Features
Richard: 32 years later
By Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha
It is 32 years today since the body of Richard de Zoysa was washed ashore, after his abduction by government forces. This is a significant date for now he has been dead for longer than he lived. He was just a few weeks short his 32nd birthday when he was killed by government forces. Though this seems an absurd anniversary to think about, I had long thought of it as the time when he would fade further and further into the past, and memory too would begin to die. Thankfully that has not happened and the years of friendship with him are still vivid in my mind.
Richard was the best of companions when I returned from Oxford, and he understood immediately what education should be, at a time when it was being reduced to rote learning. Ashley Halpe still did a great job at Peradeniya but the universities in general were fading, and schools were a mess except where there were exceptional teachers such as at Ladies College. But elsewhere it was rote learning and the taking down of notes, even dictated ones.
I have written extensively about Richard, our friendship, as well as his political development, but today I will confine myself to the programmes we did together, which would never have happened without his enthusiasm and his skill at bringing literature alive. This was contributed from the start, in my first effort to introduce a different approach to literature. That was ‘The Romantic Dilemma’ on the Ladies College stage, illustrating the differences between the older and the younger Romantic poets, read by youngsters whom he brought to me and trained in the nuances we wanted. This was followed by a discussion of different approaches to ‘Romeo and Juliet’ a text at the time, in which we showed how Juliet could be decisive or forlorn, Lady Capulet harsh or helpless, Mercutio lively or despairing.
On my radio programmes,,he read the poetry I talked about, roping in Yolande Abeywira and Jeanne Pinto, older ladies who adored him. We extended such programmes to the British Council when I started working there, and though the first such programme, ‘Flights of Fancy’, presenting a range of poetry about birds, drew only a small audience, it was incredibly well received and attendance grew and grew over the next few months.
He and Yolande went with me to training colleges where we got the students to think about their texts, most interestingly through different approaches to ‘Macbeth’ which was the text at the College at Penideniya. The journeys, too, were great fun, the three of us talking and laughing all the way up and down. We would prepare the different approaches in the car, for I knew I could trust them to get across the nuances I wanted. And they did this even on the day we got carried away and talked, so that it was only through my argument at the College itself that they knew what was wanted.
By the end of 1984, my first year at the British Council, I became more ambitious, inspired after Geraldine McEwan had performed her One-Woman Jane Austen show in November 1984. So early in the following year, I devised a One Man show for Richard, based on some of the novels of Charles Dickens.
Richard was quite magnificient in perfomance, catching the different nuances in six extracts, tragic, comic, pathetic, pompous. I selected music for the different extracts which caught the mood, ‘Pomp and Circumstance’ for Mr Podsnap extolling the virtues of England, sentimental Elgar for the death of Steerforth which was perhaps the most impressive piece in the show. We toured this round the country, including to Batticaloa, and had a marvelous time, looking up old students there.
This was such a success that the following year I put together something based on Kipling, poems and stories. Richard was lyrical in ‘The Way through the Woods’, ridiculous as the butterflies in ‘The Butterfly who Stamped’, rousing in ‘Gunga Din’. That, too, was taken all over the country and we loved the evenings together after the performances were over.
In Galle we stayed at the Sun and Sea Hotel in Unawatuna where Richard and his stage manager Varuna Karunatilleke were joined by Aruni Devaraja and her sister for a lovely holiday, when we explored Madol Doowa of Martin Wickremesinghe fame.
The following year, Richard directed a production of ‘The Merchant of Venice’ with a talented young cast, including Ranmali Pathirana, who now worked with me at the Council, as Portia. I had, however, come back from my round the world trip to find Richard had taken on one of his young protégés and his girlfriend for two minor parts, and they could not act at all. I was highly critical and, though Richard was a bit upset, he replaced them, getting the experienced Kumar Mirchandani to play Lancelot Gobbo, which led to a romance with Ranmali and their getting married.
That too, was great fun, and, in addition to several shows in Colombo, it was performed in Kandy where students of the Penideniya Training College attended, so we could have a discussion on the play there afterwards. And the highlight was taking it to the Pasdunrata College of Education after which David Woolger the Council consultant there, hosted dinner at his house in Wadduwa which had a swimming pool in which the youngsters frolicked.
But then things began to change. Steve de la Zylwa produced ‘Accidental Death of an Anarchist’ in the Council Hall and I recall Richard reflecting that Shakespeare was comparatively precious, given the trauma the country was undergoing. He felt he should have been more in touch with new socio-political trends and sometimes I feel that that contributed to his increasing politicisation in the next couple of years.
When the following year I went to his father’s house at Hendala for his 30th birthday, I met his latest find, a boy called Dahanayake, through whom and indeed more his brother Richard got involved with the JVP.
And then I saw less of him, for he was getting more involved in politics, the story of which he was to tell me in some detail at the end of 1989, when he spent several nights at home under worrying circumstances. He had been led to this through the students he spent more and more time with, Dahanayake, whom he had met through the elder brother I saw at Hendala, and Madura.
The latter was an enormously talented actor and dominated the production Scott Richards put on after a workshop which brought these boys together with the more sophisticated youngsters who had been the staple of such workshops, including Richard’s Josephians from an earlier incarnation. I was very impressed by these new finds, and when Richard asked if one of them, Prasanna Liyanage, could work for me as a CAT in the Cultural Affairs Trainee programme I had started with Mrinali Thalgodapitiya – I agreed at once.
He was very good and when his stint was over I asked Richard if Madura would like to take over. But Richard told me that, after much thought, Madura had refused, on the grounds that entering into that world would cut him off from his roots.
It was a forceful decision, for a boy still in his teens, to take. Richard had explained to me, how these scholarship boys had felt alienated at Royal, which was still dominated by an elite, with not much effort made to integrate them and ensure that both groups benefited from the strengths of the other – something I had tried to do with the Advanced Senior Secondary English Teaching (ASSET) course I had started at the time.
Madura and a couple of the others went on to deep involvement with the JVP, and when Madura was abducted, never to be heard of again, the net began to close on Richard as well. What was happening became clear after his last performance at the Council, when he called after he had left to ask if I had noticed a strange man in the audience. It was his tail, he said, and he wanted to spend the night at home for safety, which he did twice more in the next couple of weeks.
But I will not dwell here on what happened afterwards. Instead, as befits this celebration, I will talk about that last performance, which we put on to celebrate Robert Browning on the centenary of his death. Though by then he was out of fashion, I felt he was a wonderful writer, and was delighted that Regi Siriwardena thought the same and was willing to talk about him. But we told him to be brief, and the bulk of the programme was readings by Richard of the poetry.
It was a glorious performance, capturing the excitement of ‘How they brought the good news from Ghent to Aix’ with its galloping anapaests, lugubrious in ‘Bishop Blougram’s Apology’ which I told him to model on our good friend Suresh Thambipillai, chilling in ‘My Last Duchess’. At the end Lakshmi de Silva, who had been at the first performance we had put on together at the Council, said to me fervently that it was the type of evening that made her glad to be alive.
I was not here when, two months later, he was abducted and killed. That is a small blessing for I remember not that horror but rather the ebullience of his stage presence, which he replicated also in our long conversations. My sister once said she wished she could eavesdrop when she heard me laughing uproariously when I was talking to him on the phone. That is what remains, joy rather than sadness, the exuberance of a commitment to life.
Six months into the term of office of the new government, the main positive achievements continue to remain economic and political stability and the reduction of waste and corruption. The absence of these in the past contributed to a significant degree to the lack of development of the country. The fact that the government is making a serious bid to ensure them is the best prognosis for a better future for the country. There is still a distance to go. The promised improvements that would directly benefit those who are at the bottom of the economic pyramid, and the quarter of the population who live below the poverty line, have yet to materialise. Prices of essential goods have not come down and some have seen sharp increases such as rice and coconuts. There are no mega projects in the pipeline that would give people the hope that rapid development is around the corner.
There were times in the past when governments succeeded in giving the people big hopes for the future as soon as they came to power. Perhaps the biggest hope came with the government’s move towards the liberalisation of the economy that took place after the election of 1977. President J R Jayewardene and his team succeeded in raising generous international assistance, most of it coming in the form of grants, that helped to accelerate the envisaged 30 year Mahaweli Development project to just six years. In 1992 President Ranasinghe Premadasa thought on a macro scale when his government established 200 garment factories throughout the country to develop the rural economy and to help alleviate poverty. These large scale projects brought immediate hope to the lives of people.
More recently the Hambantota Port project, Mattala Airport and the Colombo Port City project promised mega development that excited the popular imagination at the time they commenced, though neither of them has lived up to their envisaged potential. These projects were driven by political interests and commission agents rather than economic viability leading to debt burden and underutilisation. The NPP government would need to be cautious about bringing in similar mega projects that could offer the people the hope of rapid economic growth. During his visits to India and China, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake signed a large number of agreements with the governments of those countries but the results remain unclear. The USD 1 billion Adani project to generate wind power with Indian collaboration appears to be stalled. The USD 3.7 billion Chinese proposal to build an oil refinery also appears to be stalled.
RENEWED GROWTH
The absence of high profile investments or projects to generate income and thereby take the country to a higher level of development is a lacuna in the development plans of the government. It has opened the door to invidious comparisons to be drawn between the new government’s ability to effect change and develop the economy in relation to those in the opposition political parties who have traditionally been in the seats of power. However, recently published statistics of the economic growth during the past year indicates that the economy is doing better than anticipated under the NPP government. Sri Lanka’s economy grew by 5 percent in the year 2024, reversing two years of contraction with the growth rate for the year of 2023 being estimated at negative 2.3 percent. What was particularly creditable was the growth rate for the fourth quarter of 2024 (after the new government took over) being 5.4 percent. The growth figures for the present quarter are also likely to see a continuation of the present trend.
Sri Lanka’s failure in the past has been to sustain its economic growth rates. Even though the country started with high growth rates under different governments, it soon ran into problems of waste and corruption that eroded those gains. During the initial period of President J R Jayawardene’s government in the late 1970s, the economy registered near 8 percent growth with the support of its mega projects, but this could not be sustained. Violent conflict, waste and corruption came to the centre stage which led to the economy getting undermined. With more and more money being spent on the security forces to battle those who had become insurgents against the state, and with waste and corruption skyrocketing there was not much left over for economic development.
The government’s commitment to cut down on waste and corruption so that resources can be saved and added to enable economic growth can be seen in the strict discipline it has been following where expenditures on its members are concerned. The government has restricted the cabinet to 25 ministers, when in the past the figure was often double. The government has also made provision to reduce the perks of office, including medical insurance to parliamentarians. The value of this latter measure is that the parliamentarians will now have an incentive to upgrade the health system that serves the general public, instead of running it down as previous governments did. With their reduced levels of insurance coverage they will need to utilise the public health facilities rather than go to the private ones.
COMMITTED GOVERNMENT
The most positive feature of the present time is that the government is making a serious effort to root out corruption. This is to be seen in the invigoration of previously dormant institutions of accountability, such as the Bribery and Corruption Commission, and the willingness of the Attorney General’s Department to pursue those who were previously regarded as being beyond the reach of the law due to their connections to those in the seats of power. The fact that the Inspector General of Police, who heads the police force, is behind bars on a judicial order is an indication that the rule of law is beginning to be taken seriously. By cost cutting, eliminating corruption and abiding by the rule of law the government is removing the obstacles to development. In the past, the mega development projects failed to deliver their full benefits because they got lost in corrupt and wasteful practices including violent conflict.
There is a need, however, for new and innovative development projects that require knowledge and expertise that is not necessarily within the government. So far it appears that the government is restricting its selection of key decision makers to those it knows, has worked with and trusts due to long association. Two of the committees that the government has recently appointed, the Clean Lanka task force and the Tourism advisory committee are composed of nearly all men from the majority community. If Sri Lanka is to leverage its full potential, the government must embrace a more inclusive approach that incorporates women and diverse perspectives from across the country’s multiethnic and multireligious population, including representation from the north and east. For development that includes all, and is accepted by all, it needs to tap into the larger resources that lie outside itself.
By ensuring that women and ethnic minorities have representation in decision making bodies of the government, the government can harness a broader range of skills, experiences, and perspectives, ultimately leading to more effective and sustainable development policies. Sustainable development is not merely about economic growth; it is about inclusivity and partnership. A government that prioritises diversity in its leadership will be better equipped to address the challenges that can arise unexpectedly. By widening its advisory base and integrating a broader array of voices, the government can create policies that are not only effective but also equitable. Through inclusive governance, responsible economic management, and innovative development strategies the government will surely lead the country towards a future that benefits all its people.
by Jehan Perera
Former Minister Ali Sabry’s recent op-ed, “Why Sri Lanka must continue to pursue a non-aligned, yet multi-aligned foreign policy,” published in the Daily FT on 3 March, offers a timely reflection on Sri Lanka’s foreign policy trajectory in an increasingly multipolar world. Sabry’s articulation of a “non-aligned yet multi-aligned” approach is commendable for its attempt to reconcile Sri Lanka’s historical commitment to non-alignment with the realities of contemporary geopolitics. However, his framework raises critical questions about the principles of non-alignment, the nuances of multi-alignment, and Sri Lanka’s role in a world shaped by great power competition. This response seeks to engage with Sabry’s arguments, critique certain assumptions, and propose a more robust vision for Sri Lanka’s foreign policy.
Sabry outlines five key pillars of a non-aligned yet multi-aligned foreign policy:
- No military alignments, no foreign bases: Sri Lanka should avoid entangling itself in military alliances or hosting foreign military bases.
- Economic engagement with all, dependency on none
: Sri Lanka should diversify its economic partnerships to avoid over-reliance on any single country.
* Diplomatic balancing
: Sri Lanka should engage with multiple powers, leveraging relationships with China, India, the US, Europe, Japan, and ASEAN for specific benefits.
- Leveraging multilateralism
: Sri Lanka should participate actively in regional and global organisations, such as UN, NAM, SAARC, and BIMSTEC.
- Resisting coercion and protecting sovereignty
: Sri Lanka must resist external pressures and assert its sovereign right to pursue an independent foreign policy.
While pillars 1, 2, and 5 align with the traditional principles of non-alignment, pillars 3 and 4 warrant closer scrutiny. Sabry’s emphasis on “diplomatic balancing” and “leveraging multilateralism” raises questions about the consistency of his approach with the spirit of non-alignment and whether it adequately addresses the challenges of a multipolar world.
Dangers of over-compartmentalisation
Sabry’s suggestion that Sri Lanka should engage with China for infrastructure, India for regional security and trade, the US and Europe for technology and education, and Japan and ASEAN for economic opportunities reflects a pragmatic approach to foreign policy. However, this compartmentalisation of partnerships risks reducing Sri Lanka’s foreign policy to a transactional exercise, undermining the principles of non-alignment.
Sabry’s framework, curiously, excludes China from areas like technology, education, and regional security, despite China’s growing capabilities in these domains. For instance, China is a global leader in renewable energy, artificial intelligence, and 5G technology, making it a natural partner for Sri Lanka’s technological advancement. Similarly, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) offers significant opportunities for economic development and regional connectivity. By limiting China’s role to infrastructure, Sabry’s approach risks underutilising a key strategic partner.
Moreover, Sabry’s emphasis on India for regional security overlooks the broader geopolitical context. While India is undoubtedly a critical partner for Sri Lanka, regional security cannot be addressed in isolation from China’s role in South Asia. The Chinese autonomous region of Xizang (Tibet) is indeed part of South Asia, and China’s presence in the region is a reality that Sri Lanka must navigate. A truly non-aligned foreign policy would seek to balance relationships with both India and China, rather than assigning fixed roles to each.
Sabry’s compartmentalisation of partnerships risks creating silos in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, limiting its flexibility and strategic depth. For instance, by relying solely on the US and Europe for technology and education, Sri Lanka may miss out on opportunities for South-South cooperation with members of BRICS.
Similarly, by excluding China from regional security discussions, Sri Lanka may inadvertently align itself with India’s strategic interests, undermining its commitment to non-alignment.
Limited multilateralism?
Sabry’s call for Sri Lanka to remain active in organisations like the UN, NAM, SAARC, and BIMSTEC is laudable. However, his omission of the BRI, BRICS, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) is striking. These platforms represent emerging alternatives to the Western-dominated global order and offer Sri Lanka opportunities to diversify its partnerships and enhance its strategic autonomy.
The BRI is one of the most ambitious infrastructure and economic development projects in history, involving over 140 countries. For Sri Lanka, the BRI offers opportunities for infrastructure development, trade connectivity, and economic growth. By participating in the BRI, Sri Lanka can induce Chinese investment to address its infrastructure deficit and integrate into global supply chains. Excluding the BRI from Sri Lanka’s foreign policy framework would be a missed opportunity.
BRICS and the SCO represent platforms for South-South cooperation and multipolarity. BRICS, in particular, has emerged as a counterweight to such Western-dominated institutions as the IMF and World Bank, advocating for a more equitable global economic order. The SCO, on the other hand, focuses on regional security and counterterrorism, offering Sri Lanka a platform to address its security concerns in collaboration with major powers like China, Russia, and India. By engaging with these organisations, Sri Lanka can strengthen its commitment to multipolarity and enhance its strategic autonomy.
Non-alignment is not neutrality
Sabry’s assertion that Sri Lanka must avoid taking sides in major power conflicts reflects a misunderstanding of non-alignment. Non-alignment is not about neutrality; it is about taking a principled stand on issues of global importance. During the Cold War, non-aligned countries, like Sri Lanka, opposed colonialism, apartheid, and imperialism, even as they avoided alignment with either the US or the Soviet Union.
Sri Lanka’s foreign policy, under leaders like S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike and Sirimavo Bandaranaike, was characterised by a commitment to anti-colonialism and anti-imperialism, opposing racial segregation and discrimination in both its Apartheid and Zionist forms. Sri Lanka, the first Asian country to recognise revolutionary Cuba, recognised the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam, supported liberation struggles in Africa, and opposed the US military base in Diego Garcia. These actions were not neutral; they were rooted in a principled commitment to justice and equality.
Today, Sri Lanka faces new challenges, including great power competition, economic coercion, and climate change. A truly non-aligned foreign policy would require Sri Lanka to take a stand on issues like the genocide in Gaza, the colonisation of the West Bank, the continued denial of the right to return of ethnically-cleansed Palestinians and Chagossians, the militarisation of the Indo-Pacific, the use of economic sanctions as a tool of coercion, and the need for climate justice. By avoiding these issues, Sri Lanka risks becoming the imperialist powers’ cringing, whingeing client state.
The path forward
Sabry’s use of the term “multi-alignment” reflects a growing trend in Indian foreign policy, particularly under the BJP Government. However, multi-alignment is not the same as multipolarity. Multi-alignment implies a transactional approach to foreign policy, where a country seeks to extract maximum benefits from multiple partners without a coherent strategic vision. Multipolarity, on the other hand, envisions a world order where power is distributed among multiple centres, reducing the dominance of any single power.
Sri Lanka should advocate for a multipolar world order that reflects the diversity of the global South. This would involve strengthening platforms like BRICS, the SCO, and the NAM, while also engaging with Western institutions like the UN and the WTO. By promoting multipolarity, Sri Lanka can contribute to a more equitable and just global order, in line with the principles of non-alignment.
Ali Sabry’s call for a non-aligned, yet multi-aligned foreign policy falls short of articulating a coherent vision for Sri Lanka’s role in a multipolar world. To truly uphold the principles of non-alignment, Sri Lanka must:
* Reject compartmentalisation
: Engage with all partners across all domains, including technology, education, and regional security.
* Embrace emerging platforms
: Participate in the BRI, BRICS, and SCO to diversify partnerships and enhance strategic autonomy.
* Take principled stands
: Advocate for justice, equality, and multipolarity in global affairs.
* Promote South-South cooperation
: Strengthen ties with other Global South countries to address shared challenges, like climate change and economic inequality.
By adopting this approach, Sri Lanka can reclaim its historical legacy as a leader of the non-aligned movement and chart a course toward a sovereign, secure, and successful future.
(Vinod Moonesinghe read mechanical engineering at the University of Westminster, and worked in Sri Lanka in the tea machinery and motor spares industries, as well as the railways. He later turned to journalism and writing history. He served as chair of the Board of Governors of the Ceylon German Technical Training Institute. He is a convenor of the Asia Progress Forum, which can be contacted at asiaprogressforum@gmail.com.)
by Vinod Moonesinghe
Cancellation of shows has turned out to be a regular happening where former Backstreet Boys Nick Carter is concerned. In the past, it has happened several times.
If Nick Carter is not 100 percent fit, he should not undertake these strenuous world tours, ultimately disappointing his fans.
It’s not a healthy scene to be cancelling shows on a regular basis.
In May 2024, a few days before his scheduled visit to the Philippines, Carter cancelled his two shows due to “unforeseen circumstances.”
The promoter concerned announced the development and apologised to fans who bought tickets to Carter’s shows in Cebu, on May 23, and in Manila, on May 24.
The dates were supposed to be part of the Asian leg of his ‘Who I Am’ 2024 tour.
Carter previously cancelled a series of solo concerts in Asia, including Jakarta, Mumbai, Singapore, and Taipei. And this is what the organisers had to say:
“Due to unexpected matters related to Nick Carter’s schedule, we regret to announce that Nick’s show in Asia, including Jakarta on May 26 (2024), has been cancelled.
His ‘Who I Am’ Japan tour 2024 was also cancelled, with the following announcement:
Explaining, on video, about the
cancelled ‘Who I Am’ shows
“We regret to announce that the NICK CARTER Japan Tour, planned for June 4th at Toyosu PIT (Tokyo) and June 6th at Namba Hatch (Osaka), will no longer be proceeding due to ‘unforeseen circumstances.’ We apologise for any disappointment.
Believe me, I had a strange feeling that his Colombo show would not materialise and I did mention, in a subtle way, in my article about Nick Carter’s Colombo concert, in ‘StarTrack’ of 14th January, 2025 … my only worry (at that point in time) is the HMPV virus which is reported to be spreading in China and has cropped up in Malaysia, and India, as well.
Although no HMPV virus has cropped up, Carter has cancelled his scheduled performance in Sri Lanka, and in a number of other countries, as well, to return home, quoting, once again, “unforeseen circumstances.”
“Unforeseen circumstances” seems to be his tagline!
There is talk that low ticket sales is the reason for some of his concerts to be cancelled.
Yes, elaborate arrangements were put in place for Nick Carter’s trip to Sri Lanka – Meet & Greet, Q&A, selfies, etc., but all at a price!
Wonder if there will be the same excitement and enthusiasm if Nick Carter decides to come up with new dates for what has been cancelled?
Prof. Gananath Obeyesekere passes away aged 95
Acceptance of nominations for Punakiri, Mannar and Dehiattakandiya local authorities ends at 12 noon on Thursday (27th March 2025)
Gabba to be demolished after 2032 Olympics, cricket to get new home in Brisbane
-
Business5 days agoCargoserv Shipping partners Prima Ceylon & onboards Nestlé Lanka for landmark rail logistics initiative
-
News3 days agoSeniors welcome three percent increase in deposit rates
-
Features3 days agoThe US, Israel, Palestine, and Mahmoud Khalil
-
News3 days agoScholarships for children of estate workers now open
-
Business5 days agoSri Lankans Vote Dialog as the Telecommunication Brand and Service Brand of the Year
-
News4 days agoDefence Ministry of Japan Delegation visits Pathfinder Foundation
-
Features5 days agoThe Vaping Veil: Unmasking the dangers of E-Cigarettes
-
News5 days ago‘Deshabandu is on SLC payroll’; Hesha tables documents