Connect with us

Midweek Review

Rachmaninov – quest for euphony in an age of despondency

Published

on

By Satyajith Andradi

 

The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines music as “the art or science of combining vocal or instrumental sounds (or both) to produce beauty of form, harmony, and expression of emotion”. From its beginnings in the middle ages, right up to the end of the nineteenth century, the tradition of western art music faithfully conformed to this definition. Music of that time was both beautiful and expressive of emotions, albeit in varying proportions. However, in the early twentieth century, something terrible happened. Beauty, euphony, and Shakespeare’s proverbial ‘concord of sweet sound’, dropped from the active music lexicon of many leading composers. For them, it no longer mattered whether music was beautiful or ugly. Tonality, which was the foundation of the harmonic structure of western music, was abandoned in favour of atonality. Dissonance displaced harmony. The insatiable thirst for novelty and nervous excitement replaced the quest for euphony. Amidst this cataclysmic turmoil, which is variously known as Avant–garde, Expressionism, Futurism, atonality, modernity, musical experimentation, etc., some composers continued to strive to write beautiful music – music that was melodious, harmonious, and pleasing to the senses. The famous Russian composer Sergei Rachmaninov was one of the greatest amongst them.

 

Musical Upbringing

Sergei Vasilievich Rachmaninov was born in his family’s Oneg estate near Novgorod on 20th March 1873. He belonged to a wealthy land-owning aristocratic family. His father was an officer in the imperial Russian army, whilst his mother was a daughter of an army General. Both his father and paternal grandfather were talented amateur musicians. As he showed musical gifts during his early childhood, his parents arranged piano lessons for him. When Sergei was around nine years old, his family was financially ruined due to their inability to pay huge debts. They were forced to sell their Oneg estate and move into a modest flat in St. Petersburg. There Sergei attended the junior section of the St. Petersburg Conservatoire. Thereafter he was sent to Moscow for further musical studies at the famed Moscow Conservatoire, where he studied piano under N.S. Zverev and A. I Ziloti, and composition under Sergey Taneyev and Anton Arensky. In 1892, aged 19, he graduated from the Moscow Conservatoire, winning the gold medal for composition.

 

Pianist, Conductor, and Composer

Rachmaninov first came to the limelight as a composer, whilst he was still a student at the Moscow Conservatoire. In fact, his first piano concerto in F sharp minor, Op 1, the popular prelude in C sharp minor for piano, Op 3, No 2, and the one act opera ‘Aleko’, based on Pushkin’s poem ‘The Gypsies’, were composed during the last years of his studentship. However, the monumental failure of his first symphony in D minor, Op 13, in 1897, dealt a heavy, albeit temporary, blow to his creative powers. It brought his composing career to an abrupt halt. This prompted him to embark on a musical career as a virtuoso pianist and an orchestral conductor. However, thanks to the hypnosis treatment by doctor Nikolai Dahl, Rachmaninov regained his creative powers a few years later – in the summer of 1900. The revival of his composing career was heralded by the composition of his glorious and deservedly ever popular second piano concerto in C minor, Op 18, which was completed in the spring of 1901. This was soon followed by the sonata for cello and piano in G minor, Op 9. By the following spring, he was happily married. His creative powers remained with him for the rest of his life. It is true that Rachmaninov became a respected conductor and one of the greatest pianists of all time. However, it is as a composer that he made his greatest contribution to the world of music.

 

International Career

Like many gifted Russian musicians, Rachmaninov embarked on an international career. He launched it with his concert tour to London in 1899, as a composer–pianist of repute. This was followed by a lengthy residence in Dresden, Germany, with his family from 1906 to 1909. The Russian Revolution of 1905, which was largely precipitated by the humiliating defeat of Tsarist Russia in the Russo–Japanese War, most probably played a part in his relocation abroad. However, during his stay in Germany he composed many works, including his second symphony in E minor, Op 27, and the symphonic poem ‘ The Isle of the Dead’, Op 29. He relocated to Russia in 1909 and completed his wonderful third piano concerto in in D minor, Op 30, in the summer. Shortly thereafter, in the autumn, he embarked on his tour of the USA, where he was the soloist at the world premiere of his third piano concerto in New York. He became the sole owner of his wife’s family estate ‘ Ivanovka’. In 1918, shortly after the October Socialist Revolution, Rachmaninov left Russia with his family for good. Naturally, as a member of the country’s wealthy aristocratic elite, the revolutionary socialist transformation of contemporary Russia would not have been to his liking. His estate was expropriated by the new communist state. Henceforth, he engaged in his hectic and lucrative international career from Switzerland and the USA. In the early 1930s, during Stalin’s notorious early purges, Rachmaninov’s music was banned in Russia. His music was described as representing ‘the decadent attitude of the lower middle classes’ and ‘especially dangerous on the musical front in the present class war’ ( The Oxford Companion to Music : Percy A. Scholes). However, a few years later the ban was lifted, and his music became very popular again in Soviet Russia. After the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939, Rachmaninov moved to the USA permanently. Shortly before his death he became a citizen of the USA. Sergei Rachmaninov died in Beverley Hills, California, on the 28th of March 1943.

 

Being Russian and cosmopolitan

From the commencement of his musical career in the mid-1890s, Rachmaninov was well connected to the artistic and social elites of imperial Russia. His outstanding musical gifts as well as his aristocratic background would have brought about this enviable situation. For instance, he was well known to literary giants such as Leo Tolstoy and Anton Chekov as well as musical luminaries such as Tchaikovsky, Scriabin, Taneyev and Arensky. As a result, his music was deeply influenced by the artistic and cultural traditions of Russia. Musically speaking, he was subconsciously gravitated towards Tchaikovsky and the cosmopolitan Moscow School. His outlook was decidedly conservative. He often adopted classical forms and styles such as that of the sonata – symphony. He openly acknowledged appreciation of foreign masters such as Chopin, Corelli, and Paganini, by composing works based on their famous tunes. Further, the ‘Dies Irae’ ( Day of Wrath ) theme from the Gregorian chant of the Roman Catholic Church is present in his music, especially in the symphonic poem ‘ The Isle of the Dead’ , which was inspired by a painting of the Swiss artist Arnold Boeklin. Nonetheless, his music is distinctly Russian in character. The abundance of extreme emotions, rustic spirit, the fairy- tale like supernatural ambience, martial spirit, and the sombre nature suggestive of the vast expanses of the Russia, found in his music, account for this. Broadly speaking, his music belongs to the late Romantic tradition of western art music.

 

Musical Compositions

Rachmaninov wrote a large number of works in addition to compositions already alluded to. These include numerous pieces for piano including two piano sonatas – No. 1 in D minor (1907) and No . 2 in B flat minor (1931), Variations on a theme of Corelli (La Folia) (1931), and the Variation on a theme of Chopin , Op 22 (1902 -3). His piano compositions, most of which are technically difficult, are immensely popular with virtuoso pianists. Some of his late masterpieces include the Rhapsody on a theme of Paganini, Op 43, (1934), the Third Symphony in A minor , Op 44 (1935-6) and the Symphonic Dances, Op 45 (1940). Regarding the third symphony, a contemporary critic made the following insightful observation : “This symphony… is a most excellent work in musical conception, composition and orchestration… Mr. Rachmaninov, as always, has been conservative in his harmonisations, and he has given us another example in this work that it is not necessary to write dissonance music in order to get the originality which is the greatest – and usually the single – demand of the ultramoderns” (Rachmaninov : Nikolai Bazhanov ; translated by Andrew Bromfield). Rachmaninov also composed many songs, some of which count amongst the best Russian art songs. Apart from secular music, he also composed some remarkable church music for the Russian Orthodox Church.

 

Quest for euphony in an age of despondency

Sergei Rachmaninov grew up at a time when western bourgeois civilization was reaching its zenith. Tsarist Russia, along with other western powers, was very much an integral part of that civilization. Capitalism, which was establishing its global domination, provided the material foundation of the bourgeois civilization. Leveraging its strengths, the European powers were able to subjugate the entire world and build vast, lucrative colonial empires in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Thanks to the enormous commercial profits amassed by western nations, there was unprecedented peace and prosperity in Europe for a prolonged period. Bourgeois culture flourished. The impressive development of western art music within the framework of tonality is a shining example. However, bourgeois civilization had already begun to rot from within. Inter-imperialist rivalries for greater world domination came to a head. Further, the imperialist – capitalist system was seriously challenged by the dispossessed masses – the urban proletariat. Bourgeois civilization was soon to face its moment of truth. The first rumbling was the Russian Revolution of 1905. This was followed by the First World War (1914–1918) amongst imperialist powers, the Bolshevik Revolution, the Great Depression (1929–1933), and finally the Second World War and the Nazi Holocaust. No wonder, Bourgeois Civilization was devastated to the core by this string of cataclysmic events. An age of despondency dawned in Europe. The horrendous impact of those events was bound to be felt in the world of western art music. The rejection of age-old tonality and the abandonment of the quest for euphony were the ultimate outcomes. Only a few creative musicians were able to swim against the tide and create beautiful music. Sergei Vasilievich Rachmaninov was certainly one of the greatest amongst them.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Midweek Review

At the edge of a world war

Published

on

In September 1939, as Europe descended once more into catastrophe, E. H. Carr published The Twenty Years’ Crisis. Twenty years had separated the two great wars—twenty years to reflect, to reconstruct, to restrain. Yet reflection proved fragile. Carr wrote with unsentimental clarity: once the enemy is crushed, the “thereafter” rarely arrives. The illusion that power can come first and morality will follow is as dangerous as the belief that morality alone can command power. Between those illusions, nations lose themselves.

His warning hovers over the present war in Iran.

The “thereafter” has long haunted American interventions—after Afghanistan, after Iraq, after Libya. The enemy can be dismantled with precision; the aftermath resists precision. Iran is not a small theater. It is a civilization-state with a geography three times larger than Iraq. At its southern edge lies the Strait of Hormuz, narrow in width yet immense in consequence. Geography does not argue; it compels.

Long before Carr, in the quiet anxiety of the eighteenth century, James Madison, principal architect of the Constitution, warned that war was the “true nurse of executive aggrandizement.” War concentrates authority in the name of urgency. Madison insisted that the power to declare war must rest with Congress, not the president—so that deliberation might restrain impulse. Republics persuade themselves that emergency powers are temporary. History rarely agrees.

Then, at 2:30 a.m., the abstraction becomes decision.

Donald Trump declares war on Iran. The announcement crosses continents before markets open in Asia. Within twenty-four hours, Ali Khamenei, who ruled for thirty-seven years, is killed. The President calls him one of history’s most evil figures and presents his death as an opening for the Iranian people.

In exile, Reza Pahlavi hails the moment as liberation. In less than forty-eight hours, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps collapses under overwhelming air power. A regime that endured decades falls swiftly. Military efficiency appears absolute. Yet efficiency does not resolve legitimacy.

The joint strike with Israel is framed as necessary and pre-emptive. Retaliation follows across the Gulf. The architecture of energy trade becomes fragile. Shipping routes are recalculated. Markets respond before diplomacy finds its language.

It is measured in the price of petrol in Colombo. In the bus fare in Karachi. In the rising cost of cooking gas in Dhaka. It is heard in the anxious voice of a migrant worker in Doha calling home to Kandy, asking whether contracts will be renewed, whether flights will continue, whether wages will be delayed. It is calculated in foreign reserves already strained, in currencies that tremble at rumor, in budgets forced to choose between subsidy and solvency.

Zaara was the breadwinner of her house in Sri Lanka. Her husband had been unemployed for years. At last, he secured an opportunity to travel to Israel as a foreign worker—like many Sri Lankans who depend on employment in the Middle East. It was to be their turning point: a small house repaired, debts reduced, dignity restored.

Now she lowers her eyes when she speaks. For Zaara, geopolitics is not theory. It is fear measured in distance—between a construction site abroad and a village waiting at home.

The war in Iran has shattered calculations that once felt practical. Nations like Sri Lanka now require strategic foresight to navigate unfolding realities. Reactive responses—whether to natural disasters or external shocks like this conflict—can cripple economies far faster than gradual pressures. Disruptions to energy imports, migrant remittances, and foreign reserves show how distant wars ripple into daily lives.

War among great powers is debated in think tanks. Its consequences are lived in markets—and in quiet kitchens where uncertainty sits heavier than hunger.

The conflict does not unfold in isolation. It enters the strategic calculus of China and Russia, both attentive to precedent. Power projected beyond the Western hemisphere reshapes perceptions in the Eastern theater. Iran’s transformation intersects directly with broader alignments. In 2021, Beijing and Tehran signed a twenty-five-year strategic agreement. By 2025, China was purchasing the majority of Iran’s exported oil at discounted rates. Energy underwrote strategy. That continuity has been disrupted. Yet strategic relationships do not vanish; they adjust.

In Winds of Change, my new book, I reproduce Nicholas Spykman’s 1944 two-theater confrontation map—Europe and the Pacific during the Second World War. Spykman distinguished maritime power from amphibian projection. Control of the Rimland determined balance. Then, the United States fought across two vast theaters. Today, Europe remains unsettled through Ukraine, the Pacific simmers over Taiwan and the South China Sea, Latin America remains sensitive, and the Middle East has been abruptly transformed. The architecture of multi-theater tension reappears.

At this juncture, the reflections of Marwan Bishara acquire weight. America’s ultimate power, he argues, resides in deterrence, not in the habitual use of force. Power, especially when shared, stabilizes. Force, when used with disregard for international law, breeds instability and humiliation. Arrogance creates enemies and narrows judgment. It is no surprise that many Americans themselves believe the United States should not act alone.

America’s strength does not rest solely in its military reach. Its economy constitutes roughly one-third of global output and generates close to 40 percent of the world’s research and development. Structural power—economic, technological, institutional—has historically underwritten deterrence. When force becomes the primary instrument, influence risks becoming coercion.

The United States now confronts simultaneous pressures across continents. The Second World War demonstrated the capacity to sustain multi-theater engagement; the post-9/11 wars revealed the exhaustion that follows prolonged intervention. Iran, larger and geopolitically deeper, presents a scale that cannot be resolved by air power alone.

Carr’s “thereafter” waits patiently. Military victory may be swift; political reconstruction is slow. Bishara reminds us that deterrence sustains stability, while force risks unraveling it.

At the edge of a potential world war, the decisive question is not who strikes first, but who restrains longest.

History watches. And in places far from the battlefield, mothers wait for phone calls that may not come.

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera is a Senior Research Fellow at the Millennium Project, Washington, D.C., and the author of Winds of Change: Geopolitics at the Crossroads of South and Southeast Asia, published by World Scientific

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Live Coals Burst Aflame

Published

on

Live coals of decades-long hate,

Are bursting into all-consuming flames,

In lands where ‘Black Gold’ is abundant,

And it’s a matter to be thought about,

If humans anywhere would be safe now,

Unless these enmities dying hard,

With roots in imperialist exploits,

And identity-based, tribal violence,

Are set aside and laid finally to rest,

By an enthronement of the principle,

Of the Equal Dignity of Humans.

By Lynn Ockersz

Continue Reading

Midweek Review

Saga of the arrest of retired intelligence chief

Published

on

Retired Maj. Gen. Suresh Sallay’s recent arrest attracted internatiattention. His long-expected arrest took place ahead of the seventh anniversary of the bombings. Multiple blasts claimed the lives of nearly 280 people, including 45 foreigners. State-owned international news television network, based in Paris, France 24, declared that arrest was made on the basis of information provided by a whistleblower. The French channel was referring to Hanzeer Azad Moulana, who earlier sought political asylum in the West and one-time close associate of State Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan aka Pilleyan. May be the fiction he wove against Pilleyan and others may have been to strengthen his asylum claim there. Moulana is on record as having told the British Channel 4 that Sallay allowed the attack to proceed with the intention of influencing the 2019 presidential election. The French news agency quoted an investigating officer as having said: “He was arrested for conspiracy and aiding and abetting the Easter Sunday attacks. He has been in touch with people involved in the attacks, even recently.”

****

Suresh Sallay of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) received the wrath of Yahapalana Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, in 2016, over the reportage of what the media called the Chavakachcheri explosives detection made on March 30, 2016. Premier Wickremesinghe found fault with Sallay for the coverage, particularly in The Island. Police arrested ex-LTTE child combatant Edward Julian, alias Ramesh, after the detection of one suicide jacket, four claymore mines, three parcels containing about 12 kilos of explosives, to battery packs and several rounds of 9mm ammunition, from his house, situated at Vallakulam Pillaiyar Kovil Street. Chavakachcheri police made the detection, thanks to information provided by the second wife of Ramesh. Investigations revealed that the deadly cache had been brought by Ramesh from Mannar (Detection of LTTE suicide jacket, mines jolts government: Fleeing Tiger apprehended at checkpoint, The Island, March 31, 2016).

The then Jaffna Security Forces Commander, Maj. Gen. Mahesh Senanayake, told the writer that a thorough inquiry was required to ascertain the apprehended LTTE cadre’s intention. The Chavakachcheri detection received the DMI’s attention. The country’s premier intelligence organisation meticulously dealt with the issue against the backdrop of an alleged aborted bid to revive the LTTE in April 2014. Of those who had been involved in the fresh terror project, three were killed in the Nedunkerny jungles. There hadn’t been any other incidents since the Nedunkerny skirmish, until the Chavakachcheri detection.

Piqued by the media coverage of the Chavakachcheri detection, the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe administration tried to silence the genuine Opposition. As the SLFP had, contrary to the expectations of those who voted for the party at the August 2015 parliamentary elections, formed a treacherous coalition with the UNP, the Joint Opposition (JO) spearheaded the parliamentary opposition.

The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) questioned former External Affairs Minister and top JO spokesman, Prof. G.L. Peiris, over a statement made by him regarding the Chavakachcheri detection. The former law professor questioned the legality of the CID’s move against the backdrop of police declining to furnish him a certified copy of the then acting IGP S.M. Wickremesinghe’s directive that he be summoned to record a statement as regards the Chavakachcheri lethal detection.

One-time LTTE propagandist Velayutham Dayanidhi, a.k.a. Daya Master, raised with President Maithripala Sirisena the spate of arrests made by law enforcement authorities, in the wake of the Chavakachcheri detection. Daya Master took advantage of a meeting called by Sirisena, on 28 April, 2016, at the President’s House, with the proprietors of media organisations and journalists, to raise the issue. The writer having been among the journalists present on that occasion, inquired from the ex-LETTer whom he represented there. Daya Master had been there on behalf of DAN TV, Tamil language satellite TV, based in Jaffna. Among those who had been detained was Subramaniam Sivakaran, at that time Youth Wing leader of the Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), the main constituent of the now defunct Tamil National Alliance. In addition to Sivakaran, the police apprehended several hardcore ex-LTTE cadres (LTTE revival bid confirmed: TNA youth leader arrested, The Island April 20, 2016).

Ranil hits out at media

Subsequent inquiries revealed the role played by Sivakaran in some of those wanted in connection with the Chavakachcheri detection taking refuge in India. When the writer sought an explanation from the then TNA lawmaker, M.A. Sumanthiran, regarding Sivakaran’s arrest, the lawyer disowned the Youth Wing leader. Sumanthiran emphasised that the party suspended Sivakumaran and Northern Provincial Council member Ananthi Sasitharan for publicly condemning the TNA’s decision to endorse Maithripala Sirisena’s candidature at the 2015 presidential election (Chava explosives: Key suspects flee to India, The Island, May 2, 2016).

Premier Wickremesinghe went ballistic on May 30, 2016. Addressing the 20th anniversary event of the Sri Lanka Muslim Media Forum, at the Sports Ministry auditorium, the UNP leader castigated the DMI. Alleging that the DMI had been pursuing an agenda meant to undermine the Yahapalana administration, Wickremesinghe, in order to make his bogus claim look genuine, repeatedly named the writer as part of that plot. Only Wickremesinghe knows the identity of the idiot who influenced him to make such unsubstantiated allegations. The top UNPer went on to allege that The Island, and its sister paper Divaina, were working overtime to bring back Dutugemunu, a reference to war-winning President Mahinda Rajapaksa. A few days later, sleuths from the Colombo Crime Detection Bureau (CCD) visited The Island editorial to question the writer where lengthy statements were recorded. The police were acting on the instructions of the then Premier, who earlier publicly threatened to send police to question the writer.

In response to police queries about Sallay passing information to the media regarding the Chavakachcheri detection and subsequent related articles, the writer pointed out that the reportage was based on response of the then ASP Ruwan Gunasekera, AAL and Sumanthiran, as had been reported.

Wickremesinghe alleged, at the Muslim media event, that a section of the media manipulated coverage of certain incidents, ahead of the May Day celebrations.

In early May 2016 Wickremesinghe disclosed that he received assurances from the police, and the DMI, that as the LTTE had been wiped out the group couldn’t stage a comeback. The declaration was made at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute for International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRIS) on 3 May 2016. Wickremesinghe said that he sought clarifications from the police and the DMI in the wake of the reportage of the Chavakachcheri detection and related developments (PM: LTTE threat no longer exists, The Island, May 5, 2016).

The LTTE couldn’t stage a comeback as a result of measures taken by the then government. It would be a grave mistake, on our part, to believe that the eradication of the LTTE’s conventional military capacity automatically influenced them to give up arms. The successful rehabilitation project, that had been undertaken by the Rajapaksa government and continued by successive governments, ensured that those who once took up arms weren’t interested in returning to the same deadly path.

In spite of the TNA and others shedding crocodile tears for the defeated Tigers, while making a desperate effort to mobilise public opinion against the government, the public never wanted the violence to return. Some interested parties propagated the lie that regardless of the crushing defeat suffered in the hands of the military, the LTTE could resume guerilla-type operations, paving the way for a new conflict. But by the end of 2014, and in the run-up to the presidential election in January following year, the situation seemed under control, especially with Western countries not wanting to upset things here with a pliant administration in the immediate horizon. Soon after the presidential election, the government targeted the armed forces. Remember Sumanthiran’s declaration that the ITAK Youth Wing leader Sivakaran had been opposed to the TNA backing Sirisena at the presidential poll.

The US-led accountability resolution had been co-sponsored by the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duo to appease the TNA and Tamil Diaspora. The Oct. 01, 2016, resolution delivered a knockout blow to the war-winning armed forces. The UNP pursued an agenda severely inimical to national interests. It would be pertinent to mention that those who now represent the main Opposition, Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), were part of the treacherous UNP.

Suresh moved to Malaysia

The Yahapalana leadership resented Sallay’s work. They wanted him out of the country at a time a new threat was emerging. The government attacked the then Justice Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, PC, who warned of the emerging threat from foreign-manipulated local Islamic fanatics on 11 Nov. 2016, in Parliament. Rajapakshe didn’t mince his words when he underscored the threat posed by some Sri Lanka Muslim families taking refuge in Syria where ISIS was running the show. The then government, of which he was part o,f ridiculed their own Justice Minister. Both Sirisena and Wickremesinghe feared action against extremism may cause erosion of Muslim support. By then Sallay, who had been investigating the deadly plot, was out of the country. The Yahapalana government believed that the best way to deal with Sallay was to grant him a diplomatic posting. Sally ended up in Malaysia, a country where the DMI played a significant role in the repatriation of Kumaran Pathmanathan, alias KP, after his arrest there.

Having served the military for over three cadres, Sallay retired in 2024 in the rank of Major General. Against the backdrop of his recent arrest, in connection with the ongoing investigation into the 2019 Easter Sunday carnage, The Island felt the need to examine the circumstances Sallay ended up in Malaysia at the time. Now, remanded in terms of the Prevention of terrorism Act (PTA), he is being accused of directing the Easter Sunday operation from Malaysia.

Pivithuru Hela Urumaya leader and former Minister Udaya Gammanpila has alleged that Sallay was apprehended in a bid to divert attention away from the deepening coal scam. Having campaigned on an anti-corruption platformm in the run up to the previous presidential election, in September 2024, the Parliament election, in November of the same year, and local government polls last year, the incumbent dispensation is struggling to cope up with massive corruption issues, particularly the coal scam, which has not only implicated the Energy Minister but the entire Cabinet of Ministers as well.

The crux of the matter is whether Sallay actually met would-be suicide bombers, in February 2018, in an estate, in the Puttalam district, as alleged by the UK’s Channel 4 television, like the BBC is, quite famous for doing hatchet jobs for the West. This is the primary issue at hand. Did Sallay clandestinely leave Malaysia to meet suicide bombers in the presence of Hanzeer Azad Moulana, one-time close associate of State Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, aka Pilleyan, former LTTE member?

The British channel raised this issue with Sallay, in 2023, at the time he served as Director, State Intelligence (SIS). Sallay is on record as having told Channel 4 Television that he was not in Sri Lanka the whole of 2018 as he was in Malaysia serving in the Sri Lankan Embassy there as Minister Counsellor.

Therefore, the accusation that he met several members of the National Thowheeth Jamaath (NTJ), including Mohamed Hashim Mohamed Zahran, in Karadipuval, Puttalam, in Feb. 2018, was baseless, he has said.

The intelligence officer has asked the British television station to verify his claim with the Malaysian authorities.

Responding to another query, Sallay had told Channel 4 that on April 21, 2019, the day of the Easter Sunday blasts, he was in India, where he was accommodated at the National Defence College (NDC). That could be verified with the Indian authorities, Sallay has said, strongly denying Channel 4’s claim that he contacted one of Pilleyan’s cadres, over, the phone and directed him to pick a person outside Hotel Taj Samudra.

According to Sallay, during his entire assignment in Malaysia, from Dec. 2016 to Dec. 2018, he had been to Colombo only once, for one week, in Dec. 2017, to assist in an official inquiry.

Having returned to Colombo, Sallay had left for NDC, in late Dec. 2018, and returned only after the conclusion of the course, in November 2019.

Sallay has said so in response to questions posed by Ben de Pear, founder, Basement Films, tasked with producing a film for Channel 4 on the Easter Sunday bombings.

The producer has offered Sallay an opportunity to address the issues in terms of Broadcasting Code while inquiring into fresh evidence regarding the officer’s alleged involvement in the Easter Sunday conspiracy.

The producer sought Sallay’s response, in August 2023, in the wake of political upheaval following the ouster of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, elected at the November 2019 presidential election.

At the time, the Yahapalana government granted a diplomatic appointment to Sallay, he had been head of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI). After the 2019 presidential election, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa named him the Head of SIS.

The Basement Films has posed several questions to Sallay on the basis of accusations made by Hanzeer Azad Moulana.

In response to the film producer’s query regarding Sallay’s alleged secret meeting with six NTJ cadres who blasted themselves a year later, Sallay has questioned the very basis of the so called new evidence as he was not even in the country during the period the clandestine meeting is alleged to have taken place.

Contradictory stands

Following Sajith Premadasa’s anticipated defeat at the 2019 presidential election, Harin Fernando accused the Catholic Church of facilitating Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory. Fernando, who is also on record as having disclosed that his father knew of the impending Easter Sunday attacks, pointed finger at the Archbishop of Colombo, Rt. Rev Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, for ensuring Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s victory.

Former President Maithripala Sirisena, as well as JVP frontliner Dr. Nalinda Jayathissa, accused India of masterminding the Easter Sunday bombings. Then there were claims of Sara Jasmin, wife of Katuwapitiya suicide bomber Mohammed Hastun, being an Indian agent who was secretly removed after the Army assaulted extremists’ hideout at Sainthamaruthu in the East. What really had happened to Sara Jasmin who, some believe, is key to the Easter Sunday puzzle.

Then there was huge controversy over the arrest of Attorney-at-Law Hejaaz Hizbullah over his alleged links with the Easter Sunday bombers. Hizbullah, who had been arrested in April 2020, served as lawyer to the extremely wealthy spice trader Mohamed Yusuf Ibrahim’s family that had been deeply involved in the Easter Sunday plot. Mohamed Yusuf Ibrahim had been on the JVP’s National List at the 2015 parliamentary elections. The lawyer received bail after two years. Two of the spice trader’s sons launched suicide attacks, whereas his daughter-in-law triggered a suicide blast when police raided their Dematagoda mansion, several hours after the Easter Sunday blasts.

Investigations also revealed that the suicide vests had been assembled at a factory owned by the family and the project was funded by them. It would be pertinent to mention that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s government never really bothered to conduct a comprehensive investigation to identify the Easter Sunday terror project. Perhaps, their biggest failure had been to act on the Presidential Commission of Inquiry (PCoI) recommendations. Instead, President Rajapaksa appointed a six-member committee, headed by his elder brother, Chamal Rajapaksa, to examine the recommendations, probably in a foolish attempt to improve estranged relations with the influential Muslim community. That move caused irreparable damage and influenced the Church to initiate a campaign against the government. The Catholic Church played quite a significant role in the India- and US-backed 2022 Aragalaya that forced President Rajapaksa to flee the country.

Interested parties exploited the deterioration of the national economy, leading to unprecedented declaration of the bankruptcy of the country in April 2022, to mobilie public anger that was used to achieve political change.

Continue Reading

Trending