Features
Making sense of ones and zeroes

Dr. Madhusanka Liyanage: First Sri Lankan to win IEEE Outstanding Young Researcher Award
By Sajitha Prematunge
Oblivious to the laws of physics and before he could even grasp the meaning of the word velocity, he tried to calculate the speed of the bus he was travelling in, by taking into account how long it took the bus to travel between two lamp posts. He was just seven years old then. By grade three he was trying to calculate the light year longhand. It’s not rocket science, it was just a matter of multiplying how far light travelled in a second, by how many seconds there are in a year. But for an eight-year-old to even entertain such an idea, while his peers were still playing cops and robbers, is uncanny.
In any other country he would have been celebrated as a math prodigy. So it came as no surprise when, this year, Dr. Madhusanka Liyanage won the Outstanding Young Researcher Award presented by the Communications Society of Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, one of the biggest engineering societies in the world. The award is presented to the 2nd Best Young Researcher in the region, in Liyanage’s case it is Region 8, which included Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
Award
Research performance of candidates was a major criteria for the Outstanding Young Researcher Award. The number of academic papers published in journals and conference papers produced in the last three years, for example, were graded depending on the ‘impact factor’ of the publication or conference, with contributions to IEEE journals and conferences receiving extra credit. Citations of work in the past three years is also considered, as well as contribution to the society in the form of the number of conferences or workshops organised and journals edited. Positions held within the IEEE society is given special consideration and Liyanage was elevated to the position of senior member this year. “It’s not just my award, my team of students, mentors and anyone else who had helped me throughout my career all played a vital role in my success.”
Born in Udugama, Galle, in 1985 Liyanage is the youngest in a family of three.”Everyone else in the family have a knack for business.” Both his elder brother and sister took after their businessman father, Sunil Ranjith Liyanage. The youngest Liyanage took after his mother, Magalika Hegodaarchthi. When asked whether his mathematics teacher-mother was influential in his academic trajectory, Liyanage readily admitted that she was a positive influence. He was exposed to math at an early age. His mother still fondly reminisces how the six-year-old parked himself at the back row of her math tuition class trying to solve problems meant for 14-year-olds. “Perhaps the exposure motivated me,” said Liyanage. “Math was the only subject that made sense to me. In fact, I am not good at any other subject.” His uncle bought him the book, ‘How to become an engineer’ when he was still in grade three, the math problems in which he avidly devoured. “In fact, I can’t remember a time I wanted to be anything other than an engineer,” chuckled Liyanage.
Education
Liyanage received his primary education in Udugama Maha Vidyalaya. The grade five scholarship examination results qualified him to enrol in Richmond College, Galle and A/Ls got him through to the Moratuwa University, where he obtained his B.Sc. Degree, with First Class Honours, in electronics and telecommunication engineering, in 2009. “3G was just rolling out and it was an exciting time to be in the telecommunications field,” said Liyanage. He received a scholarship to Asian Institute of Technology, even before he completed his bachelors. He completed his Master in Engineering (M.Eng.) from the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand, in 2011. After a year at AIT he moved to France on a dual degree programme, where he obtained a Master of Science (M.Sc.) from the University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, France.
In 2004, right after his A/Ls he represented Sri Lanka in the 45th International Mathematical Olympiad, held in Europe. Since that first taste of Europe, he had been drawn to it and knew then that one day he would make it his second home. In Finland, considered the base of telecommunication with big-name companies like Nokia and Huawei setting up shop there, Liyanage obtained a PhD in communication engineering from the University of Oulu, in 2016.
Then his path diverged. “I could opt for a job in the industry or stay in the academic track.” He decided to remain an academic. Between 2015 and 2018 he functioned as a visiting Research Fellow at various institutions such as Data61, CSIRO, Sydney, Australia, the data and digital specialist arm of Australia’s national science agency; Infolabs21, Lancaster University, UK; School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales; School of IT, University of Sydney and computer science laboratory LIP6, Sorbonne University.
In 2018, he received the Docentship from the University of Oulu, Finland, within 18 months from the PhD, making Liyanage the only researcher to receive the Docentship so soon. He worked as an adjunct professor at the University of Oulu while engaged in his post doctoral studies. He joined the School of Computer Science, University College Dublin (UCD), Ireland, early this year as an assistant professor and Ad Astra Fellow with the prestigious Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions Individual Fellowship. The fellowship is one of highly reputed fellowships offered by the European Union.
Research
Liyanage’s main research interest is telecommunication network, 5G and 6G mobile networks in particular, focusing on network security concerns. “The major change we can expect with the transfer from 4G to 5G will be the number of devices that will be connected to the system.” He explained that although we only connect mobile devices such as mobile phones, tabs and laptops to the network, the advent of 5G will allow more devices, such as smart wearables, to be connected to the network. 6G will further expand the horizon to include the whole shebang, or Internet of things (IoT). In lay terms IoT is the network of physical objects, referred to here by ‘things’, that exchange data with other devices and systems over the Internet.
“These new devises don’t have the standard security measures that mobile devises and laptops have, making them more susceptible to cyber attacks.” Liyanage explained that there are only a handful of mobile device manufacturers in the world, consequently all mobile devices have in place stringent security control measures and are required to follow strict standards. “There is a large number of IoT device manufacturers, and are not bound to follow such strict security measures.” Liyanage explained that such devices are susceptible to cyber attacks and can, in fact, be used as entry points for attacks on the 5G network. “Besides some IoT devices are considerably smaller and, therefore, does not have a lot of processing power. Consequently, they cannot support high power security mechanisms.”
Liyanage further explained that even reputed manufacturers of IoT devices, opt out security tests, due to related costs and time constraints imposed by high competition. “A major drawback in 5G is that it is a software controllable network and software based systems are generally more vulnerable than hardware based systems.” He elaborated that 5G is an open architecture platform, which will enable software developers to understand, and possibly manipulate it.
What has the potential to make matters worse is that, after all IoT devices are interconnected, the next step will be to integrate all critical infrastructure such as the power grid, transportation network or water managements systems. “These can be monitored by IoT devices via 5G.” Liyanage pointed out a major security risk arguing that any terrorist or cyber criminal with a decent IoT device could hack into such systems and thereby wreak havoc with any of the aforementioned critical infrastructure.
He explained that 6G will enable the integration of Artificial Intelligence into the system. “It will be a mostly automated, self sustaining network, centrally controlled by an AI. “AI is essentially a good thing as long as it is used for the good,” said Liyanage. But it can also be manipulated to achieve malicious ends, according to him. “For example, if someone creates a malicious intelligent agent, it can identify loopholes in the system and self perform attacks on it.” The sci-fi like evil AI agent stuff may come off like an episode of ‘Person of Interest’, but Liyanage maintains it is entirely plausible. Consequently, he reiterated the requirement of straightening out the AI related security issues before considering launching the 6G system. “We have to consider everything from the data fed to the AI to what kind of effect it will have on the AI and how reliable the AI algorithm will be.”
All these maybe years away and will no doubt have repercussions of global relevance. But what are the more immediate threats at individual level when switching to 5G? “It will have a huge impact on society. So far we only connect mobiles, tabs and laptops to the system.” But with a full-fledged 5G system, expected sometime between 2025 to 2030, a lot more IoT devices will be interconnected via the system. “These devices can collect a lot of personal information. For example, from cameras on mobile phones to smart TVs, every new device comes with a built in camera. It won’t be long before many strap smart wearable that store health information.” Liyanage pointed out that this wealth of personal information, most of which is uploaded on to cloud services, can easily be stolen. “This is a major violation of privacy.” He emphasised that, at an age when everyone in society is connected to the system most of the time by at least one device such as the mobile phone a proper privacy protection mechanism should be put in place to counter such privacy violations.
When asked whether 5G or 6G posed renewed individual financial security threats, Liyanage pointed out that such information is already available on most devices connected to the 4G system. “But they are connected through personal Wi-Fi, which is safe as long as you maintain it password protected.”
Blockchain applications, another research area that appeals to Liyanage, may just provide the solution for a host of these security issues. For those uninitiated in telecommunication networking, Blockchain applications are cryptography used to secure transactions made using cryptocurrency. Blockchain technology became popular a decade ago and gained momentum because of Bitcoin cryptocurrency, the digital equivalent of money. It may be just a bunch of ones and zeroes but daily transactions using cryptocurrency can amount to billions.
“Bitcoin cryptocurrency is a beautiful innovation but what’s more interesting is the technology used to secure transactions made using cryptocurrency, blockchain, because of its applications in other areas such as telecommunication.” Liyanage pointed out that some of the pressing security issues of 5G and 6G can be solved using blockchain technology. “The biggest advantage of Bitcoin cryptocurrency is that it eliminates the third party. For example, if two people want to make a transaction, it has to be done through the bank. But with Bitcoin, transactions can be made direct.”
So, what are its implications for telecommunication? “The same concept can be used in telecommunication,” explained Liyanage. “There are certain instances where a third party is required. Roaming is a case in point.” Roaming allows the use of a mobile connection while outside the range of its home network by connecting to another available network in the country of travel. “To achieve this, the home country service provider should have an existing agreement with the visiting country operator.” When two parties who do not know each other want to enter into an agreement, in order to ensure that both parties keep their end of the bargain, a trusted neutral third party must intervene, and be paid for, for their pains. Blockchain can offer this trust and is far more preferable to a physical third party as is requires no commission. “Anywhere a third party is required, they can be replaced by a blockchain.”
There are many other such applications, according to Liyanage. “It can be used in service-level or SLA agreements. For example, if a user enters into an agreement with a telecommunications service provider, on his or her own terms, a third party must ensure that both parties keep to their agreement.”
Multitasker
Liyanage currently supervises nine PhD students and three Master students in four different universities. He is also a visiting Lecturer at Moratuwa University, Sri Jayewardenepura University and Yangon Technological University, Myanmar. In addition to conducting lectures for Undergraduate and master courses at the University College Dublin, supervising postgraduate students, mentoring postdoctoral researchers and functioning as the principle investigator for various national and internal research projects, Liyanage has found time to publish over 100 research articles and three books. When asked how he achieve all this at such a young age, with two masters and a PhD to boot, Liyanage attributes it to his time management skills.
“I may not always have my nose in a book, but I manage my time efficiently.” He takes after his parents, who happen to be early birds, waking up at 4 am. From four to eight or nine he dedicates to research work. “Having the satisfaction that I have done my job for the day, I can fool around all I want the remaining 10 hours or so. I think life needs this kind of balance.”
Unlike Sri Lankan students, who are forced to work in the government or corporate sector while reading for a master or PhD, Liyanage didn’t have to sacrifice valuable time on a job unrelated to his field of work. Liyanage was paid to do research and this, he points out is the fundamental difference between European countries and Sri Lanka. “I hardly know any full-time PhD students in Sri Lanka. Most of them are forced to lecture. PhDs require dedication.” He admitted that his academic load of University College Dublin is comparatively low allowing him to dedicate more time to research. Usually a lecturer is required to teach three modules per year, but because he is an Ad Astra Fellow, he is required to teach only one module. “In a bid to encourage research, University College Dublin hired 100 lecturers over a four-year period as Ad Astra Fellows, who would have limited academic load.”
It’s quite the opposite in Sri Lanka, pointed out Liyanage. “There are talented students and lecturers in Sri Lanka, but they are overloaded. Some lecturers are required to teach three modules in a single semester.” He also pointed out the lack of research funding and grants. “It should come from either the government of the corporate sector. To attract good PhD students remuneration equivalent to industry sector salaries must be offered.”
Liyanage’s achievements are not solely academic. The multitasker also has a patent to his credit. During a short stint at General Electronics, their branch in Italy wanted to replace the wired communication mechanism between the head and the tail of trains built by them, with wireless communication. “Because wired connections were a hassle when changing carriages. But wireless communication mechanisms are relatively less secure, because open air transmissions can be intercepted.” Liyanage built a secure wireless communication mechanism, which was patented. When he is not engaged in research, teaching or supervising, Liyanage likes to travel.
Features
First leftist Mayor after NM: SJB, UNP beaten at their own game

What’s in a vote? That which we call a show of hands could still be as concealed as a secret vote. The newly elected Colombo Municipal Council has chosen the NPP’s Vraie Cally Balthazaar as the City’s new Mayor, but on a secret vote and not in an open show of hands. The secret vote route appears to have caused much consternation among the SJB-UNP opposition forces at the Town Hall. The latter openly preferred an open show and are blaming the secret vote for the defeat of their candidate Riza Zarook.
On the face of it, the NPP with 49 of the 117 Councillors has a more legitimate claim to have one of own as Mayor rather than the SJB with 29 Councillors. In what has been described as a “desperate move”, the SJB forged a mayoral united front by fusing its 29 members with the UNP’s 13, the SLPP’s five and the singular member of the People’s Alliance (whoever the PA now is).
The beefed up SJB mayoral front total of 48 was close enough to the NPP’s 49 for claims of legitimacy, and both sides needed the support at least another 11 or 10 from the remaining 20 members to get the required majority of 59 votes. In the secret vote, the NPP’s candidate presumably got 12 of the non-allied votes to get 61 votes in total. The SJB mayoral front got only six for a total 54 votes. Two votes, there’s no certainty as to whose, were rejected.
Would the result have gone the other way if this municipal conclave had decided on an open show instead of papal secrecy? You do not need supernatural powers to determine that. Let alone a clairvoyant like Gota’s Gnanaka! The commonplace supposition would be that a secret vote may have allowed secret transactions to secure support with hidden hands.
But no one is accusing the JVP-NPP of resorting to such time-(dis)honoured tactics perfected for over 75 years by the UNP and later copied by all others, and most vigorously by the Rajapaksas. If I remember right or not mistaken, the Sunday Times Political Editor made the point after the May LG elections that there was no hanky-panky meddling in the elections by the NPP government – unlike (this is my parentheses) all previous governments in all previous elections.
As well, we may turn the question around and ask about the insistence on an open show of hands as against a secret vote. Is it because the SJB is now all for keeping its hands clean and asking others to show their hands of support in the open without receiving undue incentives? OR is it because the SJB and its allies wanted to see in the open which of the NPP councillors, who may have been beneficiaries of earlier incentives, would now betray them and support the NPP candidate?
Put another way, was it a stratagem to ask for a show of hands to see the breach of loyalty in the open in spite of past IOUs? The latter hypothesis has greater credibility because of the blessings given to the SJB alliance by two former presidents representing two fallen political houses.
No matter what happened secretly and how, the eventual victory of Ms. Balthazar as NPP Mayor chalks up a rare non-UNP victory in the history of Colombo Town Hall politics. After independence there have been only two non-UNP Mayors in Colombo. The first came as a progressive breakthrough when NM Perera became Mayor in 1954. The second came as a comical farce in 2006, when Uvais Mohamed Imitiyas, the leader of an independent group put up by the UNP after its botched up list of candidates had been rejected by the Election Commissioner. Ms. Balthazar is also the City’s second female mayor in quick succession after Rosy Senanayake herself an old school UNPer.
In NM’s Footsteps
News commentaries on Ms. Balthazar’s victory have made mention of the fact that she is the first leftist Mayor of Colombo in 70 years. The first and the last leftist Mayor so far has been Dr. NM Perera, the LSSP leader. NM had been a CMC member from July 1948 and became Mayor on 13 August 1954 after the municipal election on 24 July 1954. A New York Times news report called him the world’s first Trotskyite Mayor, a tongue-in-cheek shot that was characteristic of the Cold War era.
An era that the world badly misses now with an unstoppable Netanyahu and TACO (Trump always chickens out) Trump running amok. In this instance, with Middle East burning, Trump has chickened out to the war schemes of Netanyahu.
Back to Colombo of the 1950s, the LSSP fared well in the LG elections of 1954 including Colombo, a number of Urban Councils and many village councils. In Colombo, NM was accompanied by a strong LSSP contingent that included stalwarts like Bernard Soysa Osmund Jayaratne and a well known architect of the era, J. E. Devapura. Some years ago, Stanley Abeynaike recounted the saga of NM’s Mayorship in the Sunday Observer. Last week, Nandana Weerarathne (Nandana Substack) has recalled the old NM story in the current context.
The initiatives that NM spearheaded as Mayor are worthy of emulation even today. The first order of business was ridding Town Hall of bribery and corruption and implementing a purposeful budget. He took on the private omnibus system within Colombo, replacing it by a public trolley-bus service; and started planning a public bus service for the city and suburban travellers in collaboration with the local authorities of Kolonnawa, Wattala, Dehiwela, Mount-Lavinia and Kotte. City cleanup, slum clearance, small housing schemes, upkeep of rental housing neglected by landlords, and transferring ownership of rental housing to tenants after 30 years of occupancy – were among the progressive measures that were rapidly rolled out during NM’s methodical mayorship.
But all those initiatives of NM riled up the landlords and the private bus owners, and through them the entire UNP government of Prime Minister Kotelawala. Sir John and his cabal were not going to let NM to be the Mayor of Colombo’s even as the country was heading to the general election in 1956. A conspiracy was hatched, and a resolution was passed at an emergency UNP meeting at Sri Kotha, the UNP headquarters, “to remove the Colombo Mayor, Dr. NM Perera.” Even the courts got in on the act to facilitate a resolution at Council against NM as Mayor.
When the resolution to remove NM as Mayor finally came to the floor, Bernard Soysa, Osmund Jayaratne and JE Devapura took turns speaking for hours on end against the resolution. They were hoping to run the clock until the Supreme Court ruling came. But to no avail, and the resolution was passed on October 1st, 1955 by a majority of two votes. One of them was the Communist Party’s Kotahena Member Anthony Marcellus who was brought over to the UNP to vote against NM. Orchestrating the moves was R. Premadasa (father of the current SJB leader) who was brought from outside to oversee matters inside, replacing then Deputy Mayor T. Rudra, who was obliged to resign. All of that in time for the April 1956 election that the UNP lost anyway.
Even the 2006 election of Uvais Mohamed Imitiyas, a political nondescript, as mayor, was the result of the backfiring of a UNP plan to prevent Vasudeva Nanayakkara, another LSSPer, from becoming Mayor. The UNP even got the better of Milinda Moragoda, one time Wickremesinghe confidant, when he chose to make a run for the Mayorship with the support of the Rajapaksas in 2011. UNP fielded its own candidate, AJM Muzammil, who defeated Moragoda and stayed on as Mayor until Rosie Senanayake succeeded him as the next, and now likely the last, UNP Mayor.
So, one can imagine the consternation of Ranil Wickremesinghe in seeing even the last bastion of the UNP’s power legacy being taken away by the upstart NPP. After 1977, through constitutional chicanery and electoral subterfuge the UNP established its supremacy at all levels of government and in all elections. After Chandrika Kumaratunga’s spectacular victories in 1994, the UNP’s electoral superstructure has been steadily dismantled and the only elected body that has survived this debacle is the Colombo Municipality. Until now, that is.
And all of this has been on Ranil Wickremesinghe’s watch. He has been quintessentially a Colombo politician, albeit with an elitist base like JR Jayewardene, unlike the likes of Pieter Keuneman, Bernard Soysa or R. Premadasa who reached out to a broader cross-section of people in the City. Losing Colombo would be the bitterest pill to swallow.
If you are inclined to feel sorry for Mr. Wickremesinghe, save yourself some space to feel good about the future of the City and even the country. Leaving Colombo in the hands of an opportunistically cobbled up SJB-UNP-SLPP alliance would have been both an insult and an injury. The NPP deserved to have one from its ranks as Mayor and it has beaten the UNP in its own game to seal its victory. But having won to govern, will the NPP govern to win – again? That is the question.
by Rajan Philips ✍️
Features
Criminalise war and work tirelessly for peace: Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

Soon to be 100-years ( July 10 th 1925) the two times former Prime Minister of Malaysia’s advice to the world is to “Criminalize War” and work tirelessly for peace.
Q: What is the secret to your healthy happy life?
A: People ask me that question all the time and I say I think its just my good luck. If I have suffered from some kind of fatal disease like cancer, of course life would be different.
I have had heart attacks, and both times I had open heart surgery, but nowadays they don’t open your heart. They use stents. I survived and I recovered and I was able to function. After that I am more careful with what I eat. I keep my weight steady. I do not increase my weight.
In this world, food is the problem. On the one hand you have people who are obese and on the other hand, we have a world that is starving. So, I avoid being obese and eat only very little every day.
Q: What is your advice to the younger generation?
A: My advice is to be active. Active means not only physically active. The brain is an amazing muscle. You need to use it every single day. If you see weight lifters, they have big muscles because they do exercise, You must not become sedentary. Brain must be constantly exercised.
Q: Now that you have retired, what is your day like?
A: I want to take it easy, but most of the time, I come to work almost daily. Usually, people try to retire at 55 or 56. But they must not do that. I keep my body and mind active all the time. I still read, write and do whatever is needed of me.
Q: About the world and with all that is going on around us, what would your advice be to all nations, specially to the nations that are at war?
A: When I stepped down from being Prime Minister, I started a movement to ‘Criminalize War” to make war a crime. There was some support, it took a long time. I believe that any conflict should be resolved. Not through killing each other. You should resolve conflicts through peaceful means like negotiations. That is what we practice here. We are a multinational country, normally there would be many conflicts, but we do not have war in Malaysia. We sit down and talk.
Q: If you had one more opportunity to be Prime Minister of Malaysia, what would you do differently this time?
A: When I stepped down after 22 years, there was still a lot of things to be done. These 22 years were a time of very high tension that came from developed countries. So, at that time, I had to know how things should be done and when things should be done. When I stepped down, unfortunately, my successors were focused on other things. In fact, making money became their priority, so the focus on the country, diminished.
Q: What is the one thing you would like to see happen in your country or in the world as a whole?
A: There are developed countries and there are under developed countries. We want to be a developed country. Developed countries have many assets. For example, economically our people have a fairly good life, our people are involved in activities that contribute to the wellbeing of each other and to other nations. Countries need to help each other, for example in the sciences. There are many areas of research that still need to be done. I would like to see developed countries, reach out to developing countries and form healthy alliances to make each other prosperous.
I have lived a fruitful life. I am happy and I wish to see all nations prosperous and live in peace.
Anusha Rayen, Freenlance Journalist (Formerly ‘The Island Newspaper’ staff member & Parliament reporter) sits for an exclusive interview with former PM of Malaysia Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in Puthrajaya.
Features
Price of Netanyahu’s Iran Offensive

That was brutal, and predicated on years of fabricated deceit. But that is how power operates. Netanyahu is not acting in isolation; he was ushered into this calamity with calculated endorsement from the West. For both Iran and Israel, this is a zero-sum confrontation—a tragic entanglement where ancient antagonisms, contemporary geopolitics, and enduring colonial residues violently intersect. What is most intellectually arresting is the glaring paradox Western powers routinely embrace. When Netanyahu launches a premeditated and unlawful assault on Iran, it is euphemistically labelled as a measure of self-defence. Yet when Vladimir Putin deploys forces into Ukraine, the West decries it as an unprovoked invasion. This hypocrisy in moral reasoning illustrates the incoherence of Western ethical frameworks—marked by selective outrage, selective jurisprudence, and selective memory.
Netanyahu is actively courting American bombardment of Tehran, even venturing so far as to suggest the types of ordnance most suitable for maximum devastation. Trump, meanwhile, hesitates—not over Iran’s fate, but because the ensuing ramifications will inevitably encircle him. This cynical arithmetic typifies the geopolitical stage on which empires perform their cruelties. A week has now passed since Netanyahu’s incursion into Iran—a deliberate campaign tacitly sanctioned by the United States and its constellation of affluent allies, whose modern prosperity is inseparable from centuries of extraction and systemic plunder. War, whether desirable or not, remains the central mechanism by which empires assert dominion, redraw territories, and dismantle resistance. Israel’s open defiance of international law—manifest in its missile barrage on Iranian soil—lays bare an unsettling truth: if global powers truly revered international legal norms, Netanyahu’s actions would face unequivocal denunciation. Instead, one could argue—chillingly—that he affirms history’s most ominous prophecies.
Western media, complicit in sanitising this act of aggression, frames it as an “unprecedented” strike—yet again resorting to euphemism to mask illegality. This was not an improvisational operation; it was the culmination of extensive clandestine preparation by Netanyahu and his ultranationalist Orthodox coalition. Israel’s intelligence apparatus has, over decades, embedded itself within the architecture of Iranian society, executing key figures and orchestrating strategic assassinations. The latest Friday strikes were not merely military engagements—they constituted a coordinated political decapitation, targeting senior officials central to the Iranian state.
Iranian society today endures compounded crises. Their tenacity and national pride remain steadfast, yet they are economically suffocated by Western sanctions, which have induced runaway inflation and scarcity. From first-hand experience in Tehran, Iranians are not consumed by a siege mentality; rather, they display a cautious hospitality that, once trust is earned, transforms into deep generosity—qualities starkly misrepresented in Western discourse. In contrast, Israelis are socialised into a perpetual state of existential fear. “Security” is not merely policy—it is a psychological infrastructure, permeating every aspect of public and private life. Israel’s economy thrives not only through sanctioned trade but through its robust arms industry and cyber-warfare enterprises, often exported under the guise of national expertise. This divergence in societal conditioning is critical: it reflects distinct historical wounds and geopolitical compulsions.
To grasp Israel’s war on Iran, one must situate it within the long arc of Western imperial entrenchment in West Asia. This history is punctuated by covert operations, artificial borders, and a strategy of managed chaos. The 1953 CIA-backed coup in Iran—toppling the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and reinstating the autocratic Shah—is emblematic of this trajectory. For decades, Western powers suppressed indigenous sovereignty while installing compliant strongmen. The 1979 Islamic Revolution was not merely theological upheaval; it was a radical assertion of national agency forged in the crucible of sustained foreign domination. In the revolution’s wake, Iranian society was reconstituted through a deep-rooted collectivism and assertive nationalism that continues to shape its resistance against external coercion.
Viewed through this prism, Netanyahu’s tenure may be remembered as one of the most corrosive in Israel’s history. By fusing religious chauvinism with militaristic expansionism, he has eviscerated Israel’s democratic ethos, transforming “security” into a tool of territorial expropriation and systemic Palestinian disenfranchisement. His escalation against Iran is not merely a tactical error; it is an incitement to regional disintegration. Framed as a crusade for “unconditional surrender,” his belligerence risks igniting a broader conflagration whose consequences will inevitably recoil upon Israel itself. Netanyahu, then, appears less as a strategist than as a provocateur, recklessly agitating the region’s deepest historical and sectarian fissures.
According to Haaretz, an independent Israeli media outlet operating despite a severely censored and often propagandistic Israeli media environment, several prominent progressive Jewish groups were notably absent from the so-called “joint unity statement” backing Israel’s strikes on Iran. These groups contend that while Iran should not acquire nuclear weapons, military action will at best delay the threat and more likely strengthen hardliners. They argue that diplomacy, not bombs, has proven effective in preventing nuclear proliferation—revealing significant divisions within the Jewish community over Netanyahu’s war.
Meanwhile, a report in the Financial Times captures the civil dimension of this confrontation. Despite sustained bombardment, millions of Iranians remain in Tehran. “Trump and Netanyahu say ‘evacuate’ as if they care about our health. How can a city of 10 million evacuate? My husband and I are not going to pave the ground for them. Let them kill us,” Shirin, a private sector employee told the newspaper. Their refusal to flee is not naïveté—it is a visceral affirmation of identity and resistance. The Iranian public consciousness, hardened by decades of war, sanctions, and subterfuge, manifests a collective defiance often misread in the West. The state’s nationalist discourse resonates beyond clerical authority; it channels a cultural memory of resistance against imperial intrusion.
Moreover, the disproportionate risk to civilians is staggering. Israeli operations ostensibly targeting senior military personnel inevitably endanger entire urban populations, as these individuals live and operate within densely populated civilian zones. The echoes of Israel’s operations in Lebanon—where missile strikes against Hezbollah figures claimed high civilian casualties—are unmistakable. The Iranian Health Ministry’s figure of nearly 1,500 casualties reveals the raw human cost beneath the rhetoric of strategic necessity.
This episode also exposes the profound hypocrisy embedded in Western narratives on nuclear proliferation. The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly found no conclusive evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapon systematically. Yet, Western powers wield this unverified threat as a pretext for military aggression. The contradictory statements from US officials—from intelligence directors denying Iran’s weaponisation efforts to presidents asserting Tehran is “very close” to the bomb—reflect a politicisation of intelligence designed to justify interventionism.
History has shown the futility of liberal interventionist fantasies: that democracy can be air-dropped or imposed through market restructuring. The Arab Spring, once heralded as a democratic revival, instead expedited the collapse of fragile states and exacerbated regional instability. The supposed liberal order in West Asia has devolved into a transactional, militarised regime wherein peace is manufactured, not cultivated.
Netanyahu’s war on Iran is not an anomaly—it is the terminal result of accumulated imperial failures, ideological rigidity, and historical amnesia. It confirms a grim axiom: when utopias collapse, it is always the powerless who bleed. His offensive, cloaked in the pieties of national security, belongs to a longer, darker chronicle—one whose conclusion will define the fate of West Asia and the very contours of justice in our century.
by Nilantha Ilangamuwa ✍️
-
Business2 days ago
Foreign Direct Investment records 90% Increase in First Quarter of 2025
-
Business2 days ago
The World of the Black Leopard
-
Features6 days ago
When the water rises: Climate change and the future of Yala’s Mugger Crocodiles
-
News4 days ago
Senior SLAS officer succeeds Bogollagama as SL’s UK HC
-
News3 days ago
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism, accelerates digital transformation
-
Features2 days ago
A legendary military leader of our time
-
Business2 days ago
War and panic take their toll on bourse which recovers somewhat at close
-
Business3 days ago
Spring board to ‘unleashing a new era in start-up driven growth’