Features
Neighbourhood Lost: The End is Nigh for SAARC’s South Asian University
Of Man’s First Disobedience, and the Fruit
Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal taste
Brought Death into the World, and all our woe,
With loss of Eden …· John Milton (Paradise Lost)
On 26th February 2025, Yashada Sawant, an Indian female student from the South Asian University (SAU), an international University in New Delhi, was publicly assaulted by Ratan Singh, a male student from the same university, along with a gang of goons with clear affiliations to the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (All India Students’ Council) a.k.a. ABVP. That ABVP is a right-wing student organisation affiliated to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a known Hindu nationalist organisation in India, is no secret.
Their grouse was that fish was being served on Maha Sivaratri and Ms Sawant’s ‘crime’, as the Mess Secretary elected by students to oversee canteen operations, was trying to stop the fish curry from being thrown away by them. This is when the assault ensued, with Sawant being punched in the face and inappropriately touched by these students, who are yet to be punished by the university.
What is of concern is that the university does not have a good track record when it comes to women’s safety. Apoorva Yarabahally, a former legal studies student had earlier lodged a complaint against her Dean of harassment and also described her entire ordeal on X in April 2023. To date, however, the university has failed to take any action.
The university’s canteens have always served both vegetarian and non-vegetarian food. On the day in question, special arrangements had also been made for those observing the religious holiday. While there have often been on-and-off caste-based arguments over the ‘purity’ of food, this has never reached the depths of the recent incident. Sadly, this is not a freak mishap.
Since SAU’s current India-nominated President A.K. Aggarwal, who has no experience in running an international university, took over, his tolerance and even sponsorship of absolute parochialism, especially where the Hindutva agenda is concerned, has led to this deplorable state of affairs.
In her recent detailed tweet, Sawant has clearly described the role of different university officials who have attempted to sweep numerous sexual harassment complaints under the carpet. The same Proctor, who was reprimanded by the Delhi High Court in an earlier case for not following SAU regulations, still holds the reins and has been instrumental in pushing the overtly misogynistic agenda in SAU.
SAU’s South Asian sensibility dismantled
SAU was established by the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) as an international university in 2010 with taxpayer’s money from all eight member countries. Therefore, the legal and institutional ownership of the university is with SAARC.
It was meant to be a secular, English language university where no single political ideology, language or any one form of nationalism was to dominate. Its founding provisions and principles were meant to preserve the university’s South Asian character. The intention of the university’s founders was to bring in an element of parity and equality in the broader space of inequity and hegemony in which the university is physically located.
Unfortunately, notwithstanding these laudable efforts, a mere 15 years into its establishment, the downward spiral of the institution is driven by the incumbent president, with alarming signs of an imminent and total crash.
The bottom line is, SAU is no longer effectively owned by SAARC and it is certainly not South Asian by any stretch of the imagination. In cultural and social outlook, it has become blatantly North Indian, to the extent that it is even making students from other regions in India feel extremely unsafe.
While Aggarwal and his handpicked coterie of yes-men and women are dismantling the institution, its academics have hypocritically stood by in tacit support, pusillanimously hiding behind lofty pronouncements in the regional and global conference circuit. Its feminists who call themselves ‘critical feminists’ have fallen silent.
With an overwhelmingly Indian student body at present and very few non-Indian officers in administration, the university has become a largely Indian entity. Among others, the proctor of the university, dean of students, registrar, directors of various departments, deans and department heads and almost all non-academic staff are Indians.
The mandatory student ratio with 50% being Indian and the rest from other South Asian countries, has been breached with the introduction of new India-oriented courses (such as BTech degrees) and the expansion of all intakes benefiting mostly Indian applicants. From 2024 onwards, non-Indian students have been reduced to mere spectators on campus.
This could be the final nail in the coffin for the university’s South Asian Character.
SAARC & SAU Governing Board’s Culpability
As a formal intergovernmental effort in New Delhi, the university’s rapid parochialisation is a telling example of the utter ineffectiveness of both SAARC and SAU’s Governing Board members representing the eight SAARC countries.
The brick-by-brick dismantling of the institution, that held considerable promise until seven years ago, is propped up by their lackadaisical attitude. By extension, this foreshadows the trajectory of what the Indian government claims to be its main vision and strategy in the region – the Neighbourhood First Policy – and is more like the figurative ‘fist’ in the neighbours’ faces.
The manner in which SAU marks the national days of the SAARC member states clearly exemplifies the path it is treading. Until December 2023, national days were not in the university’s calendar of events. Students from different countries, on their own volition, celebrated these occasions of national importance without any involvement of university administration. This was to consciously maintain a distance from politically sensitive occasions in the larger interest of preserving the university’s multinational character.
Aggarwal’s decision to make the national days part of the university’s calendar initially appeared to be a progressive step towards cartographically recognising South Asia. But as it ensued, only India’s Independence and Republic Days were celebrated with pomp and pageantry and the SAU President’s personal participation.
After he initiated this practice by celebrating India’s Republic Day in January 2024, Sri Lanka’s Independence Day which fell a week or so later, was not marked in any manner. I brought this to the attention of the then Sri Lanka High Commissioner in New Delhi. Neither Sri Lanka nor any other diplomatic mission in Delhi with citizens in SAU has shown any interest in rectifying this lapse. Since then, only political events important to India are being celebrated.
I recall suggesting to Aggarwal, it would be best to help minority nationalities observe their national days with university sponsorship, if this was indeed the declared policy of the university, or to stay away from such celebrations altogether in line with the past practice. But this advice was not heeded. My intention in making this suggestion was to establish inclusiveness and not institutionalize exclusion. It is evident, the latter is now the norm, a legacy which no discerning or self-respecting leader or institution would wish to leave behind.
SAU as a Hindi Language and Hindu Enclave
SAU has also become an unapologetic Hindi Language enclave, further crippling the South Asian character of the university. When the International Mother Language Day was celebrated at the university on 21st February 2025, a North Indian student wrote ‘Jai Sri Ram’ on a Tamil poster put up by Indian and Sri Lankan Tamil speakers, leading to a needless scuffle.
The occasion had been peacefully and gracefully celebrated at the university since 2011 until recent times, when every language spoken at the university was celebrated by its speakers, and their histories and literatures brought to the fore. This was a practice introduced by Bangladeshi students and embraced by all others.
The new language chauvinism does not operate in isolation. It is manifesting itself in a situation when the three-language formula of Independent India has effectively been disregarded by the present government. As anticipated, this already led to the reemergence of language nationalism as a counter force in southern states.
Students also do not feel comfortable in approaching the Dean of Students Navnit Jha, who only speaks fluently in Hindi, and whose office has been compromised due to his track record in harassing students who are considered ‘too independent’.
One of the salient features of the current administration is the weaponisation of the offices of the Dean of Students and Hostel Wardens and the deafening silence of the Gender Sensitisation Committee. They have been successful in silencing students with the everpresent threat of expulsion. The same threats to faculty have also succeeded spectacularly, with the suspension of four faculty members in 2023.
Hindi hegemony appears on many other fronts too. SAU’s sports festival this year is called ‘Khel Kumbh’, the word kumbh being written in Hindi on all official posters shared on social media. Khel means sports in Hindi.
Would it not have been more inclusive if the word had been adopted from one of the minority languages represented in the university’s student body? Why not kreeda in Sinhala; viḷaiyâṭṭu in Tamil; Khçlâdhulâ in Bengali; kaayikam in Malayaam and so on? This is one way in which people can be brought into the fold rather than by suppressing them with hegemony.
One should either use only English for such events and posters or the different South Asian languages represented in SAU for different events. But this can only be conceived by a leadership with intellectual sophistication.
In the same way, the word kumbh is also problematic, given its religious connotations with Hinduism via the Indian state sponsored Kumbh Mela in Allahabad. But this is the SAU administration’s ruse to signal to the government that it is looking after its interests given the way the latter has lately culturally upended this important religious festival.
Surely, there would have been many ways to conceptualise and name this sports event and many other university events within the cultural and linguistic plurality India and South Asia have to offer.
But this is not the only association SAU has with Hinduism officially. While freedom of faith existed in SAU, from its inception, it did not involve itself in religion. This very sensible approach was adopted by the two earlier presidents though both hailed from a Hindu background. My own position was that the university can have a dedicated space or spaces for worship for those who required them, while not sponsoring events or ideas belonging to any particular faith. My views came from a more open approach towards faith emanating from my own training and upbringing. But I was overruled on the basis that such openness would lead to intractable inter-religious competition and potential hegemony. They were clearly drawing from their own experiences in India. And seeing what SAU has become, I appreciate my senior colleagues’ foresight at the time. Such enlightenment is no longer prevalent in SAU.
Today, for all intents and purposes, SAU is a Hindu organisation. Though in theory, the university is not supposed to have dedicated places of worship, in practice the situation is different with a shrine informally set up in ‘Block A’, one of the hostel areas for students. But interested staff and faculty also freely visit this place. Though this is known, no opposition has been voiced, which is in effect tacit encouragement for the institutionalisation of Hinduism. If so, why not similar spaces for Jainism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Islam and Christianity which are all major faiths in the SAARC landscape and in the university too?
The situation gets worse: For an institution that hitherto has intentionally stayed away from sponsoring religious events, it does now just as consciously. On 19th February 2025, Lila Prabhuji, in collaboration with the educational wing of International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), Delhi.
Moreover, the community dance typically associated with ISKCON activities was enacted with the active participation of faculty, staff and students. This can certainly be a regular practice if need be, but it would be non-discriminatory, only if the university also sponsors events by other religions and allows them the same space to practice aspects of their faith as well. This, however, is not the case.
These are just a few well-known examples. But the rot runs deeper, even into the dubious recruitment of teachers and new teaching program designs. Moreover, new ‘professorial’ recruits who are running newly established centres and schools such as the Faculty of Arts and Design and the Centre on Climate Change do not have serious academic credentials. Their academic trajectory of having worked in dozens of institutions of no great repute raises questions about their ability to initiate these centres and schools.
But significant scholarship on these areas have been produced across South Asia. For instance, Arts and Design are fields where Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh have excelled in and produced good scholars. They were not even considered for positions in SAU. Moreover, Delhi itself has reputable institutions in these fields from JNU’s School of Arts and Aesthetics to College of Arts, from where well-trained academics or recent graduates could have been recruited.
It is evident that the administration is not interested in placing emphasis on academic rigour or established scholarship. Instead, it is looking for people it thinks can be controlled rather than seeking to benefit from their intellect and experience. This effectively results in the relentless pursuit of mediocrity, entrenchment of yes-men and women, compromising the future of the university in much the same way many other major universities in India have been in recent times.
One could argue, this downward spiral is contained within SAU and is not a reflection of the Indian government, the university’s Governing Board, or the SAARC Secretariat in Kathmandu. But this would not be a valid proposition. India is the only country that has had representation within the university for many years through a staffer of its Ministry of External Affairs. Hence, the Indian government is well aware of the situation in the university, and it’s wishes and diktats are often informally communicated to the SAU administration.
No other country has been accorded this privilege. Moreover, the responsibility of the Governing Board and the SAARC Secretariat is to ensure that the university is run according to the norms, rules and regulations which have already been collectively designed, approved and established, in the interest of the member states.
Regrettably, one cannot see this expected oversight from these mechanisms. Governing Board meetings are effectively mere rituals of scant significance, where members simply fly in from their respective countries for a free foreign trip and a few hundred US dollars per head. No one other than Indian representatives makes any contribution of substance. India for its part, dictates while the rest nod in uniform agreement.
The SAU administration’s self-assuredness in their illegalities and arrogance emanate partly from this situation where it is guaranteed protection by the Indian government come hell or high water, and there is silence from the rest of the board. This also comes from the fact that no other country other than India pays their dues at present, and that too in relatively smaller amounts. This institutionalised ‘loss of face’ by being cash-strapped does not help; nor does the resultant sense of superiority of India.
This combination does not augur well for the professional running of an institution, much like the United Nations which is driven by the vested interests of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (P5) and the organisation’s major contributors.
If SAARC does not own up to its own creation, it should move away from SAU as should all member states so that the undeserving reputation the university is given by this association is formally and legally severed. Hapless students will thus not be misguided to an institution in search of a South Asian enclave in Delhi, and be marginalized and isolated in a toxic space, and end up being victims of the callous lack of regard and interest of their own Governing Board representatives.
On India’s part, it would behoove the government to legalize the de-facto hostile cultural and political coup that has already been allowed to take place. It can graciously do so by formally handing over the funds other member states have already poured into the university since inception. In fact, at an early stage of this de-facto transition, I made this very suggestion to Ramesh Chandra, an MEA functionary who had been appointed Acting President.
I proposed that he communicates this to the Indian government so that the pretense of SAU’s South Asianism can formally end and people like me who had come to Delhi to set up a very different institution can go back home in peace knowing we tried but failed due to India’s Big Brother attitude and other regional governments’ pusillanimity in countering this in an institution they collectively set up.
As far as the rest of South Asia is concerned, SAU should simply be left to its own desires, designs and devices — a mediocre and parochial institution spewing venomous cultural and nationalist ideologies. Let it be another case study of a grand idea doomed for failure, much like the Nalanda University, because of unchecked singular and toxic nationalism. The danger however, is its spillover effect on the neighbourhood, and the potential disruption of regional harmony. This also shows that South Asian countries, including India are incapable of managing a truly international university. The required cosmopolitanism of thought and outlook are absent, and these nations need to accept this reality.
—-
(An earlier version of this essay appeared in The Wire on 8 March 2025).
Sri Lanka becoming a Macbethian sick state?
The traditional ritual of anointing medicinal oil (or ‘hisa thel gaema’ in Sinhalese, literally, applying oil to the head) is unique to the Sinhala Aluth Avurudda observances. This year, the ritual was performed at the auspicious moment of 9:04 a.m. (Sri Lanka time) on Wednesday April 16. It was observed at appointed venues across the country at the same time. The anointing was done, as usual, mostly by Buddhist monks in their monasteries.
Where they were not available for the purpose, a senior citizen would do the needful. The oil anointing ceremony was held to invoke blessings of good health on all the individuals who subjected themselves to the ritual. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya was shown participating in the oil anointing ceremony at the historic Kolonnawa Raja Maha Viharaya. There were many social media videos showing similar oil anointing scenes that included even elephants and hippos in a zoo receiving the compassionate treatment; this is not seen as going too far with traditions, for extending loving-kindness even to animals is taken for granted in the majority Buddhist Sri Lanka. Watching this ritual (that used to be so familiar for me in my childhood and youth) from abroad I couldn’t help my eyes filling with tears, feeling kind of homesick, in spite of me having spent more than forty-three years of my adult life living and working away from my Mother Country Sri Lanka.
Though usually Buddhist monks do the anointing, it is not considered a religious practice by the ordinary Buddhists. It is only a part of the completely secular Sinhala Aluth Avurudda festival. The most important annual religious festival for the Sinhalese (especially Sinhala Buddhists) is Vesak, which will be held next month. However, the oil anointing ceremony impresses on the Avurudu celebrants the great importance of maintaining their physical and mental health throughout the coming year, reflecting the high level of attention that our traditional culture pays to that objective.
Prof. Snyder
However, the actual discrepancy that is noticed between the ideal and the reality in the mundane world, as in other countries, is a different matter. Shining beacons like ideals of a long-evolved culture are important for what they are; their importance doesn’t go away because those ideals are only imperfectly realised by the people of that culture. But the values endure.
The news of this happy occasion and my awareness of a deepening political and cultural malaise in my beloved Motherland back home reminded me of a book I read during the Covid-19 lockdown period of 2020-2022: OUR MALADY by American historian and public intellectual, the Yale University professor Timothy D. Snyder published in 2020. The book, whose subtitle is ‘Liberty and Solidarity’, is about the weakness of the American healthcare system that he himself got a taste of, privately.
Professor Snyder came to know first-hand how America failed its citizens in the public healthcare sphere as an inmate of a hospital ward, where he was admitted to the emergency room at midnight on December 29, 2019. He was complaining of a condition of severe bodily ‘malaise’. Doctors later told him that he had an abscess the size of a baseball in his liver. The emergency operation to remove the abscess was done after seventeen hours of his having had to wait confined to a hospital bed!
‘Rage’ is the word he repeatedly uses to describe how he felt during his hospitalisation. He was not raging against God or any particular person or a group or the bacteria that caused his illness. ‘I raged against a world where I was not’, Snyder writes in the Prologue to the book (implying how much he was angry about there not being a healthy enough healthcare system to look after Americans who fell ill like himself. The book grew out of entries he made in a diary that he maintained while recuperating in hospital. Proficient in a number of European languages including English, French and Polish, he adopts a sort of poetic idiom to deal with his naturally dull subject.
He imagined he was not suffering in solitude, though. He thought about other Americans in his situation, and empathised with them. The absence of a sound healthcare system is America’s malady according to Snyder. Probably, the current situation in America is different, having changed for the better. We must remember that the time he is talking about was the last year of the first term (January 20, 2017-January 20, 2021) of the 45th US president Donald Trump of the Republican Party.
Currently, Trump is serving as the 47th US president. The ideas that professor Snyder develops in the book have global topical relevance, I think. They are organised into four Chapters or ‘Lessons’ as he dubs them, which in my opinion, have implications that could be utilised even by the citizens of the Macbethian ‘sick state’ that Sri Lanka has become today, complete with a Macbeth (though a muppet) and a shadowy but more determined Lady Macbeth.
Timothy Snyder offers the four Lessons for his fellow Americans, and by extension, to fellow humans around the world including us, Sri Lankans. Perhaps these are uniquely American issues, with little direct relevance to a small country like Sri Lanka with no stake in the international pharmaceutical industry. But then no country can escape from the implications of the following facts (taken from Wikipedia): In 2023, the global pharmaceutical industry earned revenues of US $ 1.48 trillion, whereas the top 10 arms manufacturing companies earned only US $ 632 billion. In the same year, the global life and health insurance carriers industry, which is the biggest industry in the world in terms of revenue, earned US $ 4.3 trillion.
Our own late medical professor Senake Bibile (1920-1977), a pharmacology expert and a rare philanthropist and compassionate social activist of the Trotskyite Sama Samaja party persuasion who always had the welfare of the suffering poor at heart, met his death allegedly in mysterious circumstances in Guyana where he was attending a UN conference, promoting the domestic drug policy that he had developed for Sri Lanka, as a model for use in other countries and by the World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) for developing policies for ‘rational pharmaceutical use’.
It goes without saying that Sri Lankans are also highly vulnerable to the deleterious effects of the inhuman excesses of the purely profit oriented international Big Pharma; these harmful consequences get transferred to the innocent citizens magnified several times through the unholy alliance between the local corporate drugs mafiosi and corrupt politicians. Be that as it may, Snyder adds another three equally important related points, covering all four, each in a Lesson that must receive the utmost attention of all adult Sri Lankans: health care for children and children’s education, truth in politics, and the supremacy of the doctors’ role in a malady situation. We will look at these briefly, intermittently taking our eyes off America to reflect on our own country Sri Lanka.
Lesson 1 is ‘Health care is a human right’.
Despite its wealth, professor Snyder complains, America is a sick nation; life expectancy is falling for Americans. Moody’s Analytics suggests that US millennials will die younger than their parents or grandparents, though there is no lack of money spent. What is causing this decline in life expectancy? Snyder’s unsettling answer is that the American healthcare system prioritises profit over people’s lives. America still lacks a universal healthcare system, in spite of being a supporter of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and this leads to unequal access to health care, as Snyder asserts.
Exorbitantly priced commercial medicine has a devastating effect on the protection of the health-care rights of the people. It has robbed the American citizens of their health, in Snyder’s view. The American health-care system’s profit-focussed approach and lack of investment in protective equipment for medical professionals jeopardised their safety during the Covid-19 pandemic. In America, 20 million people lost their jobs and over 150,000 died from pandemic. Health insurance became too expensive, and health care unaffordable. Without a diagnosis, many became dangerously ill or unknowingly infected others with the virus.
Though poor, Sri Lanka beats America in respect of looking after public health. It has a better record in providing satisfactory health care for the citizens. The state runs an almost 100% free medicare service for all the citizens. There is a (kind of) parallel paid private hospital system as well, that caters to the better off segment of the population that can resort to it if they prefer to do so. This potentially eases the burden on the free state medical services, which can then focus more on attending to the needs of the economically weaker section of the population.
The maintenance by the state of such a public welfare-based healthcare system is desired and supported by our dominant socio-cultural background that strongly resonates with the humanistic spirit of the Aluth Avurudda that prioritises health over all forms of wealth. This is embodied in the principle Arogya parama labha ‘Good health is the greatest wealth’, the antithesis of the American attitude towards citizens’ health.
Sri Lanka was among the handful of countries that contained the Covid-19 pandemic most efficiently, minimizing deaths, whereas in America, according to Snyder, flaws in the healthcare system were aggravated by the contagion. This led to more deaths in America than in other wealthy nations like Japan and Germany. But the not so well-to-do Sri Lanka escaped with a minimum number of Covid-caused fatalities amidst obstacles mounted by antinationalist ill-wishers as I saw it at the time. That is Professor Snyder’s Lesson 1, which is about the human right of easily accessible health care. Sri Lanka is actually ahead of America in this respect in spite of relative poverty.
by Rohana R. Wasala
(To be concluded.)
I received a video that announced Japan was considering changing to a four-day work week. Suspicious of such news in my cell phone, I googled and found that certain countries had already opted for work weeks of four days and thus three-day weekends. This change too is a consequence of closedowns of work due to the Covid pandemic.
“Several countries are experimenting with or have implemented four-day work weeks, including Belgium, Iceland, Spain, the United Kingdom and Portugal. Other countries like Germany, Australia, Canada, the Netherlands and the US have also shown interest in, or have tested the four-day work week model.”
The video I got was about Japan changing its government work week to four days from mid-April with many projected objectives. One is to improve government employees’ work-life balance and to address the country’s declining birth rate. Also, the hours of the work day are to be reduced so parents can spend more time caring for their kids termed: ‘Childcare partial leave’. Flexible work hours for women to be implemented so choosing between careers and family will not be necessary.
In Germany experimental trials were carried out in 2023-24 involving 43 companies; 73% plan to continue with the new work structure. Noted for productivity and efficiency, Germany has in addition to one day less working, on average only 34 hours per week. A five-day week of 9 to 5 has 40 work hours per week. Fewer hours at work has been found to promote smarter and more focussed effort with employees happier and more engaged.
Long ago in the 1970s Cassandra shifted from employment in the private sector to a semi government job. She was shocked at the laissez faire attitude of her co-workers in an information centre. Most came to work at around 9.00 am: discussed the bus journey and home; had breakfast; read the morning newspapers; did a bit of work and were ready to have lunch by 12.00 noon. Two hours for this and half for a small snooze. Work till 3.30 pm or so when books/files were closed and grooming selves commenced, to depart at 4.30 pm sharp.
The work ethic in a remote government school and a private school in a city were as opposed to each other as the proverbial chalk to cheese. Do minimum against teaching; don’t care attitude to dedication and commitment; take leave to maximum vs hardly taking leave in consideration of the fact parents of students pay fees; non disciplining principals to dedicated pedagogues who set an example.
Cassandra supposes, and correctly, that with the change of government and a system change, even though many offices are overstaffed, employees put in a solid day’s work. The public is better served, most definitely.
Hence how would it be for Sri Lanka to lop off one work day a week? There will certainly be benefits, but aren’t many of us complaining about the presence of too many public holidays; we enjoy 24 to 30 a year including every full moon Poya Day. A travesty!
Pope Francis
The utter mayhem of Poya weekends
Those who lived through the period when the calendar in this overzealous Buddhist country went lunar (sic) and made the four Poya Days of a month and half the pre-Poya Day as the country’s weekend. It was a total mess since many a week had more than five week days in it till the moon changed from one phase to another. Ceylon was completely out of sync with the rest of the world. That was in 1966 with Dudley Senanayake as Prime Minister. Mercifully, in 1970, the Saturday Sunday weekend was reverted to, and sanity regained.
Conclusion is that making our week of four days’ work and weekend three days has to be carefully considered, tested and implemented, or kept as it is. Better it would be if government offices were pruned of excess staff recruited on politicians’ orders and genuinely legitimate officers made to work efficiently.
VVIP Mother in queue
A photograph made the rounds on social media of a frail looking, white haired lady in a queue in Kandy moving slowly to pay homage to the Sacred Tooth Relic. It was said to be President AKD’s mother who was hospitalised just a couple of months ago. Admired is her devotion as well as the fact she came incognito; not informing her son of her intended travel.
But Cass is censorious. Here was a genuine case of needing a bit of stretching of points and helping her to fulfil her desire to pay homage with ease. After all, he is working hard and very probably long hours to get this country on an even keel. He needs appreciation and if he refuses advantages, let a less able person benefit.
A truly honourable Pope
Roman Catholics across the globe mourn the death of the 266th Pope on the Monday after the Easter weekend; and the world respects and reveres him. People comment he must have willed himself to live through Easter, even presenting himself to crowds gathered in the huge grounds of St Peter’s Basilica.
Pope Francis was born Jorge Bergoglio on December 17, 1936, in Buenos Aires, Argentina. He was inspired to join the Society of Jesus or Jesuits in 1958 after a serious illness. Ordained a Catholic priest in 1969, he was the Jesuit provincial superior in Argentina from 1973 to 79. He became the Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 1998 and was created a cardinal in 2001 by Pope John Paul II. He was elected in the papal conclave following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI as head of the Catholic Church and Sovereign of the Vatican City State in 1913, claiming many firsts: a Jesuit becoming Pope; first from America, from the Southern Hemisphere. He chose his papal name in honour of Saint Francis of Assisi, kind to all living beings. “Throughout his public life, Francis was noted for his humility, emphasis on God’s mercy, international visibility as pope, concern for the poor and commitment to interreligious dialogue. He was known for having a less formal approach to the papacy than his predecessors.”
We remember his visit to Sri Lanka from January 13 to 15, 2015, when he travelled to the Shrine of Our Lady of Madhu and canonized Sri Lanka’s first saint, Joseph Vaz. He conducted a Mass and bestowed blessings to the multitude at Galle Face Green. As he entered and left the Green, he placed his hands on the heads of infants, children, the very poor, the old and infirm; never mind oil and dirt on heads. A truly great and good person.
The most urgent need for the South Asian region right now, in the wake of the cold-blooded killing by gunmen of nearly 30 local tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir two days back, is the initiation of measures that could ensure regional stability and peace. The state actors that matter most in this situation are India and Pakistan and it would be in the best interests of the region for both countries to stringently refrain from succumbing to knee-jerk reactions in the face of any perceived provocations arising from the bloodshed.
The consequences for the countries concerned and the region could be grave if the terror incident leads to stepped-up friction and hostility between India and Pakistan. Some hardline elements in India, for instance, are on record in the international media as calling on the Indian state to initiate tough military action against Pakistan for the Kashmiri terror in question and a positive response to such urgings could even lead to a new India-Pakistan war.
Those wishing South Asia well are likely to advocate maximum restraint by both states and call for negotiations by them to avert any military stand-offs and conflicts that could prove counter-productive for all quarters concerned. This columnist lends his pen to such advocacy.
Right now in Sri Lanka, nationalistic elements in the country’s South in particular are splitting hairs over an MoU relating to security cooperation Sri Lanka has signed with India. Essentially, the main line of speculation among these sections is that Sri Lanka is coming under the suzerainty of India, so to speak, in the security sphere and would be under its dictates in the handling of its security interests. In the process, these nationalistic sections are giving fresh life to the deep-seated anti-India phobia among sections of the Sri Lankan public. The eventual result will be heightened, irrational hostility towards India among vulnerable, unenlightened Sri Lankans.
Nothing new will be said if the point is made that such irrational fears with respect to India are particularly marked among India’s smaller neighbouring states and their publics. Needless to say, collective fears of this kind only lead to perpetually strained relations between India and her neighbours, resulting in regional disunity, which, of course would not be in South Asia’s best interests.
SAARC is seen as ‘dead’ by some sections in South Asia and its present dysfunctional nature seems to give credence to this belief. Continued friction between India and Pakistan is seen as playing a major role in such inner paralysis and this is, no doubt, the main causative factor in SARRC’s current seeming ineffectiveness.
However, the widespread anti-India phobia referred to needs to be factored in as playing a role in SAARC’s lack of dynamism and ‘life’ as well. If democratic governments go some distance in exorcising such anti-Indianism from their people’s psyches, some progress could be made in restoring SAARC to ‘life’ and the latter could then play a constructive role in defusing India-Pakistan tensions.
It does not follow that if SAARC was ‘alive and well’, security related incidents of the kind that were witnessed in India-administered Kashmir recently would not occur. This is far from being the case, but if SAARC was fully operational, the states concerned would be in possession of the means and channels of resolving the issues that flow from such crises with greater amicability and mutual accommodation.
Accordingly, the South Asian Eight would be acting in their interests by seeking to restore SAARC back to ‘life’. An essential task in this process is the elimination of mutual fear and suspicion among the Eight and the states concerned need to do all that they could to eliminate any fixations and phobias that the countries have in relation to each other.
It does not follow from the foregoing that the SAARC Eight should not broad base their relations and pull back from fostering beneficial ties with extra-regional countries and groupings that have a bearing on their best interests. On the contrary, each SAARC country’s ties need to be wide-ranging and based on the principle that each such state would be a friend to all countries and an enemy of none as long as the latter are well-meaning.
The foregoing sharp focus on SAARC and its fortunes is necessitated by the consideration that the developmental issues in particular facing the region are best resolved by the region itself on the basis of its multiple material and intellectual resources. The grouping should not only be revived but a revisit should also be made to its past programs; particularly those which related to intra-regional conflict resolution. Thus, talking to each other under a new visionary commitment to SAARC collective wellbeing is crucially needed.
On the question of ties with India, it should be perceived by the latter’s smaller neighbours that there is no getting away from the need to foster increasingly closer relations with India, today a number one global power.
This should not amount to these smaller neighbours surrendering their rights and sovereignty to India. Far from it. On the contrary these smaller states should seek to craft mutually beneficial ties with India. It is a question of these small states following a truly Non-aligned foreign policy and using their best diplomatic and political skills to structure their ties with India in a way that would be mutually beneficial. It is up to these neighbours to cultivate the skills needed to meet these major challenges.
Going ahead, it will be in South Asia’s best interests to get SAARC back on its feet once again. If this aim is pursued with visionary zeal and if SAARC amity is sealed once and for all intra-regional friction and enmities could be put to rest. What smaller states should avoid scrupulously is the pitting of extra-regional powers against India and Pakistan in their squabbles with either of the latter. This practice has been pivotal in bringing strife and contention into South Asia and in dividing the region against itself.
Accordingly, the principal challenge facing South Asia is to be imbued once again with the SAARC spirit. The latter spirit’s healing powers need to be made real and enduring. Thus will we have a region truly united in brotherhood and peace.
PM pays condolence to pope Francis at the Embassy of the Vatican in Colombo
President conducts an inspection tour of Kandy city
Sri Lankan delegation meets with US Trade Representative
-
Business7 days agoDIMO pioneers major fleet expansion with Tata SIGNA Prime Movers for ILM
-
News6 days agoFamily discovers rare species thought to be extinct for over a century in home garden
-
Features4 days agoRuGoesWild: Taking science into the wild — and into the hearts of Sri Lankans
-
Foreign News6 days agoChina races robots against humans in Beijing half marathon
-
Editorial7 days agoSelective use of PTA
-
News3 days agoOrders under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruptions Act No. 9 of 2023 for concurrence of parliament
-
Features5 days agoNew species of Bronzeback snake, discovered in Sri Lanka
-
Features6 days agoThe ironies of history