Midweek Review

The Sri Lankan debt crisis: A layman’s review

Published

4 years ago

2022/06/1

Figure 1. Sri Lanka’s foreign debt from 2000 -2020 ( from https://www.reuters.com/markets/rates-bonds/sri-lanka-edge-debt-burden-mounts-2022-01-17/)

By Nimal Gunatilleke

As a layman in the subject of political economy, nonetheless interested in discerning the real background to the historic debt crisis that Sri Lanka is undergoing at present, I have been reading many reports, including expert views, opinion statements, institutional press releases, think-tank analyses, COPE reports, etc., that are plentiful on the internet. Based on these readings, I was able to synthesize a layman’s review, which I thought of putting out to a wider readership to stimulate constructive discourses from the more knowledgeable authorities and others alike, especially on the solutions that are available for our country to come out of this huge debt crisis. One of the major criticisms of the general public is that although warnings of this impending disaster had been made repeatedly at official meetings among technocrats and bureaucrats, the general public was not sufficiently alerted early enough, especially via popular media, to shake up the bureaucracy to make a timely course correction.

We all are now aware that Sri Lanka has an accumulated foreign debt of US $ 51 billion at the time of pre-emptive sovereign default of foreign currency repayment which happened in March/April 2022. The following Figure 1, with a series of histograms that appeared on the web, provides a relatively easy understanding of the progression of our cumulated foreign debt over the years since 2000 and its proportional ownership of creditors/lenders. It had been prepared by Reuters in January 2022 sourcing Central Bank information and colour-coded to apportion the foreign debt accumulated since 2000. The proportional ownership has been grouped into several categories of lenders in this chart, such as International Financial Institutions (IDA, ADB, etc. in red), foreign governments (Japan, China, India, etc. in orange), International Sovereign Bond Issuers (Goldman Sachs, Black Rock, and Pacific Investment Management, Vanguard, etc., in green!!) and other capital market lenders (Exim banks, etc., in pale green).

This figure reveals that a higher proportion of foreign funding for Sri Lanka’s development projects as well as to bridge the annual budget deficits in the early 2000 period, came via bilateral and multilateral donor contributions (red and orange color codes), when Sri Lanka was still a Lower Middle-Income Country (LMIC). However, this trend has been changing since 2007 or so, when Sri Lanka started obtaining loans at relatively higher interest rates from International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs) and other Financial Capital Markets. The contribution of ISBs increased significantly from around 2015 and reached an all-time high in 2019 almost at the same time when Sri Lanka was elevated to an Upper Middle-Income category (UMIC) for a short period of time by the World Bank. However, a year later, Sri Lanka was down-graded again as a lower-middle income country after it recorded a US$ 4,020 per capita income for 2020. Apparently, when a country reaches an Upper Middle-Income level, it is not entitled to concessionary loans but must seek funding from International Capital Markets at the internationally prevailing competitive interest rates. Sri Lanka’s access to international capital markets (with International Sovereign Bonds issuances since 2007) brought a shift to commercial borrowing and an increase in external interest rates to be paid back in short periods of time.

Consequently, Sri Lanka’s foreign debt apportioning in 2022, as per Figure 1, which has been computed using information from Sri Lanka’s Central Bank, indicates that over 35% of the island’s debt is owned by US and UK-based ISBs. The balance of foreign debt in 2022 is owned by the aforesaid bi-lateral and multilateral agencies. Some of these latter agencies, usually charge lower interest rates on concessionary terms. They have even gone to the extent of being more compassionate to express their willingness to further delay the debt repayment while at the same time being charitable enough to donate humanitarian aid in the form of food, fuel, and medicine during this crisis period. It is clear that the root cause of Sri Lanka’s default, at this time, is due to the disproportionate accumulation of ISBs and other such financial instruments in recent times. Higher interest rates over short periods of time needed to be paid, for refinancing the loans already taken. (See the graph)

This annual progression of the ‘sovereign debt trap’ also led to the speculation of unsustainability of Sri Lanka’s foreign debt from 2019 onwards leading to a progressive downgrading of credit ratings by the three leading credit rating agencies – Moody’s Investor Services, Standard and Poor’s (S&P), and the Fitch Group. This downgrading by credit rating agencies further deepened Sri Lanka’s debt crisis, pushing us into one of the worst economic crises in modern history.

The Verite Research Strategic Analysis Working Paper published in October 2021provides an analysis on this. For the five years, from 2021 to 2025, the annual average repayments due on servicing external debt maturities is US$ 4,400 million. In contrast, from 2015 to 2018, the government only had to repay an annual average of US$ 2,700 million as external debt repayment. To meet those debt repayments, during 2015 to 2018, the government borrowed on average US$ 1,900 million through ISBs in a year, as indicated in Figure 1. Since the beginning of 2020, the yields of ISBs have more than doubled and the credit ratings of the sovereign bonds were also downgraded multiple times, in 2020, leading to high risks of default in 2021 preventing further borrowing from the international markets. This forced the government to use its already depleting reserves to meet the external debt obligations, while at the same time, meeting the urgent healthcare emergencies resulting from the rapid spread of the COVID 19 pandemic which demanded lockdowns over months, associated economic losses and also for meeting increasing healthcare needs.

While it has been widely reported in the western media that Sri Lanka is a victim of a ‘Chinese debt trap’, our increased dependency on International Sovereign Bonds, over recent times is also equally, if not more, responsible for the default, at this time, as Sri Lanka has been compelled to borrow money from international capital markets at higher rates to be paid back over short periods of time. These funds were needed for the repayment of the loans already taken for the settlement of earlier taken loans/their interests while providing at the same time, the shortfall of social welfare benefits from the lost tax revenue as a result of ill-advised tax rebates granted in 2019. The resultant drop in revenue amounted to 3% of GDP – from 12.6% in 2019 to 9.2% in 2020. The revenue as a share of GDP for 2020 has apparently been the lowest in the post-independence history of Sri Lanka that led to huge deficits which need to be financed through borrowing, resulting in increasing debt.

Notwithstanding some of these unanticipated debilitating economic cataclysms, some political analysts speculate whether Sri Lanka was duped into a situation of ‘pumped and dumped’ by the Western interests. The World Bank up-graded Sri Lanka to a Lower Middle-Income Country (LMIC) in 1997, and then to the short-lived Upper Middle-Income Country in 2019 thus making it ineligible for lower interest rates for national development thus compelling to borrow from International Capital Markets. This fortuitously coincided with the 2019 Easter Sunday bombing spree which started the rapid downward spiraling of Sri Lanka’s economy.

On top of these, internal mismanagement of our economy also has contributed in no small measure to this predicament. The infamous bond scams, unbridled corruption and nepotism at the highest levels, imprudent decisions of the then monitory board of the Central Bank, and more significantly, holding on to such irrational decisions for a long period thus bleeding our foreign exchange reserves by over US$ 5.5, as reported by one of its members at a recent COPE meeting.

So, it surmises that both external interventions as well as internal economic mismanagement has contributed to the present-day debt crisis leading to ‘Arab Spring’ style protests by segments of the general public fueled by opportunistic politicians and their invisible handlers. It has been transmitted in some academic fora that Sri Lanka’s default seemed to follow a systematic, deliberate, and planned route to haul Sri Lanka into IMF’s and Washington’s clutches. This likelihood had apparently been in the air for some time – at least since the rejection of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) compact by the Sri Lankan Government in December 2019.

The MCC compact for Sri Lanka was designed to reduce poverty through improved transportation network and providing secure land titles to small holder farmers and other Sri Lankan landholders. The Special Presidential Commission Report which examined the draft MCC Compact has recommended the rejection of the Compact in its current form as it not only imperils Sri Lanka’s economic sovereignty but also undermines the land and human rights of her citizens. We need to be vigilant at this stage at which we are in a desperate situation in meeting day-to-day needs of the people as well as fulfilling debt obligations through their restructuring. There are indications that a number of stealthy moves are already at play to undermine the rights of the people (see recent press releases by Dr. Gunadasa Amarasekera of the Federation of National Organisations).

Some political analysts argue that this ‘staged default’ would enable the IMF to effectively take control of strategic geopolitical positioning by influencing Sri Lanka’s economic policy initiatives compromising its sovereignty. It is also speculated that by doing so, they can stave off the Chinese influence (despite China being a leading member of the IMF) and more significantly, make it difficult for Sri Lanka to source its oil, gas and other energy requirements at discounted rates from sanctions-hit Russia. Ironically, India continues to avail themselves to the discounted oil and gas supplies from Russia despite some resistance from her western partners while helping to meet our energy needs through loans and grants. It is a pity that Sri Lanka is far too late in looking into this possibility of negotiating with Russia directly for supplementing our long-term fossil fuel and other energy needs in exchange for our tea exports.

Sri Lanka is apparently caught between the devil and the deep blue sea for being located in a geostrategic position abundantly endowed with strategically important natural resources. While being at the centre of the Indian Ocean Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) with an extensive ocean and land-based mineral resources, including premium grade graphite and rare earth elements, some political analysts are of the view that Sri Lanka suffers from a ‘Paradox of Plenty’ or perhaps, a geostrategic ‘Resource Curse’. This phenomenon often afflicts countries blessed with abundant natural resources, like Sri Lanka. According to the Global Wealth Databook 2020 of the Credit Suisse Research Institute, the total wealth of Sri Lanka is estimated to be USD 351 billion while admitting at the same time that the quality of wealth data used for this estimation to be poor. A more realistic estimate could indeed yield even a higher value and Sri Lanka appears to be far from bankrupt, on that count. Despite all these, we have been having a slower economic development prone to poor governance, corruption and cronyism over successive political regimes since independence. This economic wealth of Sri Lanka may be a key constituent put on offer in attracting creditors to our national-scale real estate assets at this crucial stage of negotiations for debt relief.

The US Ambassador to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, Julie Chung, in a recent press release remarked that Sri Lanka is at the heart of the Indo-Pacific oceanscape, sitting next to some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes through which about half the world’s container ships and two-thirds of the world’s oil shipments pass. According to her, Sri Lanka has the potential to play a pivotal role in the health of world trade. It is not surprising, therefore, the former US Under Secretary for South and Central Asia, Alice G. Well, a few years ago, called Sri Lanka a ‘valuable piece of real estate’ in the Indian Ocean. Still others have termed Sri Lanka ‘an unsinkable aircraft carrier’ in the Indian Ocean – much more strategic than the Chargos Island which was handed back to the people of Mauritius by the British (and hence US occupation ended) in February 2019 after the International Court of Justice in the Hague ruled that the latter’s occupation of Chargos Island was illegal under International Law.

Furthermore, it was none other than the US Secretary Blinken who had recently reported that in today’s world, cyberspace and cyber security are increasingly important and, as part of their vision for the Indo-Pacific, the United States looks to coordinate with partners to ensure an open and secure internet and to implement a framework for responsible behavior in cyberspace.

With a background of this politico-geostrategic wealth, the Sri Lanka Government is up against tough bargaining with the IMF and their designated creditors to raise USD 8 – 12 billion or perhaps even more from the lease or sale of at least some of these valuable ‘real estate’ assets belonging to the public of Sri Lanka which have been grossly mismanaged over decades by successive governments. Dr. Nishan De Mel of Verite Research says, “When the IMF determines that a country’s debt is not sustainable, the country needs to take steps to restore debt sustainability prior to IMF lending”. These steps would undoubtedly feel quite painful in particular to the poorest and most vulnerable sectors of the country.

Prime Minister Wickremasinghe recently stated in the Parliament that SriLankan Airlines, with all its assets would be the first to be privatized to relieve the debt burden. Among the other valuable public assets that are being considered to go under the hammer according to reports on the web are Mattala and Ratmalana airports, Sri Lanka Telecom shares, and the Sri Lanka Insurance Corporation to name a few. Then there are physical assets like Sri Lanka’s marine Exclusive Economic Zone which include the already identified oil and gas deposits, Under-sea Data Cable Routes, the strategic island’s telecom frequencies important for cyber-security. These are a part of this ‘real estate’ package – the cynosure of many powerful global political players backed by leading international financiers – up for negotiations in the name of debt restructuring. Some economists are of the opinion that divesting these strategic public assets resulting from mismanagement, corruption, and ignorance of the potential value of these resources, is tantamount to throwing the baby with the bath water!

The debt restructuring and bridge financing negotiations with the IMF, if successful, may be able to provide us short term debt relief tied with very stringent conditions such as tightening our monitory policy, raising taxes, reduction of government expenditure and wastage, introducing a fuel and utilities pricing formula reflecting the market prices, among others. Although Sri Lanka promised a number of similar adjustments in the during earlier rounds of negotiations with the IMF (in 2009 and 2016), none of them were implemented in full as planned since these would have resulted in high social and political costs.

With such a track record, the conventional IMF debt restructuring formula may not help to overcome our efforts in moving toward bridging the trade deficit. This is primarily because Sri Lanka continues to spend more foreign exchange than its receipt of revenue through the export of goods and services. This indeed has been the root cause of our long-term external debt problem. Economists argue that going to the IMF alone will not fix this problem. According to them, the IMF will simply put a sticking plaster on our arterial wound and send us home. If Sri Lanka continues haemorrhaging foreign exchange with its typical laissez-faire approach, we may have to go back again to the IMF in two years’ time asking for yet more debt relief!.

IMF has just concluded a joint technical session with Sri Lanka to determine a roadmap for restoring macro-economic stability and debt sustainability that will serve as a platform for the negotiations with other creditors/lenders, later. Furthermore, this joint initiative once implemented in compliance with IMF conditions, is expected to increase investors’ confidence and also in securing additional resources from the IMF, the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and other such agencies.

Amidst all these, there appears to be a silver lining in the dark financial clouds that hovering over Sri Lanka at present where even an adversity of this magnitude could be turned into an excellent medium or long-term investment opportunity. The silver lining in the dark horizon is that the leading international donor agencies are steadily moving towards ‘sustainable financing’ in compliance with the Paris Agreement on Climate Change in the present green economic era.

(To be continued tomorrow)

The author can be contacted at
nimsavg@gmail.com

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Opp. MP’s hasty stand on US air strikes in Nigeria and Sri Lanka’s foreign policy dilemma

Published

3 days ago

2026/01/14

Sahan Weerasooriya

Somaliland's President Abdirahman Abdullahi Mohamed (right), posing for a photograph with Israel's Foreign Minister Gideon Saar, at the Presidential Palace in Hargeisa (Pic released by the Somaliland Presidential Office on 06 January, 2026)

Israel’s recognition of Somaliland on 26 December, 2025, couldn’t have taken place without US approval. The establishment of full diplomatic ties with Somaliland, a breakaway part of Somalia, and Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar’s visit to that country, drew swift criticism from Somalia, as well as others. Among those who had been upset were Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and the African Union.

The US-backed move in Africa didn’t receive public attention as did the raid on Venezuela. But, the Somaliland move is definitely part of the overall US global strategy to overwhelm, undermine and belittle Russia and China.

And on the other hand, the Somaliland move is a direct challenge to Türkiye, a NATO member that maintains a large military presence in Somalia, and to Yemen based Houthis who had disrupted Red Sea shipping, in support of Hamas, in the wake of Israeli retaliation over the 07 October, 2023, raid on the Jewish State, possibly out of sheer desperation of becoming a nonentity. The Israeli-US move in Africa should be examined taking into consideration the continuing onslaught on Gaza and attacks on Lebanon, Iran, Syria, Yemen, and Qatar.

Many an eyebrow was raised over Opposition MP Dr. Kavinda Jayawardana’s solo backing for the recent US air strikes in Nigeria.

The Gampaha District Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) lawmaker handed over a letter to the US Embassy here last week applauding US President Donald Trump’s order to bomb Nigeria on Christmas Day. The letter was addressed to President Trump

( https://island.lk/kavinda-lauds-us-president-trumps-actions-to-protect-christians-in-nigeria/)

The former UNPer who had been in the forefront of a high-profile campaign demanding justice for the 2019 Easter Sunday terror victims, in an obvious solo exercise praised Trump for defending the Nigerian Christian community. The US bombing targeted Islamic State Terrorists (ISIS) operating in that country’s northwest, where Muslims predominate.

The only son of the late UNP Minister Dr. Jayalath Jayawardana, he seemed to have conveniently forgotten that such military actions couldn’t be endorsed under any circumstances. Against the backdrop of Dr. Jayawardana’s commendation for US military action against Nigeria, close on the heels of the murderous 03 January US raid on oil rich Venezuela, perhaps it would be pertinent to seek the response of the Catholic Church in that regard.

President Trump, in a wide-ranging interview with the New York Times, has warned of further strikes in case Christians continued to be killed in the West African nation. International media have disputed President Trump’s claim of only the Christians being targeted.

Both Christians and Muslims – the two main religious groups in the country of more than 230 million people – have been victims of attacks by radical Islamists.

The US and the Nigerian government of President Bola Tinubu reached a consensus on Christmas Day attacks. Nigeria has roughly equal numbers of Christians – predominantly in the south – and Muslims, who are mainly concentrated in the north.

In spite of increasingly volatile global order, the Vatican maintained what can be comfortably described as the defence of the national sovereignty. The Vatican has been critical of the Venezuelan government but is very much unlikely to throw its weight behind US attacks on that country and abduction of its President and the First Lady.

Dr. Jayawardana’s stand on US intervention in Nigeria cannot definitely be the position of the main Opposition party, nor any other political party represented in Parliament here. The National People’s Power (NPP) government refrained from commenting on US attacks on Nigeria, though it opposed US action in Venezuela. Although the US and Nigeria have consensus on Christmas Day attacks and may agree on further attacks, but such interventions are very much unlikely to change the situation on the ground.

SL on US raid

Let me reproduce Sri Lanka’s statement on US attacks on Venezuela, verbatim:

“The Government of Sri Lanka is deeply concerned about the recent developments in Venezuela and is closely monitoring the situation.

Sri Lanka emphasises the need to respect principles of international law and the UN Charter, such as the prohibition of the use of force, non-intervention, peaceful settlement of international disputes and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states.

Sri Lanka attaches great importance to the safety and well-being of the people of Venezuela and the stability of the region and calls on all parties to prioritize peaceful resolution through de-escalation and dialogue.

At this crucial juncture, it is important that the United Nations and its organs such as the UN Security Council be seized of the matter and work towards a peaceful resolution taking into consideration the safety, well-being and the sovereign rights of the Venezuelan people.”

That statement, dated 05 January, was issued by the Foreign Affairs, Foreign Employment and Tourism Ministry. Almost all political parties, represented in Parliament, except one-time darling of the LTTE, Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), condemned the US attacks on Venezuela and threats on Cuba, Colombia and Iran. The US is also targeting China, Russia and even the European Union.

Dr. Jayawardana requested coverage for his visit to the US Embassy here to hand over his letter, hence the publication of his ‘love’ letter to President Trump on page 2 of the 09 January edition of The Island.

There had never been a previous instance of a Sri Lankan lawmaker, or a political party, endorsing unilateral military action taken by the US or any other country. One-time Western Provincial Council member and member of Parliament since 2015, Jayawardana should have known better than to trust President Trump’s position on Nigeria. Perhaps the SJBer felt that an endorsement of US action, allegedly supportive of the Nigerian Catholic community, may facilitate his political agenda. Obviously, the Opposition MP endorsed US military action purely for domestic political advantage. The lawmaker appears to have simply disregarded the growing criticism of US actions in various parts of the world.

The German and French response to US actions, not only in Venezuela, but various other regions, as well, underscore the growing threat posed by President Trump’s agenda.

French President Emmanuel Macron and German leader Frank-Walter Steinmeier have sharply condemned US foreign policy under Donald Trump, declaring, respectively, that Washington was “breaking free from international rules” and the world risked turning into a “robber’s den”.

US threat to annex Greenland at the expense of Denmark, a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) ,and the grouping itself, has undermined the post WWII world order to such an extent, the developing crisis seems irreversible.

Focus on UAE

Indian Army Chief Gen. Upendra Dwivedi visited the United Arab Emirates on 05 and 06 January. His visit took place amidst rising tension on the Arabian Peninsula, following the Saudi-led military coalition launching air attacks on Yemen based Southern Transitional Council (STC) whose leader Aidarous al-Zubaid was brought to Abu Dhabi.

In the aftermath of the Saudi led strikes on Yemen port, held by the STC, the UAE declared that it would withdraw troops deployed in Yemen. The move, on the part of UAE, seems to be meant to de-escalate the situation, but the clandestine operation, undertaken by that country to rescue a Saudi target, appeared to have caused further deterioration of Saudi-UAE relations. Further deterioration is likely as both parties seek to re-assert control over the developing situation.

From Abu Dhabi, General Dwivedi arrived in Colombo on a two-day visit. Like his predecessors, General Dwivedi visited the Indian Army memorial at Pelawatte, where he paid respects to those who paid the supreme sacrifice during deployment of the Indian Army here – 1987 July to 1990 March. That monument is nothing but a testament to the foolish and flawed Indian policy. Those who portray that particular Indian military mission as their first major peace keeping operation overseas must keep in mind that over half a dozen terrorist groups were sponsored by India.

Just over a year after the end of that mission, one of those groups – the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) -assassinated Congress leader Rajiv Gandhi, the former Premier who sent the military mission here.

India never accepted responsibility for the death and destruction caused by its intervention in Sri Lanka. In fact, the Indian action led to an unprecedented situation when another Sri Lankan terrorist group PLOTE (People’s Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam) mounted a raid on the Maldives in early Nov. 1988. Two trawler loads of PLOTE cadres were on a mission to depose Maldivian President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom on a contract given by a disgruntled Maldivian businessman. India intervened swiftly and brought the situation under control. But, the fact that those who had been involved in the sea-borne raid on the Maldives were Indian trained and they left Sri Lanka’s northern province, which was then under Indian Army control, were conveniently ignored.

Except the LTTE, all other major Tamil terrorist groups, including the PLOTE, entered the political mainstream in 1990, and over the years, were represented in Parliament. It would be pertinent to mention that except the EPDP (Eelam People’s Democratic Party) all other Indian trained groups in 2001 formed the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), under the leadership of Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK), to support the separatist agenda in Parliament. Sri Lanka’s triumph over the LTTE, in May 2009, brought that despicable project to an end.

The Indian Army statement on General Dwivedi’s visit here, posted on X, seemed like a propaganda piece, especially against the backdrop of continuing controversy over the still secret Indo-Lanka Memorandum of Understanding on defence that was entered into in April last year. Within months after the signing of the defence MoU, India acquired controlling stake of the Colombo Dockyard Ltd., a move that has been shrouded in controversy.

Indian High Commissioner Santosh Jha’s response to my colleague Sanath Nanayakkara’s query regarding the strategic dimension of the India–Sri Lanka Defence Cooperation Agreement following the Indian Army Chief’s recent visit, the former was cautious in his response. Jha asserted that there was “nothing beyond what is included” in the provisions of the pact, which was signed by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and has generated controversy in Sri Lanka due to the absence of public discourse on its contents.

Framing the agreement as a self-contained document focused purely on bilateral defence cooperation, Jha said this reflected India’s official position. By directing attention solely to the text of the agreement, the High Commissioner indicated that there were no unstated strategic calculations involved, aligning with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister’s recent clarification that the pact was not a military agreement but one that dealt with Indian support.

Nanayakkara had the opportunity to raise the issue at a special media briefing called by Jha at the IHC recently.

Julie Chung departs

The US attack on Venezuela, and the subsequent threats directed at other countries, including some of its longtime allies, should influence our political parties to examine US and Indian stealthy interventions here, leading to the overthrowing of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in July 2022.

The US Embassy in Colombo recently announced that Julie Chung, who oversaw the overthrowing of Gotabaya Rajapaksa, would end her near four-year term. Former Indian High Commissioner in Colombo Gopal Baglay, who, too, played a significant role in the regime change project, ended his term in December 2023 and took up position in Canberra as India’s top diplomat there.

Both Chung and Baglay have been accused of egging on the putsch directly by urging Aragalaya time Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, on 13 July, 2022, to take over the presidency. Former Minister Wimal Weerawansa and top author Sena Thoradeniya, in their comments on Aragalaya accused Chung of unprecedented intervention, whereas Prof. Sunanada Maddumabanadara found fault with Baglay for the same.

The US Embassy, in a statement dated 07 January, 2026, quoted the outgoing US Ambassador as having said: “I have loved every moment of my time in Sri Lanka. From day one, my focus has been to advance America’s interests—strengthening our security partnerships, expanding trade and investment, and promoting education and democratic values that make both our nations stronger. Together, we’ve built a relationship that delivers results for the American people and supports a free, open, and secure Indo-Pacific.”

The Embassy concluded that statement reiterating the US commitment to its partnership with Sri Lanka and to build on the strong foundation, established during Ambassador Chung’s nearly four-year tenure.

Sri Lanka can expect to increasingly come under both US and Indian pressure over Chinese investments here. It would be interesting to see how the NPP government solves the crisis caused by the moratorium on foreign research vessel visits, imposed in 2024 by the then President Ranil Wickremesinghe. The NPP is yet to reveal its position on that moratorium, over one year after the lapse of the ban on such vessels. Wickremesinghe gave into intense US and Indian pressure in the wake of Chinese ship visits.

In spite of US-India relations under strain due to belligerent US actions, they are likely to adopt a common approach here to undermine Sri Lanka’s relations with China. But, the situation is so dicey, India may be compelled to review its position. The US declaration that a much-anticipated trade deal with India collapsed because Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hasn’t heeded President Trump’s demand to call him.

This was revealed by US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick in the ‘All-In Podcast’ aired on Thursday, 08 January. The media quoted Indian spokesman Randhir Jaiswal as having said on the following day: “The characterisation of these discussions in the reported remarks is not accurate.” Jaiswal added that India “remains interested in a mutually beneficial trade deal between two complementary economies and looks forward to concluding it.”

Sri Lanka in deepening dilemma

Sri Lanka, struggling to cope up with post-Aragalaya economic, political and social issues, is inundated with foreign policy issues.

The failure on the part of the government and the Opposition to reach consensus on foreign policy challenges/matters has further weakened the country’s position. If those political parties represented in Parliament at least discussed matters of importance at the relevant consultative committee or the sectoral oversight committee, lawmaker Jayawardana wouldn’t have endorsed the US bombing of Nigeria.

Sri Lanka and Nigeria enjoy close diplomatic relations and the SJB MP’s unexpected move must have caused quite a controversy, though the issue at hand didn’t receive public attention. Regardless of the US-Nigerian consensus on the Christmas Day bombing, perhaps it would be unwise on the part of Sri Lanka to support military action at any level for obvious reasons.

Sri Lanka taking a stand on external military interventions of any sort seems comical at a time our war-winning military had been hauled up before the Geneva Human Rights Council for defending the country against the LTTE that had a significant conventional military capacity in addition to being “the most ruthless terrorist organisation” as it was described by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation. The group capitalised on experience gained in fighting the Indian Army during 1987 July-1990 March period and posed quite a threat. Within five months after the resumption of fighting, in June 1990, the LTTE ordered the entire Muslim population to leave the predominantly Tamil northern province.

No foreign power at least bothered to issue a statement condemning the LTTE. MP Jayawardana’s statement supporting US military action in support of Christian community should be examined in Sri Lanka’s difficult battle against terrorism that took a very heavy toll. Perhaps, political parties represented in Parliament, excluding those who still believe in a separatist project, should reexamine their stand on Sri Lanka’s unitary status.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Midweek Review

Buddhist Iconography

Published

3 days ago

2026/01/14

Sahan Weerasooriya

A Buddha statue from Mathura with a single curl, 2nd cent. CE

Seeing a new kind of head ornament on a recent reproduction of the iconic Avukana Buddha statue, made me ponder how the Enlightened One would have looked in real life, and what relationship that may or may not have with Buddhist iconography. Obviously, there is no record or evidence of any rendering of the Buddha made by an artist who saw him alive, but there are a few references to his appearance in the Pali Sutta Pitaka, that affirms, as he himself has said, Buddha was nothing other than a human being, albeit an extraordinarily intelligent one (Dhammika 2021).

Before enlightenment, Siduhath Gotama was described as having black hair and a beard. One account describes him as “handsome, of fine appearance, pleasant to see, with a good complexion and a beautiful form and countenance” (D.I,114). Venerable Ananda has said, “It is wonderful, truly marvelous how serene is the good Gotama’s presence, how clear and radiant is his complexion. Just as golden jujube fruit in the autumn is clear and radiant … so too is the good Gotama’s complexion” (A.I,181). If Venerable Ananda’s comparison is correct, Gotama must have been of what is called ‘Wheatish’ complexion common in present-day North India, which is described as typically falling between fair and dusky complexions, exhibiting a light brown hue with golden or olive undertones (Fitzpatrick scale Type III to VI).

The Buddha is also described as a slim tall person; slim, perhaps, as a result of practising asceticism before enlightenment and spartan life thereafter. As he aged, he also suffered from back pain and other ailments, according to Sutta Pitaka.

Artists’ imagination

We need not argue that the depictions of the Buddha we see across countries, in various media, are the imaginations of the artists influenced by their local cultures and traditions. The potentially controversial aspect regarding Buddhist iconography is the depiction of his hair, which is almost universal. There are several references in the Sutta Pitaka, where various Brahmin youths derogatorily referred to the Buddha as “bald-pated recluse” (MN 81). There is no reason to believe that he would have been any different from the rest of the Bhikkhus who had and have clean shaven heads. In fact, when King Ajatasattu visited the Buddha for the first time, he had trouble identifying the Buddha from the rest of the sangha, and an attendant had to help the king.

In early Buddhist art, the Buddha was represented by the wheel of dhamma, Bodhi tree, throne, lotus, the footprints, or a parasol. For example, in the carvings of Sanchi temple built in the third century BCE, the Buddha is depicted by some of these symbols, but never in human form. Depiction of the Buddha in human form has started around the first century CE in two places, Gandhara and Mathura. In both places, the Buddha is depicted with hair, and not as a “bald-pated recluse” the way the Sutta Pitaka depicts him.

Figure 1. Bimaran Casket

No scholarly agreeement

So, the question is who started this artistic trend, was it the Gandhara artists under the Greek influence or the Mathura artists following their own traditions? There is no scholarly agreement on this; Western scholars think it was the Greek influence that made presenting the Buddha in human form while Ananda Coomaraswamy presents another theory (Coomaraswamy 1972).

The earliest dateable representation of the Buddha in human form is found on the Bimaran casket found during the exploration of a stupa near Bimaran, Afghanistan in 1834. It has been dated to the first century CE using the coins found along with it, that also depict and refer to the Buddha by name in Greko-Bactrian. This reliquary, a gold cylinder embossed with figures and artwork, is on display at the British Museum (Figure 1). Under the Hellenistic influence, it must have been natural for the Gandhara artists to represent a revered or divine figure in human form; Greeks have been doing it for millennia. The standing Buddha figure is depicted wearing the hair in the form of a knot over the crown. In other carvings from the same period, most male figures are shown with the same hair style. Also, it appears that both Spartan men and women tied their hair in a knot over the crown of the head, known as the “Knidian hairstyle” (Wikipedia). The Gandhara sculpture is famous for the Hellenistic style of realism (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Gandhara statue from 1-2
century CE

Coomaraswamy’s reasoning

Coomaraswamy reasons that the Bhakti movement – the loving devotion of the followers towards the deities, is the reason for the emergence of Buddha figure in Mathura. We cannot say for sure if the Gandhara art induced the Mathura artists to break away from their tradition of aniconic symbolism. What is clear is that they have been influenced by the trend to elevate religious leaders to divinity, to impress the followers and compete or to outdo the practices of other religions. This tradition, which predates the Buddha, has introduced the concept of the thirty-two characteristics or marks of great personalities.

It is this trend that has introduced divine interventions and other mysticisms to Buddhism and culminated in famous poems as Asvagosha’s Buddhacharithaya and exegeses as Lalithavistara a few centuries later and continues to date. Instead of following realism as the Gandhara artists did, Mathura artists have followed this tradition and incorporated the thirty-two characteristics of a great person into their representation of the Buddha figure.

Some of these marks are described as “… there is a protuberance on the head, this is, for the great man, the venerable Gotama, a mark of a great man; the hair bristles, his bristling hair is blue or dark blue, the color of collyrium, turning in curls, turning to the right; the tuft of hair between the eyebrows on his forehead is very white like cotton; he is golden in color, has skin like gold; eyes very blue, like sapphires; under the soles of his feet there are wheels, with a thousand rims and naves, complete in every way…(DN 30, M 91). Thus, the tradition of adding the protuberance referred to as Usnisha to Buddha statues started.

Buddhist traditions in different forms

This practice has been adopted by all Buddhist traditions in different forms. The highly effective outcome of incorporating these great marks into the statuary is that it has created a globally recognisable symbol that is independent of the artist’s skills, cultural affiliation or the medium used. Without such distinct features, we would have difficulty in distinguishing the depictions of the Enlightened One from those of other monks or other religious leaders such as Mahaveera. Nevertheless, in addition to its spiritual aspect, Buddhist iconography has been a flourishing art form, which has allowed human talent and ingenuity to thrive over millennia.

Let us not forget that artistic expression is a fundamental right. Interestingly, the curly hair on the Buddha statues made the early European Indologists to think that the Buddha was an African deity (Allen 2002).

Sri Lankan Buddhist art

Sri Lankan Buddhist art is said to be related to Amaravathi style; all Sri Lankan statues are depicted with curling hair bristles turning to right. The presence and prominence of the usnisha on local statues vary depending on the period. Toluvila statue, prominently displayed at the National Museum, is considered the earliest dateable statue in Sri Lanka. It is dated to 3rd or 4th century CE, has a less prominent usnisha and lacks the elongated ear lobes; it is said to be influenced by the Mathura school.

Since Dambulla temple dates to third century BCE, one wonders if the magnificent reclining statue in Cave 1 could be earlier than the Toluvila statue. There are several bronze statues from Anuradhapura period without usnisha. Towards late Anuradhapura period, usnisha is beginning to be replaced with rudimentary Siraspatha, which represents a flame. This addition evolved over time and became a very prominent feature during the Kandyan period and replaced the traditional usnisha completely (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Kandyan era statue with
Siraspatha

Incomparable workmanship

Then the question is how does the Avukana statue, which belongs to the early Anuradhapura period, have a siraspatha that is not compatible with the style of the period or the incomparable workmanship of the statue itself? I have come across two explanations. According to the Sinhala Encyclopedia, the original siraspatha was destroyed and a cement replacement was installed in recent times, likely in the early 20th century.

The other version is that the statue never had a siraspatha like many other contemporary stone statues. For example, the Susseruwa (Ras Vehera) statue, which is identical in style, and likely a contemporary work, does not have a siraspatha. During the Buddhist revival, a group of devotees from a Southern town felt that the lack of a siraspatha on such a great statue as a major deficiency, and they ceremoniously installed the crude cement ornament seen today.

This raises the question: which is more valuable, preservation and protection of archeological treasures or reconstruction to meet modern expectations and standards? For example, what would have been more impressive, the Mirisavetiya Stupa as it was found before the failed reconstruction attempts, or the current version that is indistinguishable from modern concrete constructs? Even though, one can assume it was done in good faith. What if the Mihintale Kanthaka Chetiya were covered under brick and concrete to convert into a finished product? Would it increase or decrease its archeological value?

Differences between reality and iconography

None of that should matter in following the Buddha Dhamma. In theory. However, when the influence of Buddhist iconography is deeply rooted in devotee’s mind, it is impossible to imagine the Buddha as a normal human being, with or without a clean-shaven head and a brown complexion. The failure to see the difference between reality and iconography or art, poetry, and literature can be detrimental as it could distort the fact that Dhamma is the truth discovered by a human being, and it is accessible to any human, here and now. That is responsible, at least in part, for the introduction of mysticism, myths, and beliefs that are rapidly sidelining of Dhamma.

How often do we think of Enlightened One as a humble mendicant who roamed the Ganges Valley barefoot, in the beating sun, and resting at night on the folded outer robe spread under a tree. Sadly, iconography and other associated myths have driven us too far away from reality and Dhamma.

Up until I was six years old, we lived in a place up in the Balangoda hills that had a kaolin (kirimeti) deposit. The older students in the school used it for various handcrafts, but for the youngsters, it was playdough, even though we had never heard of that term. After witnessing an artist working on a Buddha statue at the local temple, my friend Bandara and I made Buddha statues of all types and sizes. If any of them were to survive for a few thousand years at the site where the schools stood, future archaeologists may wonder if a primitive tribe existed there (of course carbon dating will show otherwise). Like that, looking at some of the thousands of statues that pop up on every street corner, the purpose of which varies, sometimes I wonder if they were made by a civilisation that was yet to finesse the art of sculpture or by kids having access to kirimeti. No wonder birds take liberty to exercise their freedom of expression.

by Geewananda Gunawardana