka correspondent, Director of International Truth and Justice Project and author of ‘Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War,’ Dr. Madura Rasaratnam, Executive Director of PEARL (People for Equality and Relief in Lanka) and former UK and EU MP and Wickremesinghe’s presidential envoy, Niranjan Joseph de Silva Deva Aditya, never even once referred to India’s accountability during the programme recorded in late February but released in March. As a UPFA MP (2010-2015) in addition to have served as Peace Secretariat Chief and Secretary to the Disaster Management and Human Rights Ministry, could we discuss the issues at hand leaving India out?
A:
I would not call the interview a hatchet job since Hasan was basically concerned about Wickremesinghe’s woeful record with regard to human rights. In raising his despicable conduct under Jayewardene, Hasan clearly saw continuity, and Wickremesinghe laid himself open to this in that he nailed his colours to the Rajapaksa mast in order to become President, thus making it impossible for him to revert to his previous stance. Sadly, given how incompetent both Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa were about defending the forces, one cannot expect foreigners to distinguish between them.
Q:
You are one of the many UPFA MPs who backed Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo perpetrated the despicable act of backing the Geneva Resolution against our armed forces and they should be held responsible for that. Having thrown your weight behind the campaign to defeat Mahinda Rajapaksa’s bid to secure a third term, did you feel betrayed by the Geneva Resolution? And if so, what should have the Yahapalana administration done?
A:
By 2014, given the total failure of the Rajapaksas to deal firmly with critiques of our forces, resolutions against us had started and were getting stronger every year. Mahinda Rajapaksa laid us open by sacking Dayan Jayatilleke who had built up a large majority to support our victory against the Tigers, and appointed someone who intrigued with the Americans. He failed to fulfil his commitments with regard to reforms and reconciliation, and allowed for wholesale plundering, so that I have no regrets about working against him at the 2015 election. But I did not expect Wickremesinghe and his cohorts to plunder, too, and ignore the Sirisena manifesto, which is why I parted company with the Yahapalanaya administration, within a couple of months.
I had expected a Sirisena administration to pursue some of the policies associated with the SLFP, but he was a fool and his mentor Chandrika was concerned only with revenge on the Rajapaksas. You cannot talk about betrayal when there was no faith in the first place. But I also blame the Rajapaksas for messing up the August election by attacking Sirisena and driving him further into Ranil’s arms, so that he was a pawn in his hands.
Q:
Have you advised President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government how to counter unsubstantiated war crimes allegations propagated by various interested parties, particularly the UN, on the basis of the Panel of Experts (PoE) report released in March 2011? Did the government accept your suggestions/recommendations?
A:

Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha
I kept trying, but Mahinda was not interested at all, and had no idea about how to conduct international relations. Sadly, his Foreign Minister was hanging around behind Namal, and proved incapable of independent thought, in his anxiety to gain further promotion. And given that I was about the only person the international community, that was not prejudiced, took seriously – I refer to the ICRC and the Japanese with whom I continued to work, and, indeed, the Americans, until the Ambassador was bullied by her doctrinaire political affairs officer into active undermining of the Rajapaksas – there was much jealousy, so I was shut out from any influence.
But even the admirable effort, headed by Godfrey Gunatilleke, was not properly used. Mahinda Rajapaksa seemed to me more concerned with providing joy rides for people rather than serious counter measures, and representation in Geneva turned into a joke, with him even undermining Tamara Kunanayagam, who, when he supported her, scored a significant victory against the Americans, in September 2011. The Ambassador, who had been intriguing with her predecessor, then told her they would get us in March, and with a little help from their friends here, they succeeded.
Q:
As the writer pointed out in his comment on Wickremesinghe’s controversial Al Jazeera interview, the former Commander-in-Chief failed to mention critically important matters that could have countered Hasan’ s line of questioning meant to humiliate Sri Lanka?
A:
How could you have expected that, since his primary concern has always been himself, not the country, let alone the armed forces?
Q:
Do you agree that Western powers and an influential section of the international media cannot stomach Sri Lanka’s triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism?
A:
There was opposition to our victory from the start, but this was strengthened by the failure to move on reconciliation, creating the impression that the victory against the Tigers was seen by the government as a victory against Tamils. The failure of the Foreign Ministry to work with journalists was lamentable, and the few exceptions – for instance the admirable Vadivel Krishnamoorthy in Chennai or Sashikala Premawardhane in Canberra – received no support at all from the Ministry establishment.
Q:
A couple of months after the 2019 presidential election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa declared his intention to withdraw from the Geneva process. On behalf of Sri Lanka that announcement was made in Geneva by the then Foreign Minister Dinesh Gunawardena, who became the Premier during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as the President. That declaration was meant to hoodwink the Sinhala community and didn’t alter the Geneva process and even today the project is continuing. As a person who had been closely involved in the overall government response to terrorism and related matters, how do you view the measures taken during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s short presidency to counter Geneva?
A:
What measures? I am reminded of the idiocy of the responses to the Darusman report by Basil and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who went on ego trips and produced unreadable volumes trying to get credit for themselves as to issues of little interest to the world. They were planned in response to Darusman, but when I told Gotabaya that his effort was just a narrative of action, he said that responding to Darusman was not his intention. When I said that was necessary, he told me he had asked Chief-of-Staff Roshan Goonetilleke to do that, but Roshan said he had not been asked and had not been given any resources.
My own two short booklets which took the Darusman allegations to pieces were completely ignored by the Foreign Ministry.
Q:
Against the backdrop of the Geneva betrayal in 2015 that involved the late Minister Mangala Samaraweera, how do you view President Wickremesinghe’s response to the Geneva threat?
A: Wickremesinghe did not see Geneva as a threat at all. Who exactly is to blame for the hardening of the resolution, after our Ambassador’s efforts to moderate it, will require a straightforward narrative from the Ambassador, Ravinatha Ariyasinha, who felt badly let down by his superiors. Geneva should not be seen as a threat, since as we have seen follow through is minimal, but we should rather see it as an opportunity to put our own house in order.
Q:
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake recently questioned both the loyalty and professionalism of our armed forces credited with defeating Northern and Southern terrorism. There hadn’t been a previous occasion, a President or a Premier, under any circumstances, questioned the armed forces’ loyalty or professionalism. We cannot also forget the fact that President Dissanayake is the leader of the once proscribed JVP responsible for death and destruction during 1971 and 1987-1990 terror campaigns. Let us know of your opinion on President Dissanayake’s contentious comments on the armed forces?
A: I do not see them as contentious, I think what is seen as generalizations was critiques of elements in the forces. There have been problems, as we saw from the very different approach of Sarath Fonseka and Daya Ratnayake, with regard to civilian casualties, the latter having planned a campaign in the East which led to hardly any civilian deaths. But having monitored every day, while I headed the Peace Secretariat, all allegations, and obtained explanations of what happened from the forces, I could have proved that they were more disciplined than other forces in similar circumstances.
The violence of the JVP and the LTTE and other such groups was met with violence, but the forces observed some rules which I believe the police, much more ruthlessly politicized by Jayewardene, failed to do. The difference in behaviour between the squads led for instance by Gamini Hettiarachchi and Ronnie Goonesinghe makes this clear.
Q:
Mehdi Hasan also strenuously questioned Wickremesinghe on his role in the UNP’s counter-terror campaign during the 1987-1990 period. The British-American journalists of Indian origins attacked Wickremesinghe over the Batalanda Commission report that had dealt with extra-judicial operations carried out by police, acting on the political leadership given by Wickremesinghe. What is your position?
A:
Wickremesinghe’s use of thugs’ right through his political career is well known. I still recall my disappointment, having thought better of him, when a senior member of the UNP, who disapproved thoroughly of what Jayewardene had done to his party, told me that Wickremesinghe was not honest because he used thugs. In ‘My Fair Lady,’ the heroine talks about someone to whom gin was mother’s milk, and for Wickremesinghe violence is mother’s milk, as can be seen by the horrors he associated with.
The latest revelations about Deshabandu Tennakoon, whom he appointed IGP despite his record, makes clear his approval for extra-judicial operations.
Q:
Finally, will you explain how to counter war crimes accusations as well as allegations with regard to the counter-terror campaign in the’80s?
A:
I do not think it is possible to counter allegations about the counter-terror campaign of the eighties, since many of those allegations, starting with the Welikada Prison massacre, which Wickremesinghe’s father admitted to me the government had engendered, are quite accurate. And I should stress that the worst excesses, such as the torture and murder of Wijeyedasa Liyanaarachchi, happened under Jayewardene, since there is a tendency amongst the elite to blame Premadasa. He, to give him his due, was genuine about a ceasefire, which the JVP ignored, foolishly in my view though they may have had doubts about Ranjan Wijeratne’s bona fides.
With regard to war crimes accusations, I have shown how, in my ‘Hard Talk’ interview, which you failed to mention in describing Wickeremesinghe’s failure to respond coherently to Hasan. The speeches Dayan Jayatilleke and I made in Geneva make clear what needed and still needs to be done, but clear sighted arguments based on a moral perspective that is more focused than the meanderings, and the frequent hypocrisy, of critics will not now be easy for the country to furnish.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
-
Sports2 days ago
Sri Lanka’s eternal search for the elusive all-rounder
-
Features6 days ago
Celebrating 25 Years of Excellence: The Silver Jubilee of SLIIT – PART I
-
Business6 days ago
CEB calls for proposals to develop two 50MW wind farm facilities in Mullikulam
-
Business4 days ago
AIA Higher Education Scholarships Programme celebrating 30-year journey
-
News3 days ago
Gnanasara Thera urged to reveal masterminds behind Easter Sunday terror attacks
-
Features6 days ago
Notes from AKD’s Textbook
-
News2 days ago
ComBank crowned Global Finance Best SME Bank in Sri Lanka for 3rd successive year
-
Features2 days ago
Sanctions by The Unpunished