Connect with us

Features

Unveiling the layers of JFK’s ‘Think Tank’

Published

on

JFK. Image couresty Pew Research Centre, US

by Dr B.J.C.Perera
Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow,

Postgraduate Institute of Medicine,
University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.


John Fitzgerald Kennedy or JFK was the 35th President of the United States of America. He served as President from 20th January 1961, until his assassination on 22nd November 1963. Though his presidency lasted only a short time, President Kennedy’s administration was known for innovation, intellect, and a fervent commitment to progress. It consisted of a paradigm shift of the traditional qualities of the then-prevalent American way of running a country.

Central to his governance was the establishment of a ‘Think Tank’; a supremely dynamic hub of intellectual exchanges and policy formulation, working at the highest levels possible. This article attempts to delve into the multifaceted aspects and workings of Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’, exploring its composition, objectives, methods, and lasting impact on American governance, as well as global affairs.

Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ was a heterogeneous collective of brilliant minds from various disciplines, including, but not restricted to, academia, industry, government, and the military. Comprising of economists, scientists, researchers, strategists, and policymakers, the ‘Think Tank’ brought together diverse perspectives to tackle complex challenges facing the nation. Notable members included Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy, Walt Rostow, and Theodore Sorensen, among many others who were most capable persons in their own right.

Their collective expertise spanned fields such as economics, defence, imports and exports, foreign policy, health, and social welfare, just to mention a few, clearly reflecting Kennedy’s vision for a comprehensive approach to governance. There was no limit to a fixed number of people who worked in the ‘Think Tank’. Kennedy often consulted with a wide range of experts and scholars on specific issues, drawing upon their expertise to facilitate policymaking and decision-making processes.

The composition of the ‘Think Tank’ evolved, with different individuals contributing to various initiatives and policy discussions throughout Kennedy’s presidency. Instead of focusing solely on IQ, Kennedy most likely valued a diverse range of skills, experience, and perspectives among his advisors and intellectuals to facilitate robust policy discussions and decision-making processes. At its core, Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ aimed to foster innovative solutions to pressing domestic and international issues.

Whether confronting the Cold War, advancing civil rights, or spurring economic growth, the ‘Think Tank’ served as a crucible for bold ideas, minute dissection of the possibilities and provision of advice on pragmatic policies. Kennedy envisioned it as a catalyst for change, a forum where rigorous analysis and creative thinking could inform the best processes of decision-making at the highest levels of government. Beyond mere problem-solving, the ‘Think Tank’ sought to shape long-term strategies that aligned with Kennedy’s vision of a more prosperous, just, and secure future.

A true-to-life analysis of the methods employed within Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ were many determinations characterised by rigour, honesty, non-partisan evaluations, collaboration, and forward-thinking. Regular meetings, brainstorming sessions, and policy workshops facilitated lively debate and the exchange of ideas. Members of the initiative drew upon empirical research, economic modelling, and geopolitical analysis to put forward their recommendations.

Moreover, Kennedy encouraged a culture of experimentation and even a bit of risk-taking, urging his advisors to explore unconventional approaches and thereby challenge conventional wisdom. This dynamic environment fostered a spirit of innovation that propelled the administration’s agenda forward.

Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ played a pivotal role in shaping several landmark initiatives and policies during his presidency. In the realm of national security, the Cuban Missile Crisis stands as a testament to the ‘Think Tank’s’ strategic acumen, as advisors navigated the treacherous waters of nuclear brinkmanship with prudence and resolve. Domestically, the ‘Think Tank’ contributed to the formulation of legislative initiatives such as the New Frontier, which aimed to stimulate economic growth, expand access to healthcare and education, and promote civil rights.

Furthermore, Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ spearheaded efforts to revitalize American diplomacy and bolster alliances abroad, laying the groundwork for initiatives such as the Alliance for Progress and the Peace Corps.

While Kennedy’s presidency was tragically cut short, the legacy of his ‘Think Tank’ endures as a testament to the power of visionary leadership and collaborative governance. Many of the policies and initiatives championed by the ‘Think Tank’ continue to shape the trajectory of American politics and global affairs, even to this day. Moreover, Kennedy’s emphasis on intellectual curiosity, unbridled honesty, strategic foresight, and moral clarity and transparency continue to inspire future generations of leaders to confront the challenges of their time with courage and conviction.

In an era marked by uncertainty and complexity, the enduring legacy of Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ serves as a beacon of hope, as well as wonder, and a reminder of the transformative potential of courageous and innovative ideas, implemented by collective action. John Fitzgerald Kennedy was an extremely strong statesman. However, little did many people realise that such strength emanated from a proper appraisal of even the most complex of problems, ably assisted by that unique ‘Think Tank’ of his. That proven oasis of splendour was the one that facilitated the best brains of the USA to work steadfastly and backstage on every issue that President JFK had to deal with.

President John F. Kennedy’s ‘Think Tank’ represented a bold experiment in governance, harnessing the supreme power of a combination of intellect and collaboration to confront the pressing challenges of its time. Through its diverse composition, innovative methods, and far-reaching impact, the ‘Think Tank’ left an indelible mark on American politics and global affairs. As we reflect on its legacy, we are reminded of the enduring importance of visionary leadership, rigorous analysis, and principled decision-making, in shaping a brighter future for generations to come, in a country where a person of the calibre of JKH was the Head of State.

There is a reflection as a thoughtful postscript to this article. As far as we are aware, over the last 76 years following our independence, no Sri Lankan Head of State has even thought of using such a ‘Think Tank’ formulated and assembled using the best independent brains and self-regulating strategists of our Motherland.

Traditionally, their advisors have consisted of a conglomerate of ‘yes’ persons, colloquially referred to as henchmen and henchwomen, who would not even dream of calling a spade, just what it is; a spade. The Heads of State, both male and female, have generally thought that they knew anything and everything. Such traits are the ones that fit in ruthlessly and quite significantly to the distinctive lexicon of lesser mortals. Many of them have had even more than a sprinkling of autocratic and steam-rolling behaviour with high-decibel value retorts to those who even vaguely disagreed. One has only to look at the way things have panned out in the United States of America and our so-called Paradise Isle, over the period from the early 1960s, to get a glimpse of the way things have progressed in the two countries. Need we say more?

The author acknowledges assistance from AI in writing this article.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Misinterpreting President Dissanayake on National Reconciliation

Published

on

President Dissanayake

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been investing his political capital in going to the public to explain some of the most politically sensitive and controversial issues. At a time when easier political choices are available, the president is choosing the harder path of confronting ethnic suspicion and communal fears. There are three issues in particular on which the president’s words have generated strong reactions. These are first with regard to Buddhist pilgrims going to the north of the country with nationalist motivations. Second is the controversy relating to the expansion of the Tissa Raja Maha Viharaya, a recently constructed Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai which has become a flashpoint between local Tamil residents and Sinhala nationalist groups. Third is the decision not to give the war victory a central place in the Independence Day celebrations.

Even in the opposition, when his party held only three seats in parliament, Anura Kumara Dissanayake took his role as a public educator seriously. He used to deliver lengthy, well researched and easily digestible speeches in parliament. He continues this practice as president. It can be seen that his statements are primarily meant to elevate the thinking of the people and not to win votes the easy way. The easy way to win votes whether in Sri Lanka or elsewhere in the world is to rouse nationalist and racist sentiments and ride that wave. Sri Lanka’s post independence political history shows that narrow ethnic mobilisation has often produced short term electoral gains but long term national damage.

Sections of the opposition and segments of the general public have been critical of the president for taking these positions. They have claimed that the president is taking these positions in order to obtain more Tamil votes or to appease minority communities. The same may be said in reverse of those others who take contrary positions that they seek the Sinhala votes. These political actors who thrive on nationalist mobilisation have attempted to portray the president’s statements as an abandonment of the majority community. The president’s actions need to be understood within the larger framework of national reconciliation and long term national stability.

Reconciler’s Duty

When the president referred to Buddhist pilgrims from the south going to the north, he was not speaking about pilgrims visiting long established Buddhist heritage sites such as Nagadeepa or Kandarodai. His remarks were directed at a specific and highly contentious development, the recently built Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai and those built elsewhere in the recent past in the north and east. The temple in Kankesanturai did not emerge from the religious needs of a local Buddhist community as there is none in that area. It has been constructed on land that was formerly owned and used by Tamil civilians and which came under military occupation as a high security zone. What has made the issue of the temple particularly controversial is that it was established with the support of the security forces.

The controversy has deepened because the temple authorities have sought to expand the site from approximately one acre to nearly fourteen acres on the basis that there was a historic Buddhist temple in that area up to the colonial period. However, the Tamil residents of the area fear that expansion would further displace surrounding residents and consolidate a permanent Buddhist religious presence in the present period in an area where the local population is overwhelmingly Hindu. For many Tamils in Kankesanturai, the issue is not Buddhism as a religion but the use of religion as a vehicle for territorial assertion and demographic changes in a region that bore the brunt of the war. Likewise, there are other parts of the north and east where other temples or places of worship have been established by the military personnel in their camps during their war-time occupation and questions arise regarding the future when these camps are finally closed.

There are those who have actively organised large scale pilgrimages from the south to make the Tissa temple another important religious site. These pilgrimages are framed publicly as acts of devotion but are widely perceived locally as demonstrations of dominance. Each such visit heightens tension, provokes protest by Tamil residents, and risks confrontation. For communities that experienced mass displacement, military occupation and land loss, the symbolism of a state backed religious structure on contested land with the backing of the security forces is impossible to separate from memories of war and destruction. A president committed to reconciliation cannot remain silent in the face of such provocations, however uncomfortable it may be to challenge sections of the majority community.

High-minded leadership

The controversy regarding the president’s Independence Day speech has also generated strong debate. In that speech the president did not refer to the military victory over the LTTE and also did not use the term “war heroes” to describe soldiers. For many Sinhala nationalist groups, the absence of these references was seen as an attempt to diminish the sacrifices of the armed forces. The reality is that Independence Day means very different things to different communities. In the north and east the same day is marked by protest events and mourning and as a “Black Day”, symbolising the consolidation of a state they continue to experience as excluding them and not empathizing with the full extent of their losses.

By way of contrast, the president’s objective was to ensure that Independence Day could be observed as a day that belonged to all communities in the country. It is not correct to assume that the president takes these positions in order to appease minorities or secure electoral advantage. The president is only one year into his term and does not need to take politically risky positions for short term electoral gains. Indeed, the positions he has taken involve confronting powerful nationalist political forces that can mobilise significant opposition. He risks losing majority support for his statements. This itself indicates that the motivation is not electoral calculation.

President Dissanayake has recognized that Sri Lanka’s long term political stability and economic recovery depend on building trust among communities that once peacefully coexisted and then lived through decades of war. Political leadership is ultimately tested by the willingness to say what is necessary rather than what is politically expedient. The president’s recent interventions demonstrate rare national leadership and constitute an attempt to shift public discourse away from ethnic triumphalism and toward a more inclusive conception of nationhood. Reconciliation cannot take root if national ceremonies reinforce the perception of victory for one community and defeat for another especially in an internal conflict.

BY Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Recovery of LTTE weapons

Published

on

Sri Lanka Navy in action

I have read a newspaper report that the Special Task Force of Sri Lanka Police, with help of Military Intelligence, recovered three buried yet well-preserved 84mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers used by the LTTE, in the Kudumbimalai area, Batticaloa.

These deadly weapons were used by the LTTE SEA TIGER WING to attack the Sri Lanka Navy ships and craft in 1990s. The first incident was in February 1997, off Iranativu island, in the Gulf of Mannar.

Admiral Cecil Tissera took over as Commander of the Navy on 27 January, 1997, from Admiral Mohan Samarasekara.

The fight against the LTTE was intensified from 1996 and the SLN was using her Vanguard of the Navy, Fast Attack Craft Squadron, to destroy the LTTE’s littoral fighting capabilities. Frequent confrontations against the LTTE Sea Tiger boats were reported off Mullaitivu, Point Pedro and Velvetiturai areas, where SLN units became victorious in most of these sea battles, except in a few incidents where the SLN lost Fast Attack Craft.

Carl Gustaf recoilless rocket launchers

The intelligence reports confirmed that the LTTE Sea Tigers was using new recoilless rocket launchers against aluminium-hull FACs, and they were deadly at close quarter sea battles, but the exact type of this weapon was not disclosed.

The following incident, which occurred in February 1997, helped confirm the weapon was Carl Gustaf 84 mm Recoilless gun!

DATE: 09TH FEBRUARY, 1997, morning 0600 hrs.

LOCATION: OFF IRANATHIVE.

FACs: P 460 ISRAEL BUILT, COMMANDED BY CDR MANOJ JAYESOORIYA

P 452 CDL BUILT, COMMANDED BY LCDR PM WICKRAMASINGHE (ON TEMPORARY COMMAND. PROPER OIC LCDR N HEENATIGALA)

OPERATED FROM KKS.

CONFRONTED WITH LTTE ATTACK CRAFT POWERED WITH FOUR 250 HP OUT BOARD MOTORS.

TARGET WAS DESTROYED AND ONE LTTE MEMBER WAS CAPTURED.

LEADING MARINE ENGINEERING MECHANIC OF THE FAC CAME UP TO THE BRIDGE CARRYING A PROJECTILE WHICH WAS FIRED BY THE LTTE BOAT, DURING CONFRONTATION, WHICH PENETRATED THROUGH THE FAC’s HULL, AND ENTERED THE OICs CABIN (BETWEEN THE TWO BUNKS) AND HIT THE AUXILIARY ENGINE ROOM DOOR AND HAD FALLEN DOWN WITHOUT EXPLODING. THE ENGINE ROOM DOOR WAS HEAVILY DAMAGED LOOSING THE WATER TIGHT INTEGRITY OF THE FAC.

THE PROJECTILE WAS LATER HANDED OVER TO THE NAVAL WEAPONS EXPERTS WHEN THE FACs RETURNED TO KKS. INVESTIGATIONS REVEALED THE WEAPON USED BY THE ENEMY WAS 84 mm CARL GUSTAF SHOULDER-FIRED RECOILLESS GUN AND THIS PROJECTILE WAS AN ILLUMINATER BOMB OF ONE MILLION CANDLE POWER. BUT THE ATTACKERS HAS FAILED TO REMOVE THE SAFETY PIN, THEREFORE THE BOMB WAS NOT ACTIVATED.

Sea Tigers

Carl Gustaf 84 mm recoilless gun was named after Carl Gustaf Stads Gevärsfaktori, which, initially, produced it. Sweden later developed the 84mm shoulder-fired recoilless gun by the Royal Swedish Army Materiel Administration during the second half of 1940s as a crew served man- portable infantry support gun for close range multi-role anti-armour, anti-personnel, battle field illumination, smoke screening and marking fire.

It is confirmed in Wikipedia that Carl Gustaf Recoilless shoulder-fired guns were used by the only non-state actor in the world – the LTTE – during the final Eelam War.

It is extremely important to check the batch numbers of the recently recovered three launchers to find out where they were produced and other details like how they ended up in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka?

By Admiral Ravindra C. Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc (Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Continue Reading

Features

Yellow Beatz … a style similar to K-pop!

Published

on

Yes, get ready to vibe with Yellow Beatz, Sri Lanka’s awesome girl group, keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-pop!

With high-energy beats and infectious hooks, these talented ladies are here to shake up the music scene.

Think bold moves, catchy hooks, and, of course, spicy versions of old Sinhala hits, and Yellow Beatz is the package you won’t want to miss!

According to a spokesman for the group, Yellow Beatz became a reality during the Covid period … when everyone was stuck at home, in lockdown.

“First we interviewed girls, online, and selected a team that blended well, as four voices, and then started rehearsals. One of the cover songs we recorded, during those early rehearsals, unexpectedly went viral on Facebook. From that moment onward, we continued doing cover songs, and we received a huge response. Through that, we were able to bring back some beautiful Sri Lankan musical creations that were being forgotten, and introduce them to the new generation.”

The team members, I am told, have strong musical skills and with proper training their goal is to become a vocal group recognised around the world.

Believe me, their goal, they say, is not only to take Sri Lanka’s name forward, in the music scene, but to bring home a Grammy Award, as well.

“We truly believe we can achieve this with the love and support of everyone in Sri Lanka.”

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz as they have received an exceptional opportunity to represent Sri Lanka at the World Championships of Performing Arts in the USA.

Under the guidance of Chris Raththara, the Director for Sri Lanka, and with the blessings of all Sri Lankans, the girls have a great hope that they can win this milestone.

“We believe this will be a moment of great value for us as Yellow Beatz, and also for all Sri Lankans, and it will be an important inspiration for the future of our country.”

Along with all the preparation for the event in the USA, they went on to say they also need to manage their performances, original song recordings, and everything related.

The year 2026 is very special for Yellow Beatz

“We have strong confidence in ourselves and in our sincere intentions, because we are a team that studies music deeply, researches within the field, and works to take the uniqueness of Sri Lankan identity to the world.”

At present, they gather at the Voices Lab Academy, twice a week, for new creations and concert rehearsals.

This project was created by Buddhika Dayarathne who is currently working as a Pop Vocal lecturer at SLTC Campus. Voice Lab Academy is also his own private music academy and Yellow Beatz was formed through that platform.

Buddhika is keen to take Sri Lankan music to the world with a style similar to K-Pop and Yellow Beatz began as a result of that vision. With that same aim, we all work together as one team.

“Although it was a little challenging for the four of us girls to work together at first, we have united for our goal and continue to work very flexibly and with dedication. Our parents and families also give their continuous blessings and support for this project,” Rameesha, Dinushi, Newansa and Risuri said.

Last year, Yellow Beatz released their first original song, ‘Ihirila’ , and with everything happening this year, they are also preparing for their first album.

Continue Reading

Trending