Midweek Review
Vanni war and Israel-Gaza conflict: similarities, differences
The US utilised Hamas attack to prepare an emergency funding project that conveniently accommodated Ukraine battling Russia. The funding amounted to USD 105 bn in military and humanitarian aid to Kiev and Tel Aviv. Having visited Tel Aviv last week, US President Joe Biden declared that their security is directly connected to the success of Ukraine and Israel. Interestingly the largest share of USD 105 bn allocation has been earmarked for Ukraine (more than USD 61 bn) with Israel receiving over USD 14 bn, over nine bn for humanitarian assistance for Ukraine, Israel and Gaza and over USD 14 bn for border enforcement with Mexico. Regardless of US pouring military assistance, Israel remains unsure of its capacity to fight a ground war in Gaza to the finish. The delay in launching the ground offensive underscores Israel’s continuing dilemma. That is the reality.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
Unparalleled Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, triggered a spate of comments on Sri Lanka’s war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) that was brought to a successful end in May 2009. Hamas captured about 230 persons, including Israeli military personnel and foreigners and moved them to areas under their control. The abducted persons’ whereabouts remain unclear though four, including two Americans were released so far. Respected expert on terrorism experienced in Sri Lanka, M.R. Narayan Swamy, discussed the similarities of Sri Lanka’s conflict and the ongoing Israel-Gaza war. New Delhi based Swamy, who had served UNI and AFP during his decades long career discussed the issues at hand while acknowledging no two situations were absolutely comparable. Swamy currently serves as the Executive Director of IANS (Indo-Asian News Service).
Now there is a possibility of Lebanon being dragged into the conflict as Iran threatened Israel amidst ongoing heavy exchange of fire between Israeli forces and Lebannon based Hezbollah. However, the battles on the Lebanese border have tied up several Israeli Divisions thereby preventing them from joining the formations deployed against Hamas.
‘How’s Hamas’ attack similar to that of LTTE?’ and ‘Hamas’ offensive on Israel may bring it closer to LTTE’s fate’ dealt with the issues involved. Let me reproduce Swamy’s comment: “Oct 7 could be a turning point for Hamas similar to what happened to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in Sri Lanka in 2006. Let me explain. Similar to Hamas, the LTTE grew significantly over time eventually gaining control of a significant portion of Sri Lanka’s land and coast. The LTTE was even more formidable than Hamas. It had a strong army, growing air force and a deadly naval presence. Unlike Hamas the LTTE successfully assassinated high ranking political figures in Sri Lanka and India. Notably LTTE achieved this without direct support from any country well Hamas received military and financial backing from Iran and some other states [emphasis is mine]. The LTTE became too sure of their victories overtime. They thought, they could never be beaten and that starting a war would always make them stronger. But in 2006 when they began Eelam War 1V their leader Velupillai Prabhakaran couldn’t have foreseen that within three years he and his prominent group would be defeated. Prabhakaran believed gathering tens of thousands of Tamils during the last stages of war would protect them and Sri Lanka wouldn’t unleash missiles and rockets. Colombo proved him wrong. They were hit. By asking the people not to flee Gaza despite Israeli warnings Hamas is taking a similar line. Punishing all Palestinians for Hamas’ actions is unjust just like punishing all Tamils for LTTE’s actions was wrong. The LTTE claimed to fight for Tamils without consulting them and Hamas claimed to represent Palestinians without seeking the approval for the Oct.7 strike. Well two situations are not absolutely comparable. We can be clear that Hamas is facing a situation similar to what the LTTE faced shortly before its end. Will Hamas meet a similar fate as the LTTE? Only time will answer that question.”
Swamy quite conveniently refrained from mentioning India’s direct role in setting up one of the deadliest terror projects in the world in the 80s. How could he forget the loss of nearly 1,400 Indian military personnel and double that number wounded here?
Former Editor of The Hindu Malini Parthasarathy who also had served as Chairperson of The Hindu Group released a list of politicians assassinated by the LTTE, as she hit back hard at those who raged against the comparison of the Hamas to the LTTE. The list included two Jaffna District MPs, Arumugam Murugesu Alalasundaram and Visvanathan Dharmalingam, assassinated in early Sept 1985. Slain Visvanathan Dharmalingam’s son, Dharmalingam Siddharthan, who represents the Vanni electoral district on the Illankai Thamil Arasu Kadchi (ITAK) is on record as having said that the two MPs were abducted and killed by TELO (Tamil Eelam Liberation Organisation.) gunmen. The list posted by Parthasarathy included PLOTE leader Uma Maheswaran assassinated in Colombo in July 1989. The LTTE hadn’t been involved in that killing. Maheswaran is believed to have been killed by his onetime associates, perhaps over the abortive PLOTE raid on the Maldives in Nov 1988. India never bothered at least to acknowledge that the Maldives raid was carried out by men trained by India to destabilise Sri Lanka. There is no doubt that Maheswasran’s killers, too, were known to the Indian intelligence at that time.
Before rushing into conclusions regarding Hamas and LTTE, perhaps a proper examination of the circumstances they emerged is necessary. The two situations-fourth phase of the Eelam conflict and the latest Hamas strike on Israel and the devastating counter attack cannot be compared under any circumstances. Efforts to compare the two issues is more like comparing apples and oranges, though mutually Tamils and Sinhalese have so many commonalities having intermingled throughout history like the Arabs and Jews.
It is no doubt Jews are a people that suffered persecution throughout known history under Assyrians, Babylonians to Romans and so forth. Such persecution includes expulsion of Jews from England in 1290 and from Spain 1492. So what Hitler and the Germans did was to take the historic process to another extreme.
Yet to blame the Palestinians and treat them like animals and to simply butcher them for the latest uprising by Hamas for all the humiliations and suffering they have been going through non-stop since Naqba in1948, from the time of the creation of Israel is to allow the creators of the problem, including the UK, USA and United Nations to wash all their sins on the true other victims of this conflict, the Palestinians.
It would be pertinent to mention that Israel in spite of having one of the world’s best fighting armed forces with 100 percent backing from the West cannot totally eradicate Hamas the way Sri Lanka dealt with the LTTE.
The circumstances under which the LTTE launched a large-scale offensive in Aug 2006 and its objectives had been very much different from that of Hamas. The LTTE really believed that it could have defeated the Sri Lankan military in the north by cutting off the sea supply route from Trincomalee to Kankesanthurai and simultaneously overrunning the Kilali-Muhamalai-Nagarkovil forward defence line (FDL). The total collapse of the FDL could have allowed the LTTE to eradicate isolated fighting formations trapped north of the FDL. But, in the case of the Gaza war, the Hamas strike was meant to provoke Israel to unleash a massive unbridled counter attack that caused maximum losses on the civilians. As Hamas expected the Israeli counter attack has triggered massive protests in the West against their leaders. They have been accused of encouraging violence against Palestine. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and other US allies are under heavy pressure from Muslims and other horrified communities’ world over to take a stand against the US.
A Western lifeline for LTTE
UK Premier Rishi Sunak pledged unequivocal support for Israel before flying to the Jewish State where he reiterated British commitment. Sunak followed US President Joe Biden, the first foreign leader to visit Tel Aviv amidst indiscriminate attacks on Gaza. At the time this comment was written on Oct 22, the international media reported the possibility of French President Emmanuel Macron also undertaking a visit to Tel Aviv. Canada, too, declared support for Israel. Their declaration of support for Israel didn’t surprise anyone.
Against the backdrop of various interested parties comparing the Vanni situation and the developing regional crisis with devastating global implications, it would be pertinent to examine the Western response to the eelam war.
Western powers intervened on behalf of the LTTE facing annihilation in the hands of the Sri Lankan military. By late Feb 2009, the LTTE had taken such a beating on the Vanni front, its command and control structures were in tatters. Responding to LTTE’s pleas for help backed by demonstrations organised by Tamil Diaspora in Europe and Canada, the then British and French Foreign Ministers, David Miliband and Bernard Kouchner arrived in Colombo in late April 2009. They demanded an immediate halt to offensive action. They wanted to visit Prabhakaran. The combined British – French move backed by the US was meant to save Prabhakaran. Later a diplomatic cable originating from the US mission in London disclosed Miliband’s intervention was due to domestic political compulsions. Interested parties also speculated about a US role in a possible bid to evacuate Prabhakaran but Sri Lanka insisted that the offensive could be brought to an end only if Prabhakaran surrendered.
In May-June 1987 when the SLA engaged in ‘Operation Liberation’ and advanced on Prabhakaran’s Vadamaratchchi base, India intervened. Having forced JRJ to call off the first Brigade-level offensive, Indian Mi-17s landed in Jaffna on July 24 to evacuate Prabhakaran, his wife and the two children along with several other LTTE cadres. This happened five days before the signing of the Indo-Lanka accord in Colombo that paved the way for the deployment of the Indian Army (July 1987-March 1990).
Had India allowed Sri Lanka to finish off the LTTE, it could have avoided a disastrous war here. Thousands of lives could have been saved if India didn’t play politics with the Sri Lanka issue. New Delhi paid a very heavy price and over a year after its pull out the LTTE assassinated wartime Indian Premier Rajiv Gandhi during a general election campaign in May 1991.
Let us get back to the Western effort to rescue Prabhakaran, the way India did in July 1987. The Western objective was the same though the tactics and circumstances were different. The UK and France with the blessings of the UN and the US tried to save Prabhakaran in late April 2009 to fight another day.
India-Israel relations
Although Indian Premier Narendra Modi won’t fly to Tel Aviv to reiterate their support for Israel, New Delhi would be extremely cautious in addressing the issue. India cannot jeopardise her growing relationship with Israel, a key weapons and technology supplier over the years though in the 80s New Delhi strongly opposed Israeli presence in Sri Lanka. The Jewish state is one of the few countries which backed Sri Lanka throughout the war against separatist Tamil terrorism. A range of Israeli arms, ammunition and equipment made Sri Lanka’s triumph over terrorism possible.
Since India joined the US-led club, New Delhi has received a massive boost to her overall military capacity thanks to Israel and New Delhi would do nothing to upset her relationship with the Jewish State whose continuing support is of critical importance, especially against the backdrop of Russia-Ukraine conflict. The acquisition of Pegasus spyware has overnight changed India’s capabilities. That is the undeniable truth. India being one of the four members of ‘Quad’ that included US, Australia and Japan, is now in a strategic relationship with Israel. Massive Israeli weapons sales have boosted the Indian military facing China and Pakistan.
In India, thousands of people demonstrated in many cities in support of Palestine experiencing an escalation of violence perpetrated by Israel. In Mumbai, Kerala and Lahore, demonstrators expressed their solidarity with the Palestinian people and called for an end to the Israeli occupation and blockade of Gaza.
But, on the other hand, Hamas, in spite of overall Israeli prowess and strategic assets available, appeared to have achieved 100 percent surprise as Israel did nothing until large scale infiltration at an unprecedented level took place right under their nose. The Hamas action appeared to have united the people world over against the US-led grouping and taken the heat off Russia engaged in a difficult war in Ukraine.
A considered move
Perhaps one of the most significant decisions taken by Sri Lanka as the LTTE deteriorated on the Vanni east front was to invite India to deploy a fully-fledged medical team close to a point where the wounded were brought in by sea. Sri Lanka made the request several weeks after the military brought Kilinochchi under its control. It would be pertinent to mention that Kilinochchi functioned as their main administrative centre after the military regained Jaffna in late 1995. The loss of Kilinochchi in the first week of January 2009 quite clearly stunned the LTTE, Tamil Diaspora as well as those foreign powers confident of the group’s battlefield prowess. The government moved quickly to bring in an Indian medical team amidst accusations that the war wounded were being deprived of treatment. The team consisted of 62 personnel. India set up a medical facility at Pulmoddai, north of Trincomalee.
Sri Lanka went out of its way to treat those who had been evacuated from Puthumathalan to Pulmoddai. The writer had been one of the few journalists taken to the Puthumathalan seas by the Navy to witness the evacuation of the wounded by the ICRC and then transferred in a ship to Pulmoddai. This was in late April 2009. Subsequent to the visit to the Puthumathalan seas and Navy deployment at Chalai, the writer had an opportunity to meet the Indian medical team at Pulmoddai.
After the war, the Indian High Commission declared that their Pulmoddai facility treated over 3,000 war wounded and soon after the war ended the medical mission moved to Zone 1 of Menik Farm displaced persons camp. India pulled out its team from Menik Farm at the end of August, 2009 after having treated over 25,000 displaced persons. Sri Lanka opened a sea route between Puthumathalan and Pulmoddai in early 2009, soon after the closure of the overland route to and from the LTTE held area. The move underscored the government’s determination to assist the civilian population.
Unfortunately, Sri Lanka never made a real effort to set the record straight. Successive governments conveniently failed to place all available information before the international community. Any other country engaged in such a huge military operation would have second thoughts in giving foreigners direct access to the war wounded. But, Sri Lanka did.
Sri Lanka’s continued failure to mount a strong defence at the Geneva based Human Rights Council is a mystery. The Yahapalana government betrayed the war winning military by co-sponsoring an accountability resolution against the country. That was on Oct 01, 2015.
Until the very end, Sri Lanka allowed the World Food Programme (WFP) under the protection of the ICRC to move essential supplies to those living in the rapidly shrinking Vanni territory under the LTTE’s control. Once the overland route had to be closed, essential items and medicine were despatched in ships to Puthumathalan. The world shouldn’t forget that selected members of the Colombo-based diplomatic community were given real time drone footage of the Army breaking through the LTTE positions to facilitate a massive rescue operation. Have you ever heard of an Army accused of perpetrating genocide breaking enemy line for those trapped within to escape and take refuge within the territory under its control?
Israel fought the first Gaza war (Dec 27 2008-18 January 2009) against Hamas in the wake of heavy rocket attacks on its territory. It was the first large-scale invasion of Palestinian territory after Hamas took over Gaza from Fatah in 2007. The Israelis called the offensive ‘Cast Lead.’ Regardless of losses suffered, Hamas retained its command and control structure and was back in action soon. The possibility of Israel achieving victory over Hamas appeared remote and unrealistic. However, the Sri Lanka military during Dec 2008-January 2009 delivered a knockout blow to the LTTE. By the end of January 2009, the LTTE’s command and control structures were gone. A massive naval cordon involving a range of vessels, spearheaded by Fast Attack Craft (FACs) blocked sea escape route while Air Force was on high alert to intervene in case an attempt was made to evacuate Velupillai Prabhakaran, his family and top commanders from the battlefield. In a bid to reduce reaction time, the Air Force shifted a pair of jets from Katunayake air base to China Bay. The rest is history.
Although Israel claimed victory in the first Gaza war, Hamas was soon back in action. According to international media reports, Hamas fired over 200 rockets and dozens of mortar rounds at Israel during the second week of Nov 2012. Tel Aviv was hit for the first time since 1991 Gulf war when Iraqi Scud missiles landed therein. Israel launched ‘Operation Pillar of Defence’ to neutralize the threat but never extended the operation to a ground incursion.
In July 2014, Israel carried out ‘Operation Protective Edge’ which included a minor ground incursion –just a few kms into Gaza. This particular operation was conducted in the wake of breaking up of Hamas association with Egypt over the former’s alliance with the Muslim Brotherhood which the then Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi considered a threat to him. The issue prompted Egypt to close down smuggling tunnels from Egypt to Gaza, one of the major revenue sources for Hamas. The two-week long operation obviously didn’t cause serious damage to Hamas. Over the past several years, Hamas clearly succeeded in building up a massive arsenal that overwhelmed the much touted Iron Dome-a highly mobile air defence system jointly developed by the US and Israel. The latest Hamas attack proved that terrorism cannot be defeated by air and naval bombardments and availability of high tech arms, ammunition and equipment. Ground forces had to go the whole hog whatever the consequences.
The Sri Lanka military achieved irrevocable victory in a sustained campaign in the East (Aug 2006-June 2007) and North/Vanni (March 2007-May 2009) but our corrupt and utterly useless political party system never built on the military’s success. Today war winning Sri Lanka is a bankrupt country dependent on Western tool IMF and tied to the Washington headquartered lending body having obtained a USD 2.9 bn bailout package. The IMF suspended the programme recently to pressure the government to end its corrupt ways and means and to take tangible measures to meet projected revenue targets.
Midweek Review
July 09: An inexcusable overall security failure and exceptional contingency plan
Ulugetenne
The Sri Lanka Navy, on 04 June, commissioned SLNS Samudravijaya, formerly United States Coast Guard Cutter Decisive. It is the fourth mothballed US Coast Guard cutter transferred to the SLN through the US Excess Defence Articles Programme. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake attended the ceremony at the Colombo Port. The US Embassy in Colombo, in a statement issued on the same day, quoted Defence Attaché Lieutenant Colonel Matthew House as having said: “Few partners have demonstrated the commitment to maintaining and operating these vessels as successfully as the Sri Lanka Navy. The outstanding condition and operational performance of SLNS Samudura, SLNS Gajabahu, and SLNS Vijayabahu are a testament to the professionalism and technical expertise of Sri Lankan sailors. Their stewardship of these vessels helped build the confidence that made this fourth transfer possible.” The first of the four vessels SLNS Samudura was commissioned on 19 February, 2005, during Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga’s tenure as the President. Milinda Moragoda, Economic Reforms and Science and Technology Minister of the previous UNP-led UNF government, played a significant role in acquiring that vessel. SLNS Samudura boosted SLN and participated in numerous operations, including the high profile hunt for LTTE floating warehouses, during the Eelam War IV. But, the US refrained from transferring any more big ships during the war though on the then Navy Commander Vice Admiral Wsantha Karannagoda’s request to provide intelligence and Washington obliging, made the successful hunt for LTTE floating arsenals in the last stages of the war possible. The transfer of the second vessel took place 19 years after the end of the war. Ex USCG Sherman was commissioned 06 June, 2019, as SLNS Gajabahu (P626). The third vessel was transferred to the Sri Lanka Navy on October 26, 2021, as the country was heading towards an unprecedented economic crisis. That vessel was commissioned as SLNS Vijayabahu at the Colombo Port with the participation of President Ranil Wickramasinghe and US Ambassador to Sri Lanka Julie Chung on November 20, 2022. Ironically SLNS Gajabahu, one of the ex-US vessels prominently figured in the contingency plan to save President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, but whose downfall was engineered by the US.
By Shamindra Ferdinando
The moment President Gotabaya Rajapaksa decided to take up residence at the President’s House (Janadhipathi Mandiraya), Fort, in the first week of April, 2022, the Navy had no option but to prepare a thorough contingency plan, in case the regime change project posed a realistic threat to the life of the President.
The President, in consultation with senior military officers, made his move within 48 hours after violence erupted outside his private residence at Pangiriwatte, Mirihana, on the night of 31 March, 2022. That decision seemed realistic and sensible at that time.
But, in the wake of the disastrous overall armed forces response to the coordinated violence unleashed by the regime change project on 09 May, 2022, in the aftermath of the Temple Trees ordered attack on Galle Face protesters, the top brass must have recognised the urgent need for total overhauling of security strategy. But, unfortunately, that hadn’t been the case. With violent crowds overwhelming the armed forces, deployed to block them, rapidly approaching the President’s House, those who had been at the makeshift Operations Room there were stunned.
In hindsight, the President’s decision to remain at the President’s House, regardless of the near failure on the part of the armed forces to repulse the raid on Temple Trees, on 09 May, seemed unwise. The rescue operation could have gone wrong and the war-winning President Mahinda Rajapaksa could have ended up in the hands of an angry mob.
Perhaps, the conspirators envisaged the President’s move, from Pangiriwatte to the President’s House, situated walking distance away from the Galle Face protest site, where they could draw additional strength.
The failure on the part of the government to take tangible measures, in the wake of the President’s House becoming the sole target on that fateful day, is a contentious issue that needs to be properly investigated. Don’t forget that the court case filed over the 09 May attacks on the residences and properties belonging to SLPP politicians, and some supporters ,was later withdrawn. The Wickremesinghe-Rajapaksa government never investigated the 09 May incidents.
Exactly two months after the mobs almost succeeded in breaking through defences at Temple Trees, on the night of 09 May/10, where Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa was residing, they mounted the assault on the President’s House.
In the wake of the 09 May mayhem, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa named Lt. Gen. Vikum Liyanage as the Commander of the Army. He succeeded General Shavendra Silva who served as the CDS but was out of the country when all-out mayhem was unleashed by the Aragalaya mobs on 09 July, 2022, to oust the sitting government.
In spite of a direct and growing threat to the President’s House, on 09 July, 2022, the President felt confident in meeting the challenge. The President issued a directive to the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, General (retd.) Kamal Gunaratne, to shift the Operations Room from the Defence Force Headquarters, at Akuregoda, to the President’s House. Having shifted the Operations Room on 08 July, 2022, to the President’s House, as directed by the President, the top brass prepared to face the challenge.
Maj. General K.B. Egodawela, who served as an Additional Secretary (Administration) to the President, from the day the President moved to the President’s House, till he vacated on 09 July, 2022, in his memoirs ‘Aragalaya: Adarayen Prachandathwayata’ (From Love to Violence) revealed that though the top brass opposed the shifting of the Operations Room they carried out the directive. While the President felt that the top brass could collectively work at the President’s House to bring the situation under control, Gen Gunaratne proposed that the President should move to Akuregoda Defence Forces Headquarters, according to Egodawela. In fact, Gunaratne, who had been with Gotabaya Rajapaksa from the very beginning of the sinister campaign, strongly opposed the President’s decision to remain there.
Obviously, the President’s House pathetically failed to ascertain the scale of the protest and the rapidity with which protesters overwhelmed troops deployed outside the President’s House stunned the top brass. Had they swiftly reached consensus on Gen. Gunaratne’s suggestion, perhaps the 09 July regime change operation could have been thwarted. The armed forces could have resorted to tougher measures to prevent a march on Akuregoda Defence Forces Headquarters had the President agreed to move there.
Within two hours after the protest, targeting the President’s House began, video footage provided by drones indicated that troops couldn’t hold the rampaging mobs any longer. According to Egodawela, the top brass had been prepared to remove the President, even without his consent, by landing a helicopter in the Colombo harbor or by ship. Finally, they resorted to the second option. As the President and First Lady Ayoma got into a vehicle and took the rear exit into the adjoining former Navy Headquarters, mobs entered the President’s House. Another vehicle carrying several other persons followed.
The then Navy Commander Vice Admiral Nishantha Ulugetenne who had been with the President at the President’s House got into the vehicle carrying the President. Had they stayed at the President’s House for 10 more minutes, the consequences could have been devastating. https://island.lk/gotabayas-escape-from-aragalaya-mob-in-rti-spotlight/
Egodawela, who had been with the President from the very beginning of the presidential term, alleged that the raiders planned to kill the President and several others and display their bodies. The author quoted an unidentified intelligence officer as having told him that the raiders wanted to display the bodies the way LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran’s body was shown.
Perhaps shifting the Operations Room from Akuregoda Defence Force Headquarters to the President’s House had been a risky move that, in a way, facilitated the regime change operation. The rationale in bringing those who had been tasked with countering the impending threat to one place (President’s House) to be with the target (Gotabaya Rajapaksa) seems unbelievably a dicey move. The President had been influenced by what he described as inordinate and unforgivable delay on the part of the Akuregoda Operations Room to carry out timely evacuation of Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa on the night of 09 May from Temple Trees. Most probably, the President wanted to oversee the 09 July counter operation personally. But, in hindsight, the decision to shift the Operations Room from Akuregoda to the President’s House obviously hadn’t been a clever move.
SLN preparations
When mobs threatened to overwhelm the President’s security at Pangiriwattta, on 31 March, additional police and STF contingents were brought in. They were followed by the Navy and Air Force. The Army arrived at the scene, subsequently.
As pointed out by the President himself, the situation at Temple Trees, on 09 May, had been far worse and the combined police and armed forces response revealed that they hadn’t taken precautionary/counter measures, even after the Pangiriwatta fiasco.
At the time of the incidents, the overall Temple Trees security deployment included about 60 elite Special Boat Squadron (SBS) personnel deployed within the premises and were supplemented by seven SLN platoons. The Army also moved in to strengthen Temple Trees defences but the mobs pressed on till troops fired blank ammunition.
The top brass, directing counter measures from Akuregoda Defence Force Headquarters, had to act swiftly and decisively to evacuate those at the Temple Trees or face the consequences. As there hadn’t been any other alternative place of living proposed, Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa, wife Shiranthi and their eldest son Namal were escorted to nearby former Air Force Headquarters and from there flown to the Trincomalee Navy base. VA Ulugetenne, over the phone, issued instructions to the relevant officer in Trincomalee to make arrangements as two helicopters carrying the group took off from the helipad on the top of the former Air Force Headquarters. The helicopters departed around 04 in the morning.
They had stayed at Trincomalee Navy House for about a week and, as requested by the Navy, paid for their stay because by then Mahinda Rajapaksa had resigned. Perhaps, they could have taken refuge at the Panagoda Army cantonment or at Saliyapura, home to the Gajaba Regiment, but, at the end, sought the protection at the Trincomalee Navy base.
Ironically, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, too, had to take refuge at the Trincomalee Navy base, exactly two months later. Ever since the President moved into the President’s House, Fort, the Navy had been on their toes to meet any eventuality. The daunting task of arranging evacuation by sea fell on the shoulders of VA Ulugetenne, who, meticulously, planned the operation with his staff.
Having informed the President of the contingency plans, VA Ulugetenne stationed two Advanced Offshore Patrol Vessels (AOPVs), namely SLNS Sindurala and SLNS Gajabahu and four Fast Attack Craft (FACs), at the Colombo Port. It would be pertinent to mention that SLNS Sindurala, built at the Goa shipyard, in terms of an agreement signed at the tail end of the Mahinda Rajapaksa government, was adjudged the best vessel in the SLN fleet in 2022.
Additional SBS personnel and snipers, too, had been brought in to Colombo though none of them knew exactly what their task would be. The OPV and FAC crews most probably felt that they were awaiting orders for a major anti-drug operation in the high seas.
As the decision was made to evacuate the President and the First Lady, the Chief alerted the vessels and quickly deployed tugboats to pull SLNS Sindurala and, shortly thereafter, SLNS Gajabahu, formerly of the US Coast Guard, carrying the President and the First Lady. By the time the two AOPVs moved in different directions, on the instructions of VA Ulugetenne, the hand phones of SLNS Gajabahu crew were collected to prevent them from revealing what was happening. Along with the AOPVs, two pairs of FACs had moved out to sea. (https://island.lk/ranil-reveals-bid-to-get-rid-of-him-while-gr-was-fleeing-to-trinco-on-board-slns-gajabahu/)
Nearly 12-hour journey to Trinco
The SLNS Gajabahu, formerly of the US Coast Guard, had a crew consisting of over 100 officers and men. Someone, most probably a port employee, posted a short clip of some unidentified persons taking large travelling bags into the ship but the President, First Lady and VA Ulugetenne going in were never captured on a camera.
As the vessel began its journey towards Trincomalee, it remained approximately 12 nautical miles from land and the President received many calls, some of which weren’t answered. VA Ulugetenne, too, received quite a number of calls. Those familiar with the developments at that time said that some felt that SLNS Gajabahu should move out of Sri Lankan waters. There had been suggestions that the destination should be the Maldives, India or Singapore. Regardless of such suggestions, SLNS Gajabahu proceeded towards Trincomalee where the Navy made necessary arrangements to host them.
Captain Marlon Perera, who still serves the Navy, had been the Commanding Officer of the vessel. Perera now holds the Commodore rank.
During the journey precautions were taken to ensure the safety and security of the President and the First Lady. Although the crew hadn’t been aware that they would be entrusted with such a sensitive task at a time the country was in crossroads against the backdrop of an economic collapse and sovereign default, there were fears of the crew being affected by propaganda in support of regime change operation.
The attempt made by sailor Wijemuni Vijitha Rohana de Silva to cause harm to Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, way back in July, 1987, underscored the necessity to take precautions during the Colombo-Trincomalee journey as the possibility of anti-Gotabaya campaign having an impact on at least some members of the ship crew couldn’t be ruled out.
On July 30, 1987, during a guard of honor in Colombo, the 21-year-old naval rating struck Gandhi on the shoulder and back with the butt of his rifle. Gandhi narrowly avoided the full impact of the blow by evasive ducking.
On the invitation of VA Ulugetenne, Gotabaya Rajapaksa attended all the formalities in respect of a visit undertaken by the President to the Trincomalee Navy base. The President participated in those formalities knowing that he couldn’t attend the commissioning parade that was scheduled to be held on 15 July, 2022. The Navy was not in a position to put off the commissioning parade hence the decision to invite Defence Secretary Gunaratne as the Chief Guest.
Ulugetenne retired from active naval service on 18 December, 2022, following a distinguished career, spanning over 37 years. He received the appointment as the 24th Commander of the Navy in July, 2020, just a couple of months after Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election as the President.
Wickremesinghe, in his capacity as Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s successor, appointed Ulugetenne as Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Cuba. The appointment was made in late 2023 and the retired Navy Chief presented his credentials to Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel on 13 February, 2024 (https://island.lk/from-fonseka-convictions-to-arrest-of-ulugetenne/)
However, within weeks after the last presidential election held in late November, 2024, the NPP government recalled over a dozen top envoys appointed by the previous administration. Admiral Ulugetenne was among them. The government deprived a decorated officer, who had served the country for nearly four decades, from completing his term in Havana. Within months after his return, he became the target of a murder investigation.
Then out of the blue the retired Navy Chief became the focus of a murder investigation, that, too, post-war. The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) arrested him on 28 July, 2025, over the disappearance of a person reported in July, 2020.
Kurunegala High Court Judge Tikiri Jayatilleke, on 14 October, 2025, granted him bail. Jayatilleke declared that the CID acted in an illegal manner in respect of the former Navy Commander. His counsel Kalinga Indatissa, PC, alleged in court that his client had been apprehended only on the basis of an ex-LTTE cadre’s allegation in the absence of any evidence
The next hearing is scheduled for 08 July, 2026. Ulugetenne was held at the Kegalle Prison for four days and then transferred to the Dumbara (Pallekale) Prison. Altogether, he was in prison for 80 days, like a common criminal, despite him being a former Navy Commander with an unblemished career record.
Wartime Chief of Naval Intelligence, Rear Admiral (retd) Sarath Mohotti, who had been also arrested in connection with the same investigation, was also granted bail, a few weeks later.
Midweek Review
India should convene a regional El Niño preparedness dialogue in Delhi
El Niño events have historically been associated with weaker monsoons in South Asia, erratic rainfall patterns, and increased risks of droughts and floods.
The coming months could bring South Asia and the wider Indian Ocean region a dangerous mix of climate shocks, economic strain, and geopolitical instability. At the centre of this looming challenge is the anticipated El Niño event, which is likely to disrupt monsoon patterns, intensify weather extremes, and place additional pressure on already fragile food, water, and energy systems.
But El Niño will not arrive in isolation. It will intersect with continuing global disruptions—from the war in Ukraine to instability in the Middle East—each of which continues to reverberate through energy markets, food supply chains, and shipping routes. The combined effect is likely to be cumulative, not linear.
This is, therefore, a moment that calls for anticipatory regional coordination rather than fragmented national responses.
A record of regional first response
There is already a clear precedent for such coordination in the region.During the COVID-19 pandemic, India emerged as a key first responder, supplying vaccines, medicines, and logistical support across the neighbourhood under its “Neighbourhood First” policy. This helped establish a practical framework for regional cooperation in times of systemic stress.
More recently, India played a similar role during the economic crisis in Sri Lanka, providing critical financial assistance, fuel, and essential supplies at a moment of acute vulnerability. India has also been among the first responders during major climate-related disasters, including cyclone events such as Cyclone Ditwa, delivering rapid humanitarian assistance.
These are not isolated gestures. They reflect an emerging pattern in which India increasingly functions as a stabilising force in the wider region.
This trajectory is reflected in India’s evolving regional frameworks—from Neighbourhood First, to SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region), and now the broader MAHASAGAR vision, which signals an expanded maritime and regional engagement architecture.
Why El Niño is different this time
El Niño events have historically been associated with weaker monsoons in South Asia, erratic rainfall patterns, and increased risks of droughts and floods. In a region where agriculture remains highly climate-sensitive, even modest deviations can translate into inflation, rural distress, and fiscal pressure.
This year, however, the risks are compounded by global fragilities:
* Persistent food and fertilizer price volatility
* Elevated energy costs linked to geopolitical tensions
* Supply chain disruptions in key commodities
* High debt burdens in several neighbouring economies
Together, these factors reduce the resilience of national systems and increase the risk of cascading shocks across borders.It is also important to recognise that social instability in some fragile countries in the region should be kept in mind, as climate shocks and economic pressures can quickly reinforce each other and create wider humanitarian and political consequences.
The case for a Delhi-based regional initiative
Against this backdrop, there is a strong case for India to convene a regional El Niño preparedness dialogue in Delhi, bringing together neighbouring countries, key development partners, and multilateral institutions.
This should not be limited to South Asia alone. The impacts of El Niño extend across the wider Indo-Pacific and Indian Ocean region. Participation could include:
* Neighbouring states in South and Southeast Asia
* The United Nations system
* The World Bank and Asian Development Bank
* Key bilateral partners such as Japan and others active in regional resilience
Given its geographic position, institutional capacity, and experience as a first responder, it is both natural and appropriate for India to chair such an initiative.
What the initiative should focus on
The objective should be practical coordination rather than declaratory statements. Three areas stand out:
1. Shared forecasting and early warning systems
Strengthening real-time exchange of climate data, monsoon projections, and sectoral risk mapping, particularly for agriculture, water, and fisheries.
2. Contingency planning for essential supplies
Coordinating regional approaches to food reserves, fertilizer availability, and energy supply buffers during climatic disruptions.
3. Disaster response and financing coordination
Improving interoperability among disaster management systems, and exploring rapid-response financing through multilateral development banks for climate-related shocks.
From Neighbourhood First to MAHASAGAR
India’s regional doctrine has steadily evolved—from Neighbourhood First to SAGAR, and now MAHASAGAR—reflecting a broader conception of responsibility in the Indian Ocean region.Each stage has expanded the scope of engagement: from immediate neighbourhood assistance, to maritime cooperation and growth, to a wider vision of regional interconnectedness.
A structured El Niño preparedness initiative would be a natural continuation of this trajectory, embedding climate resilience into the region’s evolving strategic architecture.
Climate as regional security
The distinction between climate events and security outcomes is increasingly blurred. A failed monsoon in one country can trigger food inflation in another; a cyclone can disrupt trade routes; droughts can accelerate migration pressures and fiscal instability.
El Niño should therefore be seen not only as a meteorological phenomenon but as a systemic stress test for regional resilience.
India is already widely seen in the region as a first responder in times of crisis. The experiences of COVID-19, the Sri Lankan economic emergency, and climate-related disasters have reinforced this role in practical terms.
The next step is to move from reactive response to anticipatory coordination.
A Delhi-based regional El Niño preparedness meeting—anchored by India and supported by multilateral institutions and key bilateral partners—would be a timely and pragmatic initiative. In an era of compounding global risks, regional cooperation is no longer optional; it is essential.
(Milinda Moragoda is the Founder of the Pathfinder Foundation. Can be contacted via email@milinda.org, courtesy wionews.com.
by Milinda Moragoda
Midweek Review
Beyond Harsha’s IMF “Revelations”
“A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots.” — H.L. Mencken
Summary
During a recent television appearance (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0QWfenCFlk) , opposition MP and Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chair Dr. Harsha de Silva dramatically brandished the latest IMF Letter of Intent (LoI, 13 May 2026), pointing to the signatures of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Central Bank Governor Dr. Nandalal Weerasinghe as proof of a “secret” alignment with austerity and cost-reflective utility pricing. However, for serious students of Sri Lankan macroeconomics, this “revelation” contained no new information. The legal, structural, and institutional mandate for cost-reflective pricing was codified long before the current administration took office—embedded in the IMF Extended Fund Facility (EFF) of 2023, the 2023 IMF Governance Diagnostic, and the Economic Transformation Act of 2024. This article argues that veteran economists in parliament must move beyond theatrical “gotcha” moments designed for political popularity and instead fulfill their true duty: educating the public on the non-negotiable continuity of structural adjustment programmess.
Anatomy of a Non-Revelation
The recent spectacle of Dr. Harsha de Silva presenting the IMF Letter of Intent on live television was framed as a grand exposure of the current administration’s hidden fiscal policy. With theatrical emphasis, Dr. de Silva pointed to the signatures of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) and the Central Bank Governor, declaring that the government had bound the public to the bitter pill of cost-reflective electricity and fuel pricing.
Yet, to anyone who understands the mechanics of central banking and sovereign debt restructuring, this performance revealed nothing that was not already part of (i) the public, (ii) legal, and (iii) institutional reality. A Letter of Intent is a standard operational requirement of the IMF review process; it is not a newly minted policy conceived in secret. By treating a routine administrative continuity as a shocking disclosure, Dr. de Silva engaged in political showmanship rather than economic education.
Legacy of Cost-Reflective Pricing
The narrative that cost-reflective utility pricing is a novel concession by the AKD administration is factually incorrect. The institutional architecture to eliminate non-commercial losses within the Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) and Ceylon Petroleum Corporation (CPC) was firmly established under the previous administration of Ranil Wickremesinghe.
The structural benchmarks were explicitly laid out in (i) the March 2023 IMF EFF Agreement and (ii) re-emphasized in the September 2023 IMF Governance Diagnostic Report. This framework was further consolidated by the legislature through (i) the Economic Transformation Act of 2024 and (ii) the new Sri Lanka Electricity Act. When the current administration assumed office, the fiscal tracks had already been laid. President AKD is merely operating the machinery of state within the legal and economic boundaries inherited from his predecessor Ranil Wickremesinghe to prevent a secondary default.
The Myth of the Solitary Saviour
There is a troubling tendency among Sri Lanka’s technocratic elite to engage in a saviour complex—positioning themselves on television screens as the singular authorities capable of managing public finance or navigating international waters. Dr. de Silva’s presentation was less about unveiling unknown data and more about projecting an image of unrivaled smartness in public finance.
When veteran economists resort to these manoeuvers, they diminish their own professional standing. Sri Lanka’s economic recovery does not hinge on the brilliant insights of a single individual or party; it depends on (i) institutional discipline, (ii) data-driven planning, and (iii) structural continuity. Pretending that routine compliance documents are exclusive intelligence updates serves only to feed personal political popularity at the expense of public intellectual growth.
Real Politics behind the Screen
Why, then, did Dr. de Silva choose to make a mountain out of an administrative molehill? The answer lies in pure political strategy. The National People’s Power (NPP) platform ascended to governance on strong anti-austerity rhetoric, promising relief from the heavy tax and tariff burdens imposed by the previous regime.
By holding up the signed LoI, Dr. de Silva sought a political checkmate. His objective was to expose the contradiction between the NPP’s populist election promises and its executive actions. While highlighting this policy convergence is fair game in partisan politics, framing it as a “new discovery” misleads the electorate into believing that the IMF programme is an optional, arbitrarily signed document rather than a legally binding national framework that leaves any sitting President with zero alternative manoeuvers.
True Mandate of Parliament’s Financial Oversight
During the broadcast, the fundamental boundary of the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) was brought into question. Dr. de Silva correctly noted that COPF does not formulate state policy—that remains the strict prerogative of the Executive and its chosen advisors. COPF’s true mandate is oversight: ensuring transparency, accountability, and the efficient monitoring of state revenues and expenditures.
If the head of our public finance oversight body wishes to protect the national interest, that energy should be (ii) directed toward evaluating the actual performance scorecards of state institutions, (ii) tracking structural benchmarks, and (iii) monitoring the real-time efficiency of economic programs. Using the platform of technical oversight to score quick points on a talk show blurs the vital line between a state auditor and a political campaigner.
Conclusion: The Need for Institutional Candour
Sri Lanka has paid a catastrophic price for populist rhetoric and the manipulation of economic facts for electoral gain. What the public requires from veteran economists and seasoned politicians today is not more political theater but radical candor.
The truth is simple: Sri Lanka is locked into a long-term, institutional structural adjustment programme that transcends whoever sits in the presidential secretariat. President AKD is executing pre-existing state commitments because the alternative is immediate economic isolation. Rather than trying to convince the public that they alone possess the secret key to salvation, opposition technocrats owe it to the nation to elevate the discourse. It is time to replace television showmanship with (i) honest, (ii) evidence-based planning, (iii) acknowledging that while politicians change, the arithmetic of national survival remains exactly the same.
(The writer, among many, served as the Special Advisor to the Office of the President of Namibia from 2006 to 2012 and was a Senior Consultant with the UNDP for 20 years. He was a Senior Economist with the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (1972-1993). He can be reached via asoka.seneviratne@gmail.com)
By Prof. Asoka S. Seneviratne
-
News7 days agoWomen’s T20 World Cup 2026 warm-up: Chamari Athapaththu’s 94 helps Sri Lanka beat Pakistan
-
News7 days agoLankan-Canadian inducted to Toronto Sports Hall of Fame
-
Editorial6 days agoProbe Sallay’s complaint
-
News4 days agoLocal firms move millions of dollars overseas for phantom imports: Govt.
-
News2 days agoCIABOC summons Yoshitha over his participation in British Navy training programme
-
Editorial7 days agoPrez in the dock
-
Features7 days agoEntering MIT for my Ph.D program, coping with harsh Boston winter and breasting the tape
-
Midweek Review4 days agoJuly 09: An inexcusable overall security failure and exceptional contingency plan

