Midweek Review

The life and works of Leo Tolstoy

Published

4 years ago

2021/07/14

By Dr. SIRI
GALHENAGE
Retired Psychiatrist

[The following is an abbreviated and a modified version of a presentation to the History, Philosophy and Ethics Section of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists – WA Branch, on 15 June 2021]

“Tolstoy serves to justify all the hopes and aspirations invested in literature”

– Anton Chekov [1860 -1904]

The Russian literary artist, Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy [1828–1910], better known in the world over as Leo Tolstoy, is generally regarded as one of the most potent creative forces of world literature. He was primarily a novelist and a short-story writer, and was considered to be the master of realism – having written ‘War and Peace’ and ‘Ana Karenina’, the high peaks of realist fiction occupying the foreground of his rich literary landscape. Tolstoy was also a philosopher, social reformer and a religious activist who blended his ideology into prose fiction.

Through this essay, I wish to track the journey of self discovery of the great novelist that shaped his personal philosophy and in turn his literary artistry.

JOURNEY of SELF DISCOVERY

The story of the great story teller is as enthralling as the stories he wrote. It was so dramatic that a Tolstoy biographer, referred to his life as ‘more war than peace!’ As the drama of his life unfolded, he wore, consecutively, the mask of aristocrat, land owner, soldier, social reformer, religious activist, moral crusader, pacifist and wandering ascetic, against a backdrop of Imperial [Tsarist] Russia in transition from a feudal to an industrial society. His life is intricately linked to the evolving socio-cultural and political developments of his era.

Tolstoy was born in 1828 to an aristocratic family of landowners in the ancestral property of Yasnaya Polyana, hundred kilometres south west of Moscow.

Death was a regular visitor throughout his formative years. He lost his mother at the age of two years, followed by his father and his grandmother when he was nine. He was then taken away [along with his sister and his three brothers] to Kazan, a regional city to live with his aunt, who too died when he was fourteen. The emotional impact of the series of losses on young Leo is not clearly known.

What is known is that, due to a lack of structure and guidance, Leo entered a life of youthful debauchery during his adolescence and early adulthood. He was attracted to the brothels and gypsy cabarets of Moscow, and ‘sowed his wild oats on peasant and gypsy women’. He abused alcohol, gambled and fell into debt, and was forced to sell off some of his inherited property to pay his gambling debts.

But Leo’s intellectual potential was never in doubt. He joined the University of Kazan to study Law and Languages. He read Oriental as well as Arabo-Turkic languages and was also conversant with French, German and English. Unfortunately, his restlessness made him leave the University, before graduating.

Tolstoy was strongly influenced by the philosophical concepts of Jean-Jacques Rousseau [1712-78], the French-Swiss thinker and social reformer. Rousseau believed in an inherent goodness in man which is corrupted as he gathers power and wealth in a so-called sophisticated society, leading to unhappiness. Man’s salvation is to be found in returning to a primary culture and leading a life of simplicity and selflessness. Rousseau’s thoughts on greater social equality, rejection of organised religions in favour personal conscience, promotion of child-based education etc. had a particular impact on moulding Tolstoy’s personal philosophy and in turn his literary offerings.

In an attempt at reforming himself Tolstoy had a shot at being a model farmer and a scholar, at the same time, but failed miserably in his endeavour.

Perhaps needing external control, he headed off to the Caucasus to join his brother who was posted as an officer with the Russian army in a Cossack village, bordering Chechnya, fighting the local rebels. After a period of idling, gambling and sexual misdemeanours, he joined the army as a cadet and started writing! It was during this period, recuperating from Venereal Disease, that he wrote his first literary piece, ‘Childhood, Boyhood and Youth‘– semiautobiographical – gaining a reputation as a writer of promise.

Tolstoy then joined the Russian forces in Crimea defending the strategic Black Sea port of Sevastopol against an invasion of allied forces of the British, French and the Ottomans [1854-55]. Here he adopted a dual role as combatant and war reporter. In his latter role, accompanying the reader to the theatre of war, he portrayed a plethora of emotions in the faces and in the hearts of civilians and combatants alike – sadness, cowardice, terror, hatred and even an admiration for the enemy. He gained acclaim as the first war correspondent and was credited for his descriptive precision. ‘At Sevastopol…. there was a camera with intelligence called Tolstoy’. His dispatches to the Journal, ‘The Contemporary’, which came to be known as the ‘Sevastopol Sketches’ became part of his literary canon. He wrote, “The hero of my tale, whom I love with all the strength of my soul, whom I have tried to set forth in all his beauty, and who has been, is, and always will be most beautiful, is – The Truth”.

The experience of living through the horrors of the hostilities in Crimea made him change his attitude towards war, as reflected in his writing – from a patriotic fervour to futility, leading to a lifelong doctrine of ‘pacifism’.

On returning home from Crimea, Tolstoy identified himself with the peasants, developed an affinity for the rural landscape and felt deeply about the social inequity that existed between aristocracy and peasantry – attitudes strongly reflected in his later writing. He wore peasant clothes, grew a beard and ‘gave up the pen for the plough’. He fell in love with a peasant woman, Axinya, who bore him a son, Timofei, in 1858 – a matter that haunted him for the rest of his life.

At this stage there was increasing pressure from the family for him to get married and settle down. In 1862, having reached the age of 34, he married Sofia Behrs – half his age – the daughter of a respected doctor. Few days before the wedding, in an act which could be described as brutal, Tolstoy forced his fiancé, young and tender, to read his diaries with sordid details about his past – his drunken episodes, sexual encounters, gambling sessions, venereal disease and his relationship with the peasant woman who bore him a son. In return, he demanded the truth about her past. Nevertheless, the marriage went ahead with a grand ceremony at the Kremlin as he was seen as a promising young man – a wealthy, land-owning aristocrat with literary potential. A suitable boy!

There was relative harmony during the first decade of marriage. It was during this period that Tolstoy wrote his masterpiece ‘War and Peace”. But there was not much intimacy between husband and wife: they communicated their feelings through each other’s diaries! He believed that sexual intercourse was purely for procreation. Sofia bore 13 children in all; four of them died during childhood. He did not believe in the emancipation of women. This was in marked contrast to the sensitivity he has shown towards the female sex in his literary expression, exemplified in the characterisation of Marsha in the novella, ‘Family Happiness’ [in which he occupies the role of Marsha, the protagonist, and narrates the story in the first person] and in other great works such as ‘Anna Karenina’ and ‘Kreutzer Sonata’.

Despite the tenuous relationship, Sofia remained loyal to her husband. She was unable to pursue her own intellectual development she longed for. Instead she performed the thankless task of copying and recopying voluminous manuscripts in preparation for publication, in addition to attending to her husband’s needs, looking after the children, running the estate and keeping accounts.

But with the escalation of domestic unhappiness, Sofia became preoccupied with physical ailments and death, entertained thoughts of suicide, with a wish to join her dead children. She started abusing opium, at times was incoherent in her speech, became suspicious of her husband and harboured thoughts of killing Axinya, the peasant woman who bore him the illegitimate child. But she persevered!

There was a fundamental change in the life of Tolstoy in the final quarter of the 19th century with a spiritual awakening. He challenged what he thought was the hypocrisy of the Russian Orthodox Church for moving away from the central tenets of Christianity, aligning itself with the authoritative administrative machine. His religious activism resulted in his excommunication from the church. He was influenced by the eastern religions of Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism, and advocated a synthesis of all faiths, highlighting man’s desire for love as reflected in all religions.

Embarking on a spiritual quest, he campaigned for universal love and pacifism, gave up hunting and alcohol and stopped eating meat. He advocated celibacy, stating that he had no pity for the extinction of the human race. He depicted celibacy as the central theme in his novella, ‘Father Sergius’.

Tolstoy protested against the continuing gulf between the land-owning aristocracy and the peasantry, acting as a catalyst for the revolutionary change taking place – harbingers of the Russian Revolution [1917 – 23]. The Tsar imposed a ban on his writings. The Bolsheviks saw him as a guide.

Tolstoy brought about a synthesis of thoughts on spirituality, morality, social justice and art, a form of Christian Socialism, in an attempt at establishing a new social order. His doctrine came to be known as Tolstoysm. He was held in high regard as a sage and a prophet, and his cult attracted a large following. His pacifist ideology influenced the thinking of Mahatma Gandhi [1869 – 1948] and Martin Luther King Jr. [1929-68]. Gandhi came across a letter written by Tolstoy to Taraknath Das, a Bengali scholar and anti-colonial activist, based in Vancouver, supporting his struggle for independence. The letter which was called ‘A Letter to a Hindu’ made a deep impression on Gandhi who considered Tolstoy as a mentor, and adopted his principle of non-violent resistance in the struggle for independence from British colonial rule. Gandhi communicated with Tolstoy until the latter’s death and set up an institution called the Tolstoy Farm [in South Africa where Gandhi was living at the time] to propagate the doctrine of the Russian philosopher.

At home, Sofia resented what she thought was the hypocrisy of her husband’s transformation – preaching universal brotherhood while showing no empathy towards her! In the meantime, Vladimir Chertkov, Tolstoy’s main proponent, confidant and secretary, in a sinister move, planned to alter Tolstoy’s will in his favour with the intention of gaining copyright of his literary wealth. He encouraged Tolstoy to leave Sofia at a time when his leader was considering moving on and letting go of his material and literary wealth and his family.

In an autobiographical essay, titled, ‘A Confession’, Tolstoy revealed his vulnerability – that he had undergone a ‘spiritual crisis’ and that he had entertained thoughts of suicide ‘by means of a noose or a bullet’. Rational thinking, he wrote, made him realise that life had no meaning, and that he had wanted to do away with his self, but faith provided the meaning of life and the possibility of living – in psycho-social terminology he was facing an ‘Existential Crisis’.

In 1910, aged 82, Tolstoy left home accompanied by his youngest daughter, Sasha, and his doctor, intending never to return. He was forced to break journey at a remote station – Astopovo – with a severe bout of pneumonia, and took refuge at the station master’s lodge. He died, few days later, on 7th November 1910, surrounded by some of his followers, few family members, government officials and the world’s press. Sofia rushed to her husband’s death bed but was prevented from seeing him by Chertkov, until the legendary author lapsed into a coma. This final episode has been brilliantly presented in the movie, ‘The Last Station’, featuring Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren.

LITERARY ARTISTRY

There are several distinctive features of Tolstoy’s literary artistry that have contributed to its potency.

Tolstoy, as stated above, was a master of Realism with an exceptional ability to incorporate real life into his imaginative construct. He presented reality in a lyrical art form. He incorporated real life figures of his era and representations of individuals in his community, and projected his own biographical experiences in his art of characterisation. He was skilful in depicting the evolving inner life of a character in its depth and paradox. Tolstoy’s powers of creativity were borne out of his intuitive grasp of human nature with a remarkable ability to investigate conscious and unconscious states and their behavioural correlates, ‘by creeping into the deep crevices of the human psyche’, unearthing psychological insights. To echo the words of the French novelist, Gustave Flaubert [1821-1880] about Tolstoy: “What an Artist and what a Psychologist!”

Tolstoy is renowned for his descriptive precision based on his deep penetrating powers of observation. He created ‘word pictures’ of characters, situations such as war, landscape and nature with clarity and exactitude, not to diminish his skill in aesthetics.

The aesthetic features of his work are not limited to a mere exposition of beauty but to the deployment of a wide array of literary devices that evoke a range of emotional and critical responses – imagery, irony, symbolism, metaphor, simile, satire, to mention a few.

Tolstoy was an inspiring moral thinker. In a monograph titled, ‘What is Art?’ [1898], he asserted that Art, including literary art, should carry a moral message, transcending any aesthetic value, for it to be of benefit to mankind. His moral wisdom was based on his deep social conscience and his spiritual awakening developed throughout the latter part of his life.

Tolstoy’s writing carries a historical critique of his era by targeting several aspects of society such as social inequity [between the aristocracy and the peasantry], depravity and falsity of the aristocracy and the ruling elite, the church’s complicity with the state and the ineptitude and corruption of the administrative machine.

Above all, as reflected in his clever manipulation of plot and the vitality of his narratives, Tolstoy was a gifted story-teller with extraordinary narrative skill.

His power of creativity, built out of the above ingredients along with his intuitive grasp of human nature, has appealed directly to the sensibilities of the reader, resulting in works of enduring value.

“When you read Tolstoy, you read because you cannot stop”….”He was the greatest artist in Russian prose”

—Vladimir Nabokov [1899-1977, renowned Russian literary critic.

LITERARY ENDOWMENT

With his creative activity spanning over half his lifetime, Tolstoy endowed the world with an abundance of literary wealth. It includes 3 novels – War and Peace, Anna Karenina and Resurrection, the least known and the last to be written by Tolstoy; half a dozen ‘provests’ [Russian equivalents of novellas], for example, The Death of Ivan Ilych, The Cossacks, Kreutzer Sonata etc; and a multitude of short stories.

NOVELS

‘War and Peace’, the magnum opus of Leo Tolstoy, written over a period of seven years, runs into 587,000 words. It is a novel that many people aspire to read but only a few get round to reading it due to its enormity and complexity. It is more than a novel: an embodiment of a socio-political landscape, historical critique, philosophical reflections, moral teaching and psychological insights, with different readers viewing it from their own vantage points. It is a powerful and complex narrative set against the broad canvas of the French Invasion of Russia at the dawn of the 19th century, depicting its impact on contemporary Russian life, with myriads of characters – real and fictional – entering and leaving the pages.

From my perspective, Tolstoy, by a clever manipulation of plot, takes five prominent families of the Moscow aristocracy through the ravages of war. He recounts the challenges they face, the coping strategies they adopt, resolve their crises and consolidate their psychological and spiritual gains – individually and collectively – in building inner peace. Those who survive the crises are brought together, symbolically, in a country residence, getting them to reflect on issues such as developing a moral relationship with their peasants, family unity, a simple way of life, generosity and love. Pardon me for my impertinence in offering a simple formulation to an extremely complex narrative!

‘Anna Karenina’, considered by many to be one of the best novels ever written, is an epitome of realistic fiction. Skilfully crafted with two parallel plots with pleating strands of narrative, it is set against a background of Tsarist Russia, tying up at the end with a moral message. It provides a contrast between aristocracy and peasantry, city and country life, and between happy and unhappy families with a memorable stating line, ‘Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way’.

The main plot represents decadence, decline and death, while the parallel plot illustrates stability, harmony and progress. The main plot depicts the inner struggle of a woman who takes up a challenge at her own peril against the prevailing social norms and succumbs to the forces within and outside her soul. Tolstoy demonstrates his deep understanding of the female psyche through the character of Anna Karenina. The parallel plot that grows out as an offshoot of the main narrative is the shoot that bears the blossoms of love, humanity and spirituality. Tolstoy’s philosophy of life is represented through the characters of Levin and Kitty in this plot.

NOVELLAS

I have chosen three of Tolstoy’s popular novellas for a brief overview.

‘The Death of Ivan Ilych’ depicts the ascent, descent and death of a fiercely ambitious lawyer preoccupied with climbing the social ladder. In a masterly display of character construction Tolstoy takes his protagonist to the top of the social ladder, and makes him fall off it, both literally and metaphorically. The crisis that leads to a terminal illness makes him re-evaluate his life: that he has lived a life of falsity [‘a huge deception that had hidden both life and death’]; that life is a series of escalating suffering with no escape. Realisation of that truth about life brings Ivan the freedom to face death. [‘In place of death there was light’].

In this popular novella, apart from its spiritual theme, Tolstoy raises interesting issues regarding ‘the doctor-patient relationship’ and the ‘illness behaviour’ of patients, which may be of interest to the medical profession.

The theme of ‘Kreutzer Sonata’ resonates with what the German Psychiatrist Ernst Kretschmer [1888-1964] postulated regarding the aetiology of paranoia: the cumulative influence of a noxious social environment, sensitivity of personality and an experience meaningful to the individual. The novella tracks the motivational path and the psychological processes leading to paranoia [morbid jealousy] with a disastrous consequence, reminiscent of Shakespeare’s Othello.

“Trukhachevski’s talent for music; the nearness that came of playing together; the impressionable nature of music, especially of the violin and his apparent lustful gaze towards his wife; tormented Pozdnychev and heightened his suspicion and jealousy. He began to suspect that the sound of the piano was purposely made to drown their voices and probably their kisses, as they practiced”.

Pozdnychev’s paranoia was brought to a head at a concert when Trukhachevski and his wife played Beethoven’s Kreutzer Sonata. During a surprise appearance at a subsequent practice session, Pozdnychev stabs his wife to death. The court decided that the accused was a wronged husband who killed his wife defending his outraged honour! Tolstoy raises awareness of a range of contemporary societal values and of the criminal justice system.

Depicting the ideology of Rousseau, that man’s salvation is to be found in returning to a primary culture and leading a life of simplicity and selflessness, and drawing heavily on his experience in the scenic Caucus Mountains and its inhabitants, Tolstoy wrote the novella, ‘The Cossacks’, which gained acclaim as his ‘mini-masterpiece’. Tolstoy re-lives his experience by sending his fictional representative, Olenin, a young nobleman of the Moscow elite, disillusioned by the falsity and depravity of his urban lifestyle, on a journey of self-discovery, seeking contentment among the Cossacks who inhabit the foothills of the scenic Caucasus. The Cossacks, renowned for their military prowess, sustain themselves by farming, fishing and hunting. Olenin befriends Eroshka, a stereotypical wise old man, who engages him on enthralling conversations; narrates folk tales and rhymes; introduces him to nature; and instils in him a sense of social conscience. The young aristocrat falls in love with a Cossack girl but his affection towards her is not reciprocated as she is betrothed to an injured Cossack warrior giving him an opportunity to re-evaluate love, in contrast to the carnal pleasures he indulged in Moscow. He returns home with a wealth of experience.

SHORT STORIES

The following is a sample of the many Tolstoyan short stories: ‘How Much Land Does a Man Need’ is about a man driven by greed that leads him to his downfall. ‘The Coffee House of Surat’ reflects the need for mankind to unite in one faith under a universal temple. ‘The Bear Hunt’: [semiautobiographical] the protagonist on a hunting expedition shoots a bear which falls at his feet resulting in a major emotional impact on him. He gives up hunting and becomes a vegetarian. ‘Little Girls Wiser than Men’ depicts the innocence of childhood: a children’s story that should be read by adults! ‘Three Deaths’ is a portrayal of our common humanity with a brilliant display of symbolism.

CONCLUSION

Leo Tolstoy, the Great Russian Novelist, has endowed us with an enormous literary wealth replete with philosophical concepts, moral wisdom, psychological insights and historical critique; and not without aesthetic value. With his extraordinary literary skill and descriptive precision he has turned real life into an art form with the development of characters in all their complexity, against a contemporary socio-political background. The life of one of the greatest storytellers of all time is an extraordinary story in itself that outshines the stories he wrote. His contribution to humanity has been made at a great cost to himself and his family, especially to his wife sofia, whose commitment towards his work has remained sadly unrecognised.

[sirigalhenage@gmail.com]

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Doval’s questionable regional stock taking

Published

7 days ago

2025/11/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

Gotabaya Rajapaksa meets Ajith Doval in mid-January, 2020, in Colombo ahead of the Covid-19 eruption, and economic crisis, a year later

Indian National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval recently declared ‘poor governance’ led to uprisings that resulted in change of governments in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka over the past three-and-a-half years.

Doval said so delivering the Sardar Patel Memorial Lecture on governance on the occasion of the National Unity Day on Friday (31 October, 2025). Doval mentioned the countries in that order though the first overthrowing of a government in the region took place in Sri Lanka (2022), Bangladesh (2024) followed by Nepal (2025).

Doval refrained from making reference to Pakistan where Premier Imran Khan was ousted in April 2022 ahead of the violent toppling of the government in Sri Lanka, which began with the violence outside the private residence of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, at Mirihana, in the previous month.

Imran Khan earned the wrath of the US for going ahead with a planned visit to Moscow, regardless of the Russian offensive against Kiev. Former Bangladeshi Cabinet Minister Mohibul Hasan Chowdhury recently told RT, in an exclusive interview that Hasina’s refusal to condemn Russia over the February 2022 military action angered the US. According to him, Dhaka’s refusal to condemn Russia had been one of the reasons for the 2024 uprising.

Why did Doval wait so long to blame it all on the respective governments? Doval assertion cannot be his own, but the collective servile stand, or thinking, to please the West by the Narendra Modi government once again. Surprisingly, Doval’s debatable statement hadn’t received any swift response from any individual, or political party here, though the top Indian official’s declaration required no holds barred discussion.

Doval, who held the post of NSA since 2014, in one line cleared allegations directed at the US and the general belief that the US influenced the events in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal. No less a person than ousted Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina alleged that Washington engineered her removal after she refused to hand over St Martin’s Island to the US.

Strategically located in the northeastern region of the Bay of Bengal, the island is close to the border between Bangladesh and Myanmar and stands nine kilometres away from the southern tip of Bangladesh’s Cox’s Bazar-Teknaf peninsula.

Doval declaration should be examined taking into consideration the strategic US-India partnership, though the latter still maintained close relations with Russia. Perhaps the SLPP, that fielded Gotabaya Rajapaksa at the 2019 presidential election, should seek an explanation from India regarding Doval’s declaration.

Unlike his predecessors, Doval, formerly of the intelligence services, wielded immense power and is widely believed to be hostile to China.

Former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, two years before he successfully contested the presidential election, told Colombo-based journalists how Doval put pressure on him to halt the Chinese funded Colombo Port City and take back the Colombo International Container Terminal (CICT).

During the Yahapalana administration, the wartime Defence Secretary told the writer that Doval insisted Sri Lanka terminate/take back all major Chinese-funded infrastructure projects, including the Colombo Port City, as well as the Hambantota port.

What really made Doval claim ‘poor governance’ caused the uprising? The NSA declaration is of importance as the Congress Chief Rahul Gandhi has been trying to encourage Indians to adopt Nepal-style Gen Z campaign to pressure Modi. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been furious over Gandhi’s strategy meant to inspire revolt against Modi.

Did Doval want the Indian sub-continent to believe that people took to the streets against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Sheikh Hasina and KP Sharma Oli because of poor governance? How could the Indian NSA explain the Nepalis insurgents setting fire to their Parliament, even after Oli resigned?

In Sri Lanka, the JVP, one of the groups that had been involved in the Aragalaya (March to July 2022) made a determined bid to seize control of Parliament. Had that happened, it would have gone up in flames in July 2022. That is the ugly truth. The police and the military thwarted the JVP attempt to take over Parliament, and Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s successor, Ranil Wickremesinghe, visited Parliament to personally thank the Army there, on the ground, ignoring the somewhat tense situation almost soon after.

Bringing Parliament under their control had been part of the overall Aragalaya strategy but the operation went awry when some of those who had been involved in the project refused to provide muscle to the JVP clandestine bid to advance on Parliament. Let me stress that Sri Lanka never really honestly examined the developments that led to Aragalaya, though the Supreme Court found fault with the SLPP leaders and key Treasury officials for bankruptcy.

Sajith in Delhi

Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa visited New Delhi soon after the Doval declaration on uprisings in Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Indian media conveniently refrained from seeking Premadasa’s response to Doval’s assertion and even if the Sri Lankan lawmaker had been aware of the claim on ‘poor governance’ he chose not to comment on it. New Delhi-based multi-national news channel WION conducted a wide-ranging interview with Premadasa and among the questions posed to him one dealt with the overthrowing of governments in the region.

Let me reproduce the question posed by WION’s Sidhant Sibal and Premadasa’s response without any alteration: Q: Do you have any sense why this region, the Indian subcontinent, has witnessed these protests which have toppled governments? What’s your sense like as a leading politician, as a statesman of this region?

A: “I think it’s different from country to country. I think the economic disaster, coupled with pressures and distress that were put on people due to the consequences of terrorist bombing, Easter Sunday bombing, the Covid-19 crisis, all these came together and created a very, very propitious environment for dissenting opinions to come onto the streets. You had large queues for fuel, for bread, consumer items, gas and various other items that are needed to fulfill basic human needs. So, Sri Lanka’s case, primarily, was predicated upon the economic situation. So, it changes from country to country. I think in democracies; this should not be the case. Primarily this takes place because we don’t have sound policy-making structures and processes that give out positive policy results, because the democracy, the democratic nature and democracies have to be protected. It cannot be subjugated to mob violence or mob rule.

“However, if the very same democratic systems result in constraining the democratic space. If the youth are not given their proper right to voice their opinions in the democratic structures, then we will have a problem. So, it’s very important that the democratic structures are strengthened, strengthened to such an extent that we have sound policy making that results in good policies.”

Perhaps, Premadasa should have made reference to the direct threat the Aragalaya activists posed to his life when he visited the Galle Face protest site, soon after UPFA goons, at the behest of Temple Trees, stormed the place. Premadasa, and a couple of other SJB MPs, had to run for their dear lives as Aragalaya activists set upon them. Economic difficulties caused by the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks and Covid-19, due to disruption of the vital tourism industry, weakened the economy but decades of neglect and reckless as well as irresponsible decisions created an explosive situation.

Both Central Bank Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe and Mahinda Siriwardena who served as the Secretary to the Ministry of Finance (April 2022 to June 2025) explained the circumstances the then SLPP government caused the unprecedented crisis by failing to address the issues in spite of them being fully aware of developments behind the scene instigated by outsiders. Siriwardena, in “Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival – Reflection on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery,” launched on 08 April, 2025, maintained how the top political leadership and the decision-makers devastated the economy. On that basis Doval is 100 percent right in his assertion that poor governance led to the uprising in Sri Lanka. But such a large scale and meticulously planned political project couldn’t have been mounted without external backing.

In the run-up to the explosion of Aragalaya outside Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, the residence of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, on the night of 31 March, 2022, to the 09 July storming of Janadhipathi Mandiraya, the country witnessed how interested parties intervened at every level to undermine government authority.

Basil’s December 2021 visit to Delhi

Basil Rajapaksa had been fiercely determined to somehow secure the Finance Ministry portfolio. The developing political and economic crisis gave Basil Rajapaksa the perfect opportunity to secure that prestigious portfolio, though the entire Cabinet, by then, knew the situation was beyond repair. SLPP National List MP Jayantha Ketagoda resigned in July, 2021, to pave the way for Basil Rajapaksa to enter Parliament. The new appointment failed to make any tangible impact. The deterioration continued. By the end of 2021, the country was on the verge of a big eruption which, obviously, instigated mayhem, like, for example, the JVP calling on Lankan expatriate workers not to remit their earnings through the government banking system, which is a vital financial support line to the country, even today.

Basil Rajapaksa’s much-hyped two-day visit to New Delhi, in the first week of December, 2021, should be examined, taking into consideration the explosive situation developing in the country. Former Minister and founder of the Pathfinder organisation, Milinda Moragoda, a key proponent of a fresh arrangement with the IMF, had been Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in New Delhi.

In Colombo, the government still talked of a so-called home-grown solution to the crisis that finally forced it to declare bankruptcy and reach an agreement with the IMF. It would be pertinent to mention that among those who had received Basil Rajapaksa in New Delhi was Doval. New Delhi knew where the country was heading and advanced its strategy, accordingly.

Doval had been involved in the Sri Lankan situation from the very beginning. India made swift intervention, with assistance running into billions of USD and the country had been trapped in post-Aragalaya debt. Those who portrayed the agreement that had been finalized by President Ranil Wickremesinghe, in 2023, and accepted by Parliament, by way of the controversial Economic Transformation Act, in July 2024, seemed to have turned a blind eye to the difficulties ahead.

If Doval felt that ‘poor governance’ caused the uprisings in Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka, what is his (read Indian) assessment of their current governments now? The NPP that had just three seats in Parliament, at the time of the Aragalaya, comfortably won both presidential and parliamentary elections in 2024. Established in 2019 to contest the presidential election in that year, the JVP-led NPP hadn’t been a force to be reckoned with, but Aragalaya changed things upside down.

NPP and JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake began his five-year term in September, 2024, and his first overseas visit was to New Delhi as was with his predecessor Gotabaya Rajapaksa. In fact, India had been the first overseas destination of other Sri Lankan presidents, as well.

India-SL MoUs

Did signing of seven Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) in April this year, in Colombo, underscored India’s confidence in Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s government? Or was New Delhi taking advantage of the situation here, and globally, especially with the dwindling financial state of Uncle Sam, to extract the maximum out of our ruling compromised comrades? The MoU covered defence, energy, digitalisation, healthcare, and development assistance. Some of these agreements had been the subject of legal challenges which were dismissed by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka in August this year.

In spite of the SJB, both in and outside Parliament, requesting the NPP government to reveal the MoUs, particularly the one on defence, the administration declined to do so. It would be interesting to know whether SJB leader Premadasa had received a briefing about the MoUs or he at least raised the issue with India during the three-day visit. However, Indian media seemed to have been careful during interviews not to touch any raw nerves, like the “independent” Western media. India-NPP relations must be examined also taking into consideration New Delhi rescuing JVP leader Somawansa Amarasinghe, in the late ’80s when the UNP government was hunting for him. Amarasinghe publicly acknowledged India’s role in saving his life when he returned to the country, in 2001, following 12-year self exile.

Against the backdrop of the Indo-Lanka defence MoU, India’s premier warship and submarine builder Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) acquired controlling 51% stake in the Colombo Dockyard PLC (CDPLC), the largest shipyard in Sri Lanka, once carefully nurtured by our late National Security, and Trade and Shipping Minister Lalith Athulathmudali, who was assassinated by an LTTE hit man at an election rally during the Premadasa regime. The deal, valued at approximately $52.96 million, was finalised in June 2025. The MDL is affiliated with the Indian Ministry of Defence. India replaced the partnership with Japanese Onomichi Dockyard Co., Ltd. of Japan.

Onomichi’s decision to sell its shares was blamed on financial difficulties-impact of shipbuilding market conditions, the 2019 Easter Sunday Attack, Covid-19 pandemic, European inflation, energy crisis in Sri Lanka, bankruptcy of Sri Lanka, abnormal interest rates and inflation, etc., according to statement posted by the CDL under change of management. (https://www.cdl.lk/mazagon-dock-shipbuilders-simited-of-India.html)

The CDL statement gave the impression that the above-mentioned factors didn’t affect the MDL. India seems to be happy with the way the new government, as well as the main Opposition, addressed issues at hand. In spite of on and off minor public criticism, none of the Opposition political parties, in the current Parliament, are very much unlikely to take a nationalistic stand on any of the contentious issues involving India. Their silence on the NPP’s continuing silence on the one-year moratorium imposed on foreign research vessels visiting Sri Lankan ports during 2024 by the then President Ranil Wickremesinghe is a case in point. That ban was meant to discourage China from seeking permission from Colombo to dock their state-of-the-art research vessels here.

Wickremesinghe imposed that ban under heavy American and Indian pressure against the backdrop of intense Indian media assault on Chinese ship visits here. The people haven’t forgotten how the Indian media reacted to Chinese research ship Yuan Wang 5 docking at the Chinese-managed Hambantota port in August 2022 soon after Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s ouster. The reportage of the Yung Wang 5 visit had been entirely based on US and Indian allegations that it was a satellite and missile-tracking capable vessel and, therefore, threatened Indian security. Although the NPP government promised to formally announce a decision on Wickremesinghe’s ban that was to be effective during 2024, it was yet to do so.

Reportage of Premadasa’s three-day visit to New Delhi didn’t indicate the two sides at least make a passing reference to continuing Indian poaching in Sri Lankan territorial waters that has led to deterioration of relations between Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu. But during an interview with media, in response to a query Premadasa elaborated how he expected the two countries to address the issue. But the issue here is India brazenly allowing its virtual armada of South Indian fishing fleet to cross the international maritime boundary to steal the catch of poor local fishermen.

President Dissanayake and Prime Minister Dr. Harini Amarasuriya should receive the appreciation for taking a firm stand in respect of Indian poaching. Unfortunately, the main Opposition seems to be not sure of its stand. There is absolutely no point in trying to appease India as New Delhi, under any circumstances, cannot turn a blind eye to her huge fishing fleet preying on the catch of humble local northern fishermen.

Another issue that had been forgotten is India’s accountability for the Sri Lanka war. The Indian media hadn’t raised the issue nor did Premadasa offer his views, a grave mistake on his part, particularly against the backdrop of the Valvettiturai Citizens Committee, with the backing of Yasmin Sooka’s (member of the Darusman Committee that investigated war crimes here) seeking compensation for VVT massacre, perpetrated by the Indian Army.

Sooka’s International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) recently backed the VVT Citizens Committee appeal made to Sri Lanka’s Office of Reparations asking for millions of USD in compensation. Political parties represented in Parliament, including the NPP, remained tight-lipped, with Dr. Jehan Perera, on behalf of the National Peace Council, offering his opinion in response to a query posed by the writer.

Those who had been demanding accountability and the full implementation of the 13th Amendment forced down on our country should keep in mind that India cannot, under any circumstances, absolve itself of the responsibility for the massive terrorism project it unleashed here. Let me put it in a different way. If not for the disastrous Indian decision that also cost them the lives of nearly 1,500 military personnel, double that amount wounded, and Congress leader Rajiv Gandhi being assassinated during 1987-1991 period, the LTTE would never have achieved the status as a conventional fighting force.

The transformation of the LTTE from an essentially a guerilla group to a conventional fighting force genuinely began after the withdrawal of the Indian Army in March 1990. The combat experience the group gained fighting one of the largest and formidable armies gave them the much-needed fillip required to form into a conventional-type fighting formations. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka never made an honest effort to record the conflict by examining the gradual transformation of terrorist strength and affiliated developments to ensure the world knew what really happened here.

Having watched/read reportage of Opposition Leader Premadasa’s recently concluded visit to New Delhi, the absence of a cohesive Sri Lankan approach to India relations and other geo-political developments against the backdrop of China further consolidating its global position and Russia-Ukraine conflict is disappointing.

Sri Lankan political parties seem to be blind to what is happening in neighbouring India, regionally and globally, and simply trying to appease regional and world powers, depending on the situations.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

When will Sri Lanka eradicate extreme poverty?

Published

7 days ago

2025/11/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

President Dissanayake sharing a light moment with the Opposition during his budget speech on Friday (07).

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s (AKD) second budget speech, delivered on 8 November 2025, painted a clear picture of ‘stabilisation’ in the neoclassical economic sense:

“… from the moment we received our mandate, we initiated very broad reformative changes to stabilise the macro economy, ensure fiscal discipline, strengthen state institutions, prevent corruption and increase transparency, and ensure accountability to the people. I am pleased to announce to this House today that these reforms have restored fiscal, macroeconomic and social stability within a short period of one year.”

This was followed up with a rattle of the usual indicators – growth, inflation, interest rates, exchange rates, external trade, gross reserves, and that holy grail, the primary budget surplus. Missing from this victory lap was a clearer outline of the indicators which tell us of the challenges that remain, including extreme poverty.

According to World Bank estimates, a quarter of Sri Lanka’s population live in extreme poverty. But poverty lines are always crude and arbitrary. By the World Bank’s definition, the extreme poor are those who make less than $3 a day, which amounts to less than 30,000 rupees per month.

This is a ridiculously low threshold when the Asia Floor Wage Alliance estimates a living wage for Sri Lanka to be 154,353.45 rupees a month in 2023. The World Bank report entitled ‘Sri Lanka Public Finance Review: Towards a Balanced Fiscal Adjustment’ has revealed that real wages in Sri Lanka are 14–24% lower than what they were before the crisis.

The multidimensional poverty index – which looks not just at incomes but access to essential services like healthcare, fuel, drinking water – find that 16% of Sri Lankans (one out of every six people) are multidimensionally poor. That rate is much higher for children – 42.2%, or four out of every ten children, are multidimensionally poor and a third are underweight or stunted.

It wasn’t always like this; for decades Sri Lanka consistently boasted social indicators far above what was expected for its GDP per capita. In that sense, our performance was always closer to that of the socialist worlds of Cuba, Vietnam, and China, which even today deliver better social outcomes than what you would expect for their income level.

Lessons from Kerala

A week before AKD’s budget speech, on 1 November 2025, Chief Minister of Kerala, Pinarayi Vijayan – a politburo member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) – declared his state to be the first in India to be free from the scourge of extreme poverty.

This would make Kerala the second territory in the world, following the People’s Republic of China in 2021, to eradicate extreme poverty. This is an astounding achievement, not least because a full 24% of the world’s poor live in India.

Kerala has eradicated extreme poverty despite having no monetary powers. Indian states do not have the power to issue currency, nor do they have their own development banks. This means that Kerala has had to rely primarily on fiscal policy.

But even in the realm of fiscal policy, Kerala is constrained by what its leaders have called a financial embargo by the central government. This includes an imposition on limits to the state’s ability to borrow funds, which is a violation of India’s fiscal federalism.

So how did Kerala, with both arms tied behind its back, rid itself of poverty? The answer is the only weapon that the powerless have at their disposal: organisation.

A few days before AKD’s budget speech, headlines flashed over a statement by Minister of Industries and Entrepreneurship Development Sunil Handunetti, who criticised the Aswesuma targeted cash transfer programme for creating dependency among recipients.

Perhaps the argument could have been put in another way. Capitalism in its ‘normal’ functioning militates against full employment. It is not so much that the poor and unemployed depend on handouts, but that capitalism itself depends on maintaining a reserve army of the poor and unemployed in order to repress wages.

Regardless, it is true that cash transfers are an ineffective and unsustainable solution to eradicating poverty. Kerala’s poverty eradication story was not of cash transfers per se, but of social change through a decades-long project of agrarian reform, decentralisation of governance, public health and education, and women’s empowerment.

Kerala’s communist leadership implemented a much more thoroughgoing land reform than what was implemented in Sri Lanka. The Kerala Land Reforms Act (1963) set a land ownership ceiling of 15 acres per family (of two to five members). By contrast, Sri Lanka’s Land Reform Law (1972) set a ceiling of 25 acres of paddy and 50 acres of total agricultural land.

More importantly, Kerala has gone much further than Sri Lanka in redistributing the excess land, and encouraging cooperatives to socialise production at a higher plane of productivity.

Land and Poverty

The fact that eradicating rural poverty is highlighted as a strategic objective in the 2026 budget proposals is welcome, especially given the fact that 81% of Sri Lanka’s multidimensionally poor live in rural areas.

The proposed allocation of 25 billion rupees towards the Campaign for Eradicating Poverty is also welcome. However, using the World Bank’s extreme poverty rate and the census department’s latest population estimates, this amounts to just 4,600 rupees per person in extreme poverty!

Drawing from the success of poverty eradication in Kerala (and other socialist states), it cannot be emphasised enough that the foundation of poverty eradication is not a fiscal question but a land question. In that regard, the budget lacks of clarity about the role of land reform and access to land in the poverty eradication process.

The budget proposes a Land Use Policy Plan to “improve the efficiency of land release for investment”. The wording of the proposal prioritises the interests of private-sector investors. But if rural poverty eradication is truly a strategic goal, then a land use policy would have to take into account the needs of both the rural poor and investors, and in fact prioritise the former over the latter.

At the heart of Sri Lanka’s poverty and underdevelopment lies an unresolved land question. Resolving this question is not a fiscal constraint but a political one. The ruling elite would prefer a path of development along the lines of private ownership of the land, which inevitably leads to concentration and social polarisation.

However, the recent trajectories of China and Vietnam demonstrate that it is perfectly possible to emulate East Asian Tiger-style growth rates and industrialisation under a system of public landownership. If Sri Lanka is to take rural poverty eradication seriously, these questions need to be tackled head on – piecemeal budget allocations are not enough.

(Shiran Illanperuma is a researcher at Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and a co-editor of Wenhua Zongheng: A Journal of Contemporary Chinese Thought. He is also a co-convenor of the Asia Progress Forum).

by Shiran Illanperuma