Connect with us

Features

HYPOTHESIS: IS SRI LANKA A VICTIM OF AN INTERNATIONAL PLOT?

Published

on

by PROF. TISSA VITARANA

It is well known that the real rulers of the world are a few multi-billionaires, super-rich hegemonists, who control the economy of the USA, and use their financial power to decide who becomes the President of that country and forms its Government. So long as the USA remains the world’s number one economy it could control the global economy. The US dollar (USD) is still the currency of global trade. The USA can have enormous debts (an estimated USD 3 trillion to China), but this can be met by printing more USD.

This situation is threatened with extinction as China becomes the world’s number one economy and the Yuan possibly the currency of global trade. This will herald the end of the US control of the global economy and its exploitation by giant multinational corporations (MNC’s). The downfall of the US economy is being accelerated by the global crisis of capitalism, made worse by the Covid 19 pandemic.

The USA is doing everything possible to retain its glorious position. It has plotted and planned, and unfortunately Sri Lanka too is an essential part of this plan. The USA is doing everything possible to prevent the further expansion of trade led by East Asian countries like China, Vietnam and South Korea. Much of the expansion of East Asian economies led by China has been a result of the benefit of American investment and technology transfer to this region through outsourcing by American industrialists to East Asia, including China, so as to maximize their profits. The US Government is now countering this by raising the duty on imports from China. These moves have led to a trade war between the USA and China. The outcome is uncertain. In the event that the US efforts fail it may resort to the extreme level of a military war.

Both within the UN system and in international law there is recognition of the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean as two separate entities. The USA, Australia and Japan belong to the Pacific Rim countries. India and Sri Lanka belong to the Indian Ocean rim countries. According to international law and UN conventions countries are entitled to have military bases on their own rim. During the time of the Sirimavo led SLFP/LSPP/CP coalition Government a resolution was moved by Sri Lanka in the UN general assembly that the Indian Ocean region should be a zone of peace, and this was passed with a big majority.

As a result USA lost its military base in Diego-Garcia and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled that this be handed back to the country it belonged to, Mauritius. The USA was directed to pull out by the ICJ in the course of this year. The USA has clearly decided to make Sri Lanka its Indian Ocean military base. To enable it to do this the USA has persistently joined the two oceans and used the term Indo-Pacific Ocean. This enables the USA and its allies like Australia and Japan which are in the Pacific Ocean rim to become a part of the Indo-Pacific Ocean rim, to enable them to make Sri Lanka a US military base. Already the USA has brought in India to an alliance call the Quad made up of the USA, Australia, Japan and India. Sri Lanka too can be brought into this alliance in due course.

The 2015 Yahapalanaya (UNP) Government signed the ACSA agreement (Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement) with the USA which permitted joint military action. But fortunately it was defeated before it could sign the MCC (Millenium Challenge Corporation) and SOFA (Status of Forces) agreements. The Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) is grateful to the SLPP led alliance Government for not signing these agreements. The MCC agreement would facilitate the complete exploitation of the Sri Lankan economy by the US MNC’s and Sri Lanka would have become a banana republic. The SOFA agreement would have made the whole of Sri Lanka a US military base. The LSSP as a partner in the present SLPP led Government was overjoyed.

But it would appear that our joy is short lived. The Yugadanavi incident, where our assets are being sold to a US company surreptitiously, and the passing of the 20th amendment to the Constitution, which has enabled a dual American citizen to become the Finance Minister of our country, together with the crude manner in which these have been done is suggestive of a deep desire of the USA and its local allies to go ahead with the MCC and SOFA agreements through the present Government.

It is well known in political circles that during the period of the Yahapalana Government there were advisers and researchers in the political, economic and military feilds working at Temple Trees, besides a CIA officer. During the short period of SLPP led Government coming into office in October 2018 for a period of three months, Ranil Wickremesinghe though no longer the Prime Minister (having been replaced by Mahinda Rajapakse), refused to leave Temple Trees residence/office because of the presence of these American think tanks. These continued to be active until the General Election of August 2020 when Mahinda Rajapakse was installed as Prime Minister.

During their period in Temple Trees neoliberal policies were fully implemented by the Yahapalanaya Government. The national economy that had been established by the Centre-Left Government was progressively dismantled and regulated by market forces, both here and globally. This led to a flood of foreign goods specially from USA and Europe, replacing our products. Local producers had to close down or dismiss staff. The national economy targeting self-sufficiency broke down. The result was an adverse foreign trade balance leading to a steep drop in our foreign reserve.

Foreign debt soared and foreign borrowing went up. Foreign reserves which averaged around USD eight billion dropped to USD 1.5 billion. Our assets were sold at low prices to American and other foreign buyers to cover our debts. These neoliberal policies originated and were implemented by the Yahapalanaya Government in the interest of the USA and its allies at the expense of the people of our country. Fortunately President Maithripala Sirisena dismissed Ranil Wickremesinghe and replaced him by Mahinda Rajapakse as PM.

These events were designed to force the Yahapalanaya Government into economic and social difficulties so that they would sign the MCC and SOFA agreements. The defeat of the Yahapalanaya Government saved Sri Lanka and its people.

The SLPP-led present Government should ensure that those disastrous American neoliberal policies, which were strongly rejected by the people, are completely eliminated. The traditional humanitarian and collective policies which were the main features of Sri Lankan culture must fully replace these neoliberal policies, doing away with the priority given to individuals getting rich at the expense of the poor. The common good and the needs of all the people should be given priority. The LSSP strongly recommends some of the lessons to be taken from the experience of the Centre-Left coalition Government with Sirimavo Bandaranaike as PM and Dr.N.M.Perera as Finance Minister during the massive crisis of 1972/73 (when oil prices increased seven times and food prices by over 10 times). Dr.N.M.perera decided to place the burden on the rich rather than on the poor.

He restored the national economy, promoting local production, both agricultural and industrial, and cut down imports strictly. He increased the tax on the super-rich to 70%, while it is still kept at 14% during the present crises. The burden is now falling on the poor and 60% of families are struggling to live below the poverty line. Some people have only one meal a day. The malnutrition rate has gone up to 18%, so that a fifth of the population will grow up as thin, stunted and mentally impoverished people. This augurs badly for the future of the Sri Lankan nation.

The cooperative movement was strengthened, both producer and consumer dealt directly with each other, so that the profiteering of the middleman was prevented. Today prices of all items, specially essentials, are soaring and the people are starving as a result. It is the prime duty of the Government to ensure that every citizen of the country, whatever his race, religion or caste may be, is adequately fed and supplied with the essentials at a reasonable price. For instance the provision of a weekly dry ration free to all who are underfed should be given priority. A national development programme should be adjusted to enable this to be done.

All loss making institutions should be run on the “Solidarity Principle”, making the employees the owners, so that they get a share of the profit in addition to their salaries. This has worked in several countries in Europe and the third world, such as Argentina and India. For instance in India TATA’s owned 63,000 hectares of tea land but claimed they were running at a loss and couldn’t pay their taxes. The Left Government of the State applied the solidarity principle and now the productivity has increased and the plantations are making big profits.

Sri Lanka and its people do not need the loans being offered by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) while being forced to agree to observe their neoliberal conditions. These ultimately serve the interest of the American and foreign rich, but not the interest of the poor people in our country. Following the example of the LSSP leader and Finance Minister Dr.N.M.Perera, suitably adjusted to Sri Lanka’s present conditions, is the way forward.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Justice and democracy in Sri Lanka’s new political era

Published

on

The legal processes are steadily closing in on some of the most controversial cases that have remained as open questions without closure for many years. These include the Easter Sunday bombings of 2019, the Treasury bond scam that erupted in 2015, and a range of corruption allegations that became synonymous with successive governments over the past two or more decades. What once appeared to be stalled investigations are now showing signs of movement through the courts and investigative agencies. Recent developments suggest that these long running cases are entering a decisive phase. In the Easter Sunday attacks investigation, new arrests and investigations have brought renewed attention to allegations that extend beyond the immediate perpetrators and into questions of intelligence failures and possible political complicity. The arrest and detention of former intelligence chief Suresh Sallay under the Prevention of Terrorism Act has intensified public interest in uncovering the full truth behind the attacks.

The Treasury bond scam has also re-entered the spotlight. The Supreme Court has recently overturned legal obstacles that had prevented prosecutions from proceeding and directed that the case moves forward expeditiously. This has reopened one of the most sophisticated financial scandals in the country’s recent history and brought several prominent political and financial figures back under legal scrutiny. As those implicated in these unresolved cases are leading figures from previous governments, which have spanned both sides of the political divide since Independence, it can well be imagined that there is tremendous opposition to the gradually enveloping legal processes that is both seen and unseen.

These cases that are now being investigated cut across political camps and involve individuals who occupied some of the highest offices in the country. The result is that resistance to accountability is likely to emerge from many quarters. Still to be opened are the thousands of cases of persons gone missing during the war. Presidential Commissions have been appointed with regard to them, but there has been no serious investigations of the type now taking place.

In these circumstances, it can be surmised that the government led by those who are new to power would wish to retain a maximum of power to face the pushback that is bound to emerge from those in the opposition who have wielded power for generations. The government may calculate that this is not the time to disperse authority or reduce the instruments of state power available to it. Instead, it may believe that a period of centralised control is necessary if investigations, prosecutions and reforms are to proceed without interference.

Provincial Elections

It appears that the opposition’s efforts to mobilise the people and public opinion against the government have not been successful so far. One such instance was the attempt to generate opposition to price increases. Although people have undoubtedly been affected by rising prices and economic difficulties, these efforts failed to gather significant momentum. Another attempt came when President Dissanayake predicted that opposition politicians would face imprisonment in the month of May as legal cases progressed, though this has not happened. Critics claimed that such remarks suggested an intention to influence judicial outcomes. Yet this criticism also failed to gain traction among the public. The likely reason is that public memory remains fresh. Many people continue to associate previous governments with economic mismanagement, corruption scandals, abuse of power and the eventual economic collapse. In comparison, the present government continues to enjoy a reservoir of public goodwill and credibility. As long as legal action appears to be based on evidence and proper process, the public seems prepared to give the government the benefit of the doubt.

The government’s deliberate and cautious approach to political reform that would reduce its centralised power needs to be seen in this context. The monthly approval by Parliament of the emergency regulations is justified by the government as due to the continuing need to respond to the devastation caused by Cyclone Ditwah. However, when viewed together with the reluctance to hold provincial council elections on the grounds of electoral reform, the failure to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act and the postponement of constitutional reform, they all appear to reflect a preference for retaining maximum control at a politically sensitive moment. There is a logic to this approach. Governments facing major legal and political confrontations often seek stability and control. So does every despot. However, there is also a downside.

When political competition is denied to legitimate outlets, it often finds expression in confrontation, obstruction and polarisation. The advantage of prioritising the conduct of provincial council elections at this time is that it could reduce the political pressures that are building up. The main opposition parties are united in calling for these elections to be held. Conducting them would provide an opportunity for opposition political parties to obtain a measure of democratic representation and political authority at the provincial level. This would be especially true in the northern and eastern provinces, in which the ethnic and religious minorities predominate. It cannot be forgotten that the provincial council system was developed as a constructive response to the ethnic conflict. Elections at the provincial level would create opportunities for a new generation of political leaders to emerge through democratic competition rather than patronage. Many of those now facing legal scrutiny belong to an older generation to whose needs the younger may be less deferential.

Two Pillars

Another reform that could command bipartisan support is the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. The PTA has once again become controversial because it is being used in situations that extend beyond its original purpose. The detention of former intelligence chief Suresh Sallay under the Act, the continued incarceration of some Tamil detainees from the war period, and the arrest of individuals accused of speech related offences have all revived concerns regarding prolonged detention without trial and excessive executive power. The reason the PTA has been difficult to repeal is that it is closely associated with concerns regarding national security and territorial integrity. Introduced in 1979 as a temporary measure to confront the emerging separatist conflict, it survived through decades of war and has remained on the statute books long after the conflict ended.

At the same time, history shows that extraordinary powers are likely to be misused. Laws that permit detention without trial or broad executive discretion are rarely confined to their original purpose. Governments of different political parties have used such powers against opponents and critics. The temptation to do so is inherent in the possession of unchecked authority. The way forward could therefore be a combination of accountability and reform. The government should continue to support independent investigations and prosecutions in major corruption and security related cases. Demonstrating political will in this regard would strengthen public confidence in the rule of law and reinforce the principle that no individual is above the law. The PTA could be replaced with legislation that amends the Criminal Procedure Code and Penal Code in a manner that addresses legitimate security concerns while complying with democratic norms and human rights standards.

There are also international dimensions to consider. The European Union has repeatedly linked governance and human rights reforms, including reform of the PTA, to Sri Lanka’s continuing access to the GSP Plus trade concession. Progress on these issues would strengthen Sri Lanka’s international standing at a time when economic recovery remains a national priority. The government has a rare opportunity. It possesses a strong electoral mandate, public goodwill and a reputation for integrity that previous governments lacked. It can combine the pursuit of justice in long delayed cases with meaningful democratic reforms that reduce political resistance and broaden public support. At this time, accountability and power sharing are the two pillars which Sri Lankans need to be committed to build a just and democratic society for a better future without delay. Failure now would make for a long period of waiting for the next time.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Pitfalls and exclusions in academic recruitment

Published

on

Academic recruitment

A public university relies on its teachers in fulfilling its responsibilities to the wider community. While teaching remains the chief responsibility of the academic staff, they also conduct research and play a central role in keeping the university a vibrant space where they and students can freely participate in conversations that concern not just routine classroom education but also society at large. The broader intellectual culture and intellectual integrity of a university thus depend on how its academics perform their functions. Therefore, universities should take the task of recruiting their academics seriously. It is important to ensure that this task is done responsibly, transparently and credibly through a fair, thorough and multi-phased evaluation process.

As both an applicant and a member of selection panels for recruitment, I hold that the recruitment procedures, currently in place in our university system, require radical reforms. Echoing some of the concerns raised by Kaushalya Perera in her Kuppi article on recruitment in March 2026, I focus on the limitations I have observed and experienced, specifically in the recruitment of Lecturer (Probationary) and Senior Lecturer positions. The article also aims to explore how these shortcomings could be addressed.

The Advertisement

Recruitment for Lecturer (Probationary) and Senior Lecturer positions is done through an open-advertisement which also involves an interview with shortlisted candidates. Advertisements are finalised in line with a template issued by the Registrar’s Office. Generally, an initial draft, prepared by the Registrar’s Office, is sent to the relevant academic departments for revisions. The revisions have to be made within the template provided, which allows space for the mention of only specialisation requirements.

It should be noted that not all revisions to the advertisement, suggested by the Department Head, are accepted in the next round. Deans, Vice Chancellors and Registrars, who have very little understanding of the disciplines associated with the position, sometimes reject the changes proposed by the Department. Technocratic in their thinking, they don’t recognise that an academic programme can be taught by persons with specialisation in another overlapping discipline. For instance, a position in English, at a university in Sri Lanka, is very well suited to not just those who have postgraduate qualifications in literary studies but also those who are from the disciplines of Applied Linguistics, Cultural Studies or Translation Studies, as these areas are taught as sub-fields of English studies at most universities in the country. These disciplinary overlaps, even when pointed out by Heads, are often overlooked by our administrators.

In place of this process, dominated by academic administrators and registrars, the advertisement should ideally emerge, from the relevant department, in the form of a comprehensive job description. It should mention the nature of the position advertised, the kind of teaching (and research) expected, how the position relates to other positions in the department, in terms of specialisation and workload, and the ways in which the recruited candidate would contribute to overall institutional development.

There can be no one-size-fits-all model when it comes to recruitment. Individual departments vary in size, strength and specialisation requirements. Departments with sizable academic staff may want to emphasise specialisation during recruitment, whereas smaller departments may prefer generalists who can handle a wide-array of courses. Specifying the rationale for the requirements included in the job description may help potential applicants get an understanding of the position advertised and the selection panel to conduct the evaluation process in a fair manner.

Review of Applications

Once applications are received, we sometimes find promising candidates but with qualifications that don’t carry in their title the name of the discipline or the department in which the position is advertised. Sometimes the disciplines or fields of specialisation that appear in the advertisement and the ones that appear in the qualifications are not identical in nomenclature, even though the research undertaken by the applicant during their graduate studies is strongly relevant to the position advertised. Even when such applications are accompanied by strong and relevant publications, our system does not view them positively. Instead, nomenclatural differences are used to reject promising candidates. Such differences are also used as a pretext when universities want to exclude a candidate for their cultural background, political beliefs or other reasons. Even if academic departments recognise such applications, at the next stage, the administrators of the university try to veto them. We lose inter-disciplinary scholars of high academic standing because of the high-handedness of university administrators.

Selection Panels

Selection panels for academic positions typically comprise the Vice Chancellor, the Dean of the Faculty, the Head of the Department, two academics nominated by the Senate and two members of the University Council. In the case of programmes/disciplines jointly housed under a single department, if the Head comes from a discipline other than the one in which the position is advertised, they may not be able to contribute in an informed manner to the recruitment process. However, some Heads refuse to appoint nominees from the relevant discipline in their place as they view sitting on selection panels as their exclusive privilege.

Sometimes university Senates do not take the appointment of Senate nominees seriously. These appointments are decided in a hurry without serious deliberations at senate meetings packed with numerous agenda items. Sometimes even if the relevant department has suitable academics to serve as Senate nominees, the Senate chooses academics from other departments or disciplines who do not have a nuanced understanding of the requirements of the position advertised and its disciplinary parameters. Sometimes specialists in the relevant discipline may not be available at a university. On such occasions, Senates tend to fill up the positions with academics from other disciplines, instead of inviting external nominees from other universities. At a state university in Sri Lanka, I was interviewed thrice for academic positions by selection panels that comprised not even one specialist from the relevant discipline.

The Marking Scheme

The marking schemes used in recruitment have their own drawbacks. Publications are sometimes evaluated for their quantity rather than quality. The opinion of the subject specialist is not sought or taken seriously when a candidate’s research is evaluated. This is why our universities are saddled with academics who engage in plagiarism or predatory publishing. The evaluation process should be tightened in such a way to bar the entry of those who lack academic integrity.

It is worrying to see that marking schemes and schemes of recruitment penalise applicants who have excelled in their graduate studies and are well-reputed for their recent research and publications just because they did not earn a first-class or second-class upper-division pass at the undergraduate level. Our narrow focus on a candidate’s first degree prevents us from giving due recognition to how that person has gained intellectual depth over the years. Some marking rubrics, which allocate points for eye-contact and posture during the interview, dilute the seriousness associated with the academic position, de-prioritise scholarship and turn the interview process into a stage performance.

Cultural Credibility

In recruitment, many universities look for cultural credibility (a term that I borrow from the work of Sulaxana Hippisley) as an unwritten requirement. Some departments are reluctant to hire applicants who are not their alumni. Some selection panels discriminate against candidates from certain ethnic or religious backgrounds. In some departments, women are rejected because they are likely to go on maternity leave or have more domestic responsibilities than men. Gender and sexual minorities have to mute and censor their identities at interviews because they are likely to face rejection if they openly declare their orientation. We have no policies and procedures in place to ensure recruitment is conducted in an inclusive way that sees diversity as a strength.

The Way-forward

When recruitment fails, the entire intellectual culture of that university takes a hit, and several generations of students are affected. Some of the current problems, related to quality in our higher education system, stem from bad recruitment policies and practices. Instead of trying to address these issues through rigorous and inclusive recruitment practices, we try to seek solutions via band-aids like quality assurance and workshops on curriculum writing and pedagogy for university academics.

In developing alternative recruitment policies and practices, we have to demand that the needs and expectations of individual departments are heard. Our selection panels should include more subject specialists than administrators and council nominees. Most of the evaluation should be completed before the interviews, and interviews should be treated as opportunities to get to know candidates in person and pose clarifying questions rather than as occasions for full-scale evaluation. We have to be open and receptive to new, inter-disciplinary scholarship and cultural, ethnic and gender diversity. If we are unwilling to introspect and bring about these reforms and revise our marking schemes, we will continue to recruit the wrong candidates and thereby fail our students and the wider community.

Mahendran Thiruvarangan is a Senior Lecturer attached to the Department of Linguistics & English at the University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.)

by Mahendran Thiruvarangan

Continue Reading

Features

Rocking scene … in Japan

Published

on

Chitral ‘Chity’ Somapala, now based in Sweden, has been active in the music scene for many years, and is known for his hard rock work with European bands like Firewind, Power Quest, and Avalon.

In Sri Lanka, he’s a household name and that’s the reason why he checks out the local scene, on a regular basis, keeping rock music lovers in the groove.

His shows are invariably ‘full house’’ events.

Sri Lanka’s rock star is now ready to do the needful … in Japan, and rock fans in that part of the world are already gearing themselves up for a rock explosion, with Chitral in the spotlight.

The show is scheduled for 03rd October, 2026, at the Hattori Ryokuchi Park, in Osaka, with Wayo.

The blast off is from 1.00 pm onwards.

However, before he checks out the Osaka scene, Chitral has another important date in his itinerary – a spectacular Sri Lankan musical extravaganza at the Sydney Opera House, in Australia.

The concert is titled Rhythms of Sri Lanka and will be held on 23rd August, 2026.

Back in Colombo soon to oblige local rock fans

Although Chitral Somapala is, indeed, a big name, as a rock artiste, he also revives the music of his parents, as well, often performing their music, along with his own songs, at live programmes.

In fact, the album ‘Dambulugale’, released in 2018, which is a tribute to his parents, famous Sri Lankan musicians P. L. A. Somapala and Chitra Somapala, turned out to be a massive hit, not only in Sri Lanka, but with Sri Lankans the world over.

The album, a compilation of various cover songs, previously written and performed by his parents, was dedicated to Chitral’s parents, and released on the 70th anniversary of Sri Lanka’s independence.

He also dropped ‘Chitral Somapala Live In Concert’, in 2023, with 22 tracks, and has several other releases to his credit.

Besides his rocking career, Chitral was asked by veteran film directors Chandran Rutnam, Asoka Handagama, Priyantha Colombage, Udayakantha and Shameera Naotunna to contribute his talent for their soundtracks, and he won a Presidential award and an International award for the movie ‘Let Her Cry’ by Asoka Handagama.

Chitral will be back in Colombo soon with another rocker for his fans, so watch out for Rock Meets Reggae.

Continue Reading

Trending