Connect with us

Features

Travels with the Prime Minister

Published

on

by Leelananda de Silva

From 1973 to 1977, I accompanied the Prime Minister, Mrs. Bandaranaike on many trips abroad. My task was to advice her on the economic issues. My first trip with her was to Algiers for the Fourth Non Aligned Summit, and that included visits to Rome and the Vatican. The next visit was to the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Kingston Jamaica in May 1975. On our way to Kingston we visited Baghdad and London and on our way back visited New York.

My other visit with her to the United Nations in New York was in September 1976, immediately after the Non Aligned conference in Colombo. These visits I have described in other chapters. I accompanied the prime Minister on official visits to Thailand, Myanmar (Burma), and Indonesia in January 1976 and to Malaysia, Philippines, and Japan in November 1976. Traveling with the Prime Minister is unlike traveling with any other minister. I got the opportunity to see and meet with heads of state and government, and the most senior officials in these countries and in the United Nations.

Many of these visits being state visits, we stayed in palatial residences. There was also the need to prepare press releases and communiques after these visits. The governments of most of these countries had arranged touristic visits to see their countries and this is the kind of opportunity you get only when traveling with a head of government. Accompanying the Prime Minister on these trips gave me the opportunity to observe diplomacy at the highest levels and also to meet with many foreign leaders.

I have described the visit to Algiers for the Fourth Non Aligned Summit elsewhere. Coming back from Algiers we visited Rome and the Vatican. The Prime Minister had two days in Rome without official tasks, and we had a very enjoyable time seeing the sights of Rome. John Rodrigo was the Sri Lanka ambassador in Rome. We went to see a place called the Boca Verita (the mouth of truth). What you do there is to put your hand into the mouth of a lion made of stone, and the mouth keeps closing and opening. If your hand gets caught, then you are supposed to be a liar. Mrs. Bandaranaike was amused by this and she called me from a long distance and asked me to put my hand in to check my reliability. Luckily for me, my hand was not caught. The Prime Minister had a great sense of humour.

We had a great reception from the local Sri Lankans in Rome. The Prime Minister’s official task was to meet the Pope, Paul the Sixth, and we accompanied her to Castlegondolfo, which is the summer residence of the Pope outside the Vatican. All of us met the Pope. The Prime minister had a meeting with the Pope alone and after that meeting, the other members of the delegation (I remember W.T Jayasinghe in particular) were invited to meet the Pope. I was able to have a few words with him and he gave me a rosary. Later when I came to Sri Lanka, I gave this rosary to Mother John, the head of St. Bridget’s who was a friend of our family. She was thrilled to get this rosary given by the Pope himself.

On our way back from Rome, we had a stop in Cairo and we were not expected to leave the aircraft. However, as it was a long wait, W.T and I got out of the aircraft and walked around to stretch our legs. The police arrested us, and what we did not know was that security was tight around the aircraft as the prime minister was on board. We had to spend a few minutes before being allowed to get back to the aircraft.

On the way to the Commonwealth Summit in Jamaica we made two stop-overs, first in Baghdad and next in London. The Baghdad visit was fascinating. Iraq was to host the sixth Non Aligned Summit in Baghdad in 1979, after the Colombo Summit, and the visit of Mrs. Bandaranaike was important from that point of view. Our host was the then Vice President of Iraq, Saddam Hussein who was the real ruler of Iraq. We stayed in Baghdad Palace, where the previous King of Iraq, King Feisal had been murdered. It was a sprawling place, and rather lonely.

We saw Saddam Hussein many times. There was one formal meeting with him and at that meeting, he asked Mrs. Bandaranaike about the Commonwealth Summit to which she was going. He was not familiar with this forum. Listening to him one got the impression that he was not anti- West but that he was anti- Kuwait as he felt that Kuwait really belonged to Iraq.

Saddam Hussein came to Baghdad palace, to accompany Mrs. Bandaranaike to the official meeting we had with him and his officials. I remember walking just behind him on the way to this meeting. The Prime Minister’s concern at that time was the price of oil, and Sri Lanka’s escalating oil bills. We had, at the level of officials broached the subject of concessionary oil purchases from Iraq, and the response had not been very positive.

At the meeting with Saddam Hussein, he informed the Prime minister that he would give 250 000, tons of crude oil on highly concessionary terms. This was an immense relief to the Prime Minister. After the meetings with Saddam the Iraqi government had arranged for the Prime Minister and her delegation to visit the old Babylonian cities of Mosul and Kirkuk. The great rivers, Tigris and the Euphrates met here and it was a beautiful sight. We saw the artifacts of the ancient Babylonian civilization.

From Baghdad we were to take a commercial flight to Kuwait and then join a British Airways flight to London. When we came to the airport, we found that Saddam Hussein had ordered a special helicopter to take us to Kuwait. Talking to senior officials at the airport, we found that there was great animosity towards Kuwait. It came as no surprise later when Kuwait was invaded by Iraq.

When we landed in Kuwait, the Prime Minister’s reception lacked warmth. The Kuwaitis were not inclined to look upon those who had visited Iraq with any great favour. The Prime Minister had to wait six hours at Kuwait airport for the flight to London and the Kuwaiti government did not provide any special facilities for her.

Our next stop was London and we spent three days there. The Prime Minister, her daughter Sunethra, and I stayed at the high commissioner’s residence. Tilak Gunarathne was the high commissioner. It was a bit embarrassing, as Tilak had not been included as part of the delegation to the Commonwealth Summit in Kingston. This was strange as Tilak was Sri Lanka’s representative to the Commonwealth Secretariat and was responsible for Commonwealth affairs in London. Whatever it was, the PM did not want him on the delegation.

When we left London on a British Airways flight, there were two other heads of government on the same flight- Seretse Khama of Botswana, and Dom Mintoff of Malta. We had an extended chat standing by the aircraft on the tarmac. For me, Seretse Khania brought memories of an infamous colonial episode where he was deposed by the British government as its traditional ruler as he had married a British woman. Mrs. Ruth Khama was also there with him on his way to Kingston. My experiences at the Commonwealth Summit itself are described in a separate chapter.

Immediately after the Non Aligned Summit in Colombo, the Prime Minister visited New York to address the UN General Assembly Sessions in September 1976. I was part of her delegation. This was a triumphant visit for the Prime Minister. She had a great reception at the UN General Assembly. Henry Kissinger, the US secretary of State met with her to convey their appreciation of her role at the Summit and ensuring that it was a truly non-aligned occasion. This attitude of the Prime Minister, led to a major improvement in the relations between Sri Lanka and the United States.

Kurt Waldheim, the UN Secretary General hosted a reception for the Prime Minister as the Chairman of the Non Aligned Summit. Prior to this reception, Gamani Corea who was then Secretary General of UNCTAD told me that Waldheim was not forthcoming about the extension of his term as Secretary General for another three years (His first term of three years was coming to an end). He had spoken to the Prime Minister about it and he wanted me to remind her when she was meeting Waldheim at the reception. I mentioned this to the Prime Minister while she was with Waldheim (on this type of occasion, I spoke to her in Sinhalese) and the Prime Minister then mentioned to Waldheim that she was concerned about Gamani Corea’s extension. Waldheim said that there should be no problem about it.

Before and after the Non Aligned Summit, the Prime Minister had invitations to visit many countries. She had to select from among them and she gave preference to countries in the Asian region. I accompanied her on these bilateral visits in January and November 1976 (Dharmasiri Peiris, in his memoir, The Pursuit of Governance, written a few years back, has described these visits with the Prime Minister, in some detail).When we visited Thailand, the King was in Chiang Mai, and the government had arranged for us to fly to that city by special plane from Bangkok. We were accompanied by Kukrit Pramoj, the then Prime Minister of Thailand and we were able to have a long chat with this aristocratic, scholarly man. The Prime Minister had a meeting with the King.

The Prime Minister and her delegation had an exciting visit to Burma. General Ne Win was the military ruler of Burma, ruling the country with an iron hand. The Burmese government were very warm hosts. We had two meetings with Ne Win, and he gave us a grand open air reception somewhere near Pagan in North Burma, and by the Irrawady River. It was a gorgeous occasion with Burmese music and a relaxed atmosphere.

We were taken to see Lake Inle, a beautiful and remote place, before it became a tourist attraction. The Prime Minister was entertained to a boating competition in the middle of the lake, where she and the delegation were accommodated in a bamboo built circuit bungalow. The boats were paddled by women with their feet. We went to a remote Buddhist temple at the end of the lake.Mrs. Bandaranaike was anxious to meet Madame Aung Sang, the wife of the Burmese independence hero and the mother of Aung Sang Suu Kyi. Mrs. Bandaranaike had known her before. The government was not anxious to arrange this visit, but at the insistence of Mrs. Bandaranaike, we visited Madame Aung Sang at her house by the lake and had afternoon tea. This house is where Aung Sang Suu Kyi now lives.

At the end of the visit to Myanmar, we had to draft a joint communique. We had included in our draft a reference to the famous UN resolution 242 regarding the Arab-Israel dispute. The Burmese officials did not want to have any reference to this question and wished it to be deleted which we did. Burma is the one Asian country which always had cordial relations with Israel.

The visit to Indonesia was a low key affair. We met with President Suharto, and with the foreign minister at the time, Adam Malik. Malik accompanied the Prime Minister on our travels within the country and we had a special aircraft laid for us. We went to see Borobudur, the old Buddhist temple, which is one of the largest in Asia. In Jogjakarta, we stayed with the Sultan in his palace, and that night there was a fantastic spectacle in the form of a monkey dance. I remember the Indonesian chief of protocol (I forget his name now) and his delightful wife who accompanied the Prime Minister and we were rather friendly with them. He was to die in an air crash a few months later.

It was on this trip to Indonesia that I met Tissa and Manel Ratnatunga, whom I had known before. Tissa Ratanatunga had been the Settlement Officer in Sri Lanka and I had worked with him on the land ceilings committee. Tissa was now working for the United Nations in Indonesia. I kept up my friendship with them. Manel is now an important literary figure in Sri Lanka and she wrote a superb work of historical fiction based on Indonesian history, apart from other books.

Her book on Syria, which she wrote in the 1960s, when Tissa was working for the UN is one of the very few written by a UN expert or a spouse on the country in which they served. Manel and Tissa’s son, Sinha Ratnatunga is the Editor-in Chief of the Sunday Times. Manel is a direct descendant of Anagarika Dharmapala.

In Manila, the Prime Minister received a rousing welcome, with cheering crowds lining in the streets. We were the guests of President Ferdinand Marcos, and his first lady, Imelda Marcos. They were gracious hosts. We stayed at the Malacannang Palace, a very comfortable place. There were some official talks and they revolved mainly around the non aligned movement. Philippines was not a member of the NAM and was very anxious to be allowed to join in. It has been barred as there were American bases in the Philippines. Mrs. Bandaranaike was sympathetic to the admission of the Philippines.

I must relate a little story of the Prime Minister’s arrival at the airport in Manila. We came in a Philippines airline aircraft, and the Prime Minister was traveling economy class, as was her policy to cut down on costs. When the plane stopped on the tarmac, the guard of honour was drawn outside the first class exit of the plane. The Prime minister came out of the economy class entrance and she had to walk a little distance on the tarmac to be greeted by the guard of honour. All this was watched by a large crowd which included many Sri Lankans, some of whom were not pleased with what happened. I had to explain to them that the Prime Minister’s view was that there was no need to live beyond our means. She had a thrifty housewife’s view of public money.

The President and Imelda Marcos had organized a one day tour for the Prime Minister and her delegation. We went in the presidential yacht to a place called Bataan, accompanied by the President and his wife. Bataan was a place which saw some of the most bitter fighting between the Japanese and Americans during the Second World War. Marcos had fought there as a young lieutenant. He had built a museum there and a circuit bungalow and there were films about the fighting.

On the presidential yacht, there was much merry making and dancing during our four hour trip. We saw the President and some of his cabinet in a carefree mood that day. While in Bataan, President Marcos took the Prime Minister to the circuit bungalow and at one point, all the members of the delegation and others had gone out to see the museum, and only the President and the Prime Minister remained. I happened to be there and Mrs. Bandaranaike loudly told me in Sinhalese not to go, and remain with her.There was another interesting incident when we returned to Manila. The Prime Minister had to host a reception for the President and his lady prior to her return. The Sri Lankan charge’d’ affaires, Oliver Perera, a businessman, had arranged a venue for the reception. When the Prime Minister went for the reception, she was appalled, as the hotel was not very impressive and was located in a seedy quarter of Manila. The Prime Minister asked Oliver Perera as to why this was done. He told the Prime Minister that the first couple were highly pleased with this venue, as the hotel was owned by Imelda Marcos. So this was giving some business to them.

Japan does not invite too many foreign leaders, and the Prime Minister was one of the few. The Prime Minister of Japan was Takeo Miki, and he was the Prime Minister’s host. We had two meetings with him and they were very cordial. Emperor Hirohito hosted a lunch for the Prime Minister and her delegation, and the members of the Royal family including the Queen, the Crown Prince and Princess were there.It was exciting meeting the Emperor, who had been vilified during the war. He was very charming, speaking in halting English. At lunch, I was seated next to the crown princess. It was a very small group which sat for lunch. Apart from Dharmasisri Peiris, Arthur Basnayake, who was a member of the delegation and Bernard Tilakaratne, ours ambassador in Japan, were there.

The Prime Minister had to make a speech at the reception given to her by Prime Minister Takeo Miki. Arthur Basnayake and I prepared this speech. We made a reference to Sri Lanka’s close friendship with Japan and the role that J.R. Jayewardene had played at San Francisco in 1950 when the Japanese peace treaty was signed. Sri Lanka had waived any kind of reparations from Japan for war damage, an unusually generous offer to a Japan who was in the doldrums.

Japan never forgot this and J.R was a hero in Japan. One member of the Sri Lankan delegation was not happy with the reference to J.R. We showed the draft to the Prime Minister and she had no objection to what we had included into her draft speech. This was a very gracious act on the part of the Prime Minister, as J.R was then the leader of the opposition.The Japanese government had laid out some fantastic trips outside Tokyo. We went by bullet train to Nara and Kyoto and visited the Mikimoto pearl museum. I might mention here that on the way back from Tokyo, we had a ten hour stay in Hong Kong, and it was a surprise when the colonial governor of Hong Kong offered the palatial bungalow of the chief secretary of the colony for Mrs. Bandaranaike’s use during the stopover.

(Excerpted from Leelananda de Silva’s autobiography, The Long Littleness of Life)



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Theocratic Iran facing unprecedented challenge

Published

on

Anti-government protests in Tehran (BBC)

The world is having the evidence of its eyes all over again that ‘economics drives politics’ and this time around the proof is coming from theocratic Iran. Iranians in their tens of thousands are on the country’s streets calling for a regime change right now but it is all too plain that the wellsprings of the unprecedented revolt against the state are economic in nature. It is widespread financial hardship and currency depreciation, for example, that triggered the uprising in the first place.

However, there is no denying that Iran’s current movement for drastic political change has within its fold multiple other forces, besides the economically affected, that are urging a comprehensive transformation as it were of the country’s political system to enable the equitable empowerment of the people. For example, the call has been gaining ground with increasing intensity over the weeks that the country’s number one theocratic ruler, President Ali Khamenei, steps down from power.

That is, the validity and continuation of theocratic rule is coming to be questioned unprecedentedly and with increasing audibility and boldness by the public. Besides, there is apparently fierce opposition to the concentration of political power at the pinnacle of the Iranian power structure.

Popular revolts have been breaking out every now and then of course in Iran over the years, but the current protest is remarkable for its social diversity and the numbers it has been attracting over the past few weeks. It could be described as a popular revolt in the genuine sense of the phrase. Not to be also forgotten is the number of casualties claimed by the unrest, which stands at some 2000.

Of considerable note is the fact that many Iranian youths have been killed in the revolt. It points to the fact that youth disaffection against the state has been on the rise as well and could be at boiling point. From the viewpoint of future democratic development in Iran, this trend needs to be seen as positive.

Politically-conscious youngsters prioritize self-expression among other fundamental human rights and stifling their channels of self-expression, for example, by shutting down Internet communication links, would be tantamount to suppressing youth aspirations with a heavy hand. It should come as no surprise that they are protesting strongly against the state as well.

Another notable phenomenon is the increasing disaffection among sections of Iran’s women. They too are on the streets in defiance of the authorities. A turning point in this regard was the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, which apparently befell her all because she defied state orders to be dressed in the Hijab. On that occasion as well, the event brought protesters in considerable numbers onto the streets of Tehran and other cities.

Once again, from the viewpoint of democratic development the increasing participation of Iranian women in popular revolts should be considered thought-provoking. It points to a heightening political consciousness among Iranian women which may not be easy to suppress going forward. It could also mean that paternalism and its related practices and social forms may need to be re-assessed by the authorities.

It is entirely a matter for the Iranian people to address the above questions, the neglect of which could prove counter-productive for them, but it is all too clear that a relaxing of authoritarian control over the state and society would win favour among a considerable section of the populace.

However, it is far too early to conclude that Iran is at risk of imploding. This should be seen as quite a distance away in consideration of the fact that the Iranian government is continuing to possess its coercive power. Unless the country’s law enforcement authorities turn against the state as well this coercive capability will remain with Iran’s theocratic rulers and the latter will be in a position to quash popular revolts and continue in power. But the ruling authorities could not afford the luxury of presuming that all will be well at home, going into the future.

Meanwhile US President Donald Trump has assured the Iranian people of his assistance but it is not clear as to what form such support would take and when it would be delivered. The most important way in which the Trump administration could help the Iranian people is by helping in the process of empowering them equitably and this could be primarily achieved only by democratizing the Iranian state.

It is difficult to see the US doing this to even a minor measure under President Trump. This is because the latter’s principal preoccupation is to make the ‘US Great Once again’, and little else. To achieve the latter, the US will be doing battle with its international rivals to climb to the pinnacle of the international political system as the unchallengeable principal power in every conceivable respect.

That is, Realpolitik considerations would be the main ‘stuff and substance’ of US foreign policy with a corresponding downplaying of things that matter for a major democratic power, including the promotion of worldwide democratic development and the rendering of humanitarian assistance where it is most needed. The US’ increasing disengagement from UN development agencies alone proves the latter.

Given the above foreign policy proclivities it is highly unlikely that the Iranian people would be assisted in any substantive way by the Trump administration. On the other hand, the possibility of US military strikes on Iranian military targets in the days ahead cannot be ruled out.

The latter interventions would be seen as necessary by the US to keep the Middle Eastern military balance in favour of Israel. Consequently, any US-initiated peace moves in the real sense of the phrase in the Middle East would need to be ruled out in the foreseeable future. In other words, Middle East peace will remain elusive.

Interestingly, the leadership moves the Trump administration is hoping to make in Venezuela, post-Maduro, reflect glaringly on its foreign policy preoccupations. Apparently, Trump will be preferring to ‘work with’ Delcy Rodriguez, acting President of Venezuela, rather than Maria Corina Machado, the principal opponent of Nicolas Maduro, who helped sustain the opposition to Maduro in the lead-up to the latter’s ouster and clearly the democratic candidate for the position of Venezuelan President.

The latter development could be considered a downgrading of the democratic process and a virtual ‘slap in its face’. While the democratic rights of the Venezuelan people will go disregarded by the US, a comparative ‘strong woman’ will receive the Trump administration’s blessings. She will perhaps be groomed by Trump to protect the US’s security and economic interests in South America, while his administration side-steps the promotion of the democratic empowerment of Venezuelans.

Continue Reading

Features

Silk City: A blueprint for municipal-led economic transformation in Sri Lanka

Published

on

Mayor Saman Samarakoon (L) / J.M.C. Jayasekera (R)

Maharagama today stands at a crossroads. With the emergence of new political leadership, growing public expectations, and the convergence of professional goodwill, the Maharagama Municipal Council (MMC) has been presented with a rare opportunity to redefine the city’s future. At the heart of this moment lies the Silk City (Seda Nagaraya) Initiative (SNI)—a bold yet pragmatic development blueprint designed to transform Maharagama into a modern, vibrant, and economically dynamic urban hub.

This is not merely another urban development proposal. Silk City is a strategic springboard—a comprehensive economic and cultural vision that seeks to reposition Maharagama as Sri Lanka’s foremost textile-driven commercial city, while enhancing livability, employment, and urban dignity for its residents. The Silk City concept represents more than a development plan: it is a comprehensive economic blueprint designed to redefine Maharagama as Sri Lanka’s foremost textile-driven commercial   and cultural hub.

A Vision Rooted in Reality

What makes the Silk City Initiative stand apart is its grounding in economic realism. Carefully designed around the geographical, commercial, and social realities of Maharagama, the concept builds on the city’s long-established strengths—particularly its dominance as a textile and retail centre—while addressing modern urban challenges.

The timing could not be more critical. With Mayor Saman Samarakoon assuming leadership at a moment of heightened political goodwill and public anticipation, MMC is uniquely positioned to embark on a transformation of unprecedented scale. Leadership, legitimacy, and opportunity have aligned—a combination that cities rarely experience.

A Voluntary Gift of National Value

In an exceptional and commendable development, the Maharagama Municipal Council has received—entirely free of charge—a comprehensive development proposal titled “Silk City Seda Nagaraya.” Authored by Deshamanya, Deshashkthi J. M. C. Jayasekera, a distinguished Chartered Accountant and Chairman of the JMC Management Institute, the proposal reflects meticulous research, professional depth, and long-term strategic thinking.

It must be added here that this silk city project has received the political blessings of the Parliamentarians who represented the Maharagama electorate. They are none other than Sunil Kumara Gamage, Minister of Sports and Youth Affairs, Sunil Watagala, Deputy Minister of Public Security and Devananda Suraweera, Member of Parliament.

The blueprint outlines ten integrated sectoral projects, including : A modern city vision, Tourism and cultural city development, Clean and green city initiatives, Religious and ethical city concepts, Garden city aesthetics, Public safety and beautification, Textile and creative industries as the economic core

Together, these elements form a five-year transformation agenda, capable of elevating Maharagama into a model municipal economy and a 24-hour urban hub within the Colombo Metropolitan Region

Why Maharagama, Why Now?

Maharagama’s transformation is not an abstract ambition—it is a logical evolution. Strategically located and commercially vibrant, the city already attracts thousands of shoppers daily. With structured investment, branding, and infrastructure support, Maharagama can evolve into a sleepless commercial destination, a cultural and tourism node, and a magnet for both local and international consumers.

Such a transformation aligns seamlessly with modern urban development models promoted by international development agencies—models that prioritise productivity, employment creation, poverty reduction, and improved quality of life.

Rationale for Transformation

Maharagama has long held a strategic advantage as one of Sri Lanka’s textile and retail centers.     With proper planning and investment, this identity can be leveraged to convert the city into a branded urban destination, a sleepless commercial hub, a tourism and cultural attraction, and a vibrant economic engine within the Colombo Metropolitan Region. Such transformation is consistent with modern city development models promoted by international funding agencies that seek to raise local productivity, employment, quality of life, alleviation of urban poverty, attraction and retaining a huge customer base both local and international to the city)

Current Opportunity

The convergence of the following factors make this moment and climate especially critical. Among them the new political leadership with strong public support, availability of a professionally developed concept paper, growing public demand for modernisation, interest  among public, private, business community and civil  society leaders to contribute, possibility of leveraging traditional strengths (textile industry and commercial vibrancy are  notable strengths.

The Silk City initiative therefore represents a timely and strategic window for Maharagama to secure national attention, donor interest and investor confidence.

A Window That Must Not Be Missed

Several factors make this moment decisive: Strong new political leadership with public mandate, Availability of a professionally developed concept, Rising citizen demand for modernization, Willingness of professionals, businesses, and civil society to contribute. The city’s established textile and commercial base

Taken together, these conditions create a strategic window to attract national attention, donor interest, and investor confidence.

But windows close.

Hard Truths: Challenges That Must Be Addressed

Ambition alone will not deliver transformation. The Silk City Initiative demands honest recognition of institutional constraints. MMC currently faces: Limited technical and project management capacity, rigid public-sector regulatory frameworks that slow procurement and partnerships, severe financial limitations, with internal revenues insufficient even for routine operations, the absence of a fully formalised, high-caliber Steering Committee.

Moreover, this is a mega urban project, requiring feasibility studies, impact assessments, bankable proposals, international partnerships, and sustained political and community backing.

A Strategic Roadmap for Leadership

For Mayor Saman Samarakoon, this represents a once-in-a-generation leadership moment. Key strategic actions are essential: 1.Immediate establishment of a credible Steering Committee, drawing expertise from government, private sector, academia, and civil society. 2. Creation of a dedicated Project Management Unit (PMU) with professional specialists. 3. Aggressive mobilisation of external funding, including central government support, international donors, bilateral partners, development banks, and corporate CSR initiatives. 4. Strategic political engagement to secure legitimacy and national backing. 5. Quick-win projects to build public confidence and momentum. 6. A structured communications strategy to brand and promote Silk City nationally and internationally. Firm positioning of textiles and creative industries as the heart of Maharagama’s economic identity

If successfully implemented, Silk City will not only redefine Maharagama’s future but also ensure that the names of those who led this transformation are etched permanently in the civic history of the city.

Voluntary Gift of National Value

Maharagama is intrinsically intertwined with the textile industry. Small scale and domestic textile industry play a pivotal role. Textile industry generates a couple of billion of rupees to the Maharagama City per annum. It is the one and only city that has a sleepless night and this textile hub provides ready-made garments to the entire country. Prices are comparatively cheaper. If this textile industry can be vertically and horizontally developed, a substantial income can be generated thus providing employment to vulnerable segments of employees who are mostly women. Paucity of textile technology and capital investment impede the growth of the industry. If Maharagama can collaborate with the Bombay of India textile industry, there would be an unbelievable transition. How Sri Lanka could pursue this goal. A blueprint for the development of the textile industry for the Maharagama City will be dealt with in a separate article due to time space.

It is achievable if the right structures, leadership commitments and partnerships are put in place without delay.

No municipal council in recent memory has been presented with such a pragmatic, forward-thinking and well-timed proposal. Likewise, few Mayors will ever be positioned as you are today — with the ability to initiate a transformation that will redefine the future of Maharagama for generations. It will not be a difficult task for Saman Samarakoon, Mayor of the MMC to accomplish the onerous tasks contained in the projects, with the acumen and experience he gained from his illustrious as a Commander of the SL Navy with the support of the councilors, Municipal staff and the members of the Parliamentarians and the committed team of the Silk-City Project.

 Voluntary Gift of National Value

Maharagama is intrinsically intertwined with the textile industry. The textile industries play a pivotal role. This textile hub provides ready-made garments to the entire country. Prices are comparatively cheaper. If this textile industry can be vertically and horizontally developed, a substantial income can be generated thus providing employment to vulnerable segments of employees who are mostly women.

Paucity of textile technology and capital investment impede the growth of the industry. If Maharagama can collaborate with the Bombay of India textile industry, there would be an unbelievable transition. A blueprint for the development of the textile industry for the Maharagama City will be dealt with in a separate article.

J.A.A.S  Ranasinghe
Productivity Specialist and Management Consultant
(The writer can becontacted via Email:rathula49@gmail.com)

Continue Reading

Features

Reading our unfinished economic story through Bandula Gunawardena’s ‘IMF Prakeerna Visadum’

Published

on

Book Review

Why Sri Lanka’s Return to the IMF Demands Deeper Reflection

By mid-2022, the term “economic crisis” ceased to be an abstract concept for most Sri Lankans. It was no longer confined to academic papers, policy briefings, or statistical tables. Instead, it became a lived and deeply personal experience. Fuel queues stretched for kilometres under the burning sun. Cooking gas vanished from household shelves. Essential medicines became difficult—sometimes impossible—to find. Food prices rose relentlessly, pushing basic nutrition beyond the reach of many families, while real incomes steadily eroded.

What had long existed as graphs, ratios, and warning signals in economic reports suddenly entered daily life with unforgiving force. The crisis was no longer something discussed on television panels or debated in Parliament; it was something felt at the kitchen table, at the bus stop, and in hospital corridors.

Amid this social and economic turmoil came another announcement—less dramatic in appearance, but far more consequential in its implications. Sri Lanka would once again seek assistance from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The announcement immediately divided public opinion. For some, the IMF represented an unavoidable lifeline—a last resort to stabilise a collapsing economy. For others, it symbolised a loss of economic sovereignty and a painful surrender to external control. Emotions ran high. Debates became polarised. Public discourse quickly hardened into slogans, accusations, and ideological posturing.

Yet beneath the noise, anger, and fear lay a more fundamental question—one that demanded calm reflection rather than emotional reaction:

Why did Sri Lanka have to return to the IMF at all?

This question does not lend itself to simple or comforting answers. It cannot be explained by a single policy mistake, a single government, or a single external shock. Instead, it requires an honest examination of decades of economic decision-making, institutional weaknesses, policy inconsistency, and political avoidance. It requires looking beyond the immediate crisis and asking how Sri Lanka repeatedly reached a point where IMF assistance became the only viable option.

Few recent works attempt this difficult task as seriously and thoughtfully as Dr. Bandula Gunawardena’s IMF Prakeerna Visadum. Rather than offering slogans or seeking easy culprits, the book situates Sri Lanka’s IMF engagement within a broader historical and structural narrative. In doing so, it shifts the debate away from blame and toward understanding—a necessary first step if the country is to ensure that this crisis does not become yet another chapter in a familiar and painful cycle.

Returning to the IMF: Accident or Inevitability?

The central argument of IMF Prakeerna Visadum is at once simple and deeply unsettling. It challenges a comforting narrative that has gained popularity in times of crisis and replaces it with a far more demanding truth:

Sri Lanka’s economic crisis was not created by the IMF.
IMF intervention became inevitable because Sri Lanka avoided structural reform for far too long.

This framing fundamentally alters the terms of the national debate. It shifts attention away from external blame and towards internal responsibility. Instead of asking whether the IMF is good or bad, Dr. Gunawardena asks a more difficult and more important question: what kind of economy repeatedly drives itself to a point where IMF assistance becomes unavoidable?

The book refuses the two easy positions that dominate public discussion. It neither defends the IMF uncritically as a benevolent saviour nor demonises it as the architect of Sri Lanka’s suffering. Instead, IMF intervention is placed within a broader historical and structural context—one shaped primarily by domestic policy choices, institutional weaknesses, and political avoidance.

Public discourse often portrays IMF programmes as the starting point of economic hardship. Dr. Gunawardena corrects this misconception by restoring the correct chronology—an essential step for any honest assessment of the crisis.

The IMF did not arrive at the beginning of Sri Lanka’s collapse.

It arrived after the collapse had already begun.

By the time negotiations commenced, Sri Lanka had exhausted its foreign exchange reserves, lost access to international capital markets, officially defaulted on its external debt, and entered a phase of runaway inflation and acute shortages.

Fuel queues, shortages of essential medicines, and scarcities of basic food items were not the product of IMF conditionality. They were the direct outcome of prolonged foreign-exchange depletion combined with years of policy mismanagement. Import restrictions were imposed not because the IMF demanded them, but because the country simply could not pay its bills.

From this perspective, the IMF programme did not introduce austerity into a functioning economy. It formalised an adjustment that had already become unavoidable. The economy was already contracting, consumption was already constrained, and living standards were already falling. The IMF framework sought to impose order, sequencing, and credibility on a collapse that was already under way.

Seen through this lens, the return to the IMF was not a freely chosen policy option, but the end result of years of postponed decisions and missed opportunities.

A Long IMF Relationship, Short National Memory

Sri Lanka’s engagement with the IMF is neither new nor exceptional. For decades, governments of all political persuasions have turned to the Fund whenever balance-of-payments pressures became acute. Each engagement was presented as a temporary rescue—an extraordinary response to an unusual storm.

Yet, as Dr. Gunawardena meticulously documents, the storms were not unusual. What was striking was not the frequency of crises, but the remarkable consistency of their underlying causes.

Fiscal indiscipline persisted even during periods of growth. Government revenue remained structurally weak. Public debt expanded rapidly, often financing recurrent expenditure rather than productive investment. Meanwhile, the external sector failed to generate sufficient foreign exchange to sustain a consumption-led growth model.

IMF programmes brought temporary stability. Inflation eased. Reserves stabilised. Growth resumed. But once external pressure diminished, reform momentum faded. Political priorities shifted. Structural weaknesses quietly re-emerged.

This recurring pattern—crisis, adjustment, partial compliance, and relapse—became a defining feature of Sri Lanka’s economic management. The most recent crisis differed only in scale. This time, there was no room left to postpone adjustment.

Fiscal Fragility: The Core of the Crisis

A central focus of IMF Prakeerna Visadum is Sri Lanka’s chronically weak fiscal structure. Despite relatively strong social indicators and a capable administrative state, government revenue as a share of GDP remained exceptionally low.

Frequent tax changes, politically motivated exemptions, and weak enforcement steadily eroded the tax base. Instead of building a stable revenue system, governments relied increasingly on borrowing—both domestic and external.

Much of this borrowing financed subsidies, transfers, and public sector wages rather than productivity-enhancing investment. Over time, debt servicing crowded out development spending, shrinking fiscal space.

Fiscal reform failed not because it was technically impossible, Dr. Gunawardena argues, but because it was politically inconvenient. The costs were immediate and visible; the benefits long-term and diffuse. The eventual debt default was therefore not a surprise, but a delayed consequence.

The External Sector Trap

Sri Lanka’s narrow export base—apparel, tea, tourism, and remittances—generated foreign exchange but masked deeper weaknesses. Export diversification stagnated. Industrial upgrading lagged. Integration into global value chains remained limited.

Meanwhile, import-intensive consumption expanded. When external shocks arrived—global crises, pandemics, commodity price spikes—the economy had little resilience.

Exchange-rate flexibility alone cannot generate exports. Trade liberalisation without an industrial strategy redistributes pain rather than creates growth.

Monetary Policy and the Cost of Lost Credibility

Prolonged monetary accommodation, often driven by political pressure, fuelled inflation, depleted reserves, and eroded confidence. Once credibility was lost, restoring it required painful adjustment.

Macroeconomic credibility, Dr. Gunawardena reminds us, is a national asset. Once squandered, it is extraordinarily expensive to rebuild.

IMF Conditionality: Stabilisation Without Development?

IMF programmes stabilise economies, but they do not automatically deliver inclusive growth. In Sri Lanka, adjustment raised living costs and reduced real incomes. Social safety nets expanded, but gaps persisted.

This raises a critical question: can stabilisation succeed politically if it fails socially?

Political Economy: The Missing Middle

Reforms collided repeatedly with electoral incentives and patronage networks. IMF programmes exposed contradictions but could not resolve them. Without domestic ownership, reform risks becoming compliance rather than transformation.

Beyond Blame: A Diagnostic Moment

The book’s greatest strength lies in its refusal to engage in blame politics. IMF intervention is treated as a diagnostic signal, not a cause—a warning light illuminating unresolved structural failures.

The real challenge is not exiting an IMF programme, but exiting the cycle that makes IMF programmes inevitable.

A Strong Public Appeal: Why This Book Must Be Read

This is not an anti-IMF book.
It is not a pro-IMF book.
It is a pro-Sri Lanka book.

Published by Sarasaviya Publishers, IMF Prakeerna Visadum equips readers not with anger, but with clarity—offering history, evidence, and honest reflection when the country needs them most.

Conclusion: Will We Learn This Time?

The IMF can stabilise an economy.
It cannot build institutions.
It cannot create competitiveness.
It cannot deliver inclusive development.

Those responsibilities remain domestic.

The question before Sri Lanka is simple but profound:
Will we repeat the cycle, or finally learn the lesson?

The answer does not lie in Washington.
It lies with us.

By Professor Ranjith Bandara
Emeritus Professor, University of Colombo

Continue Reading

Trending