Connect with us

Features

PMs official visit to Japan – she tells us “don’t get late and don’t go to a geisha house!”

Published

on

Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike reviews the honour guard with Japanese Prime Minister Takeo Miki during the welcome ceremony at the Akasaka State Guest House on November 13, 1976 in Tokyo, Japan. (Photo by The Asahi Shimbun)

“Rarely have we laughed so much” swapping stories

(Excerpted from the autobiography of MDD Pieris)

At 8 a.m. next day, November 12, 1976. the State drive to the airport commenced. We took off for Tokyo. The flying time was around three hours 45 minutes, and we arrived at 1 p.m. According to the Japanese arrangements, the Prime Minister was met by the Head of the Suite of Honour, the Chief of Protocol, Ambassador Uchida and wife, as well as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna and wife. The only ceremony at the airport was a gun salute.

The formal welcoming ceremony was to be held later. We were accommodated at the luxurious and opulent Akasaka Palace Hotel, with shining marble, rich brocades and ornate furniture. Some of us were assigned very large suites of rooms. The marble floors were so shiny that walking was somewhat of a hazard. We spent a quiet afternoon, settling in and getting our bearings. At 8 p.m. the Prime Minister was interviewed on Japanese TV, for which we prepared during the early evening. Thereafter, at 9 p.m. we went to Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna’s for a relaxed private dinner.

The following day, the very colourful, formal, official welcoming ceremony took place at 10 a.m. out in the spacious courtyard of Akasaka Palace, with long red carpets, a smartly turned out guard of honour and a band playing the National Anthems. It was quite cold outside, uncomfortably so at times. The Japanese Prime Minister Mr. Miki and Mrs. Miki were present, and so were the diplomatic corps. The ceremony was over by 10.30 a.m. At 11 a.m. we left from Tokyo railway station, by the super express “Hikari” to Nagoya. Lunch was served on the train. At Nagoya we changed trains and at 3 p.m. arrived at Toba station in rain and gloom.

By 3.15 p.m. we were at Mikimoto Pearl Island. The Prime Minister was personally taken around by Mr. and Mrs. Mikimoto. We were shown the process of culturing pearls. The oyster is first delicately opened up. A small shard of skin taken from inside the oyster and a type of round oyster shell piece is placed within. The oysters are then tied to grids, and the grids immersed in water. After a period of three years the secretions of the oyster make a pearl, which is really a natural pearl, but artificially induced. All this was very interesting. Also fascinating was to see the women pearl divers in action. They were diving in fairly heavy rain and in the cold looking for oysters.

At around 4.45 p.m. we left the island for the Shima Kanko Hotel, about one hour’s drive on a picturesque winding mountain road, with a view of numerous small islands and the Pacific ocean below. The view was obscured somewhat by the rain. At 7.45 p.m. we had dinner at the hotel with Mr. & Mrs. Mikimoto.

The next day the 14th, it was still raining heavily. At 9.20 a.m. we left by train to Kyoto, a journey of about three hours. We were accommodated at the comfortable Miyako Hotel. The afternoon was free for sight-seeing. We were taken to see a silk weaving centre; a beautiful Japanese garden neatly laid out; ponds full of beautiful multi-coloured fish; Temples; and Kyoto Palace, a one time residence of emperors. The Palace was quite spartan in appearance. There was little ostentation or opulence. Wood was the predominant building material and the inside was somewhat gloomy. The white pebbled courtyards were simple and attractive.

We got back to the hotel around 5.30 p.m. At 7.30 p.m. the Chief of Protocol, Ambassador Uchida and wife, who had accompanied us took the Prime Minister and us to an excellent restaurant where we had varieties of Japanese food. We got back at 10 p.m. and Ambassador Uchida invited Arthur Basnayake, Bernard Tilakaratna and myself to go out and have a drink at a Geisha house. He wanted us to have this cultural experience, before we left Japan. It fell to my lot to inform the Prime Minister that we were going out. “Alright, but don’t get late, and don’t go to a geisha house!” she added humorously.

Ambassador Uchida and a couple of other senior Japanese officials took us to a geisha house. We removed our shoes at the entrance, and got into a comfortable pair of slippers. The lady in-charge dressed in an elaborately patterned Kimono, stylistically done hair and heavily touched up face bowed and received us. She led us to a room with subdued lighting, tatami mats and low tables, with cushions placed on the mats around the tables. A number of elaborately made up ladies dressed in traditional silk kimonos bowed and greeted us here, and they acted as hostesses until we left a little past midnight.

We spent only about one and half hours there. But it was an experience worth having. The ladies helped us to remove our jackets, and they loosened our ties to make us comfortable. We sat on the cushions and was soon sipping sake, the Japanese rice wine, and eating some delicious food served in small quantities by our hostesses. The senior Japanese officials with us were much traveled and experienced. They spoke perfect English, and the time was spent in relating a number of humorous anecdotes and experiences by everyone, some bordering on the risque.

Seldom had we laughed so much. The anecdotes were interspersed with witty remarks and irreverent comments. In the meantime, our hostesses, who were seated by our sides, gently saw to it that we ate and drank. After about 40 minutes of this, the room lights gradually dimmed, to near darkness, and a kimono clad figure appeared with some kind of classical string musical instrument, which she played whilst singing a plaintive and haunting song. It was a well-designed break from our uproarious exchanges, and was meant to slow the tempo and afford us relaxation on a different plane.

After the song, the lights brightened again and we resumed our chatter. But it was interesting, that we took awhile to transit from serenity and song, back to our previous mode of conduct. Altogether, it was a delightful evening. We had laughed so much, that we were sweating. The food and drink were excellent, and the ladies attending to us, concerned and diligent hostesses. This whole episode exemplified an important aspect of Japanese life style at a particular level.

They work very hard and long. At the same time, their culture and their practices provide them with opportunities to completely take their mind off work and relax totally. During the entire one and half-hours of socializing, not once did anyone refer to anything official, other than to satirize or lampoon. We were not there to discuss grave issues. We were there to enjoy ourselves.

The next morning, November 15, we had to make an early start, and take the 8.05 a.m. train from Kyoto to Tokyo. The Prime Minister had a very good memory, and in the morning when we met her in the lobby of the hotel just prior to our departure for the station, she remembered to ask “So how was last night?” We replied that it was most enjoyable. “What time did you return?” was the next question. We told her. But whilst answering that question our minds were working on an answer to a possible third question, as to where we went. That question did not come, but we wondered whether we detected a twinkle in her eyes.

Kyoto to Tokyo was a three-hour journey. En route the Prime Minister discussed with us details pertaining to that afternoon’s official meeting with the Japanese Prime Minister. But before that meeting, the Prime Minister and some of us had a most important luncheon engagement. It was with Emperor Hirohito, the Empress, and other members of the Royal family and some distinguished guests. Having arrived back at Akasaka Palace Hotel at 11.20 a.m., the Prime Minister, Ambassador Bernard Tilakaratna, Mackie and I left for the Imperial Palace at 12.20 p.m. Only the Prime Minister and the Ambassador attended the audience with the Emperor.

We were ushered into a hall, where two distinguished invitees in long frock coats were already there, the Chief Justice and the Speaker of the Lower House of Parliament, (The Diet). In due course, we were all introduced to the Emperor and Empress and the other members of the Royal family who sat for lunch with us. They were Crown Prince Akihito, Princess Michiko and Prince Mikasa, and his wife. Prince Mikasa had earlier visited Sri Lanka as a special envoy during the Buddha Jayanthi Celebrations in 1956.

The other distinguished Japanese invitees besides the Chief Justice and the Speaker, were the Prime Minister Mr. Miki, the Foreign Minister and the President of the Senate. It was a formal, subdued lunch, with polite conversation in soft modulated voices.

We got back at 3 p.m. and almost immediately afterwards left for the Prime Minister’s office for talks with the Japanese Prime Minister at 3.30 p.m. The discussions, as usual covered both bilateral and international issues, and were conducted in an atmosphere of great cordiality. We were back at the hotel at 5.30 p.m. and had a short break before dressing for dinner. At 7.30 p.m. Prime Minister Miki hosted a banquet in honour of the Prime Minister at his residence.

Whilst dressing to attend this, I found to my consternation that my dress shirt had come back from the laundry, with two buttons missing and a third wobbly. The two bows that I had packed also proved to be defective. There was nothing else to be done except to prop up things with judiciously placed pins, which took time and effort, with the departure deadline approaching. I had a most uncomfortable evening, thereafter, wondering what would happen every time I bowed, in a milieu where a great deal of bowing was mandatory.

To my great relief, the evening passed without a major disaster, but with stress as a companion. I was particularly concerned about the prospect of the bow ending up in the soup with a loud plop and endangering my clothes, as well as possibly my distinguished neighbours! We got back at 10.30 p.m. and as was customary, worked with my senior colleagues on the day’s cables to Colombo, the Joint Communique and other matters. We finally, went to sleep at 1.15 a.m. after a particularly long and eventful day.

The new day, the 16th, which had already dawned was not as hectic as the previous one. There were however some important appointments. The lunch hosted by the Economic Organization of Japan gave the Prime Minister an opportunity to talk to a number of industrialists and businessmen. There followed at 4.30 p.m. an Embassy reception to meet Sri Lankans living and working in Japan. At 6.15 p.m. we were at the National Theatre and watched a part of a Kabuki play. We got back at 8 p.m. and after dinner, the senior official team got down to some extended work on a number of matters, which included an important opening statement for the Prime Minister’s press conference, the next day, refining the language and adjusting the content of the draft joint communique between the two governments; and finalizing cables to Colombo. We finished only at 2.30 a.m., which meant another day of little sleep.

Later this day November 17, there was a further round of talks between the two Prime Ministers commencing at 9.15 a.m. At this meeting, Japan pledged increased grant and project aid. The sessions concluded at 10.30 a.m. We then accompanied the Prime Minister to a 10.45 a.m. reception hosted in her honour by the Japanese Buddhist Federation. After lunch, at the hotel we accompanied the Prime Minister to the Nippon Press Centre for a 4 p.m. Press Conference. It went quite smoothly, and without any problems. We got back at 5.30 p.m. for a short rest, and then came down for the 8 p.m. formal black tie dinner hosted by the Prime Minister in honour of Prime Minister Miki and Mrs. Miki, held at the plush banqueting hall of Akasaka Palace Hotel.

This was our final day in Japan, and after dinner the Prime Minister and all of us exchanged views and attempted to sum up our experience and what had been achieved in Japan. I went back to my room afterwards, and drafted the Cabinet Paper on the entire visit to the three countries. I had made this both a practice and habit, for two main reasons. The first was my belief in the necessity for promptness. The second was the more practical issue of the load of work you were going home to.

Although acting arrangements were always made, and I had a person of the calibre of WT Jayasinghe acting for me, yet the convention and practice were that important matters, unless urgent were kept back, for the permanent incumbent to tackle. Therefore, it was also a matter of practical good sense that you covered as much ground as possible of issues related to a foreign visit, before you arrived home to an accelerated period of work. You then only had to attend to the inevitable area of the follow up on certain matters, which every visit entailed.

On the 18th, our last morning in Japan, there was heavy rain. Therefore, the formal departure ceremony which was to be in the Palace courtyard, was shifted indoors to a large hall at Akasaka Palace. The guard of honour; the band; the flags of the two countries and the distinguished invitees were all accommodated in this hall. After the arrival of Prime Minister Miki and wife, the ceremony began. The band sounded very loud indoors. At 9. 30 a.m. we left Tokyo, by the British Airways flight to Colombo via Hong Kong. On the flight, I showed the draft of the Cabinet Paper, which was rather long to the Prime Minister and obtained her approval.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Pakistan-Sri Lanka ‘eye diplomacy’ 

Published

on

The writer handing over a donation to restore the eyesight of injured military personnel

Reminiscences:

I was appointed Managing Director of the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) and Chairman of the Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd (TPTL – Indian Oil Company/ Petroleum Corporation of Sri Lanka joint venture), in February 2023, by President Ranil Wickremesinghe. I served as TPTL Chairman voluntarily. TPTL controls the world-renowned oil tank farm in Trincomalee, abandoned after World War II. Several programmes were launched to repair tanks and buildings there. I enjoyed travelling to Trincomalee, staying at Navy House and monitoring the progress of the projects. Trincomalee is a beautiful place where I spent most of my time during my naval career.

My main task as MD, CPC, was to ensure an uninterrupted supply of petroleum products to the public.

With the great initiative of the then CPC Chairman, young and energetic Uvis Mohammed, and equally capable CPC staff, we were able to do our job diligently, and all problems related to petroleum products were overcome.  My team and I were able to ensure that enough stocks were always available for any contingency.

The CPC made huge profits when we imported crude oil and processed it at our only refinery in Sapugaskanda, which could produce more than 50,000 barrels of refined fuel in one stream working day! (One barrel is equal to 210 litres). This huge facility encompassing about 65 acres has more than 1,200 employees and 65 storage tanks.

A huge loss the CPC was incurring due to wrong calculation of “out turn loss” when importing crude oil by ships and pumping it through Single Point Mooring Buoy (SPMB) at sea and transferring it through underwater fuel transfer lines to service tanks was detected and corrected immediately. That helped increase the CPC’s profits.

By August 2023, the CPC made a net profit of 74,000 million rupees (74 billion rupees)! The President was happy, the government was happy, the CPC Management was happy and the hard-working CPC staff were happy. I became a Managing Director of a very happy and successful State-Owned Enterprise (SOE). That was my first experience in working outside military/Foreign service.

I will be failing in my duty if I do not mention Sagala Rathnayake, then Chief of Staff to the President, for recommending me for the post of MD, CPC.

The only grievance they had was that we were not able to pay their 2023 Sinhala/Tamil New Year bonus due to a government circular.  After working at CPC for six months and steering it out of trouble, I was ready to move out of CPC.

   I was offered a new job as the Sri Lanka High Commissioner to Pakistan. I was delighted and my wife and son were happy. Our association with Pakistan, especially with the Pakistan Military, is very long. My son started schooling in Karachi in 1995, when I was doing the Naval War Course there. My wife Yamuna has many good friends in Pakistan. I am the first Military officer to graduate from the Karachi University in 1996 (BSc Honours in War Studies) and have a long association with the Pakistan Navy and their Special Forces. I was awarded the Nishan-e-Imtiaz  (Military) medal—the highest National award by the Pakistan Presidentm in 2019m when I was Chief of Defence Staff. I am the only Sri Lankan to have been awarded this prestigious medal so far.  I knew my son and myself would be able to play a quiet game of golf every morning at the picturesque Margalla Golf Club, owned by the Pakistan Navy, at the foot of Margalla hills, at Islamabad. The golf club is just a walking distance from the High Commissioner’s residence.

When I took over as Sri Lanka High Commissioner at Islamabad on 06 December 2023, I realised that a number of former Service Commanders had held that position earlier. The first Ceylonese High Commissioner to Pakistan, with a military background, was the first Army Commander General Anton Muthukumaru. He was concurrently Ambassador to Iran. Then distinguished Service Commanders, like General H W G Wijayakoon, General Gerry Silva, General Srilal Weerasooriya, Air Chief Marshal Jayalath Weerakkody, served as High Commissioners to Islamabad. I took over from Vice Admiral Mohan Wijewickrama (former Chief of Staff of Navy and Governor Eastern Province).

A photograph of Dr. Silva (second from right) in Brigadier
(Dr) Waquar Muzaffar’s album

One of the first visitors I received was Kawaja Hamza, a prominent Defence Correspondent in Islamabad. His request had nothing to do with Defence matters. He wanted to bring his 84-year-old father to see me; his father had his eyesight restored with corneas donated by a Sri Lankan in 1972! His eyesight is still good, but he did not know the Sri Lankan donor who gave him this most precious gift. He wanted to pay gratitude to the new Sri Lankan High Commissioner and to tell him that as a devoted Muslim, he prayed for the unknown donor every day! That reminded me of what my guru in Foreign Service, the late Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar told me when I was First Secretary/ Defence Advisor, Sri Lanka High Commission in New Delhi. That is “best diplomacy is people-to-people contacts.” This incident prompted me to research more into “Pakistan-Sri Lanka Eye Diplomacy” and what I learnt was fascinating!

Do you know the Sri Lanka Eye Donation Society has donated more than 26,000 corneas to Pakistan, since 1964 to date! That means more than 26,000 Pakistani people see the world with SRI LANKAN EYES! The Sri Lankan Eye Donation Society has provided 100,000 eye corneas to foreign countries FREE! To be exact 101,483 eye corneas during the last 65 years! More than one fourth of these donations was to one single country- Pakistan. Recent donations (in November 2024) were made to the Pakistan Military at Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology (AFIO), Rawalpindi, to restore the sight of Pakistan Army personnel who suffered eye injuries due to Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) blasts. This donation was done on the 75th Anniversary of the Sri Lanka Army.

Deshabandu Dr. F. G. Hudson Silva, a distinguished old boy of Nalanda College, Colombo, started collecting eye corneas as a medical student in 1958. His first set of corneas were collected from a deceased person and were stored at his home refrigerator at Wijerama Mawatha, Colombo 7. With his wife Iranganie De Silva (nee Kularatne), he started the Sri Lanka Eye Donation Society in 1961. They persuaded Buddhists to donate their eyes upon death. This drive was hugely successful.

Their son (now in the US) was a contemporary of mine at Royal College. I pledged to donate (of course with my parents’ permission) my eyes upon my death when I was a student at Royal college in 1972 on a Poson Full Moon Poya Day. Thousands have done so.

On Vesak Full Moon Poya Day in 1964, the first eye corneas were carried in a thermos flask filled with Ice, to Singapore, by Dr Hudson Silva and his wife and a successful eye transplant surgery was performed. From that day, our eye corneas were sent to 62 different countries.

Pakistan Lions Clubs, which supported this noble gesture, built a beautiful Eye Hospital for humble people at Gulberg, Lahore, where eye surgeries are performed, and named it Dr Hudson Silva Lions Eye Hospital.

The good work has continued even after the demise of Dr Hudson Silva in 1999.

So many people have donated their eyes upon their death, including President J. R. Jayewardene, whose eye corneas were used to restore the eyesight of one Japanese and one Sri Lankan. Dr Hudson Silva became a great hero in Pakistan and he was treated with dignity and respect whenever he visited Pakistan. My friend, Brigadier (Dr) Waquar Muzaffar, the Commandant of AFIO, was able to dig into his old photographs and send me a precious photo taken in 1980, 46 years ago (when he was a medical student), with Dr Hudson Silva.

We will remember Dr and Mrs Hudson Silva with gratitude.

Bravo Zulu to Sri Lanka Eye Donation Society!

 

by Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defense Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Continue Reading

Features

Lasting solutions require consensus

Published

on

Social Media training

Problems and solutions in plural societies like Sri Lanka’s which have deep rooted ethnic, religious and linguistic cleavages require a consciously inclusive approach. A major challenge for any government in Sri Lanka is to correctly identify the problems faced by different groups with strong identities and find solutions to them. The durability of democratic systems in divided societies depends less on electoral victories than on institutionalised inclusion, consultation, and negotiated compromise. When problems are defined only through the lens of a single political formation, even one that enjoys a large electoral mandate, such as obtained by the NPP government, the policy prescriptions derived from that diagnosis will likely overlook the experiences of communities that may remain outside the ruling party. The result could end up being resistance to those policies, uneven implementation and eventual political backlash.

A recent survey done by the National Peace Council (NPC), in Jaffna, in the North, at a focus group discussion for young people on citizen perception in the electoral process, revealed interesting developments. The results of the NPC micro survey support the findings of the national survey by Verite Research that found that government approval rating stood at 65 percent in early February 2026. A majority of the respondents in Jaffna affirm that they feel safer and more fairly treated than in the past. There is a clear improving trend to be seen in some areas, but not in all. This survey of predominantly young and educated respondents shows 78 percent saying livelihood has improved and an equal percentage feeling safe in daily life. 75 percent express satisfaction with the new government and 64 percent believe the state treats their language and culture fairly. These are not insignificant gains in a region that bore the brunt of three decades of war.

Yet the same survey reveals deep reservations that temper this optimism. Only 25 percent are satisfied with the handling of past issues. An equal percentage see no change in land and military related concerns. Most strikingly, almost 90 percent are worried about land being taken without consent for religious purposes. A significant number are uncertain whether the future will be better. These negative sentiments cannot be brushed aside as marginal. They point to unresolved structural questions relating to land rights, demilitarisation, accountability and the locus of political power. If these issues are not addressed sooner rather than later, the current stability may prove fragile. This suggests the need to build consensus with other parties to ensure long-term stability and legitimacy, and the need for partnership to address national issues.

NPP Absence

National or local level problems solving is unlikely to be successful in the longer term if it only proceeds from the thinking of one group of people even if they are the most enlightened. Problem solving requires the engagement of those from different ethno-religious, caste and political backgrounds to get a diversity of ideas and possible solutions. It does not mean getting corrupted or having to give up the good for the worse. It means testing ideas in the public sphere. Legitimacy flows not merely from winning elections but from the quality of public reasoning that precedes decision-making. The experience of successful post-conflict societies shows that long term peace and development are built through dialogue platforms where civil society organisations, political actors, business communities, and local representatives jointly define problems before negotiating policy responses.

As a civil society organisation, the National Peace Council engages in a variety of public activities that focus on awareness and relationship building across communities. Participants in those activities include community leaders, religious clergy, local level government officials and grassroots political party representatives. However, along with other civil society organisations, NPC has been finding it difficult to get the participation of members of the NPP at those events. The excuse given for the absence of ruling party members is that they are too busy as they are involved in a plenitude of activities. The question is whether the ruling party members have too much on their plate or whether it is due to a reluctance to work with others.

The general belief is that those from the ruling party need to get special permission from the party hierarchy for activities organised by groups not under their control. The reluctance of the ruling party to permit its members to join the activities of other organisations may be the concern that they will get ideas that are different from those held by the party leadership. The concern may be that these different ideas will either corrupt the ruling party members or cause dissent within the ranks of the ruling party. But lasting reform in a plural society requires precisely this exposure. If 90 percent of surveyed youth in Jaffna are worried about land issues, then engaging them, rather than shielding party representatives from uncomfortable conversations, is essential for accurate problem identification.

North Star

The Leader of the Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP), Prof Tissa Vitarana, who passed away last week, gave the example for national level problem solving. As a government minister he took on the challenge the protracted ethnic conflict that led to three decades of war. He set his mind on the solution and engaged with all but never veered from his conviction about what the solution would be. This was the North Star to him, said his son to me at his funeral, the direction to which the Compass (Malimawa) pointed at all times. Prof Vitarana held the view that in a diverse and plural society there was a need to devolve power and share power in a structured way between the majority community and minority communities. His example illustrates that engagement does not require ideological capitulation. It requires clarity of purpose combined with openness to dialogue.

The ethnic and religious peace that prevails today owes much to the efforts of people like Prof Vitarana and other like-minded persons and groups which, for many years, engaged as underdogs with those who were more powerful. The commitment to equality of citizenship, non-racism, non-extremism and non-discrimination, upheld by the present government, comes from this foundation. But the NPC survey suggests that symbolic recognition and improved daily safety are not enough. Respondents prioritise personal safety, truth regarding missing persons, return of land, language use and reduction of military involvement. They are also asking for jobs after graduation, local economic opportunity, protection of property rights, and tangible improvements that allow them to remain in Jaffna rather than migrate.

If solutions are to be lasting they cannot be unilaterally imposed by one party on the others. Lasting solutions cannot be unilateral solutions. They must emerge from a shared diagnosis of the country’s deepest problems and from a willingness to address the negative sentiments that persist beneath the surface of cautious optimism. Only then can progress be secured against reversal and anchored in the consent of the wider polity. Engaging with the opposition can help mitigate the hyper-confrontational and divisive political culture of the past. This means that the ruling party needs to consider not only how to protect its existing members by cloistering them from those who think differently but also expand its vision and membership by convincing others to join them in problem solving at multiple levels. This requires engagement and not avoidance or withdrawal.

 

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Unpacking public responses to educational reforms

Published

on

A pro-government demonstration calling for the implementation of the education reforms. (A file photo)

As the debate on educational reforms rages, I find it useful to pay as much attention to the reactions they have excited as we do to the content of the reforms. Such reactions are a reflection of how education is understood in our society, and this understanding – along with the priorities it gives rise to – must necessarily be taken into account in education policy, including and especially reform. My aim in this piece, however, is to couple this public engagement with critical reflection on the historical-structural realities that structure our possibilities in the global market, and briefly discuss the role of academics in this endeavour.

Two broad reactions

The reactions to the proposed reforms can be broadly categorised into ‘pro’ and ‘anti’. I will discuss the latter first. Most of the backlash against the reforms seems to be directed at the issue of a gay dating site, accidentally being linked to the Grade 6 English module. While the importance of rigour cannot be overstated in such a process, the sheer volume of the energies concentrated on this is also indicative of how hopelessly homophobic our society is, especially its educators, including those in trade unions. These dispositions are a crucial part of the reason why educational reforms are needed in the first place. If only there was a fraction of the interest in ‘keeping up with the rest of the world’ in terms of IT, skills, and so on, in this area as well!

Then there is the opposition mounted by teachers’ trade unions and others about the process of the reforms not being very democratic, which I (and many others in higher education, as evidenced by a recent statement, available at https://island.lk/general-educational-reforms-to-what-purpose-a-statement-by-state-university-teachers/ ) fully agree with. But I earnestly hope the conversation is not usurped by those wanting to promote heteronormativity, further entrenching bigotry only education itself can save us from. With this important qualification, I, too, believe the government should open up the reform process to the public, rather than just ‘informing’ them of it.

It is unclear both as to why the process had to be behind closed doors, as well as why the government seems to be in a hurry to push the reforms through. Considering other recent developments, like the continued extension of emergency rule, tabling of the Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA), and proposing a new Authority for the protection of the Central Highlands (as is famously known, Authorities directly come under the Executive, and, therefore, further strengthen the Presidency; a reasonable question would be as to why the existing apparatus cannot be strengthened for this purpose), this appears especially suspect.

Further, according to the Secretary to the MOE Nalaka Kaluwewa: “The full framework for the [education] reforms was already in place [when the Dissanayake government took office]” (https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2025/08/12/wxua-a12.html, citing The Morning, July 29). Given the ideological inclinations of the former Wickremesinghe government and the IMF negotiations taking place at the time, the continuation of education reforms, initiated in such a context with very little modification, leaves little doubt as to their intent: to facilitate the churning out of cheap labour for the global market (with very little cushioning from external shocks and reproducing global inequalities), while raising enough revenue in the process to service debt.

This process privileges STEM subjects, which are “considered to contribute to higher levels of ‘employability’ among their graduates … With their emphasis on transferable skills and demonstrable competency levels, STEM subjects provide tools that are well suited for the abstraction of labour required by capitalism, particularly at the global level where comparability across a wide array of labour markets matters more than ever before” (my own previous piece in this column on 29 October 2024). Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) subjects are deprioritised as a result. However, the wisdom of an education policy that is solely focused on responding to the global market has been questioned in this column and elsewhere, both because the global market has no reason to prioritise our needs as well as because such an orientation comes at the cost of a strategy for improving the conditions within Sri Lanka, in all sectors. This is why we need a more emancipatory vision for education geared towards building a fairer society domestically where the fruits of prosperity are enjoyed by all.

The second broad reaction to the reforms is to earnestly embrace them. The reasons behind this need to be taken seriously, although it echoes the mantra of the global market. According to one parent participating in a protest against the halting of the reform process: “The world is moving forward with new inventions and technology, but here in Sri Lanka, our children are still burdened with outdated methods. Opposition politicians send their children to international schools or abroad, while ours depend on free education. Stopping these reforms is the lowest act I’ve seen as a mother” (https://www.newsfirst.lk/2026/01/17/pro-educational-reforms-protests-spread-across-sri-lanka). While it is worth mentioning that it is not only the opposition, nor in fact only politicians, who send their children to international schools and abroad, the point holds. Updating the curriculum to reflect the changing needs of a society will invariably strengthen the case for free education. However, as mentioned before, if not combined with a vision for harnessing education’s emancipatory potential for the country, such a move would simply translate into one of integrating Sri Lanka to the world market to produce cheap labour for the colonial and neocolonial masters.

According to another parent in a similar protest: “Our children were excited about lighter schoolbags and a better future. Now they are left in despair” (https://www.newsfirst.lk/2026/01/17/pro-educational-reforms-protests-spread-across-sri-lanka). Again, a valid concern, but one that seems to be completely buying into the rhetoric of the government. As many pieces in this column have already shown, even though the structure of assessments will shift from exam-heavy to more interim forms of assessment (which is very welcome), the number of modules/subjects will actually increase, pushing a greater, not lesser, workload on students.

A file photo of a satyagraha against education reforms

What kind of education?

The ‘pro’ reactions outlined above stem from valid concerns, and, therefore, need to be taken seriously. Relatedly, we have to keep in mind that opening the process up to public engagement will not necessarily result in some of the outcomes, those particularly in the HSS academic community, would like to see, such as increasing the HSS component in the syllabus, changing weightages assigned to such subjects, reintroducing them to the basket of mandatory subjects, etc., because of the increasing traction of STEM subjects as a surer way to lock in a good future income.

Academics do have a role to play here, though: 1) actively engage with various groups of people to understand their rationales behind supporting or opposing the reforms; 2) reflect on how such preferences are constituted, and what they in turn contribute towards constituting (including the global and local patterns of accumulation and structures of oppression they perpetuate); 3) bring these reflections back into further conversations, enabling a mutually conditioning exchange; 4) collectively work out a plan for reforming education based on the above, preferably in an arrangement that directly informs policy. A reform process informed by such a dialectical exchange, and a system of education based on the results of these reflections, will have greater substantive value while also responding to the changing times.

Two important prerequisites for this kind of endeavour to succeed are that first, academics participate, irrespective of whether they publicly endorsed this government or not, and second, that the government responds with humility and accountability, without denial and shifting the blame on to individuals. While we cannot help the second, we can start with the first.

Conclusion

For a government that came into power riding the wave of ‘system change’, it is perhaps more important than for any other government that these reforms are done for the right reasons, not to mention following the right methods (of consultation and deliberation). For instance, developing soft skills or incorporating vocational education to the curriculum could be done either in a way that reproduces Sri Lanka’s marginality in the global economic order (which is ‘system preservation’), or lays the groundwork to develop a workforce first and foremost for the country, limited as this approach may be. An inextricable concern is what is denoted by ‘the country’ here: a few affluent groups, a majority ethno-religious category, or everyone living here? How we define ‘the country’ will centrally influence how education policy (among others) will be formulated, just as much as the quality of education influences how we – students, teachers, parents, policymakers, bureaucrats, ‘experts’ – think about such categories. That is precisely why more thought should go to education policymaking than perhaps any other sector.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is attached to the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya).

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

Continue Reading

Trending