Connect with us

Features

These humans are Crazy!

Published

on

Those of us who grew up reading the “Asterix” comics by Goscinny and Uderzo will no doubt remember the resonant words of Obelix, the menhir delivery man. So many times, he has observed the actions of characters ranging from Roman Emperors to Goths and made the statement “these humans are crazy” often accompanied by a few taps from his forefinger to his ample brow. These words remain a universal truth and valid even today when looking at what is going on around us.

Let’s start in Aotearoa – New Zealand with the continuing saga of the young man of Sri Lankan origin who went berserk in a supermarket and stabbed so many innocent people. Despite many assurances from the government and almost all the Kiwi friends and even acquaintances we have in this country that we Lankans are not responsible, we feel deep down inside us that we are in some way, shape or form, responsible for this person’s behaviour. Articles not only from people of my (archaic) generation but young upstanding millennials and those even younger have expressed this emotion in their own characteristic fashion. Also, we feel responsible that our network of ex citizens of the Pearl living in Aotearoa have been unable to offer any support or counselling to this person or others of his ilk.

Just as we start clawing our way out of this mire of guilt somewhat reduced by finding out just how greatly the immigration and refugee systems of New Zealand have been duped, we are now told how a currency smuggler has been granted refugee status. Now currency smuggling happens all the time, mainly due to the punitive profits taken from customers by those licenced daylight robbers the banks, but more on that later. Apparently, a currency smuggler who arrived on a forged passport, evading arrest by the authorities in the Pearl has been granted refugee status! REFUGEE seems to be the magic word as far as the NZ authorities go. Those of us who have gone through the legal immigration channels and filled reams of forms and waited years for replies are left gasping at how those worthies in the government departments of Aotearoa have one set of rules and standards for us and another completely if one puts the word REFUGEE on one’s documents.

We move on to the pearl, if I were to attempt to apologise for the “offensive actions” of members of my family (bearing my “sir” name and direct relatives) that would take up a series of tomes resembling the encyclopaedia Britannica! It may also feature my name in a few volumes as well! The current antics of a kinsman with regard to using his position and power calls for a level of responsibility, on my part. The only caveat being a request to the fourth estate to use the person’s first name. Frequent displays of a family name which some have treasured and tried to bring enhancement to, associated with behaviour of this kind, brings dismay at a level that can only be understood by those who have tried to live up to the standards set by ancestors who held high office with honour in the past. There have been many articles some ranging from biting sarcasm (unfortunately not understood by the majority) to others simply parroting what they have read on the internet. The bottom line is standby O denizens of the Pearl, this maybe just another episode in the teledrama that is Lanka under Paksa rule! There are possibilities of scripting to distract the majority and even a wider spectrum involving human rights issues in Geneva. Also, scrutinize yourselves and remember that “those who live in glass houses should not throw stones” and “let he who is without sin cast the first stone”?!

In Aotearoa, we call our Prime Minister by her first name and a PM that has gained the utmost respect of the people not to mention the world! Isn’t it time the Pearl followed suit? Of course, comments by the leader of the opposition like “Opposition Leader Premadasa said he vehemently condemned the disgraceful and illegal behaviour” reiterates the comments of Obelix. Especially when allegations and witnesses exist to “disgraceful and Illegal” behaviour by the person who uttered those very words. It may have been in a different context and “only” to do with the decimation of a national park in the Pearl but the behaviour had the same connotations. Looks like social media is the mitigating factor, as in those days, too, the fourth estate had to take care of continuing to exist and survive! Being the first party to spotlight such actions usually led to the “death of the messenger”.

As promised, back to the licenced daylight robbers of today, the banks. There is a “Robin Hood” tax in effect in some of the leading economies of Europe. The most “interesting” aspect for me being taxes on the profits of banks. The billions it could raise every year could give a vital boost to tackling poverty and climate change around the world and definitely in the Pearl. We call upon the “genius” in charge of the Central Bank as he is the “acknowledged” financial maestro of the Pearl (although he is never going to take RESPONSIBILITY for our plight) to look at this aspect if he has the cohunes to do it! But then again levels of corruption and obligations to high profit-making organisations that fund election campaigns, have to be taken into account in countries such as the Pearl.

Powerful efficient and successful economies like Germany and modern Demi-Gods like Bill Gates endorse this tax. Here is an idea for the government of the Pearl. Tax the banks on their huge profits and give some of that money back to the people without burdening an already insufferably burdened people! I fear ideas expressed in this column will meet their usual end either in the oblivion chaos and mayhem or the lack of mental fortitude that exists in the Pearl and her officials.However, one can only hope that people who wish the Pearl renewed status in the Indian Ocean region if not the world, continue to survive in these circumstances, as the village of indomitable Gauls in the face of the mighty Roman empire. We need an “Asterix” brave and quick-thinking warrior, armed with some magic portion from “Getafix” the druid. Instead, we seem to have plenty of pseudo “Getafix’s” concocting “dammika Pani” and such portions and far too many “Vitalstastix’s”- muddle-headed incompetent chiefs!



Features

UNHRC resolution, good governance, BRICS – Operation camouflage?

Published

on

UN Human Rights Council in session

by Tamara Kunanayakam

On 8 October this year, the Cabinet media spokesman Vijitha Herath announced the new JVP/NPP Government’s decision to “strongly reject” the US-UK draft resolution tabled by the United Kingdom at the recent session of the UN Human Rights Council, extending the mandate of an “external evidence-gathering mechanism” established by its 2022 resolution 51/1.

On the following day, Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN explained to the Council that Sri Lanka considered the latest draft as lacking consensus, because the country had already opposed the two previous resolutions of 2021 (46/1) and 2022 (51/1) that had been tabled without the country’s consent and adopted by “a divided vote“. The Government she added, had also disassociated itself from the Report of the High Commissioner.

Nevertheless, on that same day, the resolution that the Government had “strongly” rejected was adopted without a vote, i.e., by consensus, and consensus resolutions necessarily involve the explicit or implicit consent of the country concerned.

Decision not to call for a vote – consent to, not rejection of, external mechanism with prosecutorial functions

Had indeed the Government “rejected” the external mechanism, it would have called for a recorded vote, the only way to prevent consensus on a hostile draft. Being a non-member state, it would have had to request a friendly country to act on its behalf, and Cuba, China and Pakistan have always obliged. Without a specific request from Sri Lanka, no country that respects the principle of state sovereignty and the right of peoples to self-determination would have called for a vote. It is evident that that request never came.

By the decision not to call for a vote, the Government did the opposite of what it had said it would do, even reversing Sri Lanka’s previous rejection of the mechanism at the Council’s 2021 and 2022, and consenting to its establishment as well as extension.

Country-specific resolutions are a weapon used by Washington to impose its hegemonic agenda on non-Western countries, and consensus is only advantageous to the one who wields the weapon. The resolution on Sri Lanka is precedent setting that gives legitimacy to the controversial ‘Responsibility to Protect’ doctrine that permits Washington to exercise its domination over other states on the pretext they are “unwilling and unable” to protect their own citizens, thus undermining the UN Charter-based multilateral order and its sovereignty principle.

Consensus, the result of behind-the-scenes ‘negotiations,’ deals, and capitulation

Consensus is always the result of behind-the-scenes ‘negotiations’, of deals made in private between the hostile country initiating the resolution and the target country, and of capitulation to outright threats or pressure. In the case of Sri Lanka, the initiator has always been the United States. The drafting is done in Washington and the text imposed in Colombo, with the US Ambassador playing a crucial role. The regular one-to-one meetings between the US Ambassador Julie Chung and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya, and between the Ambassador and the President is now an open secret.

Bilateral ‘negotiations’ and ‘agreements’ inherently unequal

Bilateral ‘negotiations’ or ‘agreements’ between a global hegemon and a small, heavily indebted Third World country are inherently unequal. The sheer hegemonic power of one makes the principle of reciprocity impracticable. It is illusory to believe that a US-led text, whether a resolution, a trade or military agreement, or for that matter IMF/World Bank conditionalities, can be “re-negotiated” or “amended” for “mutual benefit.” ‘Consensus’ between unequals can only signify capitulation, the abandon of sovereignty.

What did Sri Lanka surrender, its sovereignty? Back to the Kerry–Lugar Report

The answer may be found in Washington’s hegemonic ambitions, and the role attributed to Sri Lanka.

It is no secret that Sri Lanka is on a strategic maritime corridor linking East and West, the control over which is of central importance to Washington’s so-called ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ military strategy aimed at containing and combating China. The wide-ranging reform of the State and its institutions demanded in US-led Human Rights Council resolutions and imposed through IMF/World Bank conditionalities can be traced to the December 2009 US Senate Foreign Relations Report, “Sri Lanka: Recharting US Strategy after the war” (Kerry-Lugar Report), prepared less than six months after the historic defeat of the LTTE.

Underlining that the US “cannot afford to ‘lose’ Sri Lanka,” the Report advocated “a new approach that increases US leverage”: A more multifaceted US strategy would capitalize on the economic, trade, and security aspects of the relationship. This approach in turn could catalyze much-needed political reforms that will ultimately help secure longer term US strategic interests in the Indian Ocean. US strategy should also invest in Sinhalese parts of the country, instead of just focusing aid on the Tamil-dominated North and East. “

Washington’s ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific’ strategy is the common denominator that links the US-led resolution with its embedded ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) logic and the IMF/World Bank duo’s political project to disempower the people and their state, which is camouflaged as ‘good governance’.

R2P, ‘good governance’, the false narrative – dismantling the sovereignty principle

R2P and ‘good governance’ are both aimed at dismantling the sovereignty principle – popular sovereignty and State sovereignty, the principal enemy and foremost obstacle to the expansion of global capital and US hegemonic ambitions. They both demand far-reaching reform of the state and its institutions that shift political decision-making and control over a nation’s wealth and resources into the hands of global corporates, beyond the control of the people and their democratic institutions. They are both associated with nebulous concepts such as the rule of law,’ ‘transitional justice,’ ‘universal jurisdiction,’ ‘transparency,’ and ‘accountability’ – all of which serve to bring a country under alien domination. They both involve the reinforcement of the State’s repressive apparatus to preserve the new order of brutal exploitation thus established.

The term ‘good governance’, it must be recalled, was coined jointly by the US Treasury and the IMF/World Bank duo in the late 1980s as a coercive tool to bring former socialist bloc countries under the US hegemonic umbrella and to effectively recolonise indebted Third World countries. Presented as a technical tool involving wide-ranging legal and institutional reform to render government accountable and transparent, it is, in reality, a political project to re-engineer State to make it less, not more democratic.

Today, the false ‘good governance’ narrative has become so integrated into our daily lives that it has been adopted, without questioning, by the vast majority of political parties and trade unions, and even by the victims themselves, despite the visible and widespread suffering it causes. The rise to power of the JVP/NPP combine with as its figurehead the Harini Amarasuriya/AKD duo is a reflection of unprecedented degeneration of democracy, of popular sovereignty, in Sri Lanka.

BRICS, or not BRICS? Unanswered questions, Operation Camouflage

A question that comes to mind is why the JVP/NPP government treated the BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia, with disdain? BRICS is viewed by Washington as a threat to its global hegemony. Why was Sri Lanka not represented by the President, nor the Prime Minister, nor even the Foreign Minister, when 36 of the 38 participating states were represented by their Heads of State or Government or by Cabinet Ministers? The United Nations was represented by its Secretary General. Along with Bangladesh, Sri Lanka was the only other country to send a Foreign Secretary. Bangladesh had, however, recently seen the installation of a pro-US banker as interim head of government after what is believed to have been a US-engineered coup d’état. But what about Sri Lanka? Is the answer to be found in the hand behind the Galle Face protest, misleadingly called ‘Aragalaya,’ and its aftermath?

And, why did the JVP/NPP government publicly lie that BRICS had rejected its application to become a member?

What was the purpose of the misleading public statement about rejecting the resolution?

To trick the public into believing that the new JVP/NPP combine reflects a radical ‘system change’ when in reality it provides a cover and relative stability for global corporates and for Washington’s project of disempowerment and vassalisation?

Is this a case of ‘operation camouflage’?

Continue Reading

Features

Engineering solutions for global competitiveness and sustainability

Published

on

Transforming Sri Lanka’s Plantation Sector:

by Lalin I De Silva

Sri Lanka’s plantation industry, once a vital economic driver, is now at a crossroads due to escalating production costs, labour shortages, and the need for sustainable practices. Vivonta Green Tech Consultants Pvt Ltd presents a 20-Point Action Plan to revitalise the sector with cutting-edge engineering solutions. These include precision agriculture, mechanised harvesting, renewable energy integration, and enhanced supply chain systems. Drawing inspiration from successful models in Brazil, Malaysia, and Israel, this strategy aims to boost productivity, cut costs, and increase foreign revenue—pivotal for Sri Lanka’s economic recovery.

Key Engineering Solutions:

· Precision Agriculture Technologies: Leveraging drones, GPS, and satellite imaging for real-time monitoring of crop health and resource allocation, optimising yields with minimal input.
· Benchmark: Brazil’s coffee and sugarcane sectors.

· Mechanized Harvesting: Introducing semi-automated and fully mechanised systems for tea, rubber, and other crops to reduce labour dependency.
· Benchmark: Malaysia’s oil palm plantations.

· Advanced Irrigation Systems: Implementing sensor-based automated irrigation systems to improve water efficiency and sustainability.
· Benchmark: Israel’s drip irrigation technology.

· AI-Powered Smart Machinery: Deploying advanced machines for sorting and grading crops, enhancing productivity and quality control.
· Benchmark: Netherlands’ agricultural technology.

· Renewable Energy Integration: Utilising solar, biogas, and hydropower systems to lower energy costs and promote sustainable processing.
· Benchmark: Kenya’s tea factories.

· Post-Harvest Processing Technologies: Modernising processing methods to reduce post-harvest losses and improve product quality.
· Benchmark: India’s tea and spice industries.

· Optimised Transportation & Logistics: Enhancing infrastructure and logistics to ensure timely delivery of plantation products.
· Benchmark: Colombia’s coffee industry.

· Waste Management Technologies: Converting plantation waste into energy or organic fertilisers to foster sustainability.
· Benchmark: Thailand’s sugarcane and palm oil sectors.

· Data-Driven Management Systems: Implementing cloud-based platforms for real-time decision-making and operational optimisation.
· Benchmark: Australia’s cotton farms.

· R&D for Innovation: Establishing research units focused on developing pest-resistant crops and engineering advancements.
· Benchmark: Brazil’s EMBRAPA.

· Robotics for Labour-Intensive Tasks: Utilising robotics to automate repetitive tasks such as pruning, reducing manual labor costs.
· Benchmark: Japan’s tea farms.

· Quality Control Automation: Standardising automated quality control processes to meet international standards.
· Benchmark: US agriculture.

· GIS Mapping: Implementing Geographic Information Systems to manage land use efficiently and mitigate environmental impacts.
· Benchmark: Brazil’s sugarcane industry.

· Digitised Supply Chains: Creating transparent and efficient supply chains with digital tools for seamless plantation-to-market operations.
· Benchmark: Vietnam’s coffee industry.

· Cold Chain Logistics: Investing in cold storage and transportation infrastructure to reduce post-harvest spoilage.
· Benchmark: US agricultural logistics.

· Digital Training Platforms: Providing workers with online training in advanced management techniques and machinery operation.
· Benchmark: Singapore’s agri-tech initiatives.

· University Collaborations: Partnering with academic institutions to foster innovation tailored to Sri Lanka’s plantation needs.
· Benchmark: The Netherlands’ university-industry collaborations.

· Agroforestry Systems: Integrating crop and forestry products for sustainable land use.
· Benchmark: Costa Rica’s coffee plantations.

· Energy-Efficient Processing Infrastructure: Constructing energy-efficient processing facilities to reduce carbon footprints and improve product quality.
· Benchmark: India’s spice processing plants.

· National Engineering Standards: Developing national standards for engineering and operations to ensure consistency and scalability across the plantation sector.
· Benchmark: Australia and US agricultural standards.

· Integrated Pest Management (IPM): Promoting IPM practices to minimise chemical pesticide use and maintain ecological balance.
· Benchmark: India’s integrated pest management in cotton farming.

· Blockchain for Traceability: Using blockchain technology to enhance transparency in supply chains, ensuring farm-to-consumer traceability.
· Benchmark: IBM’s Food Trust initiative.

· Soil Health Monitoring: Investing in soil health technologies to optimise fertilisation strategies and promote biodiversity.
· Benchmark: US regenerative agriculture programs.

· Vertical Farming Techniques: Promoting urban vertical farming to reduce land usage and increase crop yields.
· Benchmark: Singapore’s urban vertical farms.

· Cross-Industry Collaborations: Partnering with industries like tourism to create eco-friendly plantation tours and organic farming experiences, attracting environmentally-conscious tourists and supporting local farmers.
· Benchmark: Costa Rica’s eco-tourism model.

Conclusion:

Sri Lanka’s plantation sector can achieve a significant transformation by adopting advanced engineering solutions such as precision farming, robotics, renewable energy, and big data. Leveraging global best practices, partnerships, and continuous education, these innovations will help the sector boost productivity, reduce costs, and secure sustainability. By modernising the plantation industry, Sri Lanka can strengthen its global competitiveness, improve foreign revenue, and contribute to long-term economic recovery.

Lalin I De Silva is a former senior planter, agricultural advisor/consultant, Secretary General of Ceylon Planters Society, Editor of Ceylon Planters Society Bulletin and freelance journalist.

Continue Reading

Features

America stands by its Man!

Published

on

Male Liberty

by Rajan Philips

Donald Trump did not simply win a second presidential election. He crushed Kamala Harris and the top-down electoral coalition that she was hurriedly assembling to overcome what Democrats rhetorically kept defining as an existential threat to American democracy. The American voters have resoundingly sided with the perpetrator of the threat not only in the contested seven swing states, but also in the popular vote across the country. And they ignored all the warnings dramatized by celebrities, meticulously explained by President Clinton in small voter gatherings in swing states, and soaringly articulated across the land by the Obamas – Michelle and Barak, the country’s most eloquent political couple.

Apart from recapturing the presidency, Trump’s Republicans have retaken control of the Senate and seem set to retain their slender majority in the House. In his second coming, Trump could be the Unitarian president that Republicans savour and the petty monarch of all he surveys. That leaves Democrats with plenty of postmortems and soul searching before the midterm elections in two years and the next presidential election in four years. To their relief, Trump will not be on the ballot in 2028.

In fairness, Kamala Harris ran a disciplined and flawless campaign without a single gaffe or scandal allegation. That is quite extraordinary in American political campaigns. That was the verdict of pundits before the vote, but postmortem verdicts will now provide alternative narratives. Her refusal to expediently dissociate herself from President Biden was seen by some as strength of character, but as a fatal error by others.

Incumbency is usually the bane of electoral prospects. This year it has been a particularly unshakable albatross to governments seeking re-election. A somewhat poetic solace, according to comparative election observers, is that of all the losing incumbents in elections this year Kamala Harris has performed best.

As Vice President running to succeed her President, Harris bore the incumbent cross with great forbearance. But the cross proved too heavy a burden as she tried to present herself as the change candidate who would turn the page on ten years of Trump and his politics of chaos and calumny. Instead, the voters settled for Trump as the change candidate and were sold on Trump’s sweeping promises to make life affordable, secure the borders and get rid off immigrants, and magically end the wars in Russia-Ukraine and the Middle East. All of which were attributed to President Biden, and by association to Vice President Harris.

In stark contrast to Harris, Trump’s campaign was characteristically incoherent, undisciplined, vulgar and insulting. Yet his core message on the economy, nativism immigration, and transgender rights struck a chord with American voters regardless of their socioeconomic locations and across racial divides. With his genius for branding and marketing, not to mention electronic communication, Trump kept himself personally engaged with the electorate, ever since he began his political campaign in the 2015 primaries. Beginning with a core group of white voters, Trump has gradually expanded it to include African Americans and immigrants of all hues, especially Latinos. Not to mention South Asians.

It is not a coincidence that his two victories have been against women and his only defeat in between was against a man. In his third and ultimately successful attempt, Trump targeted male voters as men, especially young male voters and across racial divides. He used another divider to slice the electorate. Education. He attracted non-college educated voters more than college-educated voters.

The national average for college education is 40%. The percentage is generally lower in the solid Republican (Red) states which are mostly white, rural and interior; higher in the solid Democrat (Blue) states that are more urban, diverse and coastal; and is around the 40% national average in the seven states that swing between the two parties.

Three of the seven swing states, Michigan, Philadelphia and Wisconsin, are mid-western states that are predominantly white and working class. They are the rust belt repositories of old industries and have historically voted Democrat until Trump came along. The remaining four, Georgia, North Carolina, Arizona and Nevada, are more southern and sunbelt, and include significant proportions of Black and Latino voters. Carter, Clinton and Obama have won all four of them, as well as Florida and Ohio which are now solid Republican states.

The spatial expansion of the Republican electoral base began under Bush (Jr) and his political “Architect” Karl Rove who excelled in micro-targeting voter groups based on their cultural grievances associated with pro-life (anti-abortion) evangelical Christianity, gun rights and gender rights. But the Bushes were never anti-immigrant. The Democrats ceded ground in local politics in Republican states, retreated to protecting the swing states, and turned political questions into judicial battles. Barak Obama bucked this trend in 2008 by bending the arc of history, only for Trump to come along and break it eight years later.

Trump swept all seven of the swing states in 2024 just as he did against Hillary Clinton in 2016. Biden won five of them in 2020. After 2016, Trump packed the Supreme Court with three conservative judges and made similar appointments to other federal courts. Now he has the opportunity to replace two aging Supreme Court judges, the conservative and Catholic Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, with two younger clones. Biden’s proposals to reform the Supreme Court are now a dead part of his battered legacy.

In the aftermath of their electoral shellacking the great soul searching for Democrats will be about their voting coalitions in the swing states. Hillary Clinton tried to extend Obama’s arc and expanded her support among African Americans and Latinos, but she paid the price for it when the white working class abandoned her in the three midwestern swing states. Four years later, Biden won back sufficiently among white workers in the Midwest to end Trump’s presidency after one term and made new forays in Georgia and Arizona. But he polled proportionately less among Blacks and Latinos.

By the time Kamala Harris came, handicapped to start with after Biden’s tortuously delayed exit, Trump had expanded his support among Blacks and Latinos. He had already energized the white rural voters to vote in much larger numbers than by any Republican candidate before him. Harris’s coalition strategy was to break into traditional white suburban voters who were disaffected by Trump, to compensate for her sliding support among voters of colour and the white working class. In the end, Vice President Harris’s coalition could not hold up against the tide of Trump.

In his election night victory speech, he exulted over the coalition he had cobbled, which now includes, never mind nominally or substantively, “Black voters, women, Hispanics, and Arab and Muslim Americans.” Jews were not mentioned. The media in Israel picked up on the slight, while the country itself was jubilant over Trump’s return. He had warned during the campaign that Jews would “have a lot to do with it” if he were to lose. As much as 67% to 77% percent of the Jewish vote went to Harris, according to exit polls.

“Jewish voters are the only segment of the electorate where Trump did not make meaningful inroads,” claimed Halie Soifer, the CEO of the Jewish Democratic Council of America in a tweet. “Despite unprecedented @GOP efforts to divide us, we voted our values,” he went on. But Harris lost on values and Trump won. Harris lost the crucial Arab American vote in the battleground state of Michigan, and may have lost substantial votes among pro-Palestinian students on university campuses.

Ukraine and Gaza were not top of mind issues for the voters in general. But they were clearly annoyed with the Biden Administration’s insistent bankrolling of the wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East while middle class Americans were struggling with their cost of living. Trump was always boastful that there were no wars anywhere during his four years in office. He is not at all perceptive to realize that his cozying with Netanyahu and the push for Abraham Accords while isolating the Palestinians ultimately led to the October 7 attacks by Hamas. Now he is back in office and has to deal with the aftermaths of his own mistakes and Biden’s failure in the Middle East.

Trump will also have to deal with his personal situation arising from his criminal conviction and pending indictments, while starting his second term after a campaign that was full of outlandish threats and promises. Getting himself out of legal troubles has been the main purpose of his second run and that seems to be getting done quite easily. For all the powers that he is now getting invested with, Trump is very much a lame duck president and the oldest American to become president. What is there to seriously preoccupy him now that he is legally free is the question for the next four years.

Continue Reading

Trending