Features
NPP govt., a patchwork of ideological differences, bound to suffer splits – FSP
by Saman Indrajith
Education Secretary of the Frontline Socialist Party, Pubudu Jagoda, has expressed skepticism about the government’s ability to overcome the country’s pressing economic challenges.
In an interview with The Island, Jagoda highlights the inherent divisions within the JVP/NPP coalition, which, he believes, are bound to hinder its ability to provide meaningful relief to the public.
“The government is a patchwork of ideological contradictions,” Jagoda says. “It includes remnants of the old JVP cadre who advocate socialist solutions for economic problems. Alongside them are newer social democrats whose views often clash with the socialist stance. Adding to this complexity are neoliberals who align with Ranil Wickremesinghe’s policies but reject him personally, and a faction of nationalists—many of whom were part of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Viyath Maga initiative before joining the NPP.”
Jagoda says that this diversity of perspectives has resulted in an inability to present a cohesive strategy for addressing the country’s economic woes. “This collection of divergent views struggles to formulate practical solutions for the people’s problems.”
Jagoda is of the view that the government’s current approach relies heavily on rhetoric around anti-corruption initiatives and promises of reforming the political culture. While these efforts may garner short-term support, they lack the capacity to address the more immediate issues faced by the population. “There are limits to how far you can go with slogans about changing the political culture. These initiatives cannot put food on people’s tables,” he said.
Excerpts of the interview:
Q: What is your assessment of the current situation in Sri Lanka?
A: The global economy has faced numerous crises over the years, from time to time. In the late 19th century, the 1920s, and 1973, significant economic downturns came into being. Historically, these crises have been characterised by fluctuating trends, often described using the shapes of English letters—V-shaped, U-shaped, and W-shaped—to denote the pattern of economic recovery and recession. For example, the 1973 crisis was V-shaped, while the 1927 crisis exhibited a W-shaped recovery. However, the global economic crisis of 2008 defied such conventional classifications. Initially described as L-shaped due to a sharp decline followed by prolonged stagnation, it later evolved into a pattern resembling a staircase cross-section. Economists now predict a further decline in 2025 and 2026, signifying a fast-collapsing global economy.
Economists argue that addressing the economic crisis requires a comprehensive strategy to manage external interventions by superpowers and to protect national interests. However, opposition parties, including the NPP and SJB, have failed to articulate clear economic policies. Their manifestos are technocratic and lack detailed strategies for addressing issues such as the debt crisis, state revenue challenges, foreign currency shortages, and a coherent development plan.
The government’s mandate, though significant in the parliamentary election, lacks a unified vision.
Sri Lanka faces three key economic policy challenges: the first one is continuation of IMF-driven policies. Will the NPP Government continue with the IMF’s structural adjustment programmes? The second is about managing superpower interventions: Can this government leverage its mandate to negotiate more favourable terms with global powers? The third is about addressing public welfare: Will the government prioritise economic relief for citizens or continue to favour corporate elites under the guise of political reform?
Sri Lanka’s economic crisis manifests starkly in rising poverty and malnutrition. Statistics reveal that 25% of families rely on financial support from neighbors and relatives, while 61% have reduced their food consumption. Child malnutrition rates have soared to 26%, levels previously associated with countries like Ethiopia and Somalia in the 1990s.
The government’s inability to articulate a clear economic vision and its reliance on neoliberal reforms risk deepening the crisis.
Q: What is the FSP going to do about it?
A: We advocate for an economic plan that provides an alternative to the IMF programme. We emphasise the importance of a foreign policy that protects Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and shields its people from the geostrategic invasions of powers like the US and India. Furthermore, we want the inequities created by a top corporate elite that benefited disproportionately from the previous regime’s economic policies addressed. Our position has consistently been that this elite should bear a fair share of the tax burden to provide relief to the people. These three pillars formed the foundation of our political campaign.
Looking ahead, we believe the most critical aspects will continue to revolve around these priorities, the first of them is opposition to the IMF programme. We challenge its long-term implications on Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and economy. Then the issue of geostrategic independence. We advocate for a foreign policy that avoids subjugation to major powers. Third aspect is about equitable Taxation. We demand ensuring that economic policies benefit the majority rather than a privileged few.
As public frustration with the government grows, there is a real danger that people may revert to supporting extreme-right factions responsible for Sri Lanka’s economic turmoil. This could include figures like Ranil Wickremesinghe, members of the SJB, the Mahinda Rajapaksa camp, or even more regressive alternatives. History teaches us that severe economic crises often lead to two potential outcomes: revolutions/military coups or the rise of far-right fascist governments. Sri Lanka is no exception to this historical pattern.
If the current trajectory continues, new leaders could emerge from outside the existing political framework, replacing figures such as Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sajith Premadasa, or Namal Rajapaksa. Alternatively, the country could face a revolution or even a military coup. Superpowers are unlikely to oppose such outcomes, as these scenarios could align with their strategic interests and facilitate their agendas.
Recognising these risks, we are focused on preventing a sudden collapse of the government. While criticising the IMF programme and the restructuring of International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs), we have taken proactive steps to offer alternatives. For instance, we submitted a detailed 13-page document outlining the dangers of the IMF programme and proposing alternative solutions. Recently, we provided 22 proposals for the national budget, reaffirming our commitment to constructive engagement rather than mere criticism.
Despite our efforts, the government has ignored these suggestions, offering no response or acknowledgment. Nevertheless, we see it as our responsibility to propose solutions and advocate for change. If the government continues on its current path, failure seems inevitable, leading to heightened public frustration.
In such a context, our primary focus is to create a political space that prevents the public from being pushed toward far-right factions or fascist military-style governance. To achieve this, we are engaging with leftist and progressive elements within the democratic framework. In the meantime, we are utilising platforms like the People’s Struggle to unite individuals and organisations against the potential rise of far-right authoritarianism.
This initiative seeks to build a broad coalition capable of resisting such a shift while advocating for a just and equitable alternative. We understand that this cannot be achieved by our party alone, so we are collaborating with other progressive forces to strengthen this movement.
Our efforts are directed toward preventing a political and economic regression in Sri Lanka. By uniting progressive forces and presenting clear alternatives, we aim to address the root causes of the crisis while protecting the nation from the threats of authoritarianism and economic subjugation.
Q: How would you interpret the Joint Statement issued by India and Sri Lanka following President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s visit?
A: We must acknowledge the geopolitical reality that India is both Sri Lanka’s closest neighbour and the regional superpower. It is inevitable that Sri Lanka must work with India while being mindful of her strategic and economic interests. However, this does not mean that we must relinquish our sovereignty, independence, or national dignity. A balance is both possible and necessary.
For instance, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s assurance that Sri Lanka would not allow its territory to be used against India’s security interests was, while prudent in principle, perhaps an over-commitment in execution. Safeguarding India’s security concerns is one thing but providing explicit commitments risks undermining our flexibility and sovereignty. It is a self-imposed limitation that could have been avoided.
Similarly, the joint statement’s commitments to land connectivity, an integrated oil pipeline, and a shared electricity grid raise serious concerns. These projects are not without precedent in the region, and the experiences of other nations connected to India offer cautionary lessons. Nepal, Pakistan, and Bangladesh all face significant challenges arising from their direct land links with India. Sri Lanka’s geographical separation by sea has so far shielded it from similar vulnerabilities, and it would be unwise to jeopardise this advantage without thorough deliberation.
The proposed electricity grid integration is another contentious issue. Nations like Bangladesh, which are already connected to India’s electricity grid, are formulating exit strategies due to reliability and sovereignty concerns. For instance, Bangladesh faced prolonged power cuts when it failed to settle bills with India. Similarly, Nepal has been unable to fully exploit its hydropower potential because of obligations under agreements with India. Sri Lanka, with over a century of independent electricity production and potential for future self-sufficiency, has no engineering necessity to integrate its grid with India. Such a move appears driven more by political than practical considerations.
The oil pipeline and refinery agreements also warrant scrutiny. Historically, Sri Lanka has imported crude oil for domestic refining, with plans to upgrade facilities like the Sapugaskanda refinery to produce and export diesel and petrol, emulating Singapore. However, recent agreements have seen the handover of strategic assets, including Trincomalee’s oil tanks and the operation of local petrol stations, to Indian entities. Furthermore, the proposed monopoly on LNG supply by an Indian company undermines Sri Lanka’s ability to procure competitively priced LNG from global markets.
These agreements are reportedly still at the “in-principle” stage, but the government’s failure to consult parliament or public forums before committing to such significant undertakings raises serious concerns. Instead of deferring to agreements made by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe, whose policies were widely rejected in elections, the current administration should assert its mandate and demand reconsideration of these commitments.
The issue of awarding the digital national ID project to an Indian company further highlights the erosion of sovereignty. In an era where data is as critical as military assets, granting access to the biometric and personal data of 22 million Sri Lankans to a foreign entity is a grave risk. The tender process itself has been controversial, with conditions favoring only Indian companies and the tender notice published exclusively in Indian newspapers. This lack of transparency and favoritism raises alarms about national security and accountability.
Examples from other nations further underline the dangers of such agreements. In Kenya, the same Indian company involved in Sri Lanka’s digital ID project was banned after allegations of data fraud. Despite this, the Sri Lankan government has persisted with plans that effectively outsource national security data to a foreign entity, undermining the country’s sovereignty.
While Sri Lanka’s size and economic vulnerability necessitate diplomatic tact, these factors do not justify subservience to any foreign power. The President’s visit to India and the commitments made during the visit failed to uphold the dignity and independence of Sri Lanka. It is imperative that our leaders adopt a more balanced approach that safeguards national sovereignty while engaging constructively with India.
Q: How would you comment on the President’s scheduled visit to China?
A: The geopolitical scene has evolved significantly since the Cold War era, transforming international relations into a complex interplay of economic, political, and military interests. Unlike the binary divisions of the past, where nations were clearly aligned with one of two superpowers, today’s global politics involves multifaceted alliances that often overlap and conflict.
For instance, India, which historically aligned with the USSR, now pursues multiple roles. Economically, India collaborates with China and Russia within BRICS, promoting de-dollarization. However, militarily, India partners with the U.S. and other QUAD nations, positioning itself against Chinese regional dominance. Similarly, China has shifted its foreign policy from rigid ideological stances to pragmatic engagement, often accommodating regional superpowers’ roles in their respective spheres of influence.
In this context, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s upcoming visit to China is unlikely to yield significant pushback against the commitments made to India. China is more likely to seek reciprocal agreements, such as securing concessions in Hambantota or other strategic locations, rather than urging Sri Lanka to reject Indian interests outright. This reflects a broader Chinese strategy of coexistence with other regional powers while pursuing its own strategic and economic goals.
A case in point is China’s stance on Sri Lanka’s IMF programme. Unlike during the Cold War, when China might have opposed Western-led financial restructuring, it now focuses on securing a foothold within those frameworks. For example, if Sri Lanka privatizes state-owned entities like the CEB, China’s concern would not be with the principle of privatization but with acquiring a significant stake in those assets.
The lifting of the moratorium on research vessels in Sri Lankan waters exemplifies the government’s precarious balancing act. Allowing both Indian and Chinese vessels to conduct ocean floor mapping may appear to appease both powers, but it risks antagonizing one or the other, depending on the strategic implications of the research findings. The government might view this as a strategy to placate China following the President’s visit to India, but such concessions only deepen the geopolitical entanglement.
Instead of succumbing to these pressures, Sri Lanka should revisit and reaffirm its historical commitment to neutrality in the Indian Ocean, as embodied in the 1972 UN resolution declaring the region a Zone of Peace. This resolution, co-sponsored by Sri Lanka and India, explicitly seeks to prevent military and economically motivated agreements with indirect military implications among Indian Ocean littoral states. By invoking this resolution, Sri Lanka could resist external pressures without directly antagonizing powerful nations.
The government’s current approach, of attempting to “give a little to everyone,” is fraught with risk. It creates the perception of a nation willing to compromise its sovereignty for short-term diplomatic gains. Such policies can lead to long-term strategic vulnerabilities, as seen with the lifting of the research vessel moratorium and the transactional diplomacy of balancing Chinese and Indian interests.
The broader concern is that Sri Lanka’s vulnerability, compounded by economic challenges, could make it a flashpoint in escalating global tensions. Any future conflict, potentially involving advanced ballistic missile systems, AI-driven warfare, and nuclear capabilities, would have catastrophic consequences for small nations like Sri Lanka.
While the government justifies its actions as necessary for an economically bankrupt nation, we believe that there remains space to assert Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and protect its long-term interests. Diplomacy should not equate to submission, and economic hardship must not justify policies that undermine national security and dignity. Instead, the leadership must tread carefully, adopting a principled approach that balances strategic interests while preserving the country’s independence.
Q: How do you view the Aragalaya protests now after years of their end?
A: The Aragalaya emerged as a powerful expression of public frustration, driven predominantly by economic pressures. For many Sri Lankans, the tipping point was the failure of Gotabaya Rajapaksa to provide relief during a devastating economic crisis. The sense of betrayal was especially acute among those who had voted for him in 2019, such as in Kaduwela, where Gotabaya secured 76% of the vote. This sense of disillusionment was evident when thousands from areas like Malabe, Athurugiriya, and Pelawatte—a stronghold of Rajapaksa supporters—joined daily protests for months and ultimately marched 26 kilometers to Colombo on May 9, 2022, to demand his resignation.
This mass movement was not confined to one demographic; it brought together people from all sectors of society, each with their own grievances and aspirations. For the general public, it was primarily about economic hardship and a betrayal of trust. For others, like leftist and progressive groups, it was an opportunity to promote the idea of a revolutionary mass movement aimed at empowering people.
However, the Aragalaya was also marked by significant political and diplomatic interference. Representatives from various political factions—including UNPers sponsored by Ashu Marasinghe, Mahinda Rajapaksa’s allies, Basil Rajapaksa’s agents, Sarath Fonseka’s supporters, and Champika Ranawaka’s supporters were present, each attempting to advance their own agendas. Diplomats from major powers, such as the U.S., India, and China, as well as government intelligence agents, were also actively monitoring and engaging with the movement.
Despite its grassroots energy, the real political shifts occurred in Parliament, not in the streets. The appointment of an interim president was a key moment that divided the movement and eroded its momentum. Opposition parties like the NPP and SJB had the option to reject Ranil Wickremesinghe’s election by refusing to participate in the parliamentary process, aligning with the Aragalaya’s demand for a complete overhaul of the system. Instead, they chose to field their own candidates—Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Dullas Alahapperuma—only to concede and congratulate Wickremesinghe after his victory. These actions were televised, demoralizing many activists who viewed them as a betrayal by the opposition.
An alternative approach, proposed by representatives of the Aragalaya, called for the establishment of an interim government with a six-month mandate, followed by elections. This proposal included forming a cabinet representing all political parties but excluded the concept of an interim president. It was well-received at a meeting at the Public Library Auditorium in Colombo on May 5, 2022, just days before Gotabaya was ousted. However, it failed to gain traction in Parliament, where the ultimate decisions were made.
The Aragalaya, while unprecedented in its scope and inclusivity, was ultimately undermined by political fragmentation, external influences, and the lack of a unified strategy among its leaders and participants. It highlighted the deep disconnection between parliamentary politics and the will of the people, leaving many to question whether meaningful change is possible within the current system.
by Gomi Senadhira
“It is easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled”– Mark Twain
The signing of US $3.7 billion deal to construct a “state-of-the-art oil refinery” oil refinery, with a capacity of 200,000 barrels, in Hambantota with Chinese state-run oil giant Sinopec during President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD)’s state visit to China, is indeed an important achievement. This is significant because successive governments had tried but failed to attract such a large investment into petroleum refining in Sri Lanka. However, it is appropriate to ask will it become a reality or is it another false promise, a fairy tale? After all, we have been fooled before with “fairy tales” about an oil refinery in Hambantota. Hence, we need to be cautious. Particularly because the most recent attempt to build an oil refinery began as a badly-choreographed farce and ended as a tragedy.
To understand why I am saying so, let’s start with the most recent attempt to build an oil refinery in Hambantota.
Largest Investment under the SLSFTA
In July 2018 the former Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama announced, during the Parliamentary Debate on the Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA) that “…. Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products…. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land and environmental approvals to commence the project.”
US $3.85 billion investment by Singapore’s Silver Park International
Eight months after the statement by Minister Samarawickrama in the parliament, on 19th March 2019, Deputy Minister Nalin Bandara and technical advisor to the Ministry, Mangala Yapa, announced at a press conference that the construction of US $3.85 billion oil refinery in the Mirijjawila Export Processing Zone in Hambantota will begin shortly by a Singapore-based Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd with Oman’s Oil and Gas Ministry. The project was a joint venture between Silver Park International, with 70 percent stake in the company, and the Ministry of Oil and Gas of Sultanate of Oman, with 30 percent shares. The investment was billed as Sri Lanka’s largest Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), ever. The oil refinery with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was expected to generate additional US $7 billion of exports per annum when it becomes fully operational in 2023, by exporting a minimum of 9 million metric tons of petroleum products per year.
Within twenty-four hours of the announcement by the Sri Lankan government on the joint venture, officials of Oman’s Oil and Gas Ministry denied being part of a $3.85 billion plan to build an oil refinery in Sri Lanka. According to a report filed by Reuters, addressing a news conference in Muscat, Salim al-Aufi, undersecretary of Oman’s Ministry of Oil and Gas, stated “No one on this side of the panel is aware of this investment in Sri Lanka …. It came as news to me; I don’t know who is signing the cheque for $3.8 billion.” In addition to that, Sri Lankan and Indian media started to question the credentials of the Singaporean investor.
Despite the Omani government’s denial and the media exposure of questionable credentials of the Singaporean Investor, Sri Lanka’s Board of Investments (BOI) decided to go ahead with the “project for a joint venture of Singapore company and Oman.” And on March 24, 2019, the foundation stone for the petroleum refinery was ceremoniously laid by the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at the Mirijjawila Export Processing Zone with the attendance of Omani Minister of Oil and Gas Mohammed bin Hamad Al Rumhy, a number of ministers including Sajith Premadasa and several local parliamentarians.
US $20 billion investment by Singaporean company Sugih Energy International
After that, in October 2019, Sri Lankan newspapers as well as international news websites reported, quoting minister Malik Samarawickrama and Finance Minister Mangala Samaraweera that “The Sri Lankan government has given its approval to the Singaporean company Sugih Energy International (SEI) to build a $20 billion refinery at the port (of Hambantota). The project’s value exceeds the total of all foreign direct investment in Sri Lanka over the past forty year.” Mr. Samarawickrama also stated “”The company will invest in two phases. In the first phase, they have committed an investment of $14.8 billion for the refinery, and further $4 to $5 billion for petrochemical and other projects.”
Fairy Tales to Sell the FTA
Unfortunately, or fortunately, none of these multibillion-dollar investments from Singapore due to the FTA ever saw the light of day. These and almost all other investments from Singapore “thanks to this FTA,” turned out to be “fairy tales” narrated by the government of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to sell the Sri Lanka-Singapore FTA, to the parliament and the people of Sri Lanka. Though the “Silver Park” refinery was to become fully operational by 2023, it didn’t even progress beyond the foundation stone by then. The project by “Sugih Energy International Pte Ltd” couldn’t even reach that milestone. In August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved two proposals presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe in his capacity as the Minister of Investment Promotion to cancel the agreements with these two “Singapore based investors,” Silver Park International and “Sugih Energy International Pte Ltd”, due to their failure in implementing the projects!
BOI’s Failure to exercise Due diligence on these “largest Foreign Direct Investments”
It is difficult to understand as to why the BOI failed so miserably, to exercise DUE DILIGENCE on these “largest Foreign Direct Investments” in Sri Lanka. Due diligence on an investor by BOI is essential to understand the potential risks of the investment and to make informed decisions about whether to allow an investment in or not. More importantly, it is necessary to comply with Anti-Money Laundering regulations and to prevent financial crime. At the very least, the BOI should have ascertained if the investor is a Politically Exposed Person (PEP) and what the sources of the investor’s funds were? If the BOI had undertaken even a cursory appraisal of these two companies, like a simple google search, they would have discovered enough red flags on these two investors.
However, it is necessary to state that it is difficult to find much information on Sugih Energy International through a simple google search. Only news reports on this company are on its “US $20 billion investment in an Oil refinery in Hambantota.” Then there is a reference to a company, based on data from Panama Papers, named Sugih Energy International registered in the British Virgin Islands (which is well-known for its offshore companies) with links to Singapore, in the “Offshore Leaks Database,”. There is also a reference to a Sugih Energy International in the Singapore Business Directory. However, this company had changed its name to AETURNUM ENERGY INTERNATIONAL PTE. LTD. On 10 August 2024. On the same day it had changed its Entity Status from “Live Company” to “In Liquidation – Compulsory Winding Up (Insolvency).”
In contrast, it is possible to get a substantial amount of information on Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd through a simple google search. For example; the registered address of Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd, which is 18, Roberts Lane, #03-01 Singapore, shows the building in Singapore’s Little India where this company is located. #03-01 could be a room number within that building. More interestingly, it reveals the names of nearly a hundred other companies which have 18, Roberts Lane, #03-01 Singapore (218297), as their registered address. This includes an entity specialising in setting up shell companies. Can a shell company located at a shared address, invest US$3.85 billion in Sri Lanka? A cursory appraisal would have also revealed that most of the directors of Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd were Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) and information on the investigations carried out by India’s Enforcement Directorate on these individuals.
Investigation by India’ s Enforcement Directorate (ED)
Though Sri Lankan authorities failed to carry out due diligence, after an explosive report by ‘The Hindu’ newspaper on ‘single largest foreign investment’ in Sri Lanka by a Singapore based investment company with links to an Indian politician’s family, the authorities across the Palk Strait started to investigate the Indian directors of Silver Park International (Pte) Ltd, namely, Mr S.Jagathrakshakan, a DMK Member of Indian Parliament and former union minister of state for information and Broadcasting, and his family members for their involvement money laundering activities. This was reported widely in the Indian media. And according to these reports in August 2024, Mr. Jagathrakshakan and his family members were fined ₹908 crore ( Sri Lankan Rupees 31 billion) for violation of India’s Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and the charges were related to “….an investment of ₹42 crore in a shell company, Silver Park International Pte Ltd, incorporated in Singapore in 2017, and an investment of ₹9 crore (Sri Lankan Rupees 308million) in a Sri Lankan company.”
US$ 4.5 billion Oil Refinery by Sinopec
Though the government scrapped these controversial agreements with Silver Park International and “Sugih Energy International Pte Ltd” in August 2023, these agreements with controversial shell companies seriously damaged Sri Lanka’s image as an investment destination. Law-abiding countries do not permit investments, particularly such large investments, without doing a reasonable appraisal of the investors and the sources of the investor’s funds.
After scrapping the agreements with the controversial shell companies in November 2023, the Cabinet of Ministers approved awarding a contract to China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation (SINOPEC) to build a petroleum refinery in Hambantota. It was also announced that the refinery is expected to attract an investment of at least $4.5 billion. However, since then no tangible progress has been reported on this project.
US$ 3.7 billion oil refinery by Sinopec
Now, we have the MOU signed between Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Power and Energy and China’s Sinopec Corporation to build US$ 3.7 billion oil refinery, capable of producing 200,000 barrels of oil per day. Though this was signed during President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s four-day state visit to China, given the history of this project it is still appropriate to ask will it become a reality this time around or will it be another false promise, a fairy tale?
Conclusion
Given the high-profile manner in which this MOU was signed we can be optimistic about the success of the project. After all, Sinopec is one of the biggest petroleum companies in the world and with a revenue of $429.7billion in 2023, is the fifth on Fortune Global 500 list. We cannot even think about comparing it with shell companies like Silver Park International or Sugih Energy International.
Finally, however, there is one unanswered question about the amount of the investment. The cost of this project appears to have substantially reduced since it was first mooted in November 2023; from US$4.5 billion to US$3.7 billion. Will the Ministry of Power and Energy explain the reasons for this change?
(The writer, a former public servant and a diplomat, can be reached at )
By Ifham Nizam
In an awe-inspiring achievement that highlights the beauty of the natural world, Sri Lankan wildlife photographer Tharindu Dilshan Sendanayake recently clichéd the Grand Prize at the Sanctuary Asia Wildlife Photographer of the Year 2024 competition. Held in Mumbai, India, this prestigious event brings together the best photographers from across the globe to celebrate the intersection of artistry and conservation.
Tharindu’s winning photograph, Primal Fury, captured a dramatic and emotionally charged moment in Yala National Park, Sri Lanka. It’s not just an image but a window into the complex and raw beauty of the wild—a moment that exemplifies his dedication to his craft and his passion for conservation.
From humble beginnings in Sri Lanka to the global stage of wildlife photography, Tharindu’s story is a testament to perseverance, creativity, and the power of photography to inspire conservation. In an exclusive interview, he shares his journey, challenges, and vision for the future of wildlife conservation.
Speaking to The Island, the young lad added: “Those early experiences instilled in me an urge to pursue something related to wildlife,” Tharindu recalls. This passion influenced his academic choices, pushing him to study Biology for his Advanced Level exams. His love for nature wasn’t just an interest; it became a purpose.
This purpose took a creative turn when Tharindu made his first visit to Yala National Park, armed with nothing but a mobile phone. Witnessing a leopard in the wild for the first time left an indelible mark on him. “A friend captured a stunning photo of the leopard with his camera, and that moment changed everything for me,” he says. Inspired, Tharindu acquired his first camera, and his journey as a wildlife photographer began in earnest.
Excerpts of the interview given below.
Q: Congratulations on winning the Grand Prize at the Sanctuary Asia Wildlife Photographer of the Year 2024! Could you tell us about the journey that led to this momentous achievement?
Thank you so much! My journey to this achievement began in my childhood when I developed a deep fascination with wildlife. I spent countless hours watching documentaries in Sinhala and English on television, which fueled my curiosity and passion for nature. Those early experiences instilled in me an urge to pursue something related to wildlife. This passion influenced my academic choices as well—I chose Biology for my Advanced Level exams, driven by my love for understanding and connecting with the natural world.
It’s been a long and rewarding journey, from observing animals as a child to photographing them as a professional. Winning this award is a dream come true and a moment that validates all the hard work and challenges I’ve faced along the way.
Q: What inspired you to pursue wildlife photography, and how has your passion evolved over the years?
My journey into wildlife photography began during my first trip to Yala National Park. At the time, I only had a mobile phone to capture what I saw, but that trip became a life-changing experience. I had the thrill of seeing a leopard in the wild for the very first time.
A friend who accompanied me had a camera and managed to capture an incredible photograph of the leopard. That moment stayed with me—it was amazing to see how a single photograph could encapsulate such beauty and emotion. Inspired by that, I decided to start capturing these moments myself. I eventually got my first camera, and from there, my passion only grew stronger. Every trip into the wild has deepened my connection with nature and my commitment to wildlife photography.
Q: Can you walk us through the story behind the winning photograph? What challenges did you face while capturing it?
My winning photograph, Primal Fury, captures a truly unforgettable moment in the wild. We were tracking a mating leopard couple in Yala National Park, observing their behaviour and hoping to document something unique. The environment was calm and serene until a wild boar suddenly appeared, disturbing the pair. The male leopard, annoyed by the intrusion, attempted to attack the boar.
To our surprise, the boar was not alone. A group of 10–15 wild boars charged forward to defend their companion, forcing the leopard to retreat. The sheer intensity of this encounter was incredible to witness, and I was determined to capture the moment.
However, it was not without challenges. I was using a relatively basic camera, and capturing a fast-paced action scene with clarity required a lot of trial and error. To get the perfect low-angle shot, I had to sit on the trunk bed of the safari jeep for over two hours. With my disabled leg, this posed a significant physical challenge, but I persevered. The resulting image, showcasing the raw power and drama of nature, made every effort worthwhile.
Q: As a wildlife photographer, how do you balance the technical aspects of photography with capturing the natural beauty and emotions of animals in the wild?
Balancing the technical and artistic aspects of photography is both a challenge and an art. The technical side—adjusting camera settings, managing lighting, and ensuring focus—requires constant attention. At the same time, the emotional essence of wildlife photography lies in capturing the beauty, behaviour, and spontaneity of animals.
I spend a lot of time observing the animals and understanding their behaviour. This helps me anticipate special moments, allowing me to stay ready with the right settings. I believe that preparation is key, but patience and immersion in nature are equally important. It’s a delicate balance, but with experience, I’ve learned how to stay in the moment without letting technicalities disrupt the experience.
Q: In your opinion, how does wildlife photography play a role in raising awareness about conservation and protecting endangered species?
Wildlife photography is a powerful medium for raising awareness about conservation and protecting endangered species. A single photograph can offer people a glimpse into the lives of animals they may never encounter in person. By showcasing the beauty, struggle, and resilience of wildlife, photographs evoke emotional connections and inspire action.
When people see images of endangered species in their natural habitats, they begin to understand the urgency of protecting them. Striking photographs can convey complex conservation issues in a way that words often cannot, influencing public opinion and even policy decisions. Wildlife photography helps bridge the gap between people and the natural world, encouraging a sense of responsibility for its preservation.
Tharindu receiving the award from Bittu Sahgal, Sanctuary Nature Foundation Chairman.
Q: What impact do you hope your photography will have on both the public and policymakers in terms of wildlife conservation?
Through my photography, I hope to inspire both the public and policymakers to recognise the importance of wildlife conservation. In Sri Lanka, iconic species like tuskers, elephants, and leopards are not only vital to our biodiversity but also significant contributors to our economy through tourism. Protecting them ensures that future generations can experience their beauty while supporting local livelihoods.
I try to emphasise this message through my work, urging people to take action to safeguard these majestic creatures. By raising awareness and fostering a sense of responsibility, I hope my photography can contribute to meaningful conservation efforts and help shape policies that prioritise wildlife protection.
Q: Wildlife photography often requires long hours and patience in sometimes difficult conditions. What is the most memorable or challenging experience you’ve had while shooting in the wild?
One of my most memorable experiences occurred while tracking a notorious tusker named Ratta in the Galgamuwa area. Ratta was known for his unpredictable behaviour, and after some effort, we managed to locate him. Nearby, two workers at a mango farm decided to chase Ratta away, startling the tusker. With nowhere to go, he began moving toward us.
At first, Ratta didn’t notice us, but as he got closer, he sensed our presence and began charging. I quickly retreated into my Toyota Hilux pickup, continuing to photograph through the driver’s side door. As he approached too rapidly, I had no choice but to slam the door shut, startling him and causing him to bolt back into the jungle.
It was a tense and unforgettable encounter, underscoring the importance of respecting wildlife and maintaining safe distances to avoid such situations.
Q: What message would you like to convey to young aspiring wildlife photographers who want to follow in your footsteps?
To young aspiring wildlife photographers, my advice is simple: be patient, passionate, and persistent. Wildlife photography is not about instant results—it’s about understanding the creatures you photograph and respecting their environment.
Take the time to learn about animal behaviour, connect with nature, and refine your skills. Your journey may be filled with challenges, but every setback is an opportunity to grow. Remember that your photography can be a powerful tool for conservation. Use it to tell stories that inspire others to protect the natural world.
Stay dedicated, and never stop learning—your passion will lead you to incredible experiences and opportunities.
Tharindu’s work goes beyond photography; it serves as a call to action for conservation. By capturing the beauty and struggles of the natural world, he hopes to inspire global efforts to protect wildlife and preserve their habitats for generations to come. His story is a reminder that passion and perseverance can create ripples of change, leaving an indelible mark on the world of wildlife conservation.
The unmistakable expressions of fascination which were written all over the faces of most attendees at the swearing-in formalities on January 20th of comeback US President Donald Trump and the roaring approval the latter drew from them at the end of almost every rhetorical sentence he uttered, told it all. Here is hard evidence that these Trump adulators are allowing their emotions to get the better of them and that they would be an uncritical, mesmerized cheer squad of their leader. The ‘Trump Magic’ was working all over again.
The world would have much to think about from now in the area of foreign policy, considering Trump’s pronouncements in relation to the latter, but as matters stand, the ordinary citizenry of the US would likely be the hardest hit from another Trump presidency.
Considering that the US economy would come in for some beating in the days ahead as a result of Trump’s cavalier trade policies, for instance, the lot of the average American could be expected to aggravate as we go along. There is unlikely to be any quick relief from nagging ‘Bread and Butter’ issues and the question could be reiterated; what’s in this second Trump tenure for the US citizen?
Moreover, the occupation of some of the most important positions in government by ‘tech giants’ and like ‘money bags’ would ensure that there would be little or no ‘trickle-down’ wealth for the average US citizen. The rich could not be expected to give much ear to the wailings of ordinary people, since their sole fixation is financial empire-building and it could not be otherwise; ‘Social condition determines consciousness.’
Issues of equal magnitude emerge from the arena of domestic politics. Within minutes of taking the top job, Trump stands accused of subverting the US Constitution and of unreservedly taking the US in the direction once again of a populist, rightist and repressive state which is least sensitive to the principles of democratic governance.
For example, the Rule of Law has been grossly violated by the US President’s decision to pardon the rightist rabble who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 and made a mockery of the democratic process.
Among Trump’s virtual avalanche of executive orders are moves to nullify the former administration’s measures relating to climate mitigation, equity and minority concerns, for instance, which hitherto have testified to the US’ commitments of a democratic nature.
The question arises; did Trump’s rank-and-file supporters bargain for such costly compromises and betrayals of the democratic ethos when they voted for him? Moreover, they would need to consider that the US was nowhere near being the unchallenged ‘first’ during Trump’s first term. They could be accused of wild wishful thinking if they entertain the idea that the US will be the pre-eminent ‘first’ under Trump in this his comeback tenure.
However, such is the stuff of populist governance. The leader appeals to the gut emotions of his supporters and rallies them to consolidate his power. But whether these diehards would in any respect be individually empowered is an open question.
Moreover, such emotional appeals could result in further erosions of law and order and the Rule of Law. For example, Trump’s claim that ‘very soon we will begin the largest deportation exercise in US history’ could steadily aggravate antagonisms between the white majority and the US’ minorities, resulting in stepped-up racial discord and violence. Race relations could come to be characterized by increasing intolerance and hatred, which situation would be in no-one’s interest.
The depth of the gullibility of Trump’s support base could be gauged also from the fact that it has fallen for his rhetoric on international relations despite some hard realities staring it in the face. For instance, it ought to be plain to see that most of the powers the President is threatening to confront on a number of questions are no ‘push overs’.
On the Western front, the rest of the G7 states and NATO, for instance, could be counted on to defy Trump on issues relating to the Ukraine and the Middle East. These countries are unlikely to see eye-to-eye with the US President on the matter of arming Ukraine and on containing the influence of Russia in Eastern Europe. Thus far, they have been, broadly, for continuing to arm Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression and expansionist designs and on this policy it is difficult to see the rest of West caving-in, as it were, to US demands.
Nor would the EU look on tamely as the US President seeks to exercise his suzerainty over the world and tries to establish a single world order, fashioned basically in the US’ image. Any confrontations with the rest of the West would prove very bruising for the US, considering the economic, military and political power wielded by the former.
International relations have been increasing in complexity over the decades and it would smack of simple-mindedness for any substantial power to forget this fact. It calls for foreign policy sagacity of the first order for even the foremost powers to navigate the current ‘world disorder.’ Such navigation was not easy for Trump during his first tenure and it would be no different this time around as well. It would not be a case of the US riding rough-shod over the rest of the powers that matter.
A species of foreign policy myopia is prompting President Trump to be focused primarily on his backyard and the West at present. His rhetoric on annexing Canada and buying Greenland, for example, could have been music in the ears of his followers in the run-up to the US presidential poll but these aims would be difficult to achieve, given that the rest of the world’s powers are unlikely to stand idly by when any attempts are made to turn these dreams into reality.
Trump misses out badly on also the complexities of the Eastern hemisphere. He would have to deal very delicately with ASEAN, considering that it remains the ‘economic powerhouse’ of the world. The US would be challenged to ‘give’ to ASEAN in economic terms inasmuch as the US ‘receives’ from it. Once again, simplistic thinking is inapplicable.
Likewise, China and India also call for perceptive foreign policy thinking. If the US deals roughly with China in the trade field, for instance, it should be prepared for like retaliatory measures from China, given its economic importance for the world.
The same applies to India. Going forward, the US would find in India a strong contender in science and technology and the economic fields. It too would be no easy ‘pushover’. India, for example, is virtually breathing down the neck, so to speak, of the US in space exploration.
Accordingly, Trump rhetoric is currently palatable for only some simple-minded domestic sections. Given the complex realties of the present ‘world disorder’, the Trump administration would do well to be prepared to deal with creeping disenchantment among its diehard domestic supporters.
Hamas names next Israeli hostages set to be released
Fairly heavy showers above 75 mm can be expected at some places in Uva, Western, Sabaragamuwa and Southern provinces and in Ampara, Batticaloa, Nuwara-Eliya and Matale districts
PAFFREL urges steeper penalties for candidates who fail to submit expense reports after polls
-
Features6 days agoIS THIS THE FINISH OF THE SRI LANKAN ELEPHANT?
-
News6 days agoElectricity tariff reduction: 20% inadequate says consumers
-
Business4 days agoCustomer service to new heights with Digitalized Contact Centre for Union Bank
-
Editorial6 days agoThe rice crisis
-
Features6 days agoPaddy-Rice Data Gap: How much grown? How much sold?
-
Business6 days agoDialog continues patronage of Kelani Duruthu Maha Perahera for the 8th year
-
Editorial5 days agoHobson’s choice, swings and roundabouts
-
Editorial3 days agoCost-cutting and hypocrisy