Features

JRJ recounts his famous 1951 speech advocating the Peace Treaty for Japan

Published

1 year ago

2024/09/1

With Prime Minister Yoshida and his daughter at the Japan Peace Treaty Conference in San Francisco, Mr. & Mrs. Jayewardene in 1951

Interlude is post-war Japan en route to San Fransisco

(Excepted from Men and Memories by JR Jayewardene)

I attended the Japanese Peace Treaty Conference, San Francisco, USA, in September 1951 as the representative of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). The Foreign Ministers of the major nations and Prime Minister Yoshida of Japan attended. Yoshida shed tears when I stood up for Japan and made a speech which was hailed as the turning point of the Conference.

As Ceylon’s representative I travelled to America through Japan and the Pacific. During my stay in Japan for a few days, I met leading Japanese Buddhists and gathered impressions of the political post-War conditions in Japan. At the Conference my two speeches made me ‘the Hero of the Conference’, in the words of Mr. John Foster Dulles.

The value of this contribution could be gauged by the tributes paid by the world press. Some of the Press accounts are as follows:

San Francisco Chronicle . “The generalized, philosophical argument for forbearance was ably stated by Ceylon’s Minister of Finance, J.R. Jayewardene”.

The Salt Lake Tribune . “The address of Jayewardene, Ceylon’s articulate delegate, will go down as one of the most historic of the conference. He called Russia’s bluff at every turn and quoted Buddha in an effective plea for a merciful peace for Japan”.

The London Times . “A skillful answer to the case was propounded by Jayewardene. He recalled that the United Kingdom, in face of the Russian request that the Treaty be prepared by the Council of Foreign Minister, with the power of veto in operation, had insisted that the British Dominions be consulted, and he claimed that the case for restoration of a completely independent Japan was first considered at the Colombo Conference”.

San Francisco Chronicle. “There was the Minister of Ceylon–a man of great dignity and keen grasp of subtleties–who stripped the very hide off the Soviet position with his declaration: ‘It is interesting to note that the amendments of the Soviet Union seek to insure to the people of Japan the fundamental freedoms–which the people of the Soviet Union themselves would dearly love to possess and enjoy”.

San Francisco Examiner.

“A darkly handsome diplomat from the seldom considered Island of Ceylon spoke up resoundingly for international decency and magnanimity to a world that has of late known little of either. He was J.R. Jayewardene, the rubber rich Island’s Minister of Finance. Dispassionately and with fine logic he tore Russia’s wrecking crew to pieces in his address”.

Newsweek . “A swarthy Sinhalese named J.R. Jayewardene with a clear Cambridge accent shared honours as the most popular speaker with the fiercely bearded Moslem, Sir Mohamed Zafrulla Khan of Pakistan. To the delight of American officials both spoke eloquently as Asiatics to Asiatics”.

Time. “Ablest Asian spokesman at the conference was Ceylon’s delegate, Finance Minister J.R. Jayewardene, a slim, soft-spoken man with a razor-like tongue”.

Life. “Crucial support for West comes as Ceylon’s J.R. Jayewardene protests against Soviet assumption of a ‘protector’ role in Asia, adds that the eight Asian nations present would speak for themselves”.

New York Herald Tribune.

“Ceylon’s Jayewardene led the spokesmen for 13 of the 52 nations at the conference in proclaiming their intention to sign the Anglo-American sponsored treaty”.

I was to attend the Annual Conference of Governors of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to be held in Washington during the second week of September, 1951. A conference of 52 nations to discuss a Peace Treaty for Japan was also summoned to meet at San Francisco in the first week of the same month, and the American Ambassador was very anxious that the Prime Minster D.S. Senanayake should attend, as the other nations were sending their Foreign Ministers and President Truman was to open the conference.

The Prime Minister was unable to leave Ceylon and instead suggested that I should represent him. I gladly agreed because I had to be in America during this period of time, and as the Peace Conference was to be held at San Francisco it was possible for me to arrive there traveling eastwards, through Japan and the Pacific. After San Francisco I could attend the Washington Conference; cross the Atlantic, represent Ceylon at the Economic Conference which was to be held in September in London, and then return to Ceylon. It was indeed a journey that would put a girdle round the world by air and sea.

The BOAC Constellation Liner took off from Katunayake Airport Negombo, at 6.30 a.m. on Sunday, 26 August. Our delegation consisted of R.G. Senanayake, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of External Affairs, and my Private Secretary, R. Bodinagoda. I thought the plane would first travel along the western coast and after leaving the southern tip of Ceylon charter her course eastwards. I was surprised therefore, on looking out after about half an hour’s flight to see range upon range of mountains.

The plane was traveling over the central hills. In a few minutes I found my bearings, for the summit of Adam’s Peak. with the white building of ,the monastery was easily recognizable. We soon flew over the plains in the south-east corner of Ceylon and headed for the sea and Singapore.

At 4 p.m. we landed at Singapore. Our Commissioner Saravanamuttu, and Malcolm Macdonald’s representative were there to meet us. We dined with Malcolm Macdonald who was the Special Commissioner of the UK Government for South-East Asia. Dinner was served in the magnificent palace of the Sultan of Johore, “Bukit Serene”, where Macdonald was staying.

I had been here on an earlier occasion on my way from Australia after the Colombo Plan Conference in June 1950.1 had met Macdonald at the Ceylon Independence celebrations in 1948, and at the Colombo and Sydney Conferences in 1950, and knew him fairly well. We could not spend much time over our dinner as we had to leave early the following morning.

At 3 p.m. we sighted Hongkong and owing to the absence of rain and mist landed safely in this hill-locked bay. We were able to look round the town which ; built on the side of a hill facing the bay, the side facing the sea not being built upon. A Chinese restaurant where the real Chinese food was served was one of the places we visited.

At the Commonwealth Conference in 1951 where the Colombo Plan was inawaegrated, with Prime Minister D. S. Senanayake sitting in the centre. On his left is Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India, and on his right Ernest Bevin, Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom. J.R.J. is the first figure on the left in t he standing group

Early the next day we were again in the air. In the last stage of our journey while flying over Okinawa Island I could see the hulls of ships sunk during the War. Here was fought one of the bitterest battles in which the Americans and the Japanese were involved; where thousands of lives were lost, yet a few years later the two nations were friends, and the conference at San Francisco was to discuss how Japan could again enter the comity of free nations.

We were now approaching Tokyo, and who does not look out to see the peak of Fujiyama, as we did? I stayed five days in Tokyo. The first two days were spent in paying official calls on the American Representative, the Japanese Prime Minister, Yoshida, and the Supreme Allied Commander, General Ridgeway. I also met the Indian Representative at lunch and the British Representative at dinner. Leading members of the Japanese public life were present at these functions. I was able to gather useful information on Japan’s political and economic state after the War.

In my meetings with the Japanese Buddhist leaders I discussed the possibility of holding the next session of the World Fellowship of Buddhists in Japan as requested by Dr. Malalasekera, its President, before I left Ceylon.

A nation that had enjoyed Independence and an unbroken historical record since the sixth century BC was defeated in 1945. The atomic explosions over Hiroshima and Nagasaki compelled a proud people to surrender though their armies were still unconquered. The Allied Forces landed in Japan in August 1945, and on 2 September, General MacArthur, having assumed duties in Japan as Supreme Commander, accepted the surrender of the Japanese on board the US Battleship ‘Missouri’.

SCAP (Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers) was in charge of the occupation and control of Japan. His main task was to implement the basic policies laid down by the USA, China and the UK in the Potsdam Declaration of July 1945, defining the terms for Japanese surrender. The main terms relevant to the occupation were:

(1) to eliminate the authority and influence of irresponsible militarism,

(2) destruction of Japan’s war-making power,

(3) disarming Japan’s military forces,

(4) stern justice to be meted out to all war criminals,

(5) the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people.

McArthur, who had the choice of direct or indirect government, chose the latter and utilized the existing government of the country. He issued orders to them or made suggestions as he thought fit. The Japanese Government, which could do nothing contrary to SCAP policy, had also to carry out his wishes. The people, however, looked to the Prime Minister and his government for the elected government continued to function.

After the resignation of the Cabinet that surrendered, a Cabinet headed by Prince Higashikuni assumed office in August 1945. This difficult period of demobilization and food scarcity caused conflict between the SCAP and the Government. On the Prime Minister’s resignation in October, K Shidehara, once Ambassador to the USA was nominated Prime Minister. He accepted and implemented the policy of SCAP which the previous Prime Minister had refused to do, among these being the abolition of the secret police, dismissal of high officials and the liberation of political criminals.

The Shidehara Government functioned until May 1946, and during its tenure of office many measures for the establishment of a democratic constitution were initiated, such as the drafting of a new constitution, a declaration of the sovereignty of the people and the granting of universal franchise. The formation of trade unions was encouraged, and the functioning of political parties resumed. In spite of the liberal measures adopted by the government, the insufficiency of food and its bad distribution caused grave distress, ending in food riots.

In the General Election held in April 1946, the Liberal Party led by Hatoyama was elected with the largest number of members. When Hatoyama was about to be recommended for the office of Prime Minister, SCAP ordered that he should be excluded from office. This was in pursuance of a law which ‘purged’ from office almost two hundred thousand who had militaristic tendencies. The Liberal Party, which was the largest party in Parliament, elected Shigeru Yoshida, the Foreign Minister as its President, and the retiring Prime Minister recommended him to the Emperor as the proper person to succeed him.

The Yoshida Government was constantly faced with labour troubles; strikes were averted only by the intervention of the armed strength of the SCAP; and the Communists and the Left-wing socialists were gaining in strength by clever manipulation of labour troubles. In view of the mounting opposition, the SCAP suggested a General Election, which was held in April 1947, the Socialists becoming the largest party. Yoshida resigned and was succeeded by Katayama, head of the Socialist party, who could not carry on for long owing to dissension in his party. He resigned when a supplementary budget proposal was defeated due to absence of his members from the House during voting.

Speaking at the Japanese Peace Treaty Conference

Ashida, the Democratic Party leader, was voted Prime Minister by the House under the new law which empowered the House of Representatives to elect the Prime Minister by a majority vote. Ashida’s Government was assailed as corrupt from the very first day it assumed office. It was openly stated that Ashida, head of the third largest party was chosen as Prime Minister by the use of money. Financial transactions of members of the Cabinet were investigated into by the police and Ashida unable to face opposition from without, and corruption within his ranks, resigned.

A vote in the House elected Yoshida as Prime Minister for the second time in October 1948. As Yoshida’s’ Liberal Government was a minority-government, a General Election was held in December, when the Liberals won a great victory, securing an absolute majority over all other parties. The people showed their disapproval of incompetence and corruption’, favoured the constitutional methods adopted by Yoshida and approved his plans for removing controls. In spite of opposition from organized labour and the Communists, the government carried through a series of economic reforms.

In spite of initial sufferings which the people had to bear, the government pursued its policy with determination. By the end of 1950, the Yoshida Government could proudly claim that the finances and economy of Japan were established. The government then turned its attention to the problems arising from the Korean war and the preparation of a treaty of peace leading to the freedom of Japan.

The Japanese people felt keenly the occupation of their country by foreign troops but their feelings were not exhibited. In September 1951, the Japanese were not allowed to enter the hotels we stayed in, in Tokyo. They were made to feel that they were a conquered nation. The re-gaining of their ancient freedom was one of the achievements of Premier Yoshida and his Ministers.

The six years of occupation, ending with the Peace Treaty of 1951, saw a revolutionary change in the political, economic and social institutions that existed before the War. The concept of the Emperor as the source of all authority was removed by the new Constitution, which came into operation in May 1947. Parliamentary democracy, similar to that of England, was embodied in the Constitution. The first principle was that ‘sovereign power resides with the people’. The will of the people is expressed through their elected representatives in the Diet who choose the Executive, namely, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. The Emperor was declared to be ‘the symbol of the state and of the unity of the people’.

The concomitants of this change were also seen in the reform of the government machinery, the independence of the judiciary and the extension of the local government. As stated earlier, the grant of universal franchise to men and women and the liberty allowed for the formation of trade unions took the mind of the people away from the disgrace of defeat and turned it towards a desire to better their conditions, worsened by the collapse of the economy after the close of the War.

Signing the Japanese Peace TreatyAgreement in San Francisco in 1951

Another major and useful step was the attempt at agrarian reform. A large-scale transfer of land ownership from owners to tenants was carried out over a period of years. The principle applied was that he who tills the land must be its owner. These reforms, as well as the breaking up of monopolies and trusts, and the reform of the banking system, convinced the masses that the SCAP did not intend to use its victory for the benefit of a few. Japan was thus ready to regain her freedom in 1951. Her stability, politically and financially, was due to the wise leadership of the SCAP and the elected governments that co-operated with it.

I had read about and published a short essay on, ‘Buddhism in Japan’. I was afforded an opportunity of meeting some of the leading scholars and wished to make the best use of the time available to me. A common friend, an Englishman residing in Colombo who had recently visited Japan, contacted Christmas Humphreys, one of the leading British Buddhists, and provided me with a list of those whom I should meet. Humphreys who had spent some time in Japan a few years back as the prosecuting counsel in the International War Trials, had in his book Via Tokyo published his impressions of Buddhist Japan.

I was anxious to meet some of the distinguished Buddhist leaders, and to visit the historic places mentioned there. Professor Malalasekera, President of the World Fellowship of Buddhists, a newly-formed international Organization whose first convention was held in Ceylon in 1950, proposed to hold the second convention in Japan in August 1952. He requested me to discuss with the Buddhist leaders this proposal and find out their views.

Owing to the difficulty of corresponding with the Japanese directly, I contacted them through the British Embassy in Japan. On the second day after my arrival in Tokyo I was able to meet many of the Japanese leaders at the house of one Mr. Redman of the British Embassy. On this day, and during the course of the next few days, I met Mr. Yoshimuzu and Professor Kumura, Managing Editor and Editor of a well-known Buddhist journal, The Young East; Dr. Tachibana, the well-known author, and Dr. Miyamoto, Professor of Buddhism at the Tokyo University.

I also met Dr. Nagai, ex-Professor of the Tokyo University, and Mr. Tomamaisu who was taking the keenest interest in the forthcoming conference. Preparations were being made to hold the conference in September or October, and I realized that owing to the conditions that then prevailed in Japan much work would have to be done to organize it successfully. The attainment of freedom made this work easier, and the conference held in 1952 was very successful.

With these Japanese friends and the two Englishmen interested in Buddhism, I visited as many places as I could. I was also able to visit and spend some time with Dr. Suzuki one of the great minds of Japan, and the leading scholar of the Zen sect which he introduced to the world outside Japan. On the third day of our stay, I received a message from the British Embassy that Professor Suzuki would receive us at 3 p.m. the next day at the Matsugaoka Library at Kamakura, which is 70 minutes drive from Tokyo.

The world famous bronze statue of the Buddha is also situated in this town; so we were doubly pleased. The temple (Ji) of Full Enlightenment, Engaku-ji, was the present home of Dr. Suzuki. The library was on the opposite side of the valley and was reached by a steep climb. I had heard and read of Dr. Suzuki. He was now eighty years of age; had written several major works on the Zen sect and was renowned for his learning as well as his piety.

The name of the sect is an abbreviation of Zenna, a transcription of the Sanskrit word ‘Dhyana’, meaning meditation. The sect traces its origin to Bodhidhamma (520 AD) himself. The Zen philosophy appealed specially to poets and artists and became the religion of the Intrepid Samurai of yore. The sect owned 20,000 temples, monasteries and chapels. It had more than 7,800 abbots, 36,000 monks and 800,000 perpetual members. Training centres for monks were attached to the principal temples.

All News Advertisement

Features

Counting cats, naming giants: Inside the unofficial science redefining Sri Lanka’s Leopards and Tuskers

Published

15 hours ago

2026/01/12

Thilina Walpola

For decades, Sri Lanka’s leopard numbers have been debated, estimated, and contested, often based on assumptions few outside academic circles ever questioned.

One of the most fundamental was that a leopard’s spots never change. That belief, long accepted as scientific fact, began to unravel not in a laboratory or lecture hall, but through thousands of photographs taken patiently in the wilds of Yala. At the centre of that quiet disruption stands Milinda Wattegedara.

Sri Lanka’s wilderness has always inspired photographers. Far fewer, however, have transformed photography into a data-driven challenge to established conservation science. Wattegedara—an MBA graduate by training and a wildlife researcher by pursuit—has done precisely that, building one of the most comprehensive independent identification databases of leopards and tuskers in the country.

“I consider myself privileged to have been born and raised in Sri Lanka,” Wattegedara says. “This island is extraordinary in its biodiversity. But admiration alone doesn’t protect wildlife. Accuracy does.”

Raised in Kandy, and educated at Kingswood College, where he captained cricket teams, up to the First XI, Wattegedara’s early years were shaped by discipline and long hours of practice—traits that would later define his approach to field research.

Though his formal education culminated in a Master’s degree in Business Administration from Cardiff Metropolitan University, his professional life gradually shifted toward Sri Lanka’s forests, grasslands, and coastal fringes.

From childhood, two species held his attention: the Sri Lankan leopard and the Asian elephant tusker. Both are icons. Both are elusive. And both, he argues, have been inadequately understood.

His response was methodical. Using high-resolution photography, Wattegedara began documenting individual animals, focusing on repeat sightings, behavioural traits, territorial ranges, and physical markers.

This effort formalised into two platforms—Yala Leopard Diary and Wild Tuskers of Sri Lanka—which function today as tightly moderated research communities rather than casual social media pages.

“My goal was never popularity,” he explains. “It was reliability. Every identification had to stand scrutiny.”

The results are difficult to dismiss. Through collaborative verification and long-term monitoring, his teams have identified over 200 individual leopards across Yala and Kumana National Parks and 280 tuskers across Sri Lanka.

Each animal—whether Jessica YF52 patrolling Mahaseelawa beach or Mahasen T037, the longest tusker bearer recorded in the wild—is catalogued with photographic evidence and movement history.

It was within this growing body of data that a critical inconsistency emerged.

“As injuries accumulated over time, we noticed subtle but consistent changes in rosette and spot patterns,” Wattegedara says. “This directly contradicted the assumption that these markings remain unchanged for life.”

That observation, later corroborated through structured analysis, had serious implications. If leopards were being identified using a limited set of spot references, population estimates risked duplication and inflation.

The findings led to the development of the Multipoint Leopard Identification Method, now internationally published, which uses multiple reference points rather than fixed pattern assumptions. “This wasn’t about academic debate,” Wattegedara notes. “It was about ensuring we weren’t miscounting an endangered species.”

The implications extend beyond Sri Lanka. Overestimated populations can lead to reduced protection, misplaced policy decisions, and weakened conservation urgency.

Yet much of this work has occurred outside formal state institutions.

“There’s a misconception that meaningful research only comes from official channels,” Wattegedara says. “But conservation gaps don’t wait for bureaucracy.”

That philosophy informed his role as co-founder of the Yala Leopard Centre, the world’s first facility dedicated solely to leopard education and identification. The Centre serves as a bridge between researchers, wildlife enthusiasts, and the general public, offering access to verified knowledge rather than speculation.

In a further step toward transparency, Artificial Intelligence has been introduced for automatic leopard identification, freely accessible via the Centre and the Yala Leopard Diary website. “Technology allows consistency,” he explains. “And consistency is everything in long-term studies.”

His work with tuskers mirrors the same precision. From Minneriya to Galgamuwa, Udawalawe to Kala Wewa, Wattegedara has documented generations of bull elephants—Arjuna T008, Kawanthissa T075, Aravinda T112—not merely as photographic subjects, but as individuals with lineage, temperament, and territory.

This depth of observation has also earned him recognition in wildlife photography, including top honours from the Photographic Society of Sri Lanka and accolades from Sanctuary Asia’s Call of the Wild. Still, he is quick to downplay awards.

“Photographs are only valuable if they contribute to understanding,” he says.

Today, Wattegedara’s co-authored identification guides on Yala leopards and Kala Wewa tuskers are increasingly referenced by researchers and field naturalists alike. His work challenges a long-standing divide between citizen science and formal research.

“Wildlife doesn’t care who publishes first,” he reflects. “It only responds to how accurately we observe it.”

In an era when Sri Lanka’s protected areas face mounting pressure—from tourism, infrastructure, and climate stress—the question of who counts wildlife, and how, has never been more urgent.

By insisting on precision, patience, and proof, Milinda Wattegedara has quietly reframed that conversation—one leopard, one tusker, and one verified photograph at a time.

By Ifham Nizam ✍️

Features

AI in Schools: Preparing the Nation for the Next Technological Leap

Published

15 hours ago

2026/01/12

Thilina Walpola

This summary document is based on an exemplary webinar conducted by the Bandaranaike Academy for Leadership & Public Policy ((https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqZGjlaMC08). I participated in the session, which featured multiple speakers with exceptional knowledge and experience who discussed various aspects of incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) into the education system and other sectors.

There was strong consensus that this issue must be addressed early, before the nation becomes vulnerable to external actors seeking to exploit AI for their own advantage. Given her educational background, the Education Minister—and the Prime Minister—are likely to be fully aware of this need. This article is intended to support ongoing efforts in educational reform, including the introduction of AI education in schools for those institutions willing to adopt it.

Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic concept. Today, it processes vast amounts of global data and makes calculated decisions, often to the benefit of its creators. However, most users remain unaware of the information AI gathers or the extent of its influence on decision-making. Experts warn that without informed and responsible use, nations risk becoming increasingly vulnerable to external forces that may exploit AI.

The Need for Immediate Action

AI is evolving rapidly, leaving traditional educational models struggling to keep pace. By the time new curricula are finalised, they risk becoming outdated, leaving both students and teachers behind. Experts advocate immediate government-led initiatives, including pilot AI education programs in willing schools and nationwide teacher training.

“AI is already with us,” experts note. “We must ensure our nation is on this ‘AI bus’—unlike past technological revolutions, such as IT, microchips, and nanotechnology, which we were slow to embrace.”

Training Teachers and Students

Equipping teachers to introduce AI, at least at the secondary school level, is a crucial first step. AI can enhance creativity, summarise materials, generate lesson plans, provide personalised learning experiences, and even support administrative tasks. Our neighbouring country, India, has already begun this process.

Current data show that student use of AI far exceeds that of instructors—a gap that must be addressed to prevent misuse and educational malpractice. Specialists recommend piloting AI courses as electives, gathering feedback, and continuously refining the curriculum to prepare students for an AI-driven future.

Benefits of AI in Education

AI in schools offers numerous advantages:

· Fosters critical thinking, creativity, and problem-solving skills

· Enhances digital literacy and ethical awareness

· Bridges the digital divide by promoting equitable AI literacy

· Supports interdisciplinary learning in medicine, climate science, and linguistics

· Provides personalised feedback and learning experiences

· Assists students with disabilities through adaptive technologies like text-to-speech and visual recognition

AI can also automate administrative tasks, freeing teachers to focus on student engagement and social-emotional development—a key factor in academic success.

Risks and Challenges

Despite its potential, AI presents challenges:

· Data privacy concerns and misuse of personal information

· Over-reliance on technology, reducing teacher-student interactions

· Algorithmic biases affecting educational outcomes

· Increased opportunities for academic dishonesty if assessments rely on rote memorisation

Experts emphasise understanding these risks to ensure the responsible and ethical use of AI.

Global and Local Perspectives

In India, the Central Board of Secondary Education plans to introduce AI and computational thinking from Grades 3 to 12 by 2026. Sri Lanka faces a similar challenge. Many university students and academics already rely on AI, highlighting the urgent need for a structured yet rapidly evolving national curriculum that incorporates AI responsibly.

The Way Forward

Experts urge swift action:

· Launch pilot programs in select schools immediately.

· Provide teacher training and seed funding to participating educational institutions.

· Engage universities to develop short AI and innovation training programs.

“Waiting for others to lead risks leaving us behind,” experts warn. “It’s time to embrace AI thoughtfully, responsibly, and inclusively—ensuring the whole nation benefits from its opportunities.”

As AI reshapes our world, introducing it in schools is not merely an educational initiative—it is a national imperative.

BY Chula Goonasekera ✍️
on behalf of LEADS forum admin@srilankaleads.com

Features

The Paradox of Trump Power: Contested Authoritarian at Home, Uncontested Bully Abroad

Published

2 days ago

2026/01/11

Thilina Walpola

Protests and a vigil have been held in Minneapolis, Minnesota, where the shooting of Renee Nicole Good occurred on Wednesday (photo courtesy BBC)

The Trump paradox is easily explained at one level. The US President unleashes American superpower and tariff power abroad with impunity and without contestation. But he cannot exercise unconstitutional executive power including tariff power without checks and challenges within America. No American President after World War II has exercised his authority overseas so brazenly and without any congressional referral as Donald Trump is getting accustomed to doing now. And no American President in history has benefited from a pliant Congress and an equally pliant Supreme Court as has Donald Trump in his second term as president.

Yet he is not having his way in his own country the way he is bullying around the world. People are out on the streets protesting against the wannabe king. This week’s killing of 37 year old Renee Good by immigration agents in Minneapolis has brought the City to its edge five years after the police killing of George Floyd. The lower courts are checking the president relentlessly in spite of the Supreme Court, if not in defiance of it. There are cracks in the Trump’s MAGA world, disillusioned by his neglect of the economy and his costly distractions overseas. His ratings are slowly but surely falling. And in an electoral harbinger, New York has elected as its new mayor, Zoran Mamdani – a wholesale antithesis of Donald Trump you can ever find.

Outside America it is a different picture. The world is too divided and too cautious to stand up to Trump as he recklessly dismantles the very world order that his predecessors have been assiduously imposing on the world for nearly a hundred years. A few recent events dramatically illustrate the Trump paradox – his constraints at home and his freewheeling abroad.

Restive America

Two days before Christmas, the US Supreme Court delivered a rare rebuke to the Trump Administration. After a host of rulings that favoured Trump by putting on hold, without full hearing, lower court strictures against the Administration, the Supreme Court by a 6-3 majority decided to leave in place a Federal Court ruling that barred Trump from deploying National Guard troops in Chicago. Trump quietly raised the white flag and before Christmas withdrew the federal troops he had controversially deployed in Chicago, Portland and Los Angeles – all large cities run by Democrats.

But three days after the New Year, Trump airlifted the might of the US Army to encircle Venezuela’s capital Caracas and spirit away the country’s President Nicolás Maduro, and his wife Celia Flores, all the way to New York to stand trial in an American Court. What is not permissible in any American City was carried out with absolute impunity in a foreign capital. It turns out the Administration has no plan for Venezuela after taking out Maduro, other than Trump’s cavalier assertion, “We’re going to run it, essentially.” Essentially, the Trump Administration has let Maduro’s regime without Maduro to run the country but with the US in total control of Venezuela’s oil.

Next on the brazen list is Greenland, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio who manipulated Maduro’s ouster is off to Copenhagen for discussions with the Danish government over the future of Greenland, a semi-autonomous part of Denmark. Military option is not off the table if a simple real estate purchase or a treaty arrangement were to prove infeasible or too complicated. That is the American position as it is now customarily announced from the White House podium by the Administration’s Press Secretary Karolyn Leavitt, a 28 year old Catholic woman from New Hampshire, who reportedly conducts a team prayer for divine help before appearing at the lectern to lecture.

After the Supreme Court ruling and the Venezuela adventure, the third US development relevant to my argument is the shooting and killing of a 37 year old white American woman by a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer in Minneapolis, at 9:30 in the morning, Wednesday, January 7^th. Immediately, the Administration went into pre-emptive attack mode calling the victim a “deranged leftist” and a “domestic terrorist,” and asserting that the ICE officer was acting in self-defense. That line and the description are contrary to what many people know of the victim, as well as what people saw and captured on their phones and cameras.

The victim, Renee Nicole Good, was a mother of three and a prize-winning poet who self-described herself a “poet, writer, wife and mom.” A newcomer to Minneapolis from Colorado, she was active in the community and was a designated “legal observer of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities,” to monitor interactions between ICE agents and civilian protesters that have become the norm in large immigrant cities in America. Renee Good was at the scene in her vehicle to observe ICE operations and community protesters.

In video postings that last a matter of nine seconds, two ICE officers are seen approaching Good’s vehicle and one of them trying to open her door; a bystander is heard screaming “No” as Good is seen trying to drive away; and a third ICE officer is seen standing in front of her moving vehicle, firing twice in the direction of the driver, moving to a side and firing a third time from the side. Good’s car is seen going out of control, careening and coming to a stop on a snowbank. Yet America is being bombarded with two irreconcilable narratives – one manufactured by Trump’s Administration and the other by those at the scene and everyone opposed to the regime.

It adds to the explosiveness of the situation that Good was shot and killed not far from where George Folyd was killed, also in Minneapolis, on 25^th May, 2020, choked under the knee of a heartless policeman. And within 48 hours of Good’s killing, two Americans were shot and injured by two federal immigration agents, in Portland, Oregon, on the Westcoast. Trump’s attack on immigrants and the highhanded methods used by ICE agents have become the biggest flashpoint in the political opposition to the Trump presidency. People are organizing protests in places where ICE agents are apprehending immigrants because those who are being aggressively and violently apprehended have long been neighbours, colleagues, small business owners and students in their communities.

Deportation of illegal immigrants is not something that began under Trump. It has been going on in large numbers under all recent presidents including Obama and Biden. But it has never been so cruel and vicious as it is now under Trump. He has turned it into a television spectacle and hired large number of new ICE agents who are politically prejudiced and deployed them without proper training. They raid private homes and public buildings, including schools, looking for immigrants. When faced with protesters they get into clashes rather than deescalating the situation as professional police are trained to do. There is also the fear that the Administration may want to escalate confrontations with protesters to create a pretext for declaring martial law and disrupt the midterm congressional elections in November this year.

But the momentum that Trump was enjoying when he began his second term and started imposing his executive authority, has all but vanished and all within just one year in office. By the time this piece appears in print, the Supreme Court ruling on Trump’s tariffs (expected on Friday) may be out, and if as expected the ruling goes against Trump that will be a massive body blow to the Administration. Trump will of course use a negative court ruling as the reason for all the economic woes under his presidency, but by then even more Americans would have become tired of his perpetually recycled lies and boasts.

An Obliging World

To get back to my starting argument, it is in this increasingly hostile domestic backdrop that Trump has started looking abroad to assert his power without facing any resistance. And the world is obliging. The western leaders in Europe, Canada and Australia are like the three wise monkeys who will see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil – of anything that Trump does or fails to do. Their biggest fear is about the Trump tariffs – that if they say anything critical of Trump he will magnify the tariffs against their exports to the US. That is an understandable concern and it would be interesting to see if anything will change if the US Supreme Court were to rule against Trump and reject his tariff powers.

Outside the West, and with the exception of China, there is no other country that can stand up to Trump’s bullying and erratic wielding of power. They are also not in a position to oppose Trump and face increased tariffs on their exports to the US. Putin is in his own space and appears to be assured that Trump will not hurt him for whatever reason – and there are many of them, real and speculative. The case of the Latin American countries is different as they are part of the Western Hemisphere, where Trump believes he is monarch of all he surveys.

After more than a hundred years of despising America, many communities, not just regimes, in the region seem to be warming up to Trump. The timing of Trump’s sequestering of Venezuela is coinciding with a rising right wing wave and regime change in the region. An October opinion poll showed 53% of Latin American respondents reacting positively to a then potential US intervention in Venezuela while only 18% of US respondents were in favour of intervention. While there were condemnations by Latin American left leaders, seven Latin American countries with right wing governments gave full throated support to Trump’s ouster of Maduro.

The reasons are not difficult to see. The spread of crime induced by the commerce of cocaine has become the number one concern for most Latin Americans. The socio-religious backdrop to this is the evangelisation of Christianity at the expense of the traditional Catholic Church throughout Latin America. And taking a leaf from Trump, Latin Americans have also embraced the bogey of immigration, mainly influenced by the influx of Venezuelans fleeing in large numbers to escape the horrors of the Maduro regime.

But the current changes in Latin America are not necessarily indicative of a durable ideological shift. The traditional left’s base in the subcontinent is still robust and the recent regime changes are perhaps more due to incumbency fatigue than shifts in political orientations. The left has been in power for the greater part of this century and has not been able to provide answers to the real questions that preoccupied the people – economic affordability, crime and cocaine. It has not been electorally smart for the left to ignore the basic questions of the people and focus on grand projects for the intelligentsia. Exhibit #1 is the grand constitutional project in Chile under outgoing President Gabriel Borich, but it is not the only one. More romantic than realistic, Boric’s project titillated liberal constitutionalists the world over, but was roundly rejected by Chileans.

More importantly, and sooner than later, Trump’s intervention in Venezuela and his intended takeover of the country’s oil business will produce lasting backlashes, once the initial right wing euphoria starts subsiding. Apart from the bully force of Trump’s personality, the mastermind behind the intervention in Venezuela and policy approach towards Latin America in general, is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the former Cuban American Senator from Florida and the principal leader of the group of Cuban neocons in the US. His ultimate objective is said to be achieving regime change in Cuba – apparently a psychological settling of scores on behalf Cuban Americans who have been dead set against Castro’s Cuba after the overthrow of their beloved Batista.

Mr. Rubio is American born and his parents had left Cuba years before Fidel Castro displaced Fulgencio Batista, but the family stories he apparently grew up hearing in Florida have been a large part of his self-acknowledged political makeup. Even so, Secretary Rubio could never have foreseen a situation such as an externally uncontested Trump presidency in which he would be able to play an exceptionally influential role in shaping American policy for Latin America. But as the old Burns’ poem rhymes, “The best-laid plans of men and mice often go awry.”

by Rajan Philips ✍️