Midweek Review

How Premadasa paved the way for first Parama Weera Vibushanaya, posthumously

Published

4 years ago

2021/07/21

The Army unveiled a special war hero memorial opposite the new TV transmission tower at Kokavil after the conclusion of the war. It was put up in honour of those who made the supreme sacrifice at Kokavil in June 1990

By Shamindra Ferdinando

One-time Army Commander Gen. Daya Ratnayake (2013-2015) recently joined a special event on Zoom in honour of those who made the supreme sacrifice at Kokavil, 31 years ago. Prof. Raj Somadeva and writer Charith Kiriella delivered special lectures on the occasion. Those who defended the isolated Kokavil base – Officer Commanding, Kokavil transmission complex, Saliya Aladeniya, an old Trinitian who was posthumously promoted Captain of 3 Battalion, Sri Lanka Sinha Regiment (3 SLSR), and his men, perished in the battle. The LTTE didn’t hand over their bodies.

Aladeniya, the first recipient of the country’s highest gallantry award, Parama Weera Vibushanaya, sacrificed his young life, serving on underprepared and poorly equipped Army. Opportunistic politics of the day made matters worse.

Against the backdrop of renewed interest in Kokavil, in the wake of the recent commemorative event, and Derana ‘Big Focus’ featuring Gen. Ratnayaka , the writer felt the need to examine the then security-political environment. Let me stress that the June-July 1990 Kokavil battle was nothing but a debacle that caused a humiliating setback. Kokavil remained in the hands of the LTTE till 2009.

A comment on the recent print media reportage of Kokavil heroism by academic Michael Roberts, too, underscored the pivotal importance of a better understanding of the then situation. Author Roberts didn’t mince his words when pointing out the inadequacies in the coverage, though he appreciated the effort.

What went wrong at Kokavil? Why did the Army abandon the isolated detachment? Who created an environment conducive for the LTTE? And how the Kokavil debacle/tragedy transformed the entire Vanni landscape overnight to the LTTE advantage?

Having won the Dec 19, 1988 presidential election, UNP strongman Ranasinghe Premadasa (RP polled 2,569,199/50.43%. Sirimavo Bandaranaike polled 2,289,860/44.95%) then led the party to victory at Feb 15, 1989 parliamentary election. The UNP secured 125 seats whereas the main Opposition SLFP managed 67. It would be pertinent to mention that the UNP earlier, by way of a fraudulent referendum, conducted on Dec 22, 1982, extended the life of Parliament by six years. It was the only referendum held in Sri Lanka so far. The referendum resulted in the UNP continuing till 1989, after having won the 1977 general election, with a 4/5 landslide.

As requested by President Premadasa, rather bluntly, India brought its high profile military mission, in the North and East, to an end, in March 1990. India deployed troops, in July 1987, in terms of the Indo-Lanka Accord, forced on President JRJ. The writer was among a small group of journalists taken to Trincomalee harbour to see the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) quit Sri Lanka, following a 32-month deployment here (The IPKF is off – The Island, March 25, 1990). At the time India completed the withdrawal, the LTTE had been engaged in negotiations with a gullible Premadasa for over a year. The LTTE exploited direct negotiations with President Premadasa, the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. By the time the IPKF ended its mission here, the LTTE was ready to resume hostilities. However, the LTTE delayed the resumption of hostilities, till the second week of June, 1990.

The then Army Commander Lt. Gen. Hamilton Wanasinghe hadn’t been prepared to fight the battle hardened LTTE. Having inflicted heavy losses on the IPKF, and gained valuable battlefield experience, the LTTE was ready to strike the Army. Having literally crushed the second JVP insurrection, by early 1990 by wiping out its entire leadership, barring Somawansa Amerasinghe, who managed to escape to India in the nick of time, before security forces could get at him, the Army, too, was cocky and probably didn’t anticipate a large scale LTTE offensive, in less than three months, after the IPKF pullout, because of the ostensible honeymoon with President Premadasa, who even gifted it arms and other wherewithal.

The Kokavil debacle should be quite rightly examined against the backdrop of Premadasa’s folly. Then State Defence Minister Ranjan Wijeratne, Army Chief Gen. Wanasinghe, the then advisor to the President, Gen. (retd.) Cyril Ranatunga, and IGP Ernest Perera, couldn’t absolve themselves of the catastrophe caused by political-military miscalculations. All of them were made to look like utter fools. Premadasa made some ludicrous attempts to persuade the LTTE to return to the negotiating table. The President’s utter failure to comprehend the LTTE strategy is still a mystery. The top brass remained silent. Obviously, no one had the courage to advice the President, whose Chief Negotiator Minister A.C.S. Hameed’s desperate last minute attempt to keep the talks with the LTTE going led to him nearly paying with his life. Premadasa’s idiocy was such that he had no qualms in sacrificing the lives of several hundred police officers and men who were ordered to surrender to terrorists in an attempt to mollify the LTTE.

LTTE seizes A9 north of Vavuniya

The attack on the Kokavil detachment took place in the wake of the massacre of police officers. Gen. Wanasinghe’s Army lacked the wherewithal to meet the threat. The Army could have made an attempt to neutralise the impending LTTE threat by reinforcing isolated detachments along the Kandy-Jaffna A9 road, north of Vavuniya. Unfortunately, the Army lacked the wherewithal to meet the LTTE threat in the Eastern theatre, Vanni and the Jaffna peninsula, simultaneously. Even if the Army had realised the rapidly growing danger, on multiple fronts, the top brass feared to warn Premadasa. Actually, Premadasa never believed in consensus on security matters. Premadasa simply threw caution to the winds.

The Army was under pressure in the northern theatre, with the Jaffna Fort under attack. Kokavil was almost forgotten as it came under intensified attack, following the massacre of nearly 600 policemen in the East. In the North, the Army found it difficult even to evacuate the wounded. The Jaffna Fort, too, was under siege.

Maj. Gen. Denzil Kobbekaduwa was placed in charge of the Northern region on July 11, 1991, exactly a month after the eruption of hostilities. Army Chief Wanasinghe never explained why Kobbekaduwa hadn’t been brought into the scene until it was too late. Did Gen. Wanasinghe fail to convince Premadasa of the urgent need to change the Northern Command? By the time Kobbekaduwa received command, the situation had deteriorated to such an extent, his appearance didn’t make any difference. Just two days after, Kobbekaduwa received the Northern Command, the LTTE overran Kokavil held by two platoons. It was the first major setback on the A9. The Kokavil debacle highlighted the absence of a strategy either to reinforce isolated detachments or evacuate them. The SLAF lacked required strike capability. The SLAF struggled to cope up with increasingly heavy commitment with just the Italian built Sia Marchettis (propeller driven light ground attack aircraft hardly sufficient even for counter-insurgency operations). Volunteers deployed at isolated Kokavil detachment never had a chance against strong LTTE units. Sinha volunteers turned down an earlier directive to abandon the base, leaving behind seriously wounded men. The LTTE executed those captured during the battle for Kokavil. Two men who crawled through the LTTE cordon managed to reach Mankulam detachment situated north of Kokavil.

Let me stress that those killed defending detachments along the A9 North of Vavuniya, had to be buried there as the Army lacked the wherewithal to take back the dead and the wounded overland. Isolated detachments could be supplied by air and within a month after resumption of hostilities, following the 14-month Premadasa-Prabhakaran honeymoon, the A9 aka Main Supply Route (MSR) north up to strategic Elephant Pass, was lost. The SLAF carried out risky missions to supply isolated bases and evacuate the wounded.

Four years after the combined security forces brought the war to a successful end, the then Brigadier Maithri Dias, recounted how the Army planned to evacuate Kilinochchi, even before the resumption of hostilities. Having vacated both Valvettithurai and Point Pedro detachments on the LTTE’s request, the President wouldn’t have minded the Army giving up more camps. The planned evacuation of the Kilinochchi detachment obviously is a case in point. What was really shocking was the Army seeking the assistance of a Catholic priest, based in Kilinochchi, to evacuate the personnel along with arms, ammunition and equipment.

Who wanted Kilinochchi evacuated?

The then Capt. Maithri Dias, of the 6th Battalion of the Sinha Regiment (6SR), arrived in Kilinochchi several days before the LTTE resumed hostilities, on June 11, 1990, with the massacre of hundreds of policemen in the Eastern Province. Dias was responding to a directive from Lt. Colonel H. R. Stephen, the then Coordinating Officer, based in Kilinochchi (Lt. Col. Stephen was killed on the morning of Aug.8, 1992, at Araly point, Kayts. He was one of the officers killed along with war veterans, Maj. Gen. Denzil Kobbekaduwa, Brig. Wijaya Wimalaratne. The dead included Rear Admiral Mohan Jayamaha, Lt Colonel G.H. Ariyarathne, Lt Colonel Y.N. Palipana, Commander Asanga Lankathilaka, Lt Colonel Nalin de Alwis, Lt Commander C.B. Wijepura and Private W J Wickremasinghe). Only one survived the blast.

Dias, the then General Officer Commanding 54 Division, got in touch with the writer immediately having read ‘Eelam War II: LTTE takes upper hand at the onset – The Island Feb 22, 2013).

Brigadier Dias recounted the situation in Kilinochchi, leading to the Army headquarters directive to vacate the town in the last week of July 1990. Dias said: “I was tasked to function as a staff officer in Kilinochchi under Lt. Colonel Stephen. The deployment therein comprised one platoon of 6 SR, another platoon of 3 SR (Volunteer) as well as support personnel (3 SR volunteers were based at Kokavil, south of Mankulam) There were altogether about 90 personnel at Kilinochchi. As the then government was having talks with the LTTE, we never expected any serious trouble. Along the A9 road, north of Vavuniya, we had several camps. North of Kilinochchi, troops were positioned at Elephant Pass, Jaffna Fort and Palaly. South of Kilinochchi, troops held Mankulam and Kokavil. Immediately after arriving in Kilinochchi, I was told by Lt. Col. Stephen to prepare to evacuate the troops. On the instructions of the Coordinating Officer, I met a Catholic priest in Kilinochchi to discuss transport arrangements for my men. Lt. Col. Stephen was away in Palaly. He was to go on leave following a conference in Palaly. Following the conference I received further instructions from Lt. Col. Stephen regarding the planned withdrawal. I was told to prepare a plan for an immediate withdrawal. As earlier discussed, I went out to meet the Catholic priest, who promised to help us move men and material from Kilinochchi to Elephant Pass. The sudden disappearance of the priest made me uneasy. The following day (June 11, 1990), the LTTE started attacking the police and the Army in the Eastern Province.”

Dias retired in 2016 after serving as the General Officer Commanding (GoC) of 53 Division after having been promoted to the rank of Maj. Gen in 2014.

It was evident that the then government had decided to abandon Kilinochchi, even before the outbreak of hostilities in the second week of June 1990. At that time Maj. Gen. Jaliya Nanmunai had served as Security Forces Commander, Jaffna.

Saving Kilinochchi troops

In spite of the much deteriorated situation at Kokavil, troops at Mankulam couldn’t intervene. The entire Army had been under tremendous pressure as the LTTE advanced on bases in the Vanni theatre. Brig. Dias recalled the crises the Army faced: “We heard heavy gunfire from the direction of Kokavil, where troops were fighting a desperate battle. The Kokavil debacle had a devastating impact on the Army. A section of troops based, at Kilinochchi, declared their intention to vacate the camp, regardless of the consequences. Having calmed them, I took measures to further strengthen the defences until a large force could intervene to facilitate our withdrawal, northwards. Pushing towards Kokavil seemed unrealistic and suicidal.”

However, those deployed at Kilinochchi had been extremely lucky as the Jaffna Command managed to muster sufficient troops to reach the beleaguered base in the last week of July. The 6th Battalion of the Gajaba Regiment (6 GR) and the 5th Battalion of the Gemunu Watch (5 GW) advanced from Elephant Pass to Kilinochchi to save those trapped at the Kilinochchi camp.

During the rescue mission, troops at Kilinochchi had almost lost communications with those coming to their rescue. Brig. Dias said: “We ran out of fuel needed to maintain communications. Luckily, the two Land Cruisers, which we removed from the Kilinochchi police station at the onset of trouble, had fuel in their tanks and it was adequate to meet our immediate requirement.”

Interestingly, Brig. Dias is the first GOC of the re-established 54 Division. Army headquarters restored the Division on Sept 10, 2010. The LTTE literally wiped out the 54 Division headquartered at Elephant Pass in late April 2000. Heavy losses suffered by the Division compelled Army headquarters to disband the formation. It was the worst battlefield defeat experienced by the Army during the entire conflict.

In September, 1990, the Army vacated isolated bases at Jaffna Fort and Mandaitivu. In the third week of Nov, the LTTE overran the Mankulam detachment on the A9. Premadasa’s security advisor, retired Gen. Cyril Ranatunga remained mum. Ranatunga played it safe. Just within four weeks after the eruption of Eelam War II, on June 11, 1990, the Army lost Kokavil and Kilinochchi. Mankulam was abandoned in the third week of Nov, 1990, thereby giving the LTTE unhindered access across Kandy-Jaffna A9, between Vavuniya and Elephant Pass.

The Army abandoned Mankulam under heavy fire just weeks after carrying out a heli-borne mission to consolidate the base. In the absence of an overall contingency plan, the Army responded to LTTE operations over a wide area.

Premadasa lacked even basic interest in security matters thereby allowing unpardonable deterioration of the security situation. Perhaps, the threat the President faced within the UNP, with a powerful section more or less discarded by him, working with the SLFP to impeach him, unsettled Premadasa. Premadasa remained immobilised in the wake of the LTTE directive in late Oct/Nov 1990 for the Northern Province Muslims to vacate the region. The government actually did nothing to avert the unprecedented crisis. The courageous efforts made by troops, under Captain Aladeniya’s command, underscored the Army’s failure. Even though the Army discussed the possibility of mounting a heli-borne mission to break the siege on Kokavil detachment in June it never materialised. Troops called in to carry out that mission were eventually deployed for the rescue of those who had been trapped at Mankulam. But, the Army subsequently withdrew a section of the troops, including commandos sent to Mankulam. Overnight, Mankulam became vulnerable and eventually the LTTE overran it in Nov 1990. Within eight months after the IPKF withdrawal, Premadasa lost the entire Vanni region with troops confined to few coastal areas. In the Jaffna peninsula, the Army had been confined to Palaly, Kankesanthurai and Elephant Pass where troops received supplies from air and sea. The Navy struggled to move supplies required by the Army to the North from the eastern port city of Trincomalee whereas the SLAF, too, operated flights to Palaly under difficult circumstances. However, in the absence of missile threat, during the Eelam War II, facilitated supply missions to the North. But, overall supplying troops based in the Jaffna peninsula had been a tremendous challenge faced by the military.

Strategic Elephant Pass base was almost overrun in mid-1991. If not for the successful sea borne assault by troops of Operation Balavegaya led by Gen Denzil Kobekaduwa and Brig. Wimalaratne, Elephant Pass too would have been overrun.

Premadasa caused an unprecedented catastrophe by pursuing an utterly foolish political agenda at the expense of national security. His failure as well as that of Gen. Wanasinghe to prepare for any eventuality following the IPKF withdrawal allowed the LTTE to take the upper hand in the Vanni region. By the time the LTTE assassinated Premadasa on May Day 1993, the LTTE achieved superiority in the North with all bases under pressure and the situation was rapidly deteriorating. The LTTE gradually pressed the Army in the North with Palaly under siege at the time of 1994 parliamentary elections followed by presidential polls in Nov 1994.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Impact of US policy shift on Sri Lanka

Published

2 days ago

2025/02/19

Sahan Weerasooriya

Early honeymoon period after mission accomplished with toppling of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Julie Chung shares a light moment with Ranil Wickremesinghe during a three-day visit to Nuwara Eliya and Ella in early July 2023. Ella Odyssey was part of Sri Lanka’s commemoration of 75 years of independence. Colombo-based foreign heads of missions and nine heads of mission, based in New Delhi, joined the journey (pic courtesy PMD)

President Trump has unceremoniously overturned US foreign policy. His decision to deport illegal Indian migrants just ahead of a summit with Premier Narendra Modi, underscored the tough stance taken by the new US admiration. The much-touted US-India strategic partnership didn’t deter Trump from carrying out the much-publicized humiliating deportations of Indians. US Vice President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference, recently, indicated that Trump has terminated his special relationship with Europe and is charting his own course. The upcoming Trump and Russian leader Putin’s meeting stressed that the US policy wouldn’t be shaped by European concerns over Russia. Against that background, the US is very much unlikely to pursue the Biden policy as regards bankrupt Sri Lanka. Actually, Sri Lanka’s political leadership will have to do some serious thinking and re-examining our position as Trump redraws US foreign policy.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Since the successful conclusion of the war in mid-May 2009, despite all the naysayers, and even the likes of the then British Foreign Secretary David Milliband and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, rushing here at the eleventh hour with the hope of getting President Mahinda Rajapaksa to halt the offensive to enable them to evacuate the LTTE supremo, his family and their surviving fanatical terrorist band to safety abroad, the US appointed five Ambassadors to Colombo. Of them four were women, namely Patricia A. Butenis, Michele J. Sison, Alaina B. Teplitz and incumbent Julie J. Chung. Between the tenures of Sison and Teplitz, the only male Atul Keshap, of Indian origin, served here for a period of four years (Aug. 2015-July 2018) during the Yahapalana administration.

Ambassador Chung oversaw President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s forced ouster in 2022. In spite of her denial, Amb. Chung’s role in President Rajapaksa’s removal is clear and cannot be disputed. Amb. Chung will soon be replaced by Elizabeth Kathryn Horst, currently the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and Deputy Assistant Secretary responsible for Pakistan, yet another country in which Washington is mired in regime change operations in the region.

Amb. Chung presented her credentials on Feb. 25, 2022, to President Rajapaksa, at the Janadhipathi Mandiraya. The President was flanked by State Foreign Minister Tharaka Balasuriya and Presidential Secretary Gamini Senarath. The new US envoy took office close on the heels of a major crisis within the government that compelled the President to ask for his Secretary Dr. P.B. Jayasundera’s resignation. Just five weeks after Amb. Chung took over the mission, the ‘GotaGoHome’ campaign got underway and a President, elected with over 6.9 mn votes on the SLPP ticket, was thrown out of office within four and half months by violent mobs armed with meticulous intelligence as to which politicians’ houses were to be ransacked and torched, along with those of their close supporters in a matter of a few hours, especially on May 09, 2022. Exactly two months later they completed their despicable mission by storming the Presidential palace.

The SLPP, both in and outside Parliament, accused Amb. Chung of staging the ouster of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Award-winning author Sena Thoradeniya (Galle Face Protest: System Change or Anarchy) and (Nine: The Hidden Story) by National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa, MP, dealt with Amb. Chung’s sordid involvement.

However, the writer believes that the whole exercise should be examined as another arrogant US intrusion rather than Amb. Chung’s private agenda. Her job was to do the bidding of Washington. Let me stress that the US made a serious but an abortive attempt to bring President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s reign to an end in 2010. Thanks to Wikileaks we know how the US used a UNP-led coalition, that included the wartime LTTE ally the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), and the JVP, to back retired General Sarath Fonseka at the presidential election. That gamble failed. The war-winning Army Chief ended up with egg on his face with an unforgettable thrashing from the overwhelming southern electorate.

Eyebrows were raised when the outgoing American envoy recently expressed her desire to meet Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) leaders at the Nelum Mawatha party office as she never bothered to do so since her arrival in early 2022.

Contrary to speculation, the outgoing US Ambassador had sought a meeting about two weeks ago before the unprecedented public exposure about the USAID’s (United States Agency for International Agency) sinister operations here and worldwide in the wake of the new US administration deciding to curtail drastically its operations for being a white elephant as America itself is being confronted with a fast developing and yet to be fully fathomed economic crisis, which might even exceed the worldwide Great Depression that came with the 1929 stock market crash. On her arrival at Nelum Mawatha last Friday (14) Amb. Chung was received by SLPP General Secretary and Attorney-at-Law Prasad Kariyawasam. The SLPP delegation was led by its National Organizer Namal Rajapaksa and one of the three lawmakers in the current Parliament. Having accused her of being in the thick of the regime change, the SLPP’s readiness to meet Amb. Chung, too, is a mystery.

It would be pertinent to briefly explain the USAID’s global objectives as the vast majority wrongly believed the agency is meant for humanitarian work. It is definitely not a charity. Its main objective is to strengthen capabilities of US agents, or assets, at local and regional levels regardless of the status of Washington’s relationship with the targeted country.

These agents, or assets, are available for the US at any time as Washington desired. Pentagon, the State Department or even the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) used its resources under whatever circumstances. If we closely examine the pattern of USAID operations, as well as other related organizations that had been active here over a period of time, even our legislature is within the sphere of their influence. In other words, they obviously have direct access to politicians and officials who wield power over key institutions. The private sector, too, became part of the US operation carefully expanded countrywide.

By the time Amb. Chung arrived here. US assets were in place at different levels ready to carry out directives. Those who pointed a finger at Amb. Chung never bothered to examine the background and comprehend the gradual build-up that allowed the gathering of all elements, under the social media fuelled ‘GotaGohome’ campaign.

The US mission here had done a tremendous amount of work, especially beginning with the Amb, Keshap’s time, to enhance the capacities of their existing assets and identify and develop new assets.

What really prompted Amb. Chung to suddenly seek a meeting with the SLPP? Did National List MP Namal Rajapaksa’s call for the setting up of a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) to probe USAID funding, influence her decision? But that cannot be as the US Embassy made the request before the USAID controversy. Perhaps, SLPP General Secretary Kariyawasam expressed concern over Amb. Chung’s frequent visits to the JVP headquarters at Pelawatte, whereas she ignored the SLPP.

Appearing on a live television programme, Kariyawasam pointed out that Amb. Chung had plenty of time for the JVP, a party with just three MPs, while the SLPP, in spite of being represented by 145 MPs, never received the US envoy’s attention.

Perhaps Amb. Chung didn’t really feel the requirement to visit Nelum Mawatha as she maintained a close contact with the SLPP founder Basil Rajapaksa.

Ambiguity over objectives

It would be pertinent to ask both the sponsors and recipients whether various foreign-funded projects achieved their objectives.

The following are some of the USAID-funded projects launched, beginning 2017: [1] USD 19 mn social cohesion and reconciliation project implemented by Global Communities (July 2018-Dec, 2023) [2] Analysis of social cohesion and reconciliation implemented by US Institute of Peace at a cost of USD 700,000 (Aug. 2018-Feb. 2024) [3] USD 15 mn project implemented by Chemonics International Inc. to strengthen the justice sector, including the Justice Ministry and Office of Attorney General (Sept. 2021-Sept. 2026) [4] USD 17 mn project carried out by National Democratic Institute, International Republican Institute and International Foundation for Electoral System in support of Parliament and other government institutions, including the Election Commission (June 2020 – June 2024) [5] USD 14 mn worth project in support of civil society meant to achieve good governance reforms and strengthen accountability. Implemented by Management Systems International (Feb. 2018-Aug. 2024) [6] USD 7.9 mn scheme to strengthen media implemented by International Research and Exchanges Board Inc. (Aug. 2017-April 2023) [7] SAFE Foundation implemented a programme at a cost of USD 3.9 mn aimed at combating human trafficking (Oct. 2021-Sept. 2026) [8] USD 1.6 mn project to enhance protection for those threatened by gender-based violence (Oct. 2021-Sept. 2026). Implementing agency Women-in-Need [9] USD 3.6 mn project for the benefit of plantation community implemented by Institute of Social Development (June 2022-June 2027) and [10] a staggering USD 19 mn project meant to strengthen the civil society by unnamed private agencies (Sept. 2022-August 2027).

Interestingly, high profile USAID operations implemented in collaboration with successive governemnts covered the Justice sector (Justice Ministry and Office of Attorney General), Parliament as well as the Election Commission.

Over the years USAID with a massive budget that even exceeded the CIA’s and allied organizations have built up a system that served the interests of the US. That is the truth. Sri Lanka has cooperated not only with the US but other organizations, such as the UNDP, to allow them influence in Parliament. The USAID and UNDP have ‘secured’ Parliament by lavishly spending funds on various projects. In spite of spending millions in USD with the 2016 agreement between Parliament and USAID being the single largest project, what they have achieved here is nothing but a mystery.

Successive governments have encouraged USAID, UNDP and other interventions. They felt happy as external sources provided the funding. Let me give an example of how the UNDP stepped-in for want of sufficient public funding for vital government initiatives. Sometimes, they advanced their political project in the guise of helping the government of the day.

On May 13, 2021, the then Attorney General Dappula de Livera, PC, opened the USAID funded state-of-the-training facility that included a boardroom, auditorium, computer laboratory, and other facilities. The outspoken AG also launched an electronic system to track cases and legal files. The launch of the training facility, electronic diary and file management system, and the Attorney General’s Department website were also attended by Supreme Court Judge Justice Yasantha Kodagoda P.C., Acting Solicitor General Sanjay Rajaratnam P.C., the Secretary of the Ministry of Justice M.M.P.K. Mayadunne, and virtually by DCM Kelly and USAID Mission Director Reed Aeschliman.

The US Embassy, in a statement issued on that quoted AG Livera as having said: “This is another first in the 136-year history of the Attorney General’s Department. The opening of the training centre is a notable, salutary achievement that meets a long-felt need for continuous learning and professional development.” The AG was further quoted as having said these new tools would “drive the institution from strength to strength.”

If such facilities were so important why on earth the Attorney General’s Department failed to take tangible measures to meet that particular requirement.

Those who demand investigations into USAID must realize that their role is much more complicated than alleged and reported in some sections of the media. Among the beneficiaries were the Sri Lanka Judges’ Institute.

American Corner in Jaffna

The US Embassy established an American Corner in Jaffna with the collaboration of Jaffna Social Action Centre (JSAC), an NGO that particularly promoted women and children rights. Formed in 2003 in the North as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was preparing to launch Eelam War IV, JSAC, over the years, developed into a recipient of US funding. JSAC is among the groups promoting LGBTQ in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. JSAC annually participates in the much-touted 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Based Violence campaign. The then US Ambassador Butenis attended the opening of the American Corner. JSAC, in its website, has revealed an impressive list of partners and donors.

Perhaps JSAC should explain how it served the interests of ordinary people, especially during the 2003-2009 period when the LTTE stepped up forcible recruitment of children, including girls. Forced conscription continued unabated as the military slowly but steadily rolled back the LTTE fighting formations, towards the east coast, until they were trapped in a sliver of land in the Mullaitivu district.

Sri Lanka should be grateful for US assistance over the past decades. The ordinary people benefited from such help but later Washington weaponized the setup as various interested parties queued up to secure lucrative contracts.

Amb, Chung, in late Sept. 2022, moved the American Centre in Colombo, that had been in existence for over seven decades, to the new US Embassy building. This was a couple of months after Aragalaya (March – July 2022) forced Gotabaya Rajapaksa out of office. The American Centre in Colombo had been first located at the Millers Building in Colombo, then at Galle Face Court, followed by Flower Road, before moving to the Sri Ramya at 44, Galle Road.

The American Corner in Kandy was established in 2004. In addition to Jaffna, Colombo and Kandy, there are similar facilities in Matara and Batticaloa.

The recent declaration by Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey, in the Indian Parliament, that the USAID had been funding organisations with a view to creating unrest cannot be ignored. The BJP’s declaration underscored the gravity of the situation. Those who discarded repeated accusations by National Freedom Front (NFF) leader Wimal Weerawansa as regards US interventions here must take a fresh look at the developments taking place since Donald Trump’s return for a second term.

Dubey alleged the USAID funded organizations that carried out protests against the Agniveer initiative of the government, backed caste census, and supported Naxalism in India.

On behalf of the BJP, Dubey asked for a probe into whether Congress and the Gandhi family-controlled Rajiv Gandhi Foundation had received USAID funds through George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) for conducting activities, including the campaign for a caste census and against the Agniveer scheme introduced by the government. The MP claimed OSF received ₹5,000 crores from USAID to “break up India”. He raised the issue during zero hour.

The BJP MP’s accusations seemed somewhat surprising as India, under Narendra Modi’s leadership, established close relations with Washington and is a member of the four-country Quad, comprising the US, Australia, Japan and India meant to counter Chinese expansion.

Why subvert India? Is the question in everybody’s mind? President Trump, during a joint press conference with Premier Modi, speculated about the possibility of USAID role in the Lok Sabha elections last year. Perhaps Trump is playing politics even at the expense of the US as he sought to dismantle USAID.

The Trump administration has imposed a global stop-work directive on USAID, suspending most aid initiatives, except for critical food relief programmes.

However, India, too, had been blamed for interfering in internal affairs of other countries. Recently Canada alleged that India intervened in its electoral process. Canada named China as the other offender. India has strongly refuted the Canadian allegation. It would be pertinent to mention that Canada had been playing politics with Sri Lanka for many years as major political parties sought to exploit the post-war developments for their advantage. New Delhi also accuses Canada of encouraging Khalistan separatists operating from there.

Canadian Parliament, in May 2022, unanimously declared that Sri Lanka perpetrated genocide in a bid to appease Canadian voters of Sri Lanka origin.

The expansion of the USAID project here should be examined against the backdrop of Geneva adopting a US accountability resolution, co-sponsored by the treacherous Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government in 2015. The US backed Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election. That was in line with their overall strategy to end the Rajapaksas rule, perceived to be China-friendly. The US funded the 2015 UNP-led campaign that involved the TNA and JVP as well. A group of civil society groups, led by the National Movement for Social Justice (NMSJ), backed Sirisena’s candidature, who switched sides at the last moment having been in the Rajapaksas camp throughout his political career and it was done after having a hopper feed with them the previous night.

Having betrayed his own party in 2014, Sirisena has ended up politically irrelevant. That is the price the one-time SLFP General Secretary had to pay for switching sides for personal gain. The former President is most unlikely to get an opportunity to re-enter Parliament ever again.

The NPP will have to be cautious how it handles the situation against the backdrop of developing political and economic upheaval in Washington as we may have never seen hitherto. The way the new administration addressed much more complicated issues, such as the Russia-Ukraine war in a manner seriously inimical to the European powers and pullout from the Geneva-based UNHRC and WHO meant that Trump has already turned US foreign policy upside down.

Midweek Review

Revisiting Humanism in Education:

Published

2 days ago

2025/02/19

Sahan Weerasooriya

Tagore

Insights from Tagore – III

by Panduka Karunanayake

Professor in the Department of Clinical Medicineand former Director, Staff Development Centre,

University of Colombo

The 34th J.E. Jayasuriya Memorial Lecture

14 February 2025

SLFI Auditorium, Colombo

(Continued from18 Feb.)

Tagore had an important answer to the question of whether the economic or the political should enjoy the primacy of place, in designing educational policy. He said: “Economic life covers the whole base of society, because its necessities are simplest and the most universal. Educational institutions, in order to obtain the fullness of truth, must have close association with this economic life.”

Sometimes I have difficulty understanding why Tagore, in spite of his appreciation of science and disdain for superstition, still lavishly exalted his traditional dieties and the scriptures. I think he did so because he saw a remarkable practical utility in them for the organisation of society and because they carried innumerable lessons for human conduct – for which science and technology, or even modern administration, had not yet furnished any suitable alternative.

Besides, it is clear that he admired religion’s potential to bring peoples together. In The Religion of Man, he wrote: “On the surface of our being we have the ever-changing phases of the individual self, but in the depth there dwells the Eternal Spirit of human unity beyond our direct knowledge.” But of course, religion seldom brought humanity together. And whenever it played the divisive role, he did not blindly follow its precepts.

The stickiest issue in India for the modern philosopher is probably its caste system, and Tagore had no qualms about repudiating it:

“…differentiation and separation of vocations and trades, professions and callings on which the caste system originally rested has become totally extinct and it is altogether impossible to maintain it any longer. Yet all the taboos, external restrictions and customs associated with the varna system are still in place, static and intact. It seems we must put up with the cage with all its iron bars and fetters though the bird for which it was made is dead and gone. We provide bird feed every day but no bird feeds on it. In this way, due to the cleavage between our social life and social customs, we are not only being inhibited and obstructed by unnecessary, outmoded arrangements, we cannot live up to our professed social ideals, either.”

Prof. Carlo Fonseka / Dr. Abrahm T. Kovoor

I wish that for our country, we could replace the phrase ‘caste system’ with our own ‘outmoded arrangements’ – such as astrology, superstitious rituals and harmful so-called healing practices – and carefully re-read that quote. Sadly, our populace is filled with superstition, myth and pseudoscience – as a cursory glance at the supplements of any weekend Sinhala newspaper would show. Here, the high literacy rate actually works against the nation! Our public intellectuals must also take the blame, because they have failed to sustain the good work that had been done in the 1970s by intellectuals like Dr E.W. Adikaram, Abraham Kovoor and Professor Carlo Fonseka.

Another interesting point in his ideas is his desire to see education as a tool for everyone, not just the educated few. Reminding us on ancient Indian education and learning, he said:

“There was a regular traffic between specialised knowledge and ordinary knowledge. Scholars, pundits or learned society did not have an antithetical relationship with the less learned segments of society…There was hardly a place in the country where the Ramayana, the Mahabharata, the Puranic myths and religious discourse did not spread in a variety of ways. Even the theoretical philosophical issues which were rigorously, relentlessly discussed and debated in philosophy and metaphysics always filtered down to the mind of the people…In those days learning was the asset of the entire society and not the acquisition of the learned few.”

In our own country, in contrast, I wonder whether expanded access to education has had a similar effect. In spite of decades of education in swabhasha and wide access to education, knowledge is a tool of separation, seclusion and self-aggrandisement for the few who win the lottery. Is this the fault of the education or the educated? Perhaps both. The educated use their learning as a weapon rather than as a tool to serve, a manifestation of the fierce competitiveness and the fixed mindset that pervades the successful products of our education. At the same time, as Tagore pointed out, it is the fault of education too:

“The rains of our education are falling a long distance away from where the roots of our whole life lie…Our ordinary daily life has no use for the education we acquire…It is unjust to blame this on students. Their world of books and the world in which they live everyday are poles apart…That is why it is seen that the same person who has formidable erudition in European philosophy, science and ethics tenaciously clings to the age old superstitions…We are no more amazed when we see that on the one hand he is separately enjoying literature full of varied sentiments while on the other he is busy only with making money…”

These are a few fundamentals that can be gleaned from Tagore’s second phase. They aren’t many, and perhaps they aren’t as earth-shattering as one might expect. But I feel that they are exactly what we are lacking today and prevent education from playing a nation-building role. If we can get these right, we actually need to get very little else right.

Phase 3: ‘Freedom from bondage’

Tagore’s role and position as an unrepentant internationalist at the time when India was demanding swaraj is well known. He was opposed to nationalism, and in fact correctly identified colonialism itself as a manifestation of the nationalism of the British – so he asked, if one were anti-colonialist, how could one be nationalist also?

But his internationalism was not a rootless existence floating aimlessly in the air. He was clear that one must be rooted in one’s own soil, strongly and firmly – it is from here that one must reach out to the wealth of the world. In another beautiful simile, he urged us not to fear the wind, and to open the windows of our house to let that wind in. He would assure us that we would be able to retain the good that the wind blew in and get rid of the bad. He also said that as long as our house had a firm foundation, the wind will not blow it away. So for him, the first step of being an internationalist is studying one’s own soil and placing a firm foundation for one’s existence. He admired and studied tradition without being a traditionalist.

With regard to Indian universities of his day, he lamented the fact that these were European grafts and nothing like India’s ancient intellectual heritage, such as Nalanda, Wikramshila or Takshasila. He lamented the type of intellectual this would produce. He wrote in 1932:

“We receive European learning as something static and immutable and consider it the height of modernity to cull and recite sentences from it. For this reason we lack the courage to reconsider it or think about it from a new angle. Our universities have nothing to do with and are cut off from the acute questions, dire necessities and extreme hardship facing the people of the country…Like parasites our mind, attached to text books, has lost its ability to find its food and invent by itself.”

These words seem no less relevant to our own universities, 90 years after they were written.

Tagore’s belief in internationalism and its effect on his philosophy of education is captured by his description of Visva-Bharati, the higher education institute he set up in 1921 using the Nobel Prize money: “Visva-Bharati represents India where she has her wealth of mind which is for all. Visva-Bharati acknowledges India’s obligation to offer to others the hospitality of her best culture and India’s right to accept from others their best.”

Conclusion

Prof. J. E. Jayasuriya / Dr. E. W. Adhikaram

Ladies and Gentlemen: I am afraid time would not permit me to cover the whole breadth of Rabindranath Tagore’s complete educational philosophy, and I wouldn’t even pretend to cover it in depth. For example, I didn’t touch on other important aspects that Tagore spoke of, such as school administration, advice for teachers, maintaining discipline without corporeal punishment, carrying out research and promoting creativity, women and education and so on. Forgive me for only scratching the surface. But the topic of Tagore’s educational philosophy is so vast that nothing wider would be possible in a short time.

You will also note that my talk was not filled with anecdotes of incidents and peculiarities at Santiniketan – like how classes were conducted under trees or how the gurudev once conducted a class in the rain for cattle when the students didn’t want to come out and get wet. These are not the timeless substance of the tale; they are only its time-sensitive ornaments.

If, on the other hand, I have been able to whet your appetite for his educational philosophy, and also convinced you that he had patiently worked on and presciently invented an antidote to today’s problems of education, I would be content for now. Balance was his antidote. My goal this evening was to place the seeds of his ideas in your minds, and hope that they will grow, be nourished and be pruned and manicured into a contextually appropriate shape in the months or years to come.

Selected bibliography

Dasgupta, U. (2013). Rabindranath Tagore: A Biography. Oxford University Press. (Translated by hiisß ckl l=udr- mßj¾;l (2024).rúkaøkd;a ;df.da¾-udkj ksoyi iy úúO;ajh kqf.af.dv iriú m%ldYlfhdaව)

Dore, R. (1976). The Diploma Disease: Education, Qualification and Development. London: George Allen & Unwin (republished in 1977 by Institute of Education, University of London).

Gunasekara, P. (2013). moaud .=Kfialr – kkaofiak .%duSh wOHdmk l%uh^1932-1939) lkakka.r;=udf.a wu;l l< fkdyels w;ayod ne,Sula fld<U iQßh m%ldYlfhda: කන්නunasekara, S.P. (2012). iuka mqIamd .=Kfialrම(2012). rúkaøkd;a ;df.da¾ fld<U tia f.dvf.aසහiyifydaorfhda(Basedon Rabindranath Tagore: The Myriad Minded Man (1995) by Krishna Dutta and Andrew Robinson, and other works.)

Illich, I. (1970). Deschooling Society. USA: Harper & Row (republished in 1973 by Penguin Education, Harmondsworth, England).

Iyengar, K.R.S. (1987). Rabindranath Tagore: A Critical Introduction. London: Oriental University Press.

Kripalani, K. (1961). Tagore: A Life. New Delhi: National Book Trust, India (author publication, republished in 1971 by National Book Trust, India).

Maithra, S., translator (2014). Education as Freedom: Tagore’s Paradigm. New Delhi: Niyogi Books.

Navaratnam, R. (1958). New Frontiers in East-West Philosophies of Education. Calcutta: Orient Longmans.

Neogy, A.K. (2010). Santiniketan and Sriniketan: The Twin Dreams of Rabindranath Tagore. New Delhi: National Book Trust, India.

Samuel Ravi, S. (2024). Philosophical and Sociological Bases of Education (2nd edn). Delhi: PHI Learning. (Chapter 13: ‘Rabindranath Tagore’, pp. 163-179.)

Sarathchandra, E.R. de S. (1942). ‘Through Santiniketan eyes’. Kesari People’s Weekly (Jaffna) serialised from 2(9) to 2(17) and compiled by Goonetileke, H.A.I., also available translated to Sinhala ^iqpß; .ï,;a-mßj¾;l ප(2001). ශYdka;s ksfla;kfha weiska fld<U tia f.dvf.a iy ifydaorfhda).

Venn, G. (1965). Man, education and work. In, Cosin, B.R., editor: Education: Structure and Society. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. (Chapter 6, pp. 97-107.)

Venn, G. (1971). Preparation for further preparation (editorial). Educational Leadership 1: 339-341.