Features

In Sri Lanka’s own interests

Published

5 years ago

2021/01/15

by Neville Ladduwahetty

India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. S. Jaishankar during his recently concluded visit to Sri Lanka is reported to have stated at a Joint Press Conference that ‘It was in Sri Lanka’s own interest that expectations of the Tamil people for equality, justice, peace and dignity within a united Sri Lanka should be fulfilled and Delhi insists on the importance of the 13^th Amendment in fulfilling those expectations’ (The Island, January 7, 2021).

Assuming the accuracy of the reported statement, its content has significant implications on the State and Nation of Sri Lanka. For instance, why are expectations for “equality, justice, peace and dignity” limited only to the Tamil people? If that is the case, by implication it must mean that all other citizens of Sri Lanka other than the Tamil community do not have similar expectations because they already enjoy equality, justice, peace and dignity in Sri Lanka. This is a factually skewed assessment on the part of Dr. Jaishankar, because he must surely know that citizens in all countries throughout the world, including Sri Lanka, regardless of which community they belong to, and/or whether they are majorities or minorities, experience inequality, injustice and lack of peace and dignity in one form or another and that India is no exception. Therefore, what is so exceptional about the Tamil community?

By insisting on the importance of the 13^th Amendment in fulfilling expectations of the Sri Lankan Tamil community, Dr. Jaishankar has underscored the link between the 13^th Amendment and the expectations. However, since the 13^th Amendments impacts only on the smaller portion of the Tamil community living in the Northern and Eastern provinces, the fulfilment of expectations would be limited only to them. What about the expectations of the larger portion of the Tamil community living outside the Northern and Eastern provinces along with the rest of the communities in Sri Lanka? For India to be concerned only with this smaller proportion of the Tamil community and not with the decidedly larger portion of the Sri Lankan citizenry has the potential to endanger India’s interests in Sri Lanka from a geostrategic perspective.

Furthermore, when Dr. Jaishankar states that it is in Sri Lanka’s own interest to ensure that the expectations for equality, justice, peace and dignity within a “UNITED Sri Lanka”, he as India’s Minister for Foreign Affairs has added a new amendment to the 13^th Amendment that impacts on the hallowed unitary structure of the Sri Lankan State. When the 13^th Amendment was introduced in 1987, Sri Lanka was unitary and remains so today. To state that the precondition for the fulfilment of expectations of the Tamil people requires the structure of the Sri Lankan State to be changed from being unitary to one that is “united” amounts to naked interference in the internal affairs of the Sri Lankan State in violation of the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement in which India was a founding member. If this is how India’s policy of “neighborhood first” manifests, the neighborhood, and in particular Sri Lanka, should be more circumspect in its dealings with India than it had been in the past.

THE “NEIGHBOURHOOD FIRST” POLICY

When Dr. Jaishankar says that it is Sri Lanka’s own interest to fulfill the expectations of the Tamil community, he, as the foremost spokesperson for India, is washing India’s hands off of any responsibility for orchestrating a forced intervention and imposing a system of governance under the 13^th Amendment, that is totally unsuitable for Sri Lanka. The net effect of the legacy left behind is a frustrated Sri Lankan nation, struggling to make the best of an inappropriate system of governance.

Is Sri Lanka in a position to introduce a system of governance that serves all communities better? According to comments made by former president Sirisena, the answer is NO. During the course of a recent interview, he stated: “The 13^th Amendment is a product of the Indo-Lanka Accord of 1987. The Provincial Council Act is a product of the 13^th Amendment. So I know that it is not so easy to abolish provincial councils…. Abolishing provincial councils is like playing with fire” (The Island, January 2, 2021).

This is the trap Sri Lanka finds itself in. This trap and the manner in which it was set by India, did not deter India from engaging in acts that violated the very principles it subscribed to and expected others to live by, despite being an influential founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement with the principles:

Mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty
Mutual non-aggression
Mutual non-interference in domestic affairs
Equality and mutual benefit
Peaceful co-existence.

Today India is not encumbered by inconvenient principles. India is now a key member of the QUAD with the U.S., Japan and Australia. Until the recent visit all leaders of India including Prime Minister Modi who visited Sri Lanka advised Sri Lanka to implement the 13^th Amendment. For the first time, what is being “insisted” upon is not only the implementation of the 13^th Amendment, but also that it should be within a “UNITED” Sri Lanka.

These expressions reflect the new India backed up by the new relationships of the QUAD. Blinded by the backing of the new relationship, India would not want to be seen by its partners in the QUAD as being weak by admitting that its experiment in Sri Lanka has failed. Therefore, they are bound to keep on pressuring Sri Lanka with proposals how to make devolution more meaningful. In such a background attempting to transform current arrangements would be met with such resistance that it may amount to “playing with fire”.

Continued attempts to make provincial councils under the 13^th Amendment work is not in keeping with India’s policy of “Neighbourhood First” because the 13^th Amendment is strictly meant to fulfill the expectations of only the Tamil community in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. It does not constitute the neighbourhood of India. Since it is in India’s own geostrategic interests to cultivate the neighbourhood, India has to cater to the interests of the larger segment of the Sri Lankan nation which for all intents and purposes constitutes the real neighbourhood as recognized by other sovereign States.

What India is yet to realize and admit is that the 13^th Amendment has not served the people of any community whether they be Tamil, Sinhala, Muslim or any other, because of the fundamental unsuitability of the structural arrangement imposed on Sri Lanka by India. This fact was confirmed by former President Sirisena in the interview referred to above. He stated: “the 30-year experience of running provincial councils has not yielded desired results in terms of developing all parts of the country”. According to him: “From a development perspective, I think a set up at the district level like a District Development board would work better than provincial councils given the fact that we are a small country”.

Realistic pragmatism requires that India rethinks its priorities because its current emphasis does not amount to its stated policy of “neighbourhood first”. Instead, the current policy as far as the 13^th Amendment in Sri Lanka is concerned amounts to “India First”, in the neighbourhood.

DENIAL of RIGHTS to DEVELOPMENT

There is a consensus in Sri Lanka that the provincial council system is an unsuitable mechanism to address the needs of the people. Despite this realization successive Sri Lankan governments have failed to present a formal statement to the leadership of India that because of the unsuitability of the existing provincial council system, Sri Lanka needs to develop an alternative. If India is opposed to an alternative that suits Sri Lanka, India should be informed that Sri Lanka would be engaging in an exercise to find an alternative, because what is at stake is the denial of a right to human development of millions in Sri Lanka brought about by India’s intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign State that introduced a system of governance that does not serve the interests of people in Sri Lanka.

Having so stated, Sri Lanka should set up a mechanism to develop an alternative to provincial councils with a mandate to develop a proposal to ensure the delivery of goods and services to all communities in the periphery independent of all parochial political and other considerations. Such an alternative should be based on inputs from the people in the periphery, and definitely not on inputs from the political leaders of all hues as has been in the past. Furthermore, such a proposal should have the flexibility to function whether the arrangement at the center is Parliamentary, or Presidential.

Hoping that the framers of the new constitution would give the needed attention to develop an alternative to the existing provincial council system together with other weighty and controversial issues, is not only to complicate the daunting task of constitution making but also to rob the attention the alternative should deserve. Therefore, since the exercise of developing a system to ensure that those at the periphery are served requires the engagement of persons with skills and experience of a sort that is different to those conversant with constitutions and how governments function, the task of developing an alternative to provincial councils should be carried out independently.

India must surely be aware that the provincial council system introduced under the 13^th Amendment has failed to fulfill intended expectations. Despite this for India to continue to insist that the 13^th Amendment is implemented by every visiting dignitary is being disingenuous to a neighbor, under a policy of “neighbourhood first”. Since the insistence on the 13^th Amendment denies the fundamental right to human development of millions in Sri Lanka, India must he held accountable and responsible for their fate.

IN INDIA’S OWN INTEREST

India’s stated policy is “Neighbourhood First”. Explaining the concept, Amb. (Retd) V.P. Haran at the Central University of Tamil Nadu stated: “Policy of Govt. of India towards neighbors is encapsulated in the phrase, ‘Neighbors First’. This policy priority holds true for almost every country in the world. For, anything that happens in one country will affect the other countries in the neighborhood. Former PM Dr. Manmohan Singh once said, ‘the real test of foreign policy is in the handling of neighbors’. We often hear political leaders say that India wants a peaceful, prosperous and stable neighborhood. Reason is simple. This means less trouble for us and will enable us to focus on development, without distraction. Neighborhood diplomacy is challenging and difficult but one that is satisfying at the end” (July 14, 2017).

If as stated above, India’s peace prosperity and stability depends on the stability of its neighbors, it is in India’s own interest that there is peace, prosperity and stability in Sri Lanka. The question then becomes, could there be prosperity in Sri Lanka under a system spawned by the 13^th Amendment that denies the right to human development to the entire population of Sri Lanka because of the systemic unsuitability of the system imposed by India? Furthermore, how could there be stability in Sri Lanka when the overwhelming majority is disadvantaged by the system of provincial governance introduced by India?

India’s interest in the Tamil community in Sri Lanka is driven by India’s own internal imperatives because of the perception that a Tamil community in Sri Lanka with fulfilled expectations would not give cause for instability in Tamil Nadu on account of Tamils in Sri Lanka. However, the context in which such notions thrived has changed. Therefore, India has to think beyond internal parochial interests. Having joined the QUAD India has to act as a global player. To do so India has to reset its sights and see nation-states as whole entities and not as made up of ethnic communities which means India has to address the concerns of the rump of sovereign States As far as Sri Lanka is concerned, this is to accept that the model imposed by India has failed, and that India should not to stand in the way of Sri Lanka developing an alternative to the provincial council system, because it is in India’s own interest to do so.

CONCLUSION

The comment by India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. S. Jaishankar Joint Press Conference was that ‘It was in Sri Lanka’s own interest that expectations of the Tamil people for equality, justice, peace and dignity within a united Sri Lanka should be fulfilled and Delhi insists on the importance of the 13^th Amendment in fulfilling those expectations’.

For a seasoned diplomat to use words such as fulfilling expectations within a UNITED Sri Lanka and to INSIST on the importance of the 13^th Amendment means that the gloves have come off. As it is with the U.S. using human rights issues in Sri Lanka to contain China’s influence in Sri Lanka, India is using the 13^th Amendment coupled with Japanese funds to get involved in Sri Lanka to dilute Chinese influence in Sri Lanka.

This is the background in which Sri Lanka has to act. After thirty plus years of denial of the right to human development of the citizens of Sri Lanka as a result of the provincial councils set up under the 13^th Amendment that was imposed in violation of principles of the Non-Aligned Movement of which India was a founding member, the people of Sri Lanka cannot afford to wait any longer. Therefore, the people who elected this President and this Parliament should prevail on the government to submit a formal statement to India that Sri Lanka would engage in an exercise to develop an alternative to the existing system.

The repeated references to the 13^th Amendment demonstrate that India’s take on Sri Lanka has not changed. Even after a lapse of nearly thirty plus years and the passing away of most of the major actors associated with Tamil politics in India and Sri Lanka, India continues to see Sri Lanka from the perspective of Tamil politics. In the meantime, the global landscape has changed dramatically with the ascendance of formidable global players that view Sri Lanka’s strategic location as being vital to their geostrategic interests. They view Sri Lanka as a nation-state and not as one made up of communities as demonstrated by India. This difference in perspective is not in India’s own interest. Therefore, in keeping with India’s own policy of “Neighbourhood First”, it is in India’s own interest to change its take on Sri Lanka, and to recognize it as being a sovereign nation-state and not one made up of disparate communities, if India is not to be seen as “India First in the Neighbourhood”.

All News Advertisement

Features

Fractious West facing a more solidified Eastern opposition

Published

11 hours ago

2026/04/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

An Iranian attack on a neighbouring Gulf state. Image courtesy BBC.

Going forward, it is hoped that a reported ceasefire agreement between the US and Iran would provide a basis for a degree of stability in the Middle East and pave the way for substantive peace talks between the powers concerned. The world is compelled to fall back on hope because there is never knowing when President Donald Trump would change his mind and plans on matters of the first importance. So erratic has he been.

Yet, confusion abounds on who has agreed to what. The US President is on record that a number of conditions put forward by him to Iran to deescalate tensions have been accepted by the latter, whereas Iran is yet to state unambiguously that this is so. For instance, the US side claims that Iran has come clear on the point that it would not work towards acquiring a nuclear weapons capability, but there is no official confirmation by Iran that this is so. The same goes for the rest of the conditions.

Accordingly, the peace process between the US and Iran, if such a thing solidly exists, could be said to be mired in uncertainty. Nevertheless, the wider publics of the world are bound to welcome the prospects of some sort of ceasing of hostilities because it would have the effect of improving their economic and material well being which is today under a cloud.

However, questions of the first magnitude would continue to bedevil international politics and provide the breeding ground for continued tensions between East and West. Iran-US hostilities helped highlight some of these divisive issues and a deescalation of these tensions would not inevitably translate into even a temporary resolution of these questions. The world community would have no choice but to take them up and work towards comprehending them better and managing them more effectively.

For example, there are thorny questions arising from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Essentially, this treaty bans the processing and use of nuclear weapons by states but some of the foremost powers are not signatories to it.

Moreover, the NPT does not provide for the destroying of nuclear arsenals by those signatory states which are already in possession of these WMDs. Consequently, there would be a glaring power imbalance between the latter nuclear-armed states and others which possess only conventional weapons.

Such a situation has grave implications for Iran’s security, for instance. The latter could argue, in view of the NPT restrictions, that the US poses a security threat to it but that it is debarred by the Treaty from developing a nuclear arms capability of its own to enable it to match the nuclear capability of the US. Moreover, its regional rival Israel is believed to possess a nuclear weapons capability.

Accordingly, a case could be made that the NPT is inherently unfair. The US would need to help resolve this vexatious matter going forward. But if it remains, US-Iran tensions would not prove easy to resolve. The same goes for Iran-Israeli tensions. Consequently, the Middle East would remain the proverbial ‘powder keg’.

Besides the above issues, the world has ample evidence that it could no longer speak in terms of a united NATO or West. Apparently, there could be no guarantee that US-NATO relations would remain untroubled in future, even if the current Iran-US standoff is peacefully resolved. US-NATO ties almost reached breaking point in the current crisis when the US President called on its NATO partners, particularly Britain, to help keep open the Hormuz Straits for easy navigation by commercial vessels, militarily, on seeing that such help was not forthcoming. Such questions are bound to remain sore points in intra-Western ties.

In other words, it would be imperative for the US’ NATO partners to help pull the US’ ‘chestnuts out of the fire’ going ahead. The question is, would NATO be willing to thus toe the US line even at the cost of its best interests.

For the West, these fractious issues are coming to the fore at a most unpropitious moment. The reality that could faze the West at present is the strong opposition shown to its efforts to bolster its power and influence by China and Russia. Right through the present crisis, the latter have stood by Iran, materially and morally. For instance, the most recent Security Council resolution spearheaded by the US which was strongly critical of Iran, was vetoed by China and Russia.

Accordingly, we have in the latter developments some marked polarities in international politics that could stand in the way of the West advancing its interests unchallenged. They point to progressively intensifying East-West tensions in international relations in the absence of consensuality.

It is only to be expected that given the substance of international politics that the West would be opposed by the East, read China and Russia, in any of the former’s efforts to advance its self interests unilaterally in ways that could be seen as illegitimate, but what is sorely needed at present is consensuality among the foremost powers if the world is to be ‘a less dangerous place to live in.’ Minus a focus on the latter, it would be a ‘no-win’ situation for all concerned.

It would be central to world stability for International Law to be upheld by all states and international actors. Military intervention by major powers in the internal affairs of other countries remains a principal cause of international mayhem. Both East and West are obliged to abide scrupulously with this principle.

From the latter viewpoint, not only did the West err in recent times, but the East did so as well. Iran, for instance, acted in gross violation of International Law when it attacked neighbouring Gulf states which are seen as US allies. Neither Iran nor the US-Israel combine have helped in advancing international law and order by thus taking the law into their own hands.

Unfortunately, the UN has been a passive spectator to these disruptive developments. It needs to play a more robust role in promoting world peace and in furthering consensual understanding among the principal powers in particular. The need is also urgent to advance UN reform and render the UN a vital instrument in furthering world peace. The East and West need to think alike and quickly on this urgent undertaking.

Features

Science-driven health policies key to tackling emerging challenges — UNFPA

Published

11 hours ago

2026/04/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

Dr. Dayanath Ranatunga

Marking World Health Day on April 7, health experts have called for a stronger commitment to science-based decision-making to address increasingly complex and evolving health challenges in Sri Lanka and beyond.

Dr. Dayanath Ranatunga, Assistant Representative of the United Nations Population Fund, stressed that health is no longer confined to hospitals or traditional medical systems, but is shaped by a broad spectrum of social, environmental, and technological factors.

“This year’s theme, ‘Together for Health. Stand with Science,’ reminds us that science is not only for laboratories or policymakers. It is a way of thinking and a tool that shapes everyday decisions,” he said.

Dr. Ranatunga noted that modern health challenges are increasingly interconnected, ranging from infectious diseases such as COVID-19 to climate-related risks, demographic shifts, and emerging forms of online violence.

He warned that maternal and newborn health continues to demand urgent attention despite progress. Globally, an estimated 260,000 women died from pregnancy and childbirth-related causes in 2023 alone—many of them preventable through timely, science-based interventions.

“In countries like Sri Lanka, where fertility rates are declining and survival rates improving, every pregnancy carries greater significance—not just for families, but for the future of communities and economies,” he said.

The UNFPA official also highlighted the growing threat of Technology Facilitated Gender-Based Violence (TFGBV), including cyber harassment and online abuse, noting that these forms of violence can have deep psychological consequences despite lacking visible physical harm.

He emphasised the need for multidisciplinary, science-informed approaches that integrate mental health, digital safety, and survivor-centered care.

Turning to demographic trends, Dr. Ranatunga pointed out that increasing life expectancy is bringing new challenges, particularly the rise of non-communicable diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular illnesses, and cancers.

In Sri Lanka, nearly 13.9% of mothers develop diabetes during pregnancy, a trend attributed to obesity and unhealthy lifestyles, underscoring the urgent need for preventive healthcare strategies.

“Are we investing enough in prevention?” he asked, noting that early intervention and healthier lifestyles could significantly reduce long-term healthcare costs, especially in a country with a free public healthcare system.

He underscored the importance of data-driven policymaking, stating that scientific research and analytics enable governments to identify gaps, anticipate future needs, and allocate resources more effectively.

The UNFPA, he said, is already leveraging tools such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to improve access to maternal healthcare, including mapping travel times for pregnant women to reach health facilities.

Digital innovation is also transforming healthcare delivery, from telemedicine to real-time data systems, improving efficiency and ensuring continuity of care even during emergencies.

In Sri Lanka, partnerships between the government and development agencies are helping to modernise training institutions, including facilities in Batticaloa, equipping healthcare workers with both clinical and digital skills.

However, Dr. Ranatunga cautioned that technology alone is not a solution.

“It must be guided by evidence and grounded in equity,” he said, pointing out that women’s health remains significantly underfunded, with only about 7% of global healthcare research focusing on conditions specific to women.

He also drew attention to the growing health impacts of climate change, including extreme weather, food insecurity, and displacement, describing it as an emerging public health crisis.

“Health does not begin in hospitals. It is shaped by the environments we live in, the choices we make, and the systems we build,” he said.

Calling for renewed commitment, Dr. Ranatunga urged stakeholders to invest in prevention, embrace innovation, and ensure that science remains central to policy and practice.

“Science is not just about knowledge—it is about ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to live healthy, dignified lives, and that no one is left behind,” he added.

By Ifham Nizam

Features

Sharing the festive joy with ‘Awurudu Kaale’

Published

11 hours ago

2026/04/9

Sahan Weerasooriya

The visually impaired who make up Bright Light Band in Awurudu attire

Melantha Perera is well known as a very versatile musician.

He was involved with the band Mirage, as their keyboardist/vocalist, and was also seen in action with other outfits, as well, before embarking on a trip to Australia, as a solo artiste.

I now hear that he has plans to operate as a trio.

However, what has got many talking about Melantha, these days, is his awesome work with the visually impaired Bright Light Band.

They have worked out a special song for the Sinhala and Tamil New Year, aptly titled ‘Awurudu Kaale.’

Says Melantha: “This song has been created to celebrate the spirit of the Sinhala and Tamil New Year and to share the joy of the Awurudu season with all Sri Lankans”.

Yes, of course, Melantha composed the song, with the lyrics written collaboratively by Melantha, Badra, and the parents of the talented performers, whose creative input brought the song to life during moments of inspiration.

Melantha Perera: Awesome work with Bright Light Band

This meaningful collaboration reflects the strong community behind the Bright Light Band.

According to Melantha, accompaning the song is a vibrant video production that also features the involvement of the parents, highlighting unity, joy, and togetherness.

Beyond showcasing their musical talents, the visually impaired members of Bright Light Band deliver a powerful message, through this project, that their abilities extend beyond singing, as they also express themselves through movement and dance.

Melantha expressed his satisfaction with the outcome of the project and looks forward to sharing it with audiences across the country during this festive season.

He went on to say that Bright Light Band extends its sincere gratitude to Bcert Australia for their generous Mian sponsorship, the CEO of the company, Samath Fernando, for his continuous support in making such initiatives possible, and Rukshan Perera for his personal support and encouragement in bringing this project to completion.

The band also acknowledges Udara Fernando for his invaluable contribution, generously providing studio space and accommodating extended recording sessions to suit the children’s availability.

Appreciation is warmly extended to the parents, whose unwavering commitment from ensuring attendance at rehearsals to supporting the video production has been instrumental in the success of this project.

Through ‘Awurudu Kaale’, Bright Light Band hopes to spread festive cheer and inspire audiences, proving that passion and talent know no boundaries.