Features

JR: The Curse and the Cause

Published

4 weeks ago

2026/04/5

J. R. Jayewardene

Once more, a public gathering to discuss J. R. Jayewardene was held last week. A country that has written so extensively on this phenomenal figure should, prima facie, have at least one person who understands him properly. Echoing Pete Seeger, “Where have all the flowers gone?” It is necessary to understand these social phenomena as we were subjected to their decisions, with the question: why were they not able to achieve what other countries were able to do? What lagged them behind? The renewal of political discourse has become an onrush of both arguments for and against JR, almost as if the very individual were a living force to contend with, for he was both the instrument of the fundamental reforms that shaped modern Sri Lanka and the curse that contributed to its numerous ills. There is no golden hue to this narrative.

However, some authors—whose own families endured bitter experiences due to JR’s rare but resolute decisions against systematic manipulation, corruption, and fraud—are seeking to frame personal, pseudo-picturesque, or pseudo-business considerations as part of a shared history. This is where much of our history has been systematically distorted. These public forums, on the other hand, are seldom more than partial renderings of the whole personality and politics of JR. They offer pronouncements rather than bold critiques. And although JR was himself a reader and writer, and possessed an intellect far surpassing anyone in Sri Lanka’s current political domain, today’s politicians and reformers are often superficial: all style and rhetorical flourish, catering for the applause rather than introspection. Indeed, the problem is not so much one of absence as one of morality; it is a problem of intellectual vacuum in the political community, and a lack of civic consciousness.

This problem cannot be isolated from the centralization of power under JR. His constitutional reforms were in many ways aimed at a French-style model where authority rests in the executive. As he himself said, “The nation cannot afford to be ruled by indecision; decisive authority is the life of governance.” However, in Sri Lankan terms, decisive authority simply meant immunity. We can think back to Kautilya, who, in his treatise on political science, the Arthashastra, wrote, “For in one’s hand alone the sceptre gathers both fear and contempt, and the soil of loyalty dries to dust.” The decisions made by JR, who was as much the modernist as he was the centralizer of power, with institutional footprints still strongly felt, clearly followed this principle; had they led to the strengthening of the institutions rather than subordinating them to executive power, Sri Lanka might have become a nation where enduring regulatory bodies or strong, ethical oversight would have tempered the crises in governance. However, this would be a reflection in hindsight, and hindsight will not appreciate the various pressures JR had to deal with: the Cold War climate, political rivals, and an ever-demanding populace.

What was missed was the chance to create an enduring framework that would stand the test of the cyclical instability Sri Lanka has so consistently experienced. In establishing a strong executive presidency and not reinforcing the independence of the regulatory bodies and the judiciary, JR strengthened the authority of an individual and not the institutions themselves. Even within his own party, the constitution was shaped in a manner that was deferential to the person and not the institution. While his was a brilliant mind capable of shaping durable autonomous governance structures, he instead created a centre of power whose influence is now, regrettably, evident in many political and bureaucratic dynamics of today. He said in 1982, in Parliament: “The strength of a nation lies not in its leaders alone, but in the clarity of vision with which they guide the people.” However, his vision was one where clarity was subject to strategy. His legacy includes a centralization of power, the shadows of which are strongly felt today and influence many political developments.

JR also made several moral compromises in the course of leadership. His memoirs and speeches show how he vacillated between openness and calculated opacity. He understood the symbolic weight of his presidency. It was written in one speech that, ‘A President must embody the conscience of the people even if that conscience is uncomfortable.’ In truth, conscience has often been subservient to pragmatism. A CIA report in 1986 on instability in Third World countries states leadership in countries like Sri Lanka may be relatively infrequent, but concentrated power tends to leave institutions weak and vulnerable to a range of destabilizing factors. JR’s leadership demonstrates that this is only too true: the more power was centralized, the weaker the structures became. We got the substance of power as well as the temptations that came with it, but without the ethical and regulatory safeguards.

His reforms essentially embodied the contradiction where the legality was there, the institution on paper survived, but the moral compass of the administration was blurred. Both the cause and the curse are inherent; it is not possible to separate his constructive measures to bring about order in Sri Lanka after 1977 from the negative consequences that followed, such as civil conflict, political centralisation, and a politicisation of the bureaucracy. This country continues to grapple with decisions taken decades ago, as if tormented by the hopes and failures of an individual.

Perhaps the argument could be made that JR had no other option, given the circumstances under which he governed Sri Lanka in the early 1980s. These were the Cold War years, and the political landscape was particularly complex. However, centralization has its costs, and its absence of institutional accountability or autonomy can only be attributed to the explicit design. He clearly recognized that concentration of power did not immunize him from moral criticism, and the shadows of his mistakes, however much they tried to be contained, did stretch far beyond his presidential tenure.

However, the age itself, spurred by urgency and political ambition, prioritized the charisma of the individual over the enduring resilience of the institutions. That was the gamble we were forced to take, and we were all made to pay the price: the civil conflict, the void that resulted, and the moral compromises made to survive.

JR’s writings and speeches clearly document this duality. He told a group of diplomats in 1981: ‘History judges not the man who acted alone, but the institutions he leaves behind.’ But the institution was created for the man. It was the opportunity and the limitation, the vision and the compromise that became synonymous with the presidency, creating a paradox: an inherently rich nation hobbled by the constraints of personality. It is a convergence of moral responsibility of the leader, temptation for immunity, and the pressures of global powers that has resulted in the current leadership style, which is both haunting and informative. The classical Chinese philosopher Han Fei stated that, ‘The ruler who relies solely on law and punishes without wisdom invites disorder; the ruler who relies on virtue without law invites betrayal.’ He tried to govern by the former, with a veneer of charisma added for smoothing out the contradictions.

The country still suffers the long shadow of these events; the ghost of centralized power, corrupted institutions, and moral greyness continue to plague both governance and policy, as if history is unwilling to let go. JR Jayewardene is an example of how one man’s blueprint can shape the trajectory of an entire nation for decades, if not longer. The conflicts, the voids, and the moral compromising we still witness today are all reflections of the model of governance he adopted. In that sense, he is more than just a figure of the past; he is a persistent and uncomfortable question that continues to stir the consciences of Sri Lankans.

The challenge is not to relive his life or to resurrect his shadows but to learn from his example, recognize his mistakes, and refine his lessons in an effort to address the systemic weaknesses of the state and the morass that the people are wallowing in. Public discourse should focus not only on remembering his legacy or whitewashing history, but on exposing the dangers and enduring temptations of centralized authority, weakened institutions, and powerful individuals who are not held accountable and therefore perpetuate the cycles of mismanagement. The moral and structural ramifications, the consequences of giving too much power to one man, are profound, and its repercussions echo across the generations.

by Nilantha Ilangamuwa

All News Advertisement

Features

Political violence stalking Trump administration

Published

10 hours ago

2026/04/30

Sahan Weerasooriya

A scene that unfolded during the shooting incident at the recent White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington. (BBC)

It would not be particularly revelatory to say that the US is plagued by ‘gun violence’. It is a deeply entrenched and widespread malaise that has come in tandem with the relative ease with which firearms could be acquired and owned by sections of the US public, besides other causes.

However, a third apparent attempt on the life of US President Donald Trump in around two and a half years is both thought-provoking and unsettling for the defenders of democracy. After all, whatever its short comings the US remains the world’s most vibrant democracy and in fact the ‘mightiest’ one. And the US must remain a foremost democracy for the purpose of balancing and offsetting the growing power of authoritarian states in the global power system, who are no friends of genuine representational governance.

Therefore, the recent breaching of the security cordon surrounding the White House Correspondents’ Dinner in Washington at which President Trump and his inner Cabinet were present, by an apparently ‘Lone Wolf’ gunman, besides raising issues relating to the reliability of the security measures deployed for the President, indicates a notable spike in anti-VVIP political violence in particular in the US. It is a pointer to a strong and widespread emergence of anti-democratic forces which seem to be gaining in virulence and destructiveness.

The issues raised by the attack are in the main for the US’ political Right and its supporters. They have smugly and complacently stood by while the extremists in their midst have taken centre stage and begun to dictate the course of Right wing politics. It is the political culture bred by them that leads to ‘Lone Wolf’ gunmen, for instance, who see themselves as being repressed or victimized, taking the law into their own hands, so to speak, and perpetrating ‘revenge attacks’ on the state and society.

A disproportionate degree of attention has been paid particularly internationally to Donald Trump’s personality and his eccentricities but such political persons cannot be divorced from the political culture in which they originate and have their being. That is, “structural” questions matter. Put simply, Donald Trump is a ‘true son’ of the Far Right, his principal support base. The issues raised are therefore for the President as well as his supporters of the Right.

We are obliged to respect the choices of the voting public but in the case of Trump’s election to the highest public position in the US, this columnist is inclined to see in those sections that voted for Trump blind followers of the latter who cared not for their candidate’s suitability, in every relevant respect, and therefore acted irrationally. It would seem that the Right in the US wanted their candidate to win by ‘hook or by crook’ and exercise power on their behalf.

By making the above observations this columnist does not intend to imply that voting publics everywhere in the world of democracy cast their vote sensibly. In the case of Sri Lanka, for example, the question could be raised whether the voters of the country used their vote sensibly when voting into office the majority of Executive Presidents and other persons holding high public office. The obvious answer is ‘no’ and this should lead to a wider public discussion on the dire need for thoroughgoing voter education. The issue is a ‘huge’ one that needs to be addressed in the appropriate forums and is beyond the scope of this column.

Looking back it could be said that the actions of Trump and his die-hard support base led to the Rule of Law in the US being undermined as perhaps never before in modern times. A shaming moment in this connection was the protest march, virtually motivated by Trump, of his supporters to the US Capitol on January 6th, 2021, with the aim of scuttling the presidential poll result of that year. Much violence and unruly behaviour, as known, was let loose. This amounted to denigrating the democratic process and encouraging the violent take over of the state.

In a public address, prior to the unruly conduct of his supporters, Trump is on record as blaring forth the following: ‘We won this election and we won by a landslide’, ‘We will stop the steal’, ‘We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn’t happen’, ‘If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.’

It is plain to see that such inflammatory utterances could lead impressionable minds in particular to revolt violently. Besides, they should have led the more rationally inclined to wonder whether their candidate was the most suitable person to hold the office of President.

Unfortunately, the latter process was not to be and the question could be raised whether the US is in the ‘safest pair of hands’. Needless to say, as events have revealed, Donald Trump is proving to be one of the most erratic heads of state the US has ever had.

However, the latest attempt on the life of President Trump suggests that considerable damage has been done to the democratic integrity of the US and none other than the President himself has to take on himself a considerable proportion of the blame for such degeneration, besides the US’ Far Right. They could be said to be ‘reaping the whirlwind.’

It is a time for soul-searching by the US Right. The political Right has the right to exist, so the speak, in a functional democracy but it needs to take cognizance of how its political culture is affecting the democratic integrity or health of the US. Ironically, the repressive and chauvinistic politics advocated by it is having the effect of activating counter-violence of the most murderous kind, as was witnessed at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Continued repressive politics could only produce more such incidents that could be self-defeating for the US.

Some past US Presidents were assassinated but the present political violence in the country brings into focus as perhaps never before the role that an anti-democratic political culture could play in unraveling the gains that the US has made over the decades. A duty is cast on pro-democracy forces to work collectively towards protecting the democratic integrity and strength of the US.

Features

22nd Anniversary Gala …action-packed event

Published

10 hours ago

2026/04/30

Sahan Weerasooriya

The Skyliners: Shanaka Viswakula (bass), Mario Ranasuriya (lead guitar), Daryl D'Souza (keyboards) and Kushmin Balasuriya (drums)

The Editor-in-Chief of The Sri Lankan Anchorman, a Toronto-based monthly, celebrating Sri Lankan community life in Canada, is none other than veteran Sri Lankan journalist Dirk Tissera, who moved to Canada in 1997. His wife, Michelle, whom he calls his “tower of strength”, is the Design Editor.

According to reports coming my way, the paper has turned out to be extremely popular in Toronto.

In fact, The Sri Lankan Anchorman won a press award in Toronto for excellence in editorial content and visual presentation.

However, the buzz in the air in Canada, right now, is The Sri Lankan Anchorman’s 22nd Anniversary Gala, to be held on Friday, 12 June, 2026, at the J&J Swagat Banquet Convention Centre, in Toronto.

An action-packed programme has been put together for the night, featuring some of the very best artistes in the Toronto scene.

The Skylines, who are classified as ‘the local musical band in Toronto’, will headline the event.

Dirk Tissera and wife Michelle: Supporting Sri Lanka-Canada community events, in Toronto, since launching The Anchorman
in 2002

They have performed and backed many legendary Sri Lanka singers.

According to Dirk, The Skylines can belt out a rhythm with gusto … be it Western, Sinhala or Tamil hits.

Also adding sparkle to the evening will be the legendary Fahmy Nazick, who, with his smooth and velvety vocals, will have the crowd on the floor.

Fahmy who was a household name, back in Sri Lanka, will be flying down from Virginia, USA.

He has captivated audiences in Sri Lanka, the Middle East and North America, and this will be his fourth visit to Toronto – back by popular demand,

Cherry DeLuna, who is described by Dirk as a powerhouse, also makes her appearance on stage and is all set to stir up the tempo with her cool and easy delivery.

“She’s got a great voice and vocal range that has captivated audiences out here”, says Dirk.

Chamil Welikala, said to be one of the hottest DJs in town, will be spinning his magic … in English, Sinhala, Tamil and Latin.

Both Jive and Baila competitions are on the cards among many other surprises on the night of 12 June.

This is The Anchorman’s fifth annual dance in a row – starting from 2022, 2023, 2024 and 2025 – and both Dirk and Michelle, and The Anchorman, have always produced elegant social events in Toronto.

“We intend to knock this one out of the park,” the duo says, adding that Western music and Sinhala and Tamil songs is something they’ve always delivered and the crowd loves it.

“We have always supported Sri Lanka-Canada community events, in Toronto, since launching The Anchorman, in 2002, and we intend to keep it that way.”

No doubt, there will be a large crowd of Sri Lankans, from all communities, turning up, on 12 June, to support Dirk, Michelle and The Anchorman.

Features

Face Pack for Radiant Skin

Published

10 hours ago

2026/04/30

Sahan Weerasooriya

* Apple and Orange:

Blend a few apple and orange pieces together. Add to it a pinch of turmeric and one tablespoon of honey. Apply it to the face and neck and rinse off after 30 minutes. This face pack is suitable for all skin types.

According to experts, apple is one of the best fruits for your skin health with Vitamin A, B complex and Vitamin C and minerals, while, with the orange peel, excessive oil secretion can be easily balanced.

* Mango and Curd:

Ripe mango pulp, mixed with curd, can be rubbed directly onto the skin to remove dirt and cleanse clogged pores. Rinse off after a few minutes.

Yes, of course, mango is a tasty and delicious fruit and this is the mango season in our part of the world, and it has extra-ordinary benefits to skin health. Vitamins C and E in mangoes protect the skin from the UV rays of the sun and promotes cell regeneration. It also promotes skin elasticity and fights skin dullness and acne, while curd, in combination, further adds to it.

* Grapes and Kiwi:

Take a handful of grapes and make a pulp of it. Simultaneously, take one kiwi fruit and mash it after peeling its skin. Now mix them and add some yoghurt to it. Apply it on your face for few minutes and wash it off.

Here again experts say that kiwi is the best nutrient-rich fruit with high vitamin C, minerals, Omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin E, while grapes contain flavonoids, which is an antioxidant that protects the skin from free radical damage. This homemade face pack acts as a natural cleanser and slows down the ageing process.