Features

Port City on the Beira: looking a gift horse through its derriere

Published

4 years ago

2021/06/18

Sahan Weerasooriya

by Jolly Somasundram

“I thought I saw a turquoise sea, billowing smooth and bright.

Wrong! It was an emerging Republic, a 700 acre wee sovereignty,

Passport and flag ready, she awaits an anthem, to enter the UN.

Defying scurrilous on-line disinformation, out of nothing came something.”

It has been done or has it? The Port City Bill has received overwhelming approval of Parliament, all amendments suggested by the Supreme Court were incorporated, so that a referendum or 2/3rds majority requirement were foreclosed. On the Speaker signing it, following due process, the Bill became law: it is within the constitution. But social media, for which truth is not a troubling issue, are carrying out a carping, personalised campaign of innuendo and insinuation against it. It would be useful to revisit the foundational bases for this law, to judge whether there is something genuine in their concerns or social media is merely flying someone else’s flag for advantage.

Natural harbours are created by nature, artificial ones by man. Both enclose the sea. Sri Lanka provided a wrinkle: a sea was drained, at a cost of US$ 15 Billion, creating a land mass on which six million square meters of built space will be erected, for commercial users. This collectivity is the Port City. The entire operation- of reclamation, building, and providing equity and debt finance- was undertaken by the Chinese: there were no Chinese loans given to Sri Lanka for this purpose, thereby leading her to debt enchainment and traps. Sri Lanka will receive half of the reclaimed land as a gift to her people. The balance, on which Chinese driven development will take place, was leased back to the Chinese for 99 years, an instance of one’s own product being back- leased. It will be managed by a corporate body headed by a very senior, experienced and highly respected Sri Lankan. This deal was riskless for Sri Lanka, for it was an asset created with no debt or funding from the Budget. Those who risk going far, would only know how far they could go! The reward of this deal came in aces. What was the catch? Punch drunk with debt blows and Sri Lanka on the fiscal ropes, Sri Lanka was not an enticing investment market. The public could not believe this deal. It was so good, it must be bad! Conspiracy theories sprouted. Social media referred to secret deals (if there were, how would they be known?). It had a whale of a time, broadcasting fake news- Galle Face Green will become a brown, they said, but a quarter mile of verdant green had already been added. The cliché, there is no free lunch, was widely bandied. Classical Latin vendors darkly quoted Aeneas, “beware those who come bearing gifts.” (Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.)

The fable of the Arab and the Camel was invoked, the Camel, given accommodation in his tent by the trusting Arab, used its vantage fulcrum point, to craftily mount a successful reverse takeover bid and later, dispossess the owner. This 700-acre transistor Republic- smaller than any municipal ward in Colombo – would be the first stop in making the country a Chinese colony, to be renamed Sino Lanka, they alleged.

There is confusion between rights of equity providers and of sovereignty governors. Lever Brothers, a British multinational, owns significant land parcels in Grandpass. They have managerial rights over company activities but these do not morph to exercising governance powers over Grandpass. Debt-equity swaps are a standard management tactic, to transfer risk from a debtor to owner, as Hambantota showed, but they are not equity-sovereignty swaps, like the Louisiana purchase of the US from France, a century and a half ago. In the Port City project there is no debt, all the equity is held by Sri Lanka. The Port City asset leased to China for 99 years is unlike Guantanamo, where the US forced Cuba to renounce sovereign rights over this parcel of Cuban territory to itself and in perpetuity too.

History repeats but, it is now claimed, with Chinese accents. 70 years ago, newly independent Sri Lanka (then Ceylon) was in dire straits as there was a severe shortage of rice. The Korean war was on and the price of rubber rose precipitously. Sri Lanka being a rubber exporting country was unable to take advantage of this bonanza because the US frowned on rubber trade with China. China countered with a win -win offer. She sold rice to Sri Lanka at a lower price than the market and purchased rubber at a higher price than what the market offered. The nay-sayers were aghast, “there is a catch in this. It is the first step in the takeover of our newly independent country by China,” they growled. The government, though a West oriented one, stood firm. The US retaliated by cutting off assistance under the Battle Act. Today, sanctions would be the retaliatory measure. These alarmists need only scan a map. A Chinese air fleet would take eight hours flying time to reach Sri Lanka with a refuelling stop in-between, a navy will take three days. Napoleon was defeated by General Winter in his abortive invasion of Moscow. General Distance with stretched supply lines, would prove an invader’s nemesis with respect to Sri Lanka. A successful invasion of Sri Lanka is a fantasy of unthinkers, futile as The Charge of the Light Brigade.

The Rice-Rubber agreement has lasted 70 years with no adverse repercussions. It was renewed periodically by every government, irrespective of ideology. The same anti-China arguments offered then, were now dusted and re-presented. But the international situation has changed. A Thucycydian trap has inserted itself. What happens when an upstart power challenges a long established one? The US superiority is in hard power- land, sea (750 bases all over the world, some nuclear armed), undersea, air, cyber, nuclear and space. China’s counter was soft power, build infrastructure all over the world, a dire need if the third world were to benefit from development. The Port City furore is all about geo-politics, of a change of power relations, whether a numero uno would let itself get downgraded tamely without resistance.

The US used its superior public relations repertoire to denigrate China by instilling fear of the Chinese Dragon swallowing innocent Sri Lanka, the Arab and the Camel fable re-furbished. Social media provided the billboard.

Anything is permitted for debaters. For them,

To be or not to be, is not a question,

But a continuing answer.

The time has come to talk of many things,

Whether pigs have wings?

These debaters are eternal talkers of the ‘could’ (the possible), but not of the ‘can’ (doable) or making the doable an ‘is’ (done). Only a century ago did human beings grow wings to fly. Perhaps, eventually, pigs too may get air borne! Just seven years ago an entrepreneurial chance was offered to Sri Lanka, to get built a Port City. The central issue was how, a ‘Could’, be made to become a ‘Can’ and later, an ‘Is’. The challenge was taken. Rewards go only to the venturesome, whether in life or in love. The losers, chagrined, then take recourse to social media, with gossip, unsupported accusations of corruption, abuse- the fox and grapes- and fake news. Social media played the Game of Losers: they lost. Their opposites- past masters- played the Game of Winners: they won and handsomely too.

When new projects are proposed, professional contrarians and fundamental rights lawyers are attracted to them, like blue bottles to rotting protein or gossipy social media, to gain carrion comfort. Columbus had a trying time getting acceptance to go West, to an unknown land mass. This was the time when Flat Earth was the prevailing cosmology. The question was posed, what will happen at the end of the outward journey? When the Gal Oya scheme was proposed all the Left political parties opposed it, saying the reservoir will silt in twenty five years. If the current social media were in existence then, they would have talked of deforestation, environmental degradation, rights of those living in the this doomed habitat- the Vedddahs. If these protests were heeded, one could imagine what Amparai would be like today. With the wave of new independent countries post- 1950, the UN wanted to set up regional Economic Commissions. One was proposed for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE). The headquarter location was offered to Colombo. Sri Lanka turned it down. Bangkok grabbed the chance.

“No” is the ugliest word in the vocabulary of development. It gives power to those who do not take responsibility for their decisions like the ECAFE one. It is against entrepreneurship, it conspires against innovation. The cost of projects undertaken could be measured but not the cost of projects not undertaken, caused by the fall of the kaduwa, no. No is reactionary, it congeals existing social and economic structures to an unchanging permanence which induces a violent revolution to dissolve. No Bungawewa!

Saying “yes” to a postage stamp Port City has developmental benefits, a sea change of the land where the sea had been drained. The investment is very high. To be able to pay the interest on loans taken by the Chinese, instalment payments and have a modicum of return on capital, the Port City cannot depend on cultivating turmeric, green chillies, setting up garment factories or exporting domestics. It has to go very high tech with high value addition serving overseas markets. A matured Port City is not for this century but the next. As much as the determining economic activity of this century is Information Technology, the next would be Artificial Intelligence (AI)- in which robotics will have a major part to play- cryogenics, global financial innovation where economic activity is a 24 hour business cycle following the sun in its progress from East to West and East again. In none of these activities has Sri Lanka significant experience. The Sri Lankan work force entering the job market are journeymen, making their daily journeys to homes of politicians in search of permanent, pensionable government unsackable jobs. The Port City will be a training ground for high paying jobs in high tech, jobs having international demand.

There is downside too. The lubricant coursing through Port City’s different functions and parts is cold cash. The Port City will have a different culture where cash is king. There will be cultural costs where value is determined by cash not morals. Port City could become a cesspit like Havana under Batista. The governing board has to keep a laser eye peeled to prevent it.

Change is necessary for stability. Sri Lanka, instead of getting involved in Thucycydian dialectics, should clearly survey the current scenario through unprejudiced eyes. Spurning China is monumental folly. China is becoming a superpower. The Port City project is giving Sri Lanka an opportunity to prepare herself for next century’s strategic commitments. Decisions taken now will determine whether she will be an exporter of domestics, which brings her, her highest foreign exchange earnings or a Singapore, who, when she was ejected from the Malaysian Federation had to import drinking water. Today, she is the third highest exporter in the world of oil products, though she does not have a drop of oil.

Will Sri Lanka be a Nepal or a Singapore?

All News Advertisement

Features

Amid Winds and Waves: Sri Lanka and the Indian Ocean – references Prof. Gamini Keerawella

Published

2 days ago

2025/11/7

Thilina Walpola

The following are the references for the four-part article, Amid Winds and Waves: Sri Lanka and the Indian Ocean byProf. Gamini Keerawella, published in The Island on 10, 11, 12 and 13 Nov.

Acharya, Amitav. 2014. The End of American World Order. Cambridge: Polity Press

Amrith, Sunil S. 2013. Crossing the Bay of Bengal: The Furies of Nature and the Fortunes of Migrants. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Baldwin, David A. 2016. Power and International Relations: A Conceptual Approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Brewster, David. 2014. India’s Ocean: The Story of India’s Bid for Regional Leadership. London: Routledge.

Blanchard, Jean-Marc F., and Colin Flint. 2017. “The Geopolitics of China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative.” Geopolitics 22 (2): 223–245.

Bose, Sugata. 2006. A Hundred Horizons: The Indian Ocean in the Age of Global Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Browning, Christopher S. 2006. “Small, Smart and Salient? Rethinking Identity in the Small States Literature.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 19 (4): 669–684. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557570601003536

Buzan, Barry, and Ole Wæver. 2003. Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Campbell, Kurt M., and Iain H. Houlden, eds. 1989. The Indian Ocean: Regional and Strategic Studies. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Chacko, Priya. 2021. “Sri Lanka and the Indian Ocean: Geopolitical Crosscurrents.” Third World Quarterly 42 (8): 1647–1665.

Chaturvedi, Sanjay, and Michal Okano-Heijmans, eds. 2019. Connectivity and the Indo-Pacific: Concepts, Challenges, and Prospects. Singapore: Springer.

Chaudhuri, K. N. 1985. Trade and Civilisation in the Indian Ocean: An Economic History from the Rise of Islam to 1750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crawford, Neta C. 2000. Rethinking International Relations. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Cordner, Lee. 2010. “Rethinking Maritime Security in the Indian Ocean Region.” Journal of the Indian Ocean Region 6 (1): 67–85

Das Gupta, Ashin, and M. N. Pearson, eds. 1987. India and the Indian Ocean, 1500–1800. Calcutta: Oxford University Press.

de Silva, Colvin R. 1953. Ceylon under the British Occupation : 1795-1833. Colombo: Ceylon Apothecaries

Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change.” International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.

Gunasekara, T. 2021. Maritime Diplomacy and Small State Strategy: Sri Lanka in the Indian Ocean. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 44(2): 275–292.

Hey, Jeanne A. K., ed. 2003. Small States in World Politics: Explaining Foreign Policy Behavior. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Holmes, James R., and Toshi Yoshihara. 2008. Chinese Naval Strategy in the 21st Century: The Turn to Mahan. London: Routledge.

Hourani, George F. 1995. Arab Seafaring in the Indian Ocean in Ancient and Early Medieval Times. Rev. ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Ingebritsen, Christine. 2006. Small States in International Relations. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Kaplan, Robert D. 2010. Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future of American Power. New York: Random House.

Keerawella, Gamini. 2024. India’s Naval Strategic ascent ane the Evolving Natal Security Dynamics of the Indian Ocean-BCIS Research Monograph Series 2024/1. Colombo: Bandaranaike Centre for International Studies.

Kuik, Cheng-Chwee. 2008. “The Essence of Hedging: Malaysia and Singapore’s Response to a Rising China.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 30 (2): 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs30-2a.

Li, Mingjiang. 2018. China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative, Africa, and the Middle East. Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mahan, Alfred Thayer. 1890. The Influence of Sea Power upon History, 1660–1783. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

Marx, Karl. 1952. The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. New York: International Publishers.

Medcalf, Rory. 2020. Indo-Pacific Empire: China, America and the Contest for the World’s Pivotal Region. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Mignolo, Walter D. 2011. The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Decolonial Options. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Pearson, M. N. 2003. The Indian Ocean. London: Routledge.

Rothstein, Robert L. 1968. Alliances and Small Powers. New York: Columbia University Press.

Schweller, Randall L. 1994. “Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In.” International Security 19 (1): 72–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539149.

Strange, Susan. 1988. States and Markets. London: Pinter.

Thorhallsson, Baldur, and Robert Steinmetz, eds. 2017. Small States and Shelter Theory: Iceland’s External Affairs. London: Routledge.

Till, Geoffrey. 2013. Seapower: A Guide for the Twenty-First Century. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.

Walt, Stephen M. 1987. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Wilson, Ernest J. 2015. Hard Power, Soft Power, Smart Power. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

(Author is a former professor of Modern History at the University of Peradeniya. He could be contacted through Keerawellag@gmail.com)

Features

Vision of Dr. Gamani Corea and the South’s present development policy options

Published

3 days ago

2025/11/6

Sahan Weerasooriya

Dr. Gamani Core / Dr. Carlos Maria Correa

The ‘takes’ were numerous for the perceptive sections of the public from the Dr. Gamani Corea 100th birth anniversary oration delivered at ‘The Lighthouse’ auditorium, Colombo, by Dr. Carlos Maria Correa, Executive Director of the South Centre in Geneva on November 4th. The fact that Dr. Gamani Corea was instrumental in the establishment of the South Centre decades back enhanced the value of the presentation. The event was organized by the Gamani Corea Foundation.

The presentation proved to be both wide-ranging and lucid. The audience was left in no doubt as to what Dr. Gamani Corea (Dr. GC) bequeathed to the global South by way of developmental policy and thinking besides being enlightened on the historic, institutional foundations he laid for the furtherance of Southern economic and material wellbeing.

For instance, in its essential core Dr. GC’s vision for the South was given as follows: sustainable and equitable growth, a preference for trade over aid, basic structural reform of global economy, enhancement of the collective influence of developing countries in international affairs.

Given the political and economic order at the time, that is the sixties of the last century, these principles were of path-breaking importance. For example, the Cold War was at its height and the economic disempowerment of the developing countries was a major issue of debate in the South. The latter had no ‘say’ in charting their economic future, which task devolved on mainly the West and its prime financial institutions.

Against this backdrop, the vision and principles of Dr. G.C. had the potential of being ‘game changers’ for the developing world. The leadership provided by him to UNCTAD as its long-serving Secretary General and to the Group of 77, now Plus China, proved crucial in, for instance, mitigating some economic inequities which were borne by the South. The Integrated Program for Commodities, which Dr. G.C. helped in putting into place continues to serve some of the best interests of the developing countries.

It was the responsibility of succeeding generations to build on this historic basis for economic betterment which Dr. G.C. helped greatly to establish. Needless to say, all has not gone well for the South since the heyday of Dr. G.C. and it is to the degree to which the South re-organizes itself and works for its betterment as a cohesive and united pressure group that could help the hemisphere in its present ordeals in the international economy. It could begin by rejuvenating the Non-aligned Movement (NAM), for instance.

The coming into being of visionary leaders in the South, will prove integral to the economic and material betterment of the South in the present world order or more accurately, disorder. Complex factors go into the making of leaders of note but generally it is those countries which count as economic heavyweights that could also think beyond self-interest that could feature in filling this vacuum.

A ‘take’ from the Dr. GC memorial oration that needs to be dwelt on at length by the South was the speaker’s disclosure that 46 percent of current global GDP is contributed by the South. Besides, most of world trade takes place among Southern countries. It is also the heyday of multi-polarity and bipolarity is no longer a defining feature of the international political and economic order.

In other words, the global South is now well placed to work towards the realization of some of Dr. GC’s visionary principles. As to whether these aims could be achieved will depend considerably on whether the South could re-organize itself, come together and work selflessly towards the collective wellbeing of the hemisphere.

From this viewpoint the emergence of BRICS could be seen as holding out some possibilities for collective Southern economic betterment but the grouping would need to thrust aside petty intra-group power rivalries, shun narrow national interests, place premium value on collective wellbeing and work towards the development of its least members.

The world is yet to see the latter transpiring and much will depend on the quality of leadership formations such as BRICS could provide. In the latter respect Dr. GC’s intellectual leadership continues to matter. Measuring-up to his leadership standards is a challenge for BRICS and other Southern groupings if at all they visualize a time of relative collective progress for the hemisphere.

However, the mentioned groupings would need to respect the principle of sovereign equality in any future efforts at changing the current world order in favour of all their member countries. Ideally, authoritarian control of such groupings by the more powerful members in their fold would need to be avoided. In fact, progress would need to be predicated on democratic equality.

Future Southern collectivities intent on bettering their lot would also need to bring into sharp focus development in contrast to mere growth. This was also a concern of Dr. G.C. Growth would be welcome, if it also provides sufficiently for economic equity. That is, economic plans would come to nought if a country’s resources are not equally distributed among its people.

The seasoned commentator is bound to realize that this will require a degree of national planning. Likewise, the realization ought to have dawned on Southern governments over the decades that unregulated market forces cannot meet this vital requirement in national development.

Thus, the oration by Dr. Carlos Maria Correa had the effect of provoking his audience into thinking at some considerable length on development issues. Currently, the latter are not in vogue among the majority of decision and policy makers of the South but they will need ‘revisiting’ if the best of Dr. GC’s development thinking is to be made use of.

What makes Dr. GC’s thinking doubly vital are the current trade issues the majority of Southern countries are beginning to face in the wake of the restrictive trade practices inspired by the US. Dr. GC was an advocate of international cooperation and it is to the degree to which intra-South economic cooperation takes hold that the South could face the present economic challenges successfully by itself as a collectivity. An urgent coming together of Southern countries could no longer be postponed.

Features

Attitude development: Key to national progress

Published

3 days ago

2025/11/6

Sahan Weerasooriya

In a developing country like Sri Lanka, one of the main challenges, is developing attitudes and social values of its citizens. Attitudes are the behaviours and beliefs that shape an individual’s or society’s actions. These attitudes have a significant impact on personal and societal development. Therefore, developing the right attitudes is crucial for the progress of a nation.

Why is Attitude Development Important?

Attitude development has a profound impact on various aspects of society. For instance, promoting efficiency, creativity, and innovation can accelerate economic growth. When citizens have a positive attitude towards work and entrepreneurship, they are more likely to contribute to the country’s economic development. Similarly, preserving and promoting social and cultural values can strengthen social harmony and cohesion. A society with a positive attitude towards diversity and inclusivity is more likely to be peaceful and prosperous.

Role of Education in Attitude Development

Education is a key factor in shaping attitudes. A well-educated population is more likely to have a positive attitude towards life, work, and society. Education helps individuals develop critical thinking skills, which enable them to make informed decisions and solve problems effectively. Moreover, education can promote values such as tolerance, empathy, and respect for others, which are essential for building a harmonious society.

Impact of Media on Attitude Development

The media plays a significant role in shaping attitudes. With the advent of social media, people are exposed to a vast amount of information, which can influence their attitudes and behaviours. The media can promote positive attitudes and values, such as kindness, compassion, and social responsibility. However, it can also perpetuate negative attitudes and stereotypes, which can be detrimental to society.

Role of Community Participation in Attitude Development

Community participation is essential for attitude development. When individuals participate in community service and volunteer work, they develop a sense of social responsibility and empathy towards others. Community participation can also promote values such as teamwork, leadership, and communication skills. Moreover, it can help build stronger, more cohesive communities.

Importance of Leadership in Attitude Development

Leadership plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes. Leaders can inspire and motivate individuals to adopt positive attitudes and behaviours. They can promote values such as integrity, accountability, and transparency, which are essential for building trust and confidence in institutions. Moreover, leaders can create a positive work culture that encourages innovation, creativity, and productivity.

Role of Parents and Teachers in Attitude Development

Parents and teachers play a vital role in shaping the attitudes of children. Children learn by observing and imitating adults, so it’s essential for parents and teachers to model positive attitudes and behaviours. They can promote values such as respect, kindness, and responsibility, which are essential for building a positive and productive society.

Benefits of Positive Attitudes

Positive attitudes have numerous benefits for individuals and society. They can improve mental and physical health, increase productivity, and enhance overall well-being. Positive attitudes can also promote better relationships, improve communication skills, and increase resilience. Moreover, they can inspire individuals to achieve their goals and pursue their passions.

Challenges of Developing Positive Attitudes

Developing positive attitudes can be challenging, especially in the face of adversity. It requires effort, commitment, and perseverance. Moreover, individuals may face resistance from others who are not supportive of change. However, with the right mindset and support, individuals can overcome these challenges and develop positive attitudes that benefit themselves and society.

Role of Technology in Attitude Development

Technology can play a significant role in attitude development. Online platforms and social media can provide access to information, resources, and support that can help individuals develop positive attitudes. Technology can also facilitate communication, collaboration, and networking, which are essential for building positive relationships and communities.

Future of Attitude Development

The future of attitude development is promising. With the increasing awareness of the importance of mental health, well-being, and social responsibility, more people are recognising the need to develop positive attitudes. Moreover, technological advancements and innovations can provide new opportunities for attitude development and social impact.

The attitude development is crucial for the progress of a nation. It requires a collective effort from individuals, institutions, and leaders to promote positive attitudes and values. By working together, we can build a society that is more harmonious, productive, and prosperous. By developing positive attitudes, we can overcome challenges, achieve our goals, and create a brighter future for ourselves and future generations.

Recommendations

To promote attitude development in Sri Lanka, we recommend the following:

* Integrate attitude development programmes in schools and universities

* Provide training and resources for parents and teachers to promote positive attitudes in children

* Encourage community participation and volunteer work

* Promote positive attitudes and values through media and social media

* Recognise and reward individuals and organisations that demonstrate positive attitudes and behaviours

By implementing these recommendations, we can create a society that values and promotes positive attitudes and behaviours. This will enable us to build a brighter future for ourselves and future generations.

By Jayantha K. Pathirana (M.A)
(Former Principal of Katuwana National School)