Features
The NPP’s proposed way out
by Uditha Devapriya
Promisingly titled “Rapid Response”, the NPP’s policy manifesto pits the party against the status quo and depicts itself as the clearly superior alternative. It advocates a politics free of corruption, a politics of the people. Written simply and striking an idealistic chord, it indicts every government since independence for the crisis we are in. This is to be expected with an outfit that views itself as better than the rest, and it is in line with the present mood, where people no longer care to distinguish between the regime and the opposition.
In such a scenario it is easy to claim, as the NPP does, that there’s no difference between the SLPP and the SJB. This explains Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s recent outbursts at Sajith Premadasa, the party’s rejection of the SLFP’s offer to get together, and its cold response to the prospect of an alliance with the Frontline Socialist Party. As far as sectarianism goes, the parliamentary avatar of the JVP is no different to the JVP.
The NPP is targeting something of a common denominator, what I have elsewhere called the golden mean of disgruntled voters. It reduces nearly everything to the corruption of the political class and comes close to condemning the idea of politics itself. That its policies are coloured by a jaundiced view of political representatives and that it considers other issues as peripheral can be gleaned from the opening lines of the manifesto: “We do not need a sophisticated grasp of statistics or politics,” it bluntly informs us, “to understand the socio-political catastrophe that has befallen our country.” In other words we don’t need to know: the facts speak for themselves and the writing is on the wall.
To indict all politicians apart from the NPP as equally responsible for the mess we are in is of course a convenient way out of figuring out what needs to be done to resolve that mess. It is for that reason, perhaps, that the NPP document does not offer substantive solutions, but veers with despairing frequency to vague suggestions and broad generalisations.
More pertinently, the authors of the manifesto draw a line between two kinds of people: those suffering and those responsible for the suffering. Laudable, but in trying to maintain that division everywhere, the NPP fails to come up with clear solutions; to give perhaps the best example, in its section on “Government Debt”, the authors admit to the severity of the crisis, but then offers to “develop a formal plan for the next five years.”
To be sure, the document is not without its merits. It is very clear about what it considers to the root of all our problems: the Open Economy. Whether or not you agree with its take, the NPP is specific on the point that it is the Open Economy that has entrenched corruption and greed, as well as the “unnecessary expansion of financialisation, austerity measures, subsidy cuts, market monopolies, inefficient borrowing, and sale of public property and state-owned enterprises.” To the best of my knowledge, the FSP is the only other party in the Opposition which traces the problems of our time to the post-1977 liberalisation of the economy. As far as its diagnosis goes, then, the NPP-JVP touts a distinctly socialist line.
Yet the NPP-JVP has evolved from what it used to be. Tactics and strategies are no longer what they once were. This, of course, has always been the JVP’s hallmark. As the late Hector Abhayavardhana used to say, it veered to the left of its leftwing opponents in the United Front government and to the right of its rightwing opponents in the Jayewardene regime. It opposed whoever was in power without formulating a clear programme that went beyond the goal of bringing down elected governments: this is why both its insurrections failed, and why the heroes of the first of them later turned to civil society outfits that are as opposed to political authoritarianism as they are to the JVP’s brand of “socialist” reform.
Today the JVP retains its critique of the Open Economy, but it has enmeshed it within an obscurantist anti-corruption discourse. That has made it eminently marketable to those who think the problems of the country are reducible to the excesses of its politicians, but at the exorbitant cost of ideological coherence. Indeed, the JVP’s shift from its supposedly Marxist roots to a parliamentary avatar housed by liberal and left-liberal intellectuals, activists, and artists, many of them allied with the yahapalana regime and not a few of them beneficiaries of yahapalanist largesse, points to a pivotal ideological turnaround.
The reforms these intellectuals urge are no different to those prescribed by the JVP’s liberal critics. They want to abolish the Executive Presidency and replace it with a parliamentary system. They want greater oversight over parliament. They want independent commissions and “completely independent” security services. They want asset declarations for MPs. They want more of what yahapalanist ideologues demanded, which was to reduce the powers of the government and transfer some of them to unelected professionals.
What is ironic here is that even MPs once allied with the spirit and letter of the yahapalanist project have swerved from these principles. Champika Ranawaka, for instance, no longer views the Executive Presidency as an evil to be abolished; replying to Victor Ivan, his proxies, including Anuruddha Pradeep Karnasuriya, now suggest that calls for abolition are based on exaggerated notions of the Presidency conceived by, of all people, Marxists.
Ranawaka has almost always been frank in his demonization of the Left, which is why these critiques should come as no surprise. What is surprising, however, is that those who batted for the overhaul of political systems, Ranawaka included, have turned the other way. The SJB is no different: it houses some of the most vociferous critics of the presidential system, but they are no longer as open about their criticism as they once were.
The point I am trying to make here is that the crisis we are undergoing today has swamped issues that we once thought mattered. Abolishing the presidency may have been the grand call of yahapalanist idealists, but now we have other things to worry about. What solutions do parties have vis-à-vis these issues? Do those solutions hold up? Are they clear or definite enough? Have they been conceived with the interests of the suffering many at heart? Can they be implemented, and if they can, how? If recent political turnarounds in Latin America and Central America are anything to go by, parties have a whole range of strategies open to them. Is the NPP availing itself of such strategies? Is it aware of them?
The NPP does not seem to be aware of them. Even if it is, it is not taking stock of them. Instead the NPP, and even the JVP, has caved into an abstract anti-political, anti-corruption discourse that has won it many fans, but not too many voters. Like its liberal critics, it has embraced a notion of politics free of politicians, a Radical Centrist view which reduces the problems we are facing to politicians and identifies the ruling class with their kind. It does offer criticisms of proposals like the privatisation of health and education, but then traces all these problems to the same source: the much derided 225 (MPs).
In aiming at a Centrist position, moreover, the NPP appears to be privileging compromises to hard-hitting reforms of the sort that progressive outfits in Latin America have opted for. This much is clear from a recent interview with the party leader: while highlighting the need for a better vision and reiterating they have that vision, Anura Kumara Dissanayake outlines a plan to “acquire at least USD 15 billion” by restructuring investment procedures. The NPP plans to do this, Dissanayake informs us, through “a long-term plan” that accounts for, inter alia, the “geographic setting”, “human resources”, and “civilisation” of the country. He does not specify what these are, where they can be found, and what should be done about them, but exudes a confidence in his party’s ability to make use of them.
In the final analysis, the NPP wants to bring together a broad coalition of anti-regimists. The clearer its policies are, the more specific its audience will be, and the more exclusivist it will appear to be. Hence, by limiting proposals like the implementation of import substitution to mere words, it can leave the task of specifying them to the future, no doubt after it wins an election. The NPP’s plan, in other words, is to keep as many as possible happy, targeting that golden mean of disgruntled voters I mentioned earlier.
Three decades of Third Way Centrism should make us realise that such tactics can only lead to electoral suicide. An obsession with reaching a compromise may win votes in the short term, but in the longer term it can only deprive parties of the radical potential they require to propose a way out. Why the NPP, of all parties, should opt for such a path, when recent developments in Latin America point to other strategies, boggles me.
Already influential think-tanks in the country are recalling and critiquing the JVP’s policies under the Chandrika Kumaratunga government. Already the middle-classes who professed admiration for the likes of Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Sunil Handunnetti are expressing disappointment with their proposals. What is the NPP’s response to them? We clearly need to know, but they are not giving us answers. This is to be regretted.
The writer can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com
Features
The US-China rivalry and challenges facing the South
The US-China rivalry could be said to make-up the ‘stuff and substance’ of world politics today but rarely does the international politics watcher and student of the global South in particular get the opportunity of having a balanced and comprehensive evaluation of this crucial relationship. But such a balanced assessment is vitally instrumental in making sense of current world power relations.
Thanks to the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo the above window of opportunity was opened on December 8th for those sections of the public zealously pursuing an understanding of current issues in global politics. The knowledge came via a forum that was conducted at the RCSS titled, ‘The US-China Rivalry and Implications for the Indo-Pacific’, where Professor Neil DeVotta of the Wake Forest University of North Carolina in the US, featured as the speaker.
A widely representative audience was present at the forum, including senior public servants, the diplomatic corps, academics, heads of civil society organizations, senior armed forces personnel and the media. The event was ably managed by the Executive Director of the RCSS, retired ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha. Following the main presentation a lively Q&A session followed, where many a point of interest was aired and discussed.
While there is no doubt that China is fast catching up with the US with regard to particularly military, economic, scientific and technological capability, Prof. DeVotta helped to balance this standard projection of ‘China’s steady rise’ by pointing to some vital facts about China, the omission of which would amount to the observer having a somewhat uninformed perception of global political realities.
The following are some of the facts about contemporary China that were highlighted by Prof. DeVotta:
* Money is steadily moving out of China and the latter’ s economy is slowing down. In fact the country is in a ‘ Middle Income Trap’. That is, it has reached middle income status but has failed to move to upper income status since then.
* People in marked numbers are moving out of China. It is perhaps little known that some Chinese are seeking to enter the US with a view to living there. The fact is that China’s population too is on the decline.
* Although the private sector is operative in China, there has been an increase in Parastatals; that is, commercial organizations run by the state are also very much in the fore. In fact private enterprises have begun to have ruling Communist Party cells in them.
* China is at its ‘peak power’ but this fact may compel it to act ‘aggressively’ in the international sphere. For instance, it may be compelled to invade Taiwan.
* A Hard Authoritarianism could be said to characterize central power in China today, whereas the expectation in some quarters is that it would shift to a Soft Authoritarian system, as is the case in Singapore.
* China’s influence in the West is greater than it has ever been.
The speaker was equally revelatory about the US today. Just a few of these observations are:
* The US is in a ‘Unipolar Moment’. That is, it is the world’s prime power. Such positions are usually not longstanding but in the case of the US this position has been enjoyed by it for quite a while.
* China is seen by the US as a ‘Revisionist Power’ as opposed to being a ‘Status Quo Power.’ That is China is for changing the world system slowly.
* The US in its latest national security strategy is paying little attention to Soft Power as opposed to Hard Power.
* In terms of this strategy the US would not allow any single country to dominate the Asia-Pacific region.
* The overall tone of this strategy is that the US should step back and allow regional powers to play a greater role in international politics.
* The strategy also holds that the US must improve economic ties with India, but there is very little mention of China in the plan.
Given these observations on the current international situation, a matter of the foremost importance for the economically weakest countries of the South is to figure out how best they could survive materially within it. Today there is no cohesive and vibrant collective organization that could work towards the best interests of the developing world and Dr. DeVotta was more or less correct when he said that the Non-alignment Movement (NAM) has declined.
However, this columnist is of the view that rather being a spent force, NAM was allowed to die out by the South. NAM as an idea could never become extinct as long as economic and material inequalities between North and South exist. Needless to say, this situation is remaining unchanged since the eighties when NAM allowed itself to be a non-entity so to speak in world affairs.
The majority of Southern countries did not do themselves any good by uncritically embracing the ‘market economy’ as a panacea for their ills. As has been proved, this growth paradigm only aggravated the South’s development ills, except for a few states within its fold.
Considering that the US would be preferring regional powers to play a more prominent role in the international economy and given the US’ preference to be a close ally of India, the weakest of the South need to look into the possibility of tying up closely with India and giving the latter a substantive role in advocating the South’s best interests in the councils of the world.
To enable this to happen the South needs to ‘get organized’ once again. The main differences between the past and the present with regard to Southern affairs is that in the past the South had outstanding leaders, such as Jawaharlal Nehru of India, who could doughtily stand up for it. As far as this columnist could ascertain, it is the lack of exceptional leaders that in the main led to the decline of NAM and other South-centred organizations.
Accordingly, an urgent task for the South is to enable the coming into being of exceptional leaders who could work untiringly towards the realization of its just needs, such as economic equity. Meanwhile, Southern countries would do well to, indeed, follow the principles of NAM and relate cordially with all the major powers so as to realizing their best interests.
Features
Sri Lanka and Global Climate Emergency: Lessons of Cyclone Ditwah
Tropical Cyclone Ditwah, which made landfall in Sri Lanka on 28 November 2025, is considered the country’s worst natural disaster since the deadly 2004 tsunami. It intensified the northeast monsoon, bringing torrential rainfall, massive flooding, and 215 severe landslides across seven districts. The cyclone left a trail of destruction, killing nearly 500 people, displacing over a million, destroying homes, roads, and railway lines, and disabling critical infrastructure including 4,000 transmission towers. Total economic losses are estimated at USD 6–7 billion—exceeding the country’s foreign reserves.
The Sri Lankan Armed Forces have led the relief efforts, aided by international partners including India and Pakistan. A Sri Lanka Air Force helicopter crashed in Wennappuwa, killing the pilot and injuring four others, while five Sri Lanka Navy personnel died in Chundikkulam in the north while widening waterways to mitigate flooding. The bravery and sacrifice of the Sri Lankan Armed Forces during this disaster—as in past disasters—continue to be held in high esteem by grateful Sri Lankans.
The Sri Lankan government, however, is facing intense criticism for its handling of Cyclone Ditwah, including failure to heed early warnings available since November 12, a slow and poorly coordinated response, and inadequate communication with the public. Systemic issues—underinvestment in disaster management, failure to activate protocols, bureaucratic neglect, and a lack of coordination among state institutions—are also blamed for avoidable deaths and destruction.
The causes of climate disasters such as Cyclone Ditwah go far beyond disaster preparedness. Faulty policymaking, mismanagement, and decades of unregulated economic development have eroded the island’s natural defenses. As climate scientist Dr. Thasun Amarasinghe notes:
“Sri Lankan wetlands—the nation’s most effective natural flood-control mechanism—have been bulldosed, filled, encroached upon, and sold. Many of these developments were approved despite warnings from environmental scientists, hydrologists, and even state institutions.”
Sri Lanka’s current vulnerabilities also stem from historical deforestation and plantation agriculture associated with colonial-era export development. Forest cover declined from 82% in 1881 to 70% in 1900, and to 54–50% by 1948, when British rule ended. It fell further to 44% in 1954 and to 16.5% by 2019.
Deforestation contributes an estimated 10–12% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Beyond removing a vital carbon sink, it damages water resources, increases runoff and erosion, and heightens flood and landslide risk. Soil-depleting monocrop agriculture further undermines traditional multi-crop systems that regenerate soil fertility, organic matter, and biodiversity.
In Sri Lanka’s Central Highlands, which were battered by Cyclone Ditwah, deforestation and unregulated construction had destabilised mountain slopes. Although high-risk zones prone to floods and landslides had long been identified, residents were not relocated, and construction and urbanisation continued unchecked.
Sri Lanka was the first country in Asia to adopt neoliberal economic policies. With the “Open Economy” reforms of 1977, a capitalist ideology equating human well-being with quantitative growth and material consumption became widespread. Development efforts were rushed, poorly supervised, and frequently approved without proper environmental assessment.
Privatisation and corporate deregulation weakened state oversight. The recent economic crisis and shrinking budgets further eroded environmental and social protections, including the maintenance of drainage networks, reservoirs, and early-warning systems. These forces have converged to make Sri Lanka a victim of a dual climate threat: gradual environmental collapse and sudden-onset disasters.
Sri Lanka: A Climate Victim
Sri Lanka’s carbon emissions remain relatively small but are rising. The impact of climate change on the island, however, is immense. Annual mean air temperature has increased significantly in recent decades (by 0.016 °C annually between 1961 and 1990). Sea-level rise has caused severe coastal erosion—0.30–0.35 meters per year—affecting nearly 55% of the shoreline. The 2004 tsunami demonstrated the extreme vulnerability of low-lying coastal plains to rising seas.
The Cyclone Ditwah catastrophe was neither wholly new nor surprising. In 2015, the Geneva-based Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) identified Sri Lanka as the South Asian country with the highest relative risk of disaster-related displacement: “For every million inhabitants, 15,000 are at risk of being displaced every year.”
IDMC also noted that in 2017 the country experienced seven disaster events—mainly floods and landslides—resulting in 135,000 new displacements and that Sri Lanka “is also at risk for slow-onset impacts such as soil degradation, saltwater intrusion, water scarcity, and crop failure”.
Sri Lanka ranked sixth among countries most affected by extreme weather events in 2018 (Germanwatch) and second in 2019 (Global Climate Risk Index). Given these warnings, Cyclone Ditwah should not have been a surprise. Scientists have repeatedly cautioned that warmer oceans fuel stronger cyclones and warmer air holds more moisture, leading to extreme rainfall. As the Ceylon Today editorial of December 1, 2025 also observed:
“…our monsoons are no longer predictable. Cyclones form faster, hit harder, and linger longer. Rainfall becomes erratic, intense, and destructive. This is not a coincidence; it is a pattern.”
Without urgent action, even more extreme weather events will threaten Sri Lanka’s habitability and physical survival.
A Global Crisis
Extreme weather events—droughts, wildfires, cyclones, and floods—are becoming the global norm. Up to 1.2 billion people could become “climate refugees” by 2050. Global warming is disrupting weather patterns, destabilising ecosystems, and posing severe risks to life on Earth. Indonesia and Thailand were struck by the rare and devastating Tropical Cyclone Senyar in late November 2025, occurring simultaneously with Cyclone Ditwah’s landfall in Sri Lanka.
More than 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions—and nearly 90% of carbon emissions—come from burning coal, oil, and gas, which supply about 80% of the world’s energy. Countries in the Global South, like Sri Lanka, which contribute least to greenhouse gas emissions, are among the most vulnerable to climate devastation. Yet wealthy nations and multilateral institutions, including the World Bank, continue to subsidise fossil fuel exploration and production. Global climate policymaking—including COP 30 in Belém, Brazil, in 2025—has been criticised as ineffectual and dominated by fossil fuel interests.
If the climate is not stabilised, long-term planetary forces beyond human control may be unleashed. Technology and markets are not inherently the problem; rather, the issue lies in the intentions guiding them. The techno-market worldview, which promotes the belief that well-being increases through limitless growth and consumption, has contributed to severe economic inequality and more frequent extreme weather events. The climate crisis, in turn, reflects a profound mismatch between the exponential expansion of a profit-driven global economy and the far slower evolution of human consciousness needed to uphold morality, compassion, generosity and wisdom.
Sri Lanka’s 2025–26 budget, adopted on November 14, 2025—just as Cyclone Ditwah loomed—promised subsidised land and electricity for companies establishing AI data centers in the country.
President Anura Kumara Dissanayake told Parliament: “Don’t come questioning us on why we are giving land this cheap; we have to make these sacrifices.”
Yet Sri Lanka is a highly water-stressed nation, and a growing body of international research shows that AI data centers consume massive amounts of water and electricity, contributing significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.
The failure of the narrow, competitive techno-market approach underscores the need for an ecological and collective framework capable of addressing the deeper roots of this existential crisis—both for Sri Lanka and the world.

A landslide in Sri Lanka (AFP picture)
Ecological and Human Protection
Ecological consciousness demands
recognition that humanity is part of the Earth, not separate from it. Policies to address climate change must be grounded in this understanding, rather than in worldviews that prize infinite growth and technological dominance. Nature has primacy over human-created systems: the natural world does not depend on humanity, while humanity cannot survive without soil, water, air, sunlight, and the Earth’s essential life-support systems.
Although a climate victim today, Sri Lanka is also home to an ancient ecological civilization dating back to the arrival of the Buddhist monk Mahinda Thera in the 3rd century BCE. Upon meeting King Devanampiyatissa, who was out hunting in Mihintale, Mahinda Thera delivered one of the earliest recorded teachings on ecological interdependence and the duty of rulers to protect nature:
“O great King, the birds of the air and the beasts of the forest have as much right to live and move about in any part of this land as thou. The land belongs to the people and all living beings; thou art only its guardian.”
A stone inscription at Mihintale records that the king forbade the killing of animals and the destruction of trees. The Mihintale Wildlife Sanctuary is believed to be the world’s first.
Sri Lanka’s ancient dry-zone irrigation system—maintained over more than a millennium—stands as a marvel of sustainable development. Its network of interconnected reservoirs, canals, and sluices captured monsoon waters, irrigated fields, controlled floods, and even served as a defensive barrier. Floods occurred, but historical records show no disasters comparable in scale, severity, or frequency to those of today. Ancient rulers, including the legendary reservoir-builder King Parākramabāhu, and generations of rice farmers managed their environment with remarkable discipline and ecological wisdom.
The primacy of nature became especially evident when widespread power outages and the collapse of communication networks during Cyclone Ditwah forced people to rely on one another for survival. The disaster ignited spontaneous acts of compassion and solidarity across all communities—men and women, rich and poor, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, and Hindus. Local and international efforts mobilized to rescue, shelter, feed, and emotionally support those affected. These actions demonstrated a profound human instinct for care and cooperation, often filling vacuums left by formal emergency systems.
Yet spontaneous solidarity alone is insufficient. Sri Lanka urgently needs policies on sustainable development, environmental protection, and climate resilience. These include strict, science-based regulation of construction; protection of forests and wetlands; proper maintenance of reservoirs; and climate-resilient infrastructure. Schools should teach environmental literacy that builds unity and solidarity, rather than controversial and divisive curriculum changes like the planned removal of history and introduction of contested modules on gender and sexuality.
If the IMF and international creditors—especially BlackRock, Sri Lanka’s largest sovereign bondholder, valued at USD 13 trillion—are genuinely concerned about the country’s suffering, could they not cancel at least some of Sri Lanka’s sovereign debt and support its rebuilding efforts? Addressing the climate emergency and the broader existential crisis facing Sri Lanka and the world ultimately requires an evolution in human consciousness guided by morality, compassion, generosity and wisdom. (Courtesy: IPS NEWS)
Dr Asoka Bandarage is the author of Colonialism in Sri Lanka: The Political Economy of the Kandyan Highlands, 1833-1886 (Mouton) Women, Population and Global Crisis: A Politico-Economic Analysis (Zed Books), The Separatist Conflict in Sri Lanka: Terrorism, Ethnicity, Political Economy, ( Routledge), Sustainability and Well-Being: The Middle Path to Environment, Society and the Economy (Palgrave MacMillan) Crisis in Sri Lanka and the World: Colonial and Neoliberal Origins, Ecological and Collective Alternatives (De Gruyter) and numerous other publications. She serves on the Advisory Boards of the Interfaith Moral Action on Climate and Critical Asian Studies.
Features
Cliff and Hank recreate golden era of ‘The Young Ones’
Cliff Richard and Hank Marvin’s reunion concert at the Riverside Theatre in Perth, Australia, on 01 November, 2025, was a night to remember.
The duo, who first performed together in the 1950s as part of The Shadows, brought the house down with their classic hits and effortless chemistry.
The concert, part of Cliff’s ‘Can’t Stop Me Now’ tour, featured iconic songs like ‘Summer Holiday’, ‘The Young Ones’, ‘Bachelor Boy’, ‘Living Doll’ and a powerful rendition of ‘Mistletoe and Wine.’
Cliff, 85, and Hank, with his signature red Fender Stratocaster, proved that their music and friendship are timeless.
According to reports, the moment the lights dimmed and the first chords of ‘Move It’ rang out, the crowd knew they were in for something extraordinary.
Backed by a full band, and surrounded by dazzling visuals, Cliff strode onto the stage in immaculate form – energetic and confident – and when Hank Marvin joined him mid-set, guitar in hand, the audience erupted in applause that shook the hall.
Together they launched into ‘The Young Ones’, their timeless 1961 hit which brought the crowd to its feet, with many in attendance moved to tears.
The audience was treated to a journey through time, with vintage film clips and state-of-the-art visuals adding to the nostalgic atmosphere.
Highlights of the evening included Cliff’s powerful vocals, Hank’s distinctive guitar riffs, and their playful banter on stage.

Cliff posing for The Island photographer … February,
2007
Cliff paused between songs to reflect on their shared journey saying:
“It’s been a lifetime of songs, memories, and friendship. Hank and I started this adventure when we were just boys — and look at us now, still up here making noise!”
As the final chords of ‘Congratulations’ filled the theatre, the crowd rose for a thunderous standing ovation that lasted several minutes.
Cliff waved, Hank gave a humble bow, and, together, they left the stage, arm-in-arm, to the refrain of “We’re the young ones — and we always will be.”
Reviews of the show were glowing, with fans and critics alike praising the duo’s energy, camaraderie, and enduring talent.
Overall, the Cliff Richard and Hank Marvin reunion concert was a truly special experience, celebrating the music and friendship that has captivated audiences for decades.
When Cliff Richard visited Sri Lanka, in February, 2007, I was invited to meet him, in his suite, at a hotel, in Colombo, and I presented him with my music page, which carried his story, and he was impressed.
In return, he personally autographed a souvenir for me … that was Cliff Richard, a truly wonderful human being.
-
News3 days agoOver 35,000 drug offenders nabbed in 36 days
-
Business5 days agoLOLC Finance Factoring powers business growth
-
Features1 day agoFinally, Mahinda Yapa sets the record straight
-
News2 days agoCyclone Ditwah leaves Sri Lanka’s biodiversity in ruins: Top scientist warns of unseen ecological disaster
-
News5 days agoCPC delegation meets JVP for talks on disaster response
-
News5 days agoA 6th Year Accolade: The Eternal Opulence of My Fair Lady
-
News3 days agoRising water level in Malwathu Oya triggers alert in Thanthirimale
-
Features4 days agoThe Catastrophic Impact of Tropical Cyclone Ditwah on Sri Lanka:
