Midweek Review

Vanni war and Israel-Gaza conflict: Funding catastrophes

Published

3 years ago

2023/11/1

Four-wheel drive double cabs with anti-aircraft guns captured during Vanni offensive. The LTTE procured these vehicles in 2003-2004 with the support of the then government of Sri Lanka (pics courtesy SLA)

The utterly duped Sri Lanka government had no qualms in bending backwards to appease the LTTE in so many ways believing the so-called peace facilitators to the bitter end, despite the LTTE violating virtually all CFA rules.

Viking peace facilitators took the Lankan leaders on right royal ride by making them believe in the Tigers to the bitter end. A case in point is the payments made by the then government in respect of an undisclosed number of brand new four-wheel drive double cabs acquired by the LTTE from Toyota Lanka (Pvt.) Ltd. According to a letter sent by S. Pulieedevan of the LTTE Peace Secretariat, dated
January 26, 2004, to Bradman Weerakoon, the Secretary to Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, the government had paid Customs duty, surcharge, excise Duty, PAL, VAT and BTT for those double cabs. The LTTE only paid the CIF value of the vehicles. During the Vanni battles, the Army captured double cabs mounted with anti-aircraft guns. These double cabs could have been among the vehicles acquired from Toyota Lanka. What really baffled the public is that the LTTE received such special status even 10 months after it quit the negotiating table.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

The creation of Hamas now fighting Israel can be easily compared with the formation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and other Tamil groups in the late 70s. Hamas is an Arabic acronym for Islamic Resistance Movement.

Hamas and the LTTE were meant to undermine the elected representatives of the Palestinians, and the Tamil speaking community, respectively. That was one of the primary objectives of those who initially sponsored Hamas and the LTTE and other Tamil groups which gave up separatist agenda during Ranasinghe Premadasa’s tenure as the President (Jan. 02, 1989, to May Day, 1993).

Later objectives of the sponsors and strategies of Hamas and the LTTE changed over the years as they rapidly expanded, drawing funding from many other sources. Both groups achieved conventional status, and the losses they inflicted on governments were an indication of their military prowess. When Israel, the founding benefactor of Hamas, stopped funding it, regional powers, opposed to the Jewish State, stepped in, in a big way.

The LTTE went to the extent of killing Rajiv Gandhi who, in his capacity as the Indian Premier, forced Sri Lanka to accept the deployment of the Indian Army here (July 1987-March 1990) to impose a solution that suited New Delhi’s overall strategy at that time. Gandhi was killed in May 1991 by an LTTE suicide bomber during an election rally in Tamil Nadu. During the IPKF deployment here the LTTE humiliated India by killing over 1,300 officers and men whereas Hamas stunned Israel with an unprecedented Oct. 07 attack after a spate of large scale attacks/confrontations over the years. Israel fought three wars with Hamas in 2009, 2012 and 2014 and the current conflict is so far the worst.

Last week The Island dealt with some of the issues at hand in an article titled Vanni war and Israel-Gaza conflict: similarities and differences. The writer felt the need to discuss the Indian financial package that helped turn a Sri Lankan armed group into one of the world’s most sophisticated fighting machines. But soon after India halted funding terrorism here, the LTTE expanded its vast network of revenue sources here and overseas. One of its new-found sponsors happened to be the government of Sri Lanka.

Before we further discuss the LTTE funding/revenue sources, it would be pertinent to mention how Israel facilitated the growth of Hamas to undermine the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and faction, Fatah.

Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, who had been the Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s, is on record as having told the New York Times that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a counterweight to the PLO and Fatah.

New York Times quoted the retired Brig. General as having disclosed how the military government funded Hamas through mosques. Number of others had commented on the Israeli funding for Hamas. Perhaps one of the most significant statements pertaining to the Jewish state’s affiliation with Hamas was made by Avner Cohen, one-time Israeli religious affairs official who served the Gaza administration for over two decades. Wall Street Journal in 2009 quoted Cohen as having declared: “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation.” That was the year Israel fought its first war with Hamas. Cohen has revealed the warning he issued to the Israeli government in the mid-80s over its divide-and-rule strategy in the occupied region. The Wall Street Journal quoted the Israeli as having said: “I … suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face.”

The US, the UK, France or EU didn’t find fault with Hamas at the time Israel promoted Hamas at the expense of the PLO and Fatah. Israel is paying a very heavy price for what can be called a strategic miscalculation in their policy.

Jayantha Dhanapala on states sponsoring terrorism

Over a year after the successful conclusion of the war against the LTTE, the late Jayantha Dhanapala, one-time UN Under-Secretary-General for the Office for Disarmament Affairs from 1998-2003, appeared before the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. Dhanapala, the career diplomat, who has had diplomatic postings in London, Beijing, Washington DC, New Delhi and Geneva and also performed ambassadorial duties in Geneva accredited to the UN from 1984-1987 and in Washington DC from 1995-1997 addressed the entire gamut of issues on Aug. 25, 2010.

Dhanapala dealt with the contentious issue of governments sponsoring terrorism with the focus on the Indian funding of the LTTE. Perhaps, Dhanapala may not have taken President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s funding and arming of the LTTE into consideration. Let me reproduce what the erudite former diplomat Dhanapala who served as the head of the Norwegian-funded Secretariat for Coordinating Peace Process (SCOPP 2004-2005) declared before the LLRC: “Now I think it is important for us to expand that concept to bring in the culpability of those members of the international community who have subscribed to the situation that has caused injury to the civilians of a nation. I talk about the way in which terrorist groups are given sanctuary; are harboured; are supplied with arms and training by some countries with regard to their neighbours or with regard to other countries. We know that in our case this happened, and I don’t want to name countries, but even countries who have allowed their financial procedures and systems to be abused in such a way that money can flow from their countries in order to buy the arms and ammunitions that cause the deaths, the maiming and the destruction of property in Sri Lanka are to blame and there is therefore a responsibility to protect our civilians and the civilians of other nation States from that kind of behaviour on the part of members of the international community, and I think this is something that will echo with many countries in the Non-Aligned Movement where Sri Lanka has a very respected position and where I hope we will be able to raise this issue.”

The writer covered the LLRC proceedings for The Island throughout the sittings held at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute (LKI) named after the much-respected Foreign Minister slain by the LTTE. Actually, Dharnapala’s statement, regardless of its importance, never received the government attention it deserved. In fact, the government simply ignored it. The then Rajapaksa government was more preoccupied in playing politics with the accountability issue than addressing the concerns of the Tamil speaking people and the Western powers who had to woo the vociferous Tamil Diaspora for their local vote bank.

Dhanapala not only dealt with India but underscored the responsibility of Western powers who allowed the LTTE to raise funds in their countries to wage war here. The sinking of nearly a dozen floating LTTE arsenals over the years in Indian waters, Sri Lankan waters, and on the high seas, revealed the extent of the funding available to the LTTE. The LTTE had a range of weapons, including heavy artillery, shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, anti-tank missiles, underwater equipment and fast boats. Acquisition of such an arsenal couldn’t have been done without unlimited funds. The group had so much funds it hired foreigners and went to the extent of making an attempt to bribe a US State Department official.

Nearly 15 years after the war, only India knows how much the Gandhi governments spent on establishing a massive terrorist project in Sri Lanka. In fact, the LTTE demanded compensation from India to cover up losses the group suffered in the wake of the 1987 Indo-Lanka peace accord. The LTTE wanted compensation for the denial of its right to tax people living in areas under its control and those who entered that region.

It would be pertinent to mention that India spent not only on the LTTE but also on nearly half a dozen Tamil groups, including the Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF) and the Tamil National Army (TNA) that was formed in the wake of India’s decision to withdraw its troops from the then temporarily merged Northern and Eastern Provinces after the Premadasa government asked them to leave unceremoniously.

How Sri Lanka funded LTTE

During the war, the then Opposition MP Bandula Gunawardena, in his own hand writing, released a statement that dealt with payments made to the LTTE at the behest of President Ranasinghe Premadasa. Lawmaker Gunawardena who now served the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa Cabinet, disclosed that the Treasury made the largest single payment months after the eruption of Eelam War II in the second week of June 1990. According to the document issued by MP Gunawardena, the first payment had been made on August 09, 1989, a couple of months after the LTTE initiated talks with Premadasa while the Indian Army was deployed here. Altogether, there had been 15 payments of Rs 5 mn each on 15 separate occasions, with the largest and the final payment of Rs 50 mn paid on Nov. 05, 1990.

At the time of these payments, R. Paskaralingam had been the Secretary to the Treasury and he couldn’t have resisted the orders issued by the President. Premadasa also had no hesitation in issuing a large stock of T-56 assault rifles and ammunition to the LTTE. His administration also issued weapons to other Tamil groups. Perhaps, Sri Lanka should officially acknowledge the type and the amount of weapons issued to Tamil groups and the funds paid to them.

Let me remind the reader that the last and the largest payment was made many months after the LTTE executed several hundred surrendered policemen in the East after they were ordered to do so by the then government and overran isolated Army detachments along the Kandy-Jaffna road, north of Omanthai. As a result, the Army lost the overland Main Supply Route (MSR) route to Jaffna. The MSR was restored in January 2009, nearly 19 years after the military suffered defeat in the Vanni.

During the conflict, successive governments accepted the LTTE’s right to tax people living in areas they controlled. Those entering the region under its control, too, were taxed.

But following the signing of a one-sided Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) with the LTTE in Feb. 2002. arranged by the Norwegian facilitators ,unknown to many, including then Commander in Chief President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, the then government did away with all restrictions. Overnight, the government accepted a region under exclusive control of the LTTE where the group denied the right of other Tamil political parties to engage in political activity. The LTTE was granted special status. The government paved the way for the LTTE to receive substantial foreign funding and also bring in a range of equipment through the Bandaranaike International Airport (BIA) without checks.

Funding for LTTE radio

Only Hamas really knows what it did with funds received from Israel. Similarly, only the LTTE knows what it really did with funds received from Sri Lanka during the conflict. Let me examine one incident during the 2002-2003 period that involved Sri Lanka, Norway and the LTTE on the basis of disclosure made by Bradman Weerakoon, the then Secretary to Premier Ranil Wickremesinghe, regarding the agreement on an LTTE proposal to install and operate an FM station in Kilinochchi.

Weerakoon, in an article titled ‘Initiating and Sustaining the Peace Process: Origins and Challenges’ included in ‘Negotiating Peace in Sri Lanka: Efforts, Failures and Lessons’ discussed the circumstances under which the equipment had been brought into the country, with the support of the Norwegians. Weerakoon described the agreement on the FM station as a confidence building measure.

The upgrading of the LTTE propaganda arm took place following the closure of Vanni Sevaya and restrictions on the Army with regard to dissemination of security related news. (Vanni Sevawa catered especially for the armed forces, police and Sinhala civilians living in the area)

Having described the installation of the new equipment as a confidence building measure, Weerakoon inadvertently exposed the despicable LTTE strategy. Had it been a genuinely confidence building measure, the LTTE would have discussed their move to establish an FM station before ordering the equipment.

Weerakoon discussed in considerable detail how the LTTE had conducted the transaction with the help of the Norwegians. Weerakoon said: “The Political headquarters of the LTTE in a letter to the PM’s Office on Oct. 1, 2002, informed the government that it had purchased a new FM transmitter, which they would like to bring to Vanni to be used in their dissemination campaign about the peace process. The equipment had already been purchased by them in Singapore at a cost of USD 93,265 and was on the way by sea. The letter requested customs clearance and duty free importation and no delay.”

Weerakoon also revealed how the Norwegians utilized their diplomatic status to clear the LTTE cargo duty free by substituting itself as the consignee of the goods. But once the Norwegians handed over the goods to the LTTE through SCOPP (Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process), the SCOPP became liable for duty amounting to Rs. 3 mn, which according to Weerakoon, was paid with funds made available by Norway to the SCOPP. Weerakoon estimated the annual donations received by SCOPP from Norway at Rs. 12 mn.

Weerakoon admitted that the LTTE had informed the government of its move, while the cargo was on its way to Colombo and the Norwegians stepped in at the right moment to have the equipment delivered to the LTTE.

A treacherous government ordered the Army to transport the equipment from Colombo port to Omanthai and hand them over to the LTTE, while their Vanni Sevaya remained closed.

While Weerakoon referred to Norwegian funds being utilised to pay for import duty, the then Director General of SCOPP, Dr. John Gooneratne claimed using funds received from Sweden. The revelation is made in a letter Gooneratne wrote to Treasury Chief, Charitha Ratwatte. The letter dated Jan. 16, 2004, referred to the role played by the Prime Minister’s Office in carrying out the controversial transaction.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to know, at least now, who actually paid duty for the LTTE equipment?

Funding through government

Sri Lanka obviously believed the LTTE wouldn’t accept a political solution and the group couldn’t be defeated on the battlefield. Therefore, the group granted the opportunity to tax the people in the North and East, whereas Western powers turned a blind eye to massive fund raising projects undertaken by the LTTE in Europe, the US and Canada as well as other countries. How much did the LTTE spend on acquiring and operating a fleet of large ships to store arms, ammunition and equipment in the high seas and transfer weapons as and when required?

The LTTE brazenly used the CFA to secure funds even from the international community. The then government fully cooperated with the LTTE strategy.

Former respected MP Rajiva Wijesinha, during his tenure as Secretary General of SCOPP, and during the initial phase of the Vanni offensive that was launched in March 2007, made a shocking revelation regarding funds received by the LTTE. In response to Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda’s criticism of the SCOPP, Prof. Wijesinha issued a statement titled ‘Sri Lanka’s civil society organizations: Shady techniques and bribes to the Tigers?’

Wijesinha dealt with hitherto unknown funding operations arranged by the UNP government in support of the peace process facilitated by the CFA. One of the grants-UNDP project worth USD 600,000 signed by Bradman Weerakoon who was also the Commissioner General for the Coordination of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconciliation as well as the External Resources Department raised eyebrows.

Wijesinha expressed surprise at the signing of the agreement on Dec 19, 2003 amidst deepening political turmoil caused by President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga suspending Parliament. She also sacked three ministers and brought the Army on to the streets of Colombo. However, what Prof. Wijesinha didn’t say that by then the LTTE had quit the negotiating table. Why did the government authorize such a huge amount of UNDP funds for the so-called LTTE Peace Secretariat nine months after the LTTE suspended its participation in the Norwegian arranged talks? Prof. Wijesinha pointed out that the UNDP funding was made available to the LTTE just months ahead of the general election. Did the UNDP realize what it was doing?

The LTTE-backed Tamil National Alliance (TNA) recorded its best performance at the general election held in early April, 2004. The Parliament conveniently forgot what the EU polls observation mission said about the LTTE helping the TNA to secure over 20 seats in the Northern and Eastern Provinces by stuffing ballot boxes. This was against the backdrop of the devastating split in the LTTE caused by Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan alias Karuna Amman, one-time commander of LTTE formations which thwarted Operation Jayasikurui in the Vanni theatre in 1997/1998 period.

The writer intended to discuss the funding made available by various interested parties, including governments to those who promoted the peace process involving the LTTE over a period of time.

The Hamas attack on Israel should influence Sri Lanka to examine various aspects of the conflict that was brought to an end through military means-an effort so far unmatched by any country since the end of World War II.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

NPP drowning in sea of scams

Published

5 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

Outgoing Treasury Chief Mahinda Siriwardena congratulates his successor Harshana Suriyapperuma in late June 2025 at the Finance Ministry

The Opposition is pressing for a one-day debate on USD 2.5 mn Treasury theft, which is more like a daylight robbery that had been kept under wraps by Treasury mandarins till ‘Free Lawyers’ made it public. However, the government is strongly opposed to the Opposition proposal. The Opposition is seeking consensus among

different parties to intensify the campaign against the government, struggling to cope up with a spate of controversies. Against the backdrop of the devastating debate on the coal scam, the NPP seems reluctant to face another over the theft of Treasury funds.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

USD 2.5 mn brazen heist at the Treasury several months ago and the bigwigs there obviously dragging their feet over the matter till it was brought to light recently, thanks to the Free Lawyers movement, which has dampened the NPP’s enthusiasm for May Day. The Treasury fiasco humiliated the cocky NPP leadership against the backdrop of damning report issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) that found fault with the government for awarding the coal tender for 2025/2026 period to Trident Champhar Limited of India in violation of tender procedures. The NAO emphasised that the Indian company shouldn’t have even been considered for the tender.

Even after the exposure of the scandalous handling of the coal tender, the NPP, in spite of some rumblings within the party, remained confident of overcoming the growing accusations regarding governance issues. But, the sudden revelation of the loss suffered by the Treasury, and pathetic efforts made by the NPP to suppress the truth, has caused irreparable harm to the ruling party. The arrogant NPP will have to use May Day to defend the government. Instead of preaching to the masses ad nauseum the corruption allegations against previous administrations, the NPP would have to explain such massive failures/corruption, particularly the loss of USD 2.5 mn.

There hadn’t been a previous instance of such an incident at the Treasury. The NPP will have to answer questions posed by ‘Free Lawyers,’ a civil society group that first raised the Treasury issue. On behalf of ‘Free Lawyers,’ its President Maithri Gunaratne, PC, former Governor of several provinces Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon, and Attorney-at-Law Shiral Lakthikala, targeted the government over the unprecedented Treasury heist. The Opposition, too, censured the NPP, with SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, MP, Chairman of Public Finance Committee (CoPF) Dr. Harsha de Silva, MP, and United Republican Front (URF) taking the lead.

The NPP’s excuses, based on claimed raids carried out by hacker/hackers targeting the Treasury, are untenable. The NPP’s position cannot be defended or supported against growing criticism. The coal scam and Treasury fiasco dominated social media, with the Opposition, as well as ordinary citizens, having a field day at the expense of the NPP, a political party that accused its opponents of waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement. Its successful propaganda campaigns, at the presidential and parliamentary polls, in September and November, 2024, respectively, were centered on fighting corruption.

Their anti-corruption platform appealed to the people for obvious reasons. Against the backdrop of bankruptcy, declared in May, 2022, after failing to meet debt commitments, the electorate rallied around the NPP that thrived on waste, corruption, irregularities and mismanagement, perpetrated by previous governments. Having bagged the executive presidency in September, 2024, the NPP assured the electorate that the Parliament would be cleansed of evils at the general election. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared that the people have been vested with the responsibility of cleansing the Parliament. Dissanayake went a step further when he addressed a public gathering at the 18th mile post on the Negombo-Colombo road. The NPP leader, who also leads the JVP, asserted that there was no need for an Opposition in Parliament and the House should be filled with NPPers.

Dissanayake based his assertion essentially on two failed No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) moved against Ravi Karunanayake and Keheliya Rambukwella in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The NPP/JVP leader found fault with Yahapalanaya and the Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government for protecting the two wrongdoers, hence the call to cleanse Parliament.

The results of the parliamentary election proved that the electorate responded very favourably to Dissanayake’s call. Of the 225-seat Parliament, the NPP secured 159 seats, including 18 National List slots. Having accused previous governments of shielding wrongdoers, Dissanayake easily directed the NPP’s steamroller parliamentary group to defeat the NCM moved against Energy Minister Punyakumara Dissanayake (National List) on 10 April, just a few days after the NAO report exposed the coal scam.

First ex-MP as Treasury Secy.

If its own hands are clean, there is no doubt that the NPP now deeply regrets the appointment of ex-NPP National List MP Harshana Suriyapperuma as the Secretary to the Treasury and the Finance Ministry. That appointment was made in June 2025 to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Mahinda Siriwardana who, along with Governor of the Central Bank Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe, played a significant role in the country’s post-Aragalaya recovery programme.

Suriyapperuma, who had served as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning for just seven months, before being appointed the Treasury Secretary/Finance Ministry Secretary, is under heavy fire for suppressing the truth. No less a person than CoPF Chairman Dr. de Silva publicly accused Suriyapperuma of trying to undermine his committee. The SJB has demanded Suriyapperuma’s immediate resignation. Dr. Anil Jayantha succeeded as Deputy Minister of Finance and Planning.

Those who inquired into the crisis-hit Treasury are of the belief that 53-year-old Suriyapperuma lacked the much required experience to fill the shoes of Mahinda Siriwardana. Perhaps, the breach at the Treasury could have been averted if an outsider was not brought in place of Siriwardena. The recent reportage of the incident revealed that Suriyapperuma had been aware of the breach and sought to avoid appearing before the CoPF. The NPP could have responded to the developing situation differently if an ex-MP hadn’t been entrusted with the task of steering the Treasury/Finance Ministry. To make matters worse, President Dissanayake holds the Finance portfolio.

Although the government declared that the theft of USD 2.5 mn had been reported to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) after initial detection made in January this year, controversy surrounds the failure on the part of law enforcement authorities to bring it to the notice of the courts. Maithri Gunaratne, appearing in Hiru last Saturday (25), questioned why the police failed to inform the relevant Magistrate if the government lodged a complaint in that regard.

Australia has confirmed irregularities in payments owed to their government. Regardless of NPP efforts to blame it on hacker/hackers, the truth is clear. Payments have been made to an account that hadn’t been in the original agreement between the governments of Sri Lanka and Australia. That is the undeniable truth that the NPP cannot suppress by propaganda.

The NPP should be ashamed that such a fraud had been perpetrated on a country still struggling to cope up with the economic destruction caused by the UNP- and the SLFP-led governments with the help of “mission impossible” type roles played by outside interests, especially during Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure using the JVP/Aragalaya.

The world knows how the UNP perpetrated the Treasury bond scams with the direct involvement of the then Governor of the Central Bank Arjuna Mahendran, in February 2015 and March 2016. Regardless of that intolerable scam, the UNP made a desperate attempt to retain the services of the Singaporean as the Governor of the Central Bank. Party leader and the then Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe demanded the re-appointment of Mahendran. That despicable move had to be dropped due to massive Opposition protests and growing public discontent over the Treasury bond scams.

The first Treasury bond scam carried out on 27 February, 2015 caused a direct loss of approximately Rs. 2 billion. On the instructions of Mahendran, the Treasury suddenly and arbitrarily changed the process of issuing Treasury Bonds. According to media reports at that time, higher interest payments, over the next 30 years, caused a further loss of around Rs. 145 billion.

Then Mahendran struck again. Caused further direct losses of more than Rs. 4 billion to the government through the fraudulent increase in interest rates as a result of the Treasury Bond issues on 27th March, 2016 ,and 29th March, 2016, in order to provide an undue advantage to connected primary dealers by indulging in further pre-meditated bond scams.

NPP on back foot

The ruling party put on a brave face with lawmakers and various others trying to play down the incident at the Treasury. Some pathetically tried to compare various accusations directed at the Rajapaksas with the incident at the Treasury which they conveniently blamed on hacker/hackers.

The NPP is facing an explosive mixture of issues. Both the coal and Treasury scams have brought immense pressure on the national economy and caused automatic deterioration. The resignation of Punyakumara aka Kumara Jayakody over the coal scam indicated that defeating the NCM moved against him was a strategic political blunder. Had the NPP asked the tainted first time Minister to step down and appoint a Presidential Commission to go into the coal scam, the NPP could have averted a major disaster. However, the Energy Minister and the Energy Secretary Udayanga Hemapala had to resign before the Parliament took up the NCM. Had the top NPP leadership bothered to peruse the executive summary of the NAO presented to Parliament on 7 April, the Party wouldn’t have tried to defend the minister.

Having championed a corruption-free political party system and then won both the presidential and parliamentary polls on that platform, the NPP executed the shocking move to move 323 containers out of the Colombo Port, in January 2025, without even any cursory checks. Those who perpetrated that operation used continuing port congestion as an excuse to clear red-flagged containers without mandatory physical checking. The NPP recently thwarted a bid by Opposition lawmakers, representing a parliamentary committee inquiring into the illegal release of containers, to summon President Dissanayake.

That committee, headed by Justice Minister Attorney-at-Law Harshana Nanayakkara, owed an explanation as to why President Dissanayake, in his capacity as the Finance Minister, shouldn’t appear before a House committee. President Dissanayake very often addresses Parliament on crucial issues. As the Minister in charge of Finance, the President should offer an explanation regarding the high profile container issue that tarnished the NPP’s image.

Three major issues in hand, namely the release of 323 containers, coal scam and theft at the Treasury, regardless of what various apologists say on mainstream and social media, have caused irrevocable damage to the party, let alone escapades involving the likes of Speaker Jagath Wickramaratne, Minister Lal Kantha, etc. The impact on the NPP can be ascertained only at an election. With the public increasingly aware of the growing accusations against it, the ruling party will do whatever possible to put off long delayed Provincial Council elections. Facing the electorate against deepening discontent among the public seems to be a frightening situation. It would be interesting to observe how a House committee, headed by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath, appointed to explore ways and means to conduct Provincial Council polls, address the issue at hand.

When compared with the three major issues, the resignation of Asoka Ranwala, as the Speaker, in December, 2024, over his failure to produce the much-touted educational qualifications, seems unnecessary. Of course, Ranwala’s case attracted tremendous public attention at that time as the public really believed the NPP wouldn’t deceive them. Ranwala’s lie shocked the public. NPP theoretician Prof. Ranjith Nirmal Dewasiri had no qualms in publicly attacking Ranwala in the wake of the NPP defending the Speaker. But, subsequent NPP actions revealed massive manipulations that shamed the first post-Aragalaya government.

Having accused Ranil Wickremesinghe of squandering as much as Rs 16 mn to join his wife Prof. Maithree in the UK in September, 2023, the NPP has ended up facing far more serious accusations. The incident at the Treasury should be sufficient for the Opposition to move NCM against the government. Of course, the NPP got the numbers in Parliament to easily defeat the NCM but the consequences would be devastating. Those who still talk of recovering the missing USD 2.5 mn must be living in a dreamland. The UNP is labelled with Treasury bond scams (2015 and 2016) and the SLPP faulted with tax cuts (2019) and sugar tax scam (2020). The NPP will have to live with the coal scam and Treasury theft. The NPP will no longer be able to parade on political platforms as paragons of virtue. It would be pertinent to mention that the Presidential Commission appointed to probe the procurement of coal, since 2009, would be able to produce a report to meet the NPP’s expectations. All indications point to that and 2026 is going to be far more challenging, both in and outside Parliament, than the previous year.

NDB fraud

Examined together, the massive fraud at the National Development Bank (NDB), perpetrated during the 2024-2026 period, and the Treasury incident, they underscore the vulnerability of the entire banking system. The 13.2 bn NDB fraud and theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury exposed the regulator, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, in respect of the NDB. The situation at the NDB cannot be examined without taking into consideration that Ernst & Young is the external auditors of the NDB and its Managing Partner Duminda Hulangamuwa functions as Senior Economic Adviser to President Dissanayake. People haven’t forgotten that Hulangamuwa had been mentioned as the possible successor of Mahinda Siriwardena before the NPP brought in Suriyapperuma. The Central Bank and Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) come under the purview of the Finance Ministry now embroiled in the expanding Treasury fiasco.

The Board of Directors at the NDB consists of Sriyan Cooray (Chairman), Kelum Edirisinghe (Director / Chief Executive Officer (Executive), Bernard Sinniah (Director /Non-Independent), Sujeewa Mudalige (Director /Independent), Kushan D’Alwis (Director/Independent), Kasturi Chellaraja (Director/Independent), Shweta Pandey (Director /Independent), Hasitha Premaratne (Director/Independent), Sanjaya Mohottala (Director (Non-Independent) and Shanil Fernando Director (Independent).

The issue at hand is how such a fraud went unnoticed for a considerable period of time and whether the top management simply ignored warning signs and the failure on the part of the regulator to intervene. Those who have read Mahinda Siriwardana’s ‘Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival: Reflections on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery’ would know the circumstances leading to the 2022 economic collapse. Soft spoken Siriwardana meticulously discussed how the then Central Bank leadership as well as the so-called economic leadership of the Pohottuwa party deliberately deceived President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Siriwardena’s narrative is explosive. The book, launched before his retirement, with the participation of President Dissanayake, underscored the responsibility on the part of the political leadership and those running the banking system. Obviously Siriwardena’s work had no impact on the current dispensation as well as the top banking management.

The Opposition sees an apparent opportunity to heap pressure on the NPP as it contemplates counter measures. Their challenge is how to take remedial measures without jeopardizing the government. The IMF declaration that it is closely watching the theft of USD 2.5 mn from the Treasury must have added pressure on the government, ripped apart by the situation at the Treasury. Let us hope the government and the Opposition reach consensus on ways and means to improve financial discipline. Overall, the Parliament cannot absolve itself of the responsibility for enactment of laws and ensuring financial discipline and the fact that Sri Lanka needs to start repayment of debt in 2028.

Midweek Review

Is language social or psychological phenomenon?

Published

5 days ago

2026/04/29

Sahan Weerasooriya

This essay was presented at The Philosophy Group of the University of London about 20 years ago. The thought provoking essay published in The Island on 22 April by Usvwatte-aratchi- Some languages confine you; some languages free you prompted me to try to get this essay published if possible. It may help the readers to further their ideas about the importance of usage of language.

Personally, I have firsthand experience in this subject. I was exposed to two different cultures and two languages. In my formative years I was brought up in a certain culture and spoke the language pertaining to that culture/language (Sinhalese -Sri Lanka). I spent all my studying and working life (55 years) using a different language in a different culture (English -England). I must mention that this was not recently. It was the early 1960’s. I can claim that I have enough knowledge and experience to justify this essay topic. In this essay I shall be investigating some of the social aspects of language with the aid of some opinions put forward by some philosophers. Then I shall be making an attempt to see what psychology has to offer before I draw my own conclusions. I am treating social aspects as part and parcel of the culture. In my view these are inseparable entities, unless one chooses to forget his or her cultural upbringing to suit a particular society.

Adoption of different culture

Socially, learning a different language and adopting a different culture is quite possible. In this case what dominates is one’s attitude or the circumstances. Attitude is psychological. I am convinced that circumstances may lead to a change of attitudes. Having said that, we must not forget that there are individuals who have not taken the trouble to learn the language of the culture in which they live. This has created a lot of socio-psychological problems in the community in which they live. It is obvious that the problem is one of communication. The main tool of communication is language. Philosophers and psychologists have spent many years investigating how language helps us to communicate and also how it may lead us to misunderstand our own fellow human beings. Understanding others (family members, members of the community in which we live, and the strangers we meet) is one of the most important aspects of living.

An awareness of the problem of language goes back to the early Greek philosophers. Parmenides gave us the first example of an argument from language to the world, saying that if we speak of a thing it must exist, since we speak of a thing at various times, it must continue to exist in a particular form. It is recently that language itself has come to be studied in a systematic way. The two landmarks in this respect were the development of Linguistics and the philosophy of language in the 20th century. The great philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) has admitted that until he became a middle-aged man, he did not think about language per se, but regarded it as ‘transparent’. I am sure this is true with most of us although we are not of Russell’s caliber when it comes to philosophy. And one may not have to wait until one reaches one’s middle age.

Linguistics and philosophy of language

It will help us if we understand the difference between Linguistics and philosophy of Language. What linguists discover may be applied to philosophy, sociology, psychology, anthropology or physiology. But as a discipline of study, it remains independent of them. The philosophy of language is different. One of the modern philosophers John Searle (1932-2025) thought, by contrast to linguistics, philosophy tries to solve philosophical problems by analyzing the ordinary use, meaning and relations of words in a particular language. Searle goes on to say that language is crucial to understand human experience. In my opinion this is a very valid comment. At a very practical level we spend a lot of time sharing our experiences. Verbal communication is vital in this area. According to Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking(1936-2023) the influence of language on philosophy has been profound and almost unrecognized. He indicates, if we are not to be misled by this influence, it is necessary to become conscious of it, and to ask ourselves deliberately how far it is legitimate.

It is appropriate to bring in Ludwig Wittgenstein(1889-1951) at this point. He brought in the subject predicate theory of language. For example, if we say “John is king”. Where John is the subject and king is the predicate. Here existence requires substance. For Aristotle, forms do not exist independently of things—every form is the form of something. A “substantial” form is a kind that is attributed to a thing, without which that thing would be of a different kind or would cease to exist altogether. Wittgenstein supports Saint Augustine’s view that words are names of objects and that combinations of words have the sole function of describing reality. For example, if we point at a certain object, say a table and try to say to a child “this is a table”, the child will be confused as to what we are pointing at. Is it the colour, the tabletop or one or more of its legs This is called the ostensive definition method of teaching. Ostensive definitions lead to a variety of interpretations. The child may understand a particular case of this definition but there is no guarantee that she will be able to make a transition from one case to others like it.

Plato’s theory

J G Herder (1744-1803) pointed out the object to which we make reference may be defined by numerous different terms. How then can we justify direct, one to one correspondence-either of so many to one, or of one to so many? How are we going to deal with situations where a term describes something non-existent or only possible? Plato’s “Forms” theory cannot be applied here as anything that we can speak of already exists as a Form. Critics of this theory ask the question: “how can the world be crowded with so many imaginary objects?” We use words to describe and define. Is there any room for slang language? This comes in handy in our day to day social communication. Ostensive definition raises the questions that require a constant selection of what counts as relevant. In Aldous Huxley’s novel Chrome Yellow, the character Old Rowley is confused as to: Does ‘pig’ refer to the quality of having a curly tail? Or standing in rows to eat? Or being pink skinned and fat? Or wearing no clothes? When we use the word “piggishness” is it something inherent to pigs, or simply, a matter of how we choose to describe them?

How can we relate the above ideas and theories of language to our daily living? Daily living is a psychosocial activity.

Perceptions

The nature of language reflects the nature of our perceptions, and these are far from straight forward. Franz Brentano (1838-1917) developed his theory of intentionality: that every mental phenomenon has a relation of direction to its object, i.e. perceptions, desires, imagination etc. are related to what is perceived, desired or imagined. I presume this can be applied to any language irrespective of the culture (our social conditioning). Say for instance the images of art and the writings are given the ability to represent objects by imposing the intentionality on the object. Thus, when we assert that we see or believe something, we impose, by convention and intention, (that is true if and only if it is the case) on the statement, and these conditions are not contained intrinsically in the sounds that make it up, but in our perception of belief about the fact. I begin to wonder how this can be applied to non-physical and unseen situations. Sometimes our feelings and attitudes are unknown to the observer. A person may shout because he is angry but you cannot see the anger, only its physical expression. We will not be able to see the prior event that has led to the anger and the utterance. This shows that there is a limit to how much is revealed simply by observing a word and its context; there is often more than that can be said.

How can we account for unexpected linguistic behaviour? This has both social and psychological implications.

For a long time behavioural theorists believed that every development of the human being was controlled by environmental and social factors. This is similar to an ostensive explanation of meaning. It implied that everything was learnt through training and association. But Noam Chomsky (b.1928) was not happy with this idea. He thought language is a complex phenomenon and which is not taught bit by bit or systematically to infants. It is successfully acquired by (almost) everybody. From my own experience it is true to say that the difficulty in learning a second language is a very different process from that experienced with the first language. Chomsky argued that the first language is not in fact learned, but rather acquired through exposure to a particular language. According to him all languages share the same basic structure, and he called this “deep structure”, which may be expressed as surface structures through a process called ‘transformation’. Chomsky’s theory helps us to assume a universal system of grammar, which may generate an infinite number of particular sentences within a language. This explains how we may create sentences within a language we have never encountered before from a limited set of grammatical rules and this appears to be a rational scientific approach.

Social or psychological phenomenon

The argument/discussion whether language is a social or a psychological phenomenon requires much more investigation than this essay warrants. I have briefly brought in various philosophers’ work, which are invaluable to this topic in terms of philosophy of language. In conclusion I am tempted to state my own experiences as a bi-lingual person. When it comes to my first language, which is Sinhalese I don’t think I learned it. I heard my parents speaking it and I picked up a few words and I constructed my own sentences and gradually became proficient by accumulating more words. Of course, the proper grammatical use of even my own language was taught in school and not by my parents. Learning my second language i.e. English took a different form. I was taught to speak, read, and write English at school and I had to work harder at this than my first language, because my English was confined to the classroom situation only, i. e. I learnt English in a non- English environment. First language came naturally and the second one I had to learn to fit into the social and the education structure that prevailed at that time. Compulsion can motivate us to learn!I had no choice but to adopt myself culturally and linguistically as a university student in England and then as a university teacher in England. Apart from the native English students, I have taught students from different countries. European, African and Asian. I had the opportunity to intermingle with them and learned various different cultural and linguistic aspects. After almost a half a century in England, I am back to my own culture (language, customs, food etc) where I was born and started my life. I am still proficient in my own language Sinhalese. No conscious effort needed.

After all the foregoing arguments and philosophy that I have put forward, my own conclusion is Chomsky’s theories are more plausible to me than other theories on this issue. It is difficult to be exact and say whether language is a social or psychological phenomenon. From the above arguments, we can see that culture and language of a given society are tightly bound. This leads us to psychological adjustments in order to fit into a society. Who can deny that even the philosophers mentioned above have not been subjected to their own cultural environment?

by Prof. Sampath
Anson Fernando
Formerly University of
The Arts London