Features
JRJ recounts his famous 1951 speech advocating the Peace Treaty for Japan
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.
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.
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.
Features
The final voyage of the Iranian warship sunk by the US
On 17 February, the Indian Navy posted a cheerful message on X.
“Welcome!” it wrote, greeting the Iranian warship Iris Dena as it steamed into the port of Visakhapatnam to join an international naval gathering.
Photographs showed sailors in crisp whites and a grey frigate gliding in the sea harbour on a clear day. The hashtags spoke of “Bridges of Friendship” and “United Through Oceans”.
Two weeks later the ship, carrying 130 sailors, lay at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. It had been torpedoed by a US submarine off Sri Lanka’s southern coast on 4 March.
Commissioned in 2021, the Dena was a relatively new vessel – a Moudge-class frigate of Iran’s Southern Fleet, which patrols the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman.
According to US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, the vessel “thought it was safe in international waters” but instead “died a quiet death”. Rescue teams from Sri Lanka have recovered at least 87 bodies. Only 32 sailors survived.
The sinking marks a dramatic widening of the war between America, Israel and Iran. And, though it occurred in international waters of the Indian Ocean and outside India’s jurisdiction, it is an awkward moment for Delhi.
“The war has come to our doorsteps. That is not a good thing,” says retired Vice Admiral Arun Kumar Singh.
For some strategists, the episode carries broader implications for India’s regional standing.
Indian strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellaney wrote on X that the US torpedoing of the Iranian warship in India’s “maritime neighbourhood” was “more than a battlefield episode” – calling it a “strategic embarrassment” for Delhi.
“By sinking a vessel returning from an Indian-hosted multilateral exercise, Washington effectively turned India’s maritime neighbourhood into a war zone, raising uncomfortable questions about India’s authority in its own backyard,” Chellaney wrote.
Just days before its destruction, the Dena had been a diplomatic guest of the Indian Navy.
The ship had travelled to Visakhapatnam, a sun-washed port city on India’s east coast, to participate in the International Fleet Review 2026 and Exercise Milan, a large multilateral naval exercise meant to showcase India’s growing maritime leadership.
Seventy-four countries and 18 warships took part in the events, which Delhi described as a demonstration of its ambition to become the Indian Ocean’s “preferedsecurity partner”.
Visiting ships at such multilateral exercises usually do not carry a full combat load of live munitions, unless scheduled for a live-fire drill, according to Chellaney. Even during the sea phase, when drills and live firing take place, ships carry only tightly controlled ammunition limited to the specific exercises.
Singh, an invitee to the event, recalls seeing the warship and its Iranian sailors in Visakhapatnam just days before its fate changed.
“I saw the boys marching in front of me,” he says of the Iranian naval contingent during the parade along the seafront, just 10m away. “All young people. I feel very sad.”
He says on 21 February, the assembled ships – including the Iranian vessel – sailed out for the sea phase of Exercise Milan, scheduled to run until 25 February.
“What happened next is less clear: the ship may have returned to port or peeled away after exercises. Either way, the waters where it was later sunk – off Galle in Sri Lanka – lie only two to three days’ sailing from India’s east coast,” Singh says. What the ship was doing in the 10-12 days in between is not clear.

Singh, who has commanded submarines, believes the sequence leading up to the attack was probably straightforward.
The US, he notes, tracks vessels across the world’s oceans. “They would have known exactly when the ship left and where it was heading,” he says. A fourth of America’s submarine fleet of 65-70 is at sea at any given time, according to analysts.
According to the Indian Navy, the Iranian warship had been operating about 20 nautical miles west of Galle – roughly 23 miles (37km) – in waters that fall under Sri Lanka’s designated search-and-rescue zone.
The attack, Singh says, appears to have involved a single Mark-48 torpedo, a heavyweight weapon carrying about 650 pounds of high explosive, capable of snapping a ship in two. Video footage suggests the submarine may have fired from 3-4km away, around 05:30 local time.
The aftermath was grim and swift.
The warship reportedly sank within two to three minutes, leaving little time for rescue. “It’s a miracle they managed to send an SOS,” Singh says, which was picked up by the Sri Lanka Maritime Rescue Coordination Centre in Colombo.
According to the Indian Navy, a distress call from the Iranian warship was picked up by Colombo in the early hours of 4 March, triggering a regional search-and-rescue effort.
The navy said in a statement that Sri Lanka’s navy began rescue operations first, while India moved to assist later.
The Indian Navy deployed a long-range maritime patrol aircraft to support the search and kept another aircraft with air-droppable life rafts on standby.
A naval vessel already operating nearby reached the area by late afternoon. Another ship, which sailed from the southern Indian port city of Kochi to join the effort, continues to comb the waters for survivors and debris.

Under the Second Geneva Convention, countries at war are required to take “all possible measures” to rescue wounded or shipwrecked sailors after a naval attack. In practice, however, this duty applies only if a rescue can be attempted without putting the attacking vessel in serious danger.
Singh says submarines are rarely able to help.
“Submarines don’t surface,” he says. “If you surface and give up your position, someone else can sink you.”
Singh suspects the speed of the sinking – and possibly sparse shipping in the area at the time – meant few nearby vessels could respond. “A ship breaking up that fast leaves almost no chance,” he says.
In a shooting war, Singh says, the legal position is blunt.
Fighting between the United States and Iran had been under way since 28 February, with claims that 17 Iranian naval vessels had already been destroyed.
“When a shooting war is on, any ship of a belligerent country becomes fair game,” he says.
Many questions remain. Why was the Iranian warship still in waters near Sri Lanka nearly two weeks after leaving India’s naval exercise? Was it heading home, or on another mission? And how long had the US submarine been tracking it before firing?
For Delhi, the episode is diplomatically awkward.
India has drawn closer to Washington on defence while maintaining long-standing political and economic ties with Tehran – a balancing act the war has made harder.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has called broadly for “dialogue and diplomacy” to resolve conflicts, but has neither addressed the sinking of the Iranian vessel directly nor criticised the American strike.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the attack as “an atrocity at sea” and stressed that the frigate had been “a guest of India’s Navy”. Meanwhile Sri Lanka has taken control of another Iranian naval vessel off its coast after an engine failure forced it to seek port, a day after the US attack.
The episode has nonetheless sparked debate within India’s strategic community.
Kanwal Sibal, a veteran diplomat, argued that India’s responsibility may not be legal, but it is moral.

“The Iranian ship would not have been where it was had India not invited it to the Milan exercise,” he wrote on X. “A word of condolence at the loss of lives of those who were our invitees would be in order.”
Others like Chellaney have framed the issue in more strategic terms.
He described the strike as a blow to India’s maritime diplomacy. The torpedoing of the frigate in “India’s maritime backyard”, he argued, punctured Delhi’s carefully cultivated image as a “preferred security partner” in the Indian Ocean.
“In one torpedo strike, American hard power has punctured India’s carefully cultivated soft power,” says Chellaney.
As the debate gathered pace in strategic circles, India’s official response remained cautious.
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said on X that he had held a telephone conversation with Araghchi, and also posted a photograph of a meeting with Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh at a foreign policy summit in Delhi.
For military historian Srinath Raghavan, the legal position is clear: once the Iranian vessel left India’s shores, Delhi had no formal responsibility.
The strategic message, however, is harder to ignore.
“First, the spreading geography of this war. Second, India’s limited ability to manage its fallout,” says Raghavan.
“Indeed, the US Navy has fired a shot across the bow aimed at all regional players, including India.”
[BBC]
Features
End of ‘Western Civilisation’?
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” ––George Orwell, Animal Farm
When I wrote in this column an essay on 4th February 2026 titled, the ‘Beginning of Another ‘White Supremacist’ World Order?’, my focus was on the hypocrisy of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos address on 20 January 2026 to the World Economic Forum. It was embraced like the gospel by liberal types and the naïve international relations ‘experts’ in our country and elsewhere. My suspicion of Carney’s words stemmed from the consistent role played by countries like Canada and others which he called ‘middle powers’ or ‘intermediate powers’ in the world order he critiqued in Davos. He wanted such countries, particularly Canada, “to live the truth?” which meant “naming reality” as it exists; “acting consistently” towards all in the world; “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” and “building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored.” These are some memorable pieces of Carney’s mantra.
Yet unsurprisingly, it only took the Trump-Netanyahu illegal war against Iran to prove the hollowness in Carney’s words. If he placed any premium on his own words, he should have at least voiced his concern against the continuing atrocities in the Middle East unilaterally initiated by the US and Israel. But his concern is only about Iran’s seemingly indiscriminate attacks across the region targeting US and Israeli installations and even civilian locations in countries allied with the Us-Israel coalition.
Issuing a statement on 3 March 2026 from Sydney he noted, “Canada has long seen Iran as the principal source of instability and terror in the Middle East” and “despite more than two decades of negotiations and diplomatic efforts, Iran has not dismantled its nuclear programme, nor halted its enrichment activities.” A sensible observer would note how the same statement would also apply to Israel. In fact, Israel has been the bigger force of instability in the Middle East surpassing Iran. After all, it has exiled an entire population of people — the Palestinians — from their country to absolute statelessness has not halted its genocide of the same people unfortunate enough to find themselves in Gaza after their homeland was taken over to create Israel in 1948 and their properties to build illegal Jewish settlements in more recent times. And then there is the matter of nuclear weapons. Israel has never been hounded to stop its nuclear programme unlike Iran. There is, in the world order Carney criticixed and the one in his fantasy, a fundamental difference between a ‘Jewish bomb’ and a ‘Muslim bomb’ in the ‘clash of civilisations’ as imagined by Samuel P. Huntington and put into practice by the likes of Messers Trump, Netanyahu, and Carney. That is, the Jewish bomb is legitimate, and the Muslim one is not, which to me evokes the commandments in the dystopian novella Animal Farm.
But Carney, in his new rhetoric closely echoing those of the leaders of Germany, UK and France, did not completely forget his Davos words too. He noted, in the same statement, “we take this position with regret, because the current conflict is another example of the failure of the international order.” But in reality, it is not the failure of the current international order, but its reinforcement by the likes of Mr Carney, reiterating why it will not change.
Coming back to the US-Israel attack on Iran, anyone even remotely versatile in the craft of warfare should have known, sooner or later, the rapidly expanding theatre of devastation in the Middle East was likely to happen for two obvious reasons. One, Iran had warned of this outcome if attacked as it considered those countries hosting US and Israeli bases or facilities as enemies. This is military common sense. Two, this was also likely because it is the only option available for a country under attack when faced with superior technology, firepower and the silence of much of the world. I cannot but feel deep shame about the lukewarm and generic statements urging restraint issued by our political leaders notwithstanding the support of Iran to our country in many times of difficulty at the hands of this very same world order.
When I say this, I am not naïvely embracing Iran as a shining example of democracy. I am cognizant of the Iranian regime’s maltreatment of some of its own citizens, stifling of dissent within the country and its proxy support for armed groups in the region. But in real terms, this is no different from similar actions of Israel and the US. The difference is, the actions of these countries, particularly of the US, have been far more devastating for the world than anything Iran has done or could do. US’s misadventures in Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan come to mind — to take only a handful of examples.
But it is no longer about Carney and the hollowness of his liberal verbal diarrhoea in Davos. What is of concern now is twofold. One is the unravelling fiction of what he called the ‘new world order’ in which he located countries like Canada at the helm. And the second is the reality of continuing to live in the same old world order where countries like Canada and other middle and intermediate powers will continue to do the bidding of powerful aggressors like the US and Israel as they have done since the 20th century.
Yet, one must certainly thank Trump and Mr Natenyahu for one thing. That is, they have effectively exposed the myth of what used to be euphemistically called the ‘western civilisation.’ Despite its euphemism, the notion and its reality were omnipresent and omnipotent, because of the devastating long term and lingering consequences of its tools of operation, which were initially colonialism and later postcolonial and neocolonial forms of control to which all of us continue to be subjected.
One thing that was clearly lacking in the long and devastating history of the ‘western civilisation’ in so far as it affected the lives of people like us is its lack of ‘civilisation’ and civility at all times. Therefore, Trump and Mr Netanyahu must be credited for exposing this reality in no uncertain terms.
But what does illegal and unprovoked military action and the absence so far of accountability mean in real terms? It simply means that rules no longer matter. If Israel and the US can bomb and murder heads of state of a sovereign country, its citizens including children, cause massive destruction claiming a non-existent imminent threat violating both domestic and international law, it opens a wide playing field for the powerful and the greedy. Hypothetically, in this free-for-all, China can invade India through Arunachal Pradesh and occupy that Indian state which it calls Zangnan simply because it has been claiming the territory of itself for a very long time and also simply because it can. India can invade and occupy Sri Lanka, if it so wishes because this can so easily be done and also because it is part of the extended neighbourhood of the Ramayana and India’s ‘Akhand Bharat’ political logic. Sri Lanka can perhaps invade and occupy the Maldives if it wants a free and perennial supply of Maldive Fish. Incidentally, the Sri Lankan Tamil guerrilla group, People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam nearly succeeded in doing so 1988.
Sarcasm aside, even more dangerous is the very real possibility of this situation opening the doors for small, violent and mobile militant groups to target citizens of these aggressor countries and their allies as we saw in the late 1960s and 1970s. This will occur because in this kind of situation, many people would likely believe this form of asymmetric warfare is the only avenue of resistance open to them. It is precisely under similar conditions that the many Palestinian armed factions and Lebanese militia groups emerged in the first place. If this happens, the victims will not be the fathers and the vociferous supporters of the present aggression but all of us including those who had nothing to do with the atrocities or even opposed it in their weak and inaudible voices.
If I may go back to Carney’s Davos words, what would “to live the truth?”, “naming reality”, “acting consistently” and “applying the same standards to allies and rivals” mean in the emerging situation in the Middle East? Would this kind of hypocrisy, hyperbole, choreographed silence and selective accusations only end if a US invasion of Greenland, an integral part of the ‘White Supremacist’ World Order’ takes place? By then, however, all of us would have been well-trained in the art of feeling numb. By that time, we too would have forgotten yet another important line in Animal Farm: “No animal shall kill any other animal without cause.”
Features
Silence is not protection: Rethinking sexual education in Sri Lanka
Sexual education is a vital component of holistic education, contributing to physical health, emotional well-being, gender equality, and social responsibility. Despite its importance, sexual education remains a sensitive and often controversial subject in many societies, particularly in culturally conservative contexts. In Sri Lanka, discussions around sexuality are frequently avoided in formal and informal settings, leaving young people to rely on peers, social media, or misinformation. This silence creates serious social, health, and psychological consequences. By examining the Sri Lankan context alongside international examples, the importance of comprehensive and age-appropriate sexual education becomes clear.
Understanding Sexual Education
Sexual education goes beyond biological explanations of reproduction. Comprehensive sexual education includes knowledge about human anatomy, puberty, consent, relationships, emotional health, gender identity, sexual orientation, reproductive rights, contraception, prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and personal safety. Importantly, it also promotes values such as respect, responsibility, dignity, and mutual understanding. When delivered appropriately, sexual education empowers individuals to make informed decisions rather than encouraging early or risky sexual behavior.
The Sri Lankan Context: Silence and Its Consequences
In Sri Lanka, sexual education is included in school curricula mainly through subjects such as Health Science and Life Competencies, however the content is often limited and taught with hesitation. Many teachers feel uncomfortable discussing sexual topics openly due to cultural norms, religious sensitivities, and fear of parental backlash. As a result, lessons are rushed, skipped, or delivered in a purely biological manner without addressing emotional, social, or ethical dimensions.
This lack of open education has led to several social challenges. Teenage pregnancies, although less visible, remain a significant issue, particularly in rural and estate sectors. Young girls who become pregnant often face school dropouts, social stigma, and limited future opportunities. Many of these pregnancies occur due to lack of knowledge about contraception, consent, and bodily autonomy.
Another serious concern in Sri Lanka is child sexual abuse. Numerous reports indicate that many children do not recognize abusive behaviour or lack the confidence and language to report it. Proper sexual education, especially lessons on body boundaries and consent, can help children identify inappropriate behavior and seek help early. In the Sri Lankan context, where respect for elders often discourages questioning authority, this knowledge is especially crucial.
Furthermore, misinformation about menstruation, nocturnal emissions, and bodily changes during puberty causes anxiety and shame among adolescents. Many Sri Lankan girls experience menarche without prior knowledge, leading to fear and confusion. Similarly, boys often receive no guidance about emotional or physical changes, reinforcing unhealthy notions of masculinity and silence around mental health.
Cultural Resistance and Misconceptions
Opposition to sexual education in Sri Lanka often stems from the belief that it promotes immoral behaviour or encourages premarital sex. However, international research consistently shows the opposite: young people who receive comprehensive sexual education tend to delay sexual initiation and engage in safer behaviours. The resistance is therefore rooted more in cultural fear than empirical evidence.
Religious and cultural values are important, but they need not conflict with sexual education. In fact, sexual education can be framed within moral discussions about responsibility, respect, family values, and care for others principles shared across Sri Lanka’s major religious traditions. Ignoring sexuality does not protect cultural values; rather, it leaves young people vulnerable.
International Evidence: Lessons from Other Countries
Several countries demonstrate how effective sexual education contributes to positive social outcomes.
In the Netherlands, sexual education begins at an early age and is age-appropriate, focusing on respect, relationships, and communication rather than explicit sexual activity. As a result, the Netherlands has one of the lowest rates of teenage pregnancy and STIs in the world. Young people are encouraged to discuss feelings, boundaries, and consent openly, both in schools and at home.
Similarly, Sweden introduced compulsory sexual education as early as the 1950s. Swedish programs emphasise gender equality, reproductive rights, and sexual health. This long-term commitment has contributed to high levels of sexual health awareness, low maternal mortality among young mothers, and strong societal acceptance of gender diversity. Sexual education in Sweden is also closely linked to public health services, ensuring access to counseling and contraception.
In many developing contexts, international organisations have supported sexual education as a tool for social development. UNESCO promotes Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) globally, emphasising that it equips young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values that enable them to protect their health and dignity. Studies supported by UNESCO show that CSE reduces risky behaviours, improves academic outcomes, and supports gender equality.
In countries such as Rwanda and South Africa, sexual education has been integrated with HIV/AIDS prevention programs. These initiatives demonstrate that sexual education is not a luxury of developed nations but a necessity for public health and social stability.
Comparing Sri Lanka with International Models
When compared with international examples, Sri Lanka’s challenges are not due to lack of capacity but lack of open dialogue and political will. Sri Lanka has a strong education system, high literacy rates, and an extensive public health network. These strengths provide an excellent foundation for implementing comprehensive sexual education that is culturally sensitive yet scientifically accurate.
Unlike the Netherlands or Sweden, Sri Lanka may not adopt early-age sexuality discussions in the same manner, but age-appropriate education during late primary and secondary school is both feasible and necessary. Topics such as puberty, menstruation, consent, online safety, and respectful relationships can be introduced gradually without violating cultural norms.
Sexual Education in the Digital Era
The urgency of sexual education has increased in the digital age. Sri Lankan adolescents are exposed to sexual content through social media, films, and online platforms, often without guidance. Pornography frequently becomes a primary source of sexual knowledge, leading to unrealistic expectations, objectification, and distorted ideas about consent and relationships.
Sexual education can counter these influences by developing critical thinking, media literacy, and ethical understanding. Teaching young people how to navigate digital relationships, cyber harassment, and online exploitation is now an essential component of sexual education.
Gender Equality and Social Change
Sexual education also plays a crucial role in promoting gender equality. In Sri Lanka, traditional gender roles often limit open discussion about female sexuality while excusing male dominance. Comprehensive sexual education challenges these norms by emphasizing mutual respect, shared responsibility, and equality in relationships.
Educating boys about consent and emotional expression helps reduce gender-based violence, while educating girls about bodily autonomy strengthens empowerment. In the long term, this contributes to healthier families and more equitable social structures.
The Way Forward for Sri Lanka
For sexual education to be effective in Sri Lanka, several steps are necessary. Teachers must receive proper training to handle the subject confidently and sensitively. Parents should be engaged through awareness programs to reduce fear and misconceptions. Curriculum developers must ensure that content is age-appropriate, culturally grounded, and scientifically accurate.
Importantly, sexual education should not be treated as a one-time lesson but as a continuous process integrated into broader life skills education. Collaboration between schools, healthcare providers, religious leaders, and community organisations can help normalise discussions around sexual health while respecting cultural values.
Finally , sexual education is not merely about sex; it is about health, dignity, safety, and responsible citizenship. The Sri Lankan experience demonstrates how silence and taboo can lead to misinformation, vulnerability, and social harm. International examples from the Netherlands, Sweden, and global initiatives supported by UNESCO clearly show that comprehensive sexual education leads to positive individual and societal outcomes.
For Sri Lanka, embracing sexual education does not mean abandoning cultural values. Rather, it means equipping young people with knowledge and ethical understanding to navigate modern social realities responsibly. In an era of rapid social and technological change, sexual education is not optional it is essential for building a healthy, informed, and compassionate society.
by Milinda Mayadunna ✍️
-
Features5 days agoBrilliant Navy officer no more
-
Opinion5 days agoSri Lanka – world’s worst facilities for cricket fans
-
News2 days agoLegal experts decry move to demolish STC dining hall
-
News1 day agoUniversity of Wolverhampton confirms Ranil was officially invited
-
Features5 days agoA life in colour and song: Rajika Gamage’s new bird guide captures Sri Lanka’s avian soul
-
Business3 days agoCabinet nod for the removal of Cess tax imposed on imported good
-
Features6 days agoOverseas visits to drum up foreign assistance for Sri Lanka
-
Features6 days agoSri Lanka to Host First-Ever World Congress on Snakes in Landmark Scientific Milestone


