Features
The President versus the hegemonic West
By Uditha Devapriya
The President has a way with interviewers, and I don’t mean that as a compliment. Be it a local or a foreigner, his distaste or contempt for them comes out. His champions tend to see this as a sign of his intelligence. His critics, on the other hand, see it as a mark of his lack of it. Ranil Wickremesinghe’s recent confrontation on German television was a case in point: it essentially brought out the man that he has been for the last 25 years.
To say this is not to defend Western double standards, which is what Wickremesinghe’s champions think he attacked on television. The West’s line on its own values came out fully in the recent diplomatic spat between India and Canada. Though it reportedly shared intelligence with Canada, the US has so far not made an explicit pronouncement on the issue, no doubt because India is too valuable an ally in the region to lose over such mundane concerns as the killing of a man. Wickremesinghe has of course given his two cents on the Indo-Canada spat, unsurprisingly in India’s favour. More regularly than ever, he is making a name for himself by taking potshots at the West, accusing them of hypocrisy.
But of course they are hypocrites, and of course they need to be called out. Leaving aside the merits of demonising the West when Sri Lanka has become more dependent than ever on Western markets and financial institutions, however, one wonders what the President is aiming at with his strategy of lambasting them over issues like Ukraine and human rights.
The Deutsche-Welle interview, for instance, focused on the recent Channel 4 documentary. The official government response to the documentary has been to appoint a Commission. On television, however, Wickremesinghe reflected none of that, instead opting to accuse his interrogator of brandishing neo-colonialist rhetoric against his country.
Sri Lanka’s relations with the West have never really been stable. Yet by this point, the Sri Lankan government has chosen to submit itself to the diktats of the IMF, World Bank, and ADB, all of which have links with the West. Though one can consider these institutions as neutral umpires, playing a difficult game in the midst of geopolitical turmoil across Asia and Africa, one can also consider them as intermediaries and tools of Western powers.
The US and the West have a direct interest in the policies these organisations advocate. In that light, one wonders how the President’s remarks will go down with Western government officials, policymakers, and academics, as well as interests hostile to Sri Lanka.
Again, this is not to say his stance is wrong all the way. On Ukraine, for instance, he has consistently maintained that NATO’s enlargement pushed Russia to launch an offensive backed by militias and oligarchs. From a certain standpoint, there is nothing to dispute in this position.
It may even be factually accurate. That he maintained such a line even as the sole sitting Opposition MP from his party, long before last year’s crisis, is a credit to him. The same goes for his positions on China and India, his seeming reluctance to take sides in the great geopolitical game in the Indian Ocean, and his unwillingness to become the ideologue over the West that he was, as Prime Minister, from 2001 and 2004.
It is no secret that Sri Lankan politicians, especially the more nationalist among them, like taking potshots at the West, because the West at least pretends to be accommodative of such criticisms. This is definitely not the case with Russia and China, for very valid reasons. Yet for how long will even the West brook the sort of criticisms that Wickremesinghe has issued over the last year?
The West’s method of retaliation has been to withdraw economic concessions, like the GSP Plus. The West also curries more favour with ordinary Sri Lankans than China or India, since the scale of the crisis has made many Sri Lankans more suspicious of the latter two countries than of countries like the US. These two points are obviously not in favour of any President who has turned attacking the West into a sport.
It is certainly ironic that a political figurehead once considered the most pro-Western in the country has turned against the West. But behind the President’s defensive posture may be his need to appease his political allies, particularly in the SLPP, as well as hardliners in the Opposition. The mistake political commentators make with regard to Wickremesinghe is that they imagine him to be this or that: they try to fit him in one ideological hole or the other.
But Wickremesinghe has been trying to be President for more than a quarter-century: I was barely a year old when he made his first attempt, and next month I will turn 30. In that light, the President’s motives seem palpably clear: this is his one and only chance to shine in the limelight abroad, and he is doing so, now, as an advocate of multipolarity, just as he tried his luck as an advocate of the West while serving as Prime Minister.
But if Wickremesinghe thinks the way to advocate multipolarity is by demonising the West whenever and wherever he may be, he is sadly mistaken. There is no one way of skinning a cat, and no one time-tested way of criticising the hegemony of the Global North. From Latin America to West Asia, the trend is towards regionalisation, towards a form of globalisation that is more representative of the Global South. The likes of Lula da Silva, my candidate for Elder Statesman of the World, are not merely parroting anti-American diatribes: they are putting such criticisms into practice, by linking up with the Global South.
Wickremesinghe’s modus operandi, on the other hand, has been to parrot rhetoric, while his government does little to act on his statements. We are multipolar in speech, but are we in deed? The Foreign Minister regularly speaks of multi-alignment. But that’s not the same thing.
This, I think, is the most valid criticism one can make of Wickremesinghe’s denunciation of the West. The West, of course, may tolerate it for a while. But the Sri Lankan government has made itself more vulnerable by submitting to the IMF and World Bank, to their policies, and prescriptions. If all the President can do is demonise the West, while enforcing painful neoliberal austerity at home, then we are in that proverbial Right Royal Mess. That is less a criticism than a comment on our status quo, and on where it is taking us.
The writer is an international relations analyst, independent researcher, and freelance columnist who can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com.
Features
Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines
Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.
Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.
Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.
Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.
Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.
The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.
The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:
=Joint planning across operational divisions
=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making
=Continuous cross-functional consultation
=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates
Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.
Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.
By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst
Features
Why Pi Day?
International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow
The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.
Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.
It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.
Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.
Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.
π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)
The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.
π = 9801/(1103 √8)
For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.
It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.
This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.
Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.
Happy Pi Day!
The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.
by R N A de Silva
Features
Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink
The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.
As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.
It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.
Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.
Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.
Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.
The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.
While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.
On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.
Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.
Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.
Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.
Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.
Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.
However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.
-
News6 days agoPeradeniya Uni issues alert over leopards in its premises
-
News4 days agoRepatriation of Iranian naval personnel Sri Lanka’s call: Washington
-
News6 days agoWife raises alarm over Sallay’s detention under PTA
-
Features4 days agoWinds of Change:Geopolitics at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia
-
News3 days agoProf. Dunusinghe warns Lanka at serious risk due to ME war
-
Latest News6 days agoHeat Index at ‘Caution Level’ in the Sabaragamuwa province and, Colombo, Gampaha, Kurunegala, Anuradhapura, Vavuniya, Hambanthota and Monaragala districts
-
Sports2 days agoRoyal start favourites in historic Battle of the Blues
-
Features6 days agoThe final voyage of the Iranian warship sunk by the US


