Connect with us

Features

What Premadasa felt about Prabhakaran

Published

on

Premadasa

Continued from last week

Direct Talks with LTTE

On 15th April, Anton Balasingham from the LTTE headquarters in London responded by a fax addressed to the president, accepting the invitation and hoping that the necessary arrangements would be made to facilitate a dialogue.

Building Confidence

There were at least five specific measures that President Premadasa took before the negotiations commenced. These helped create the environment for a trusting relationship between the government and the Tamil militants. The first was his peremptory demand, made at the Chittavivekashramaya temple on the outskirts of Colombo on the 13th of April 1989, that the Government of India withdraw the IPKF completely from Sri Lanka in three months. This was seen as a very positive step by the LTTE, and also incidentally, by the JVP.

Premadasa made special arrangements for Balasingham and his Australian wife, Adele, who were then in exile in London to fly down to Colombo at government expense for exploratory discussions.

This was not all. The wife of the LTTE leader Prabhakaran and their two children, who had taken refuge abroad in a European country, were provided security and facilities to return to Sri Lanka and rejoin Prabhakaran in the Wanni.

Subsequently came his ‘directions’ to the Indian High Commissioner, Lakhen Mehotra, and his many letters to the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, to expedite the process of withdrawal/deinduction of the IPKF from Sri Lanka. He kept up One-to-One with Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi,

New Delhi, September 1989 the pressure by sending personal emissaries — I was sent on two occasions — to personally convey information to the Indian prime minister. These were similarly very much appreciated by the LTTE as being completely in line with their request and their interest.

The Hilton Hotel Talks — May to September 1989

The arrangements made to ensure security for the LTTE delegation during their stay in Colombo once the peace talks started were of the highest. All the LTTE cadres who participated in the talks were permitted to keep their personal weapons. The first group of LTTE delegates for the May talks, namely Balasingham, Yogaratnam Yogi, and Paramu Murthy, arrived in Colombo from the Wanni in Air Force helicopters with their own heavily armed bodyguards. It was an unnerving experience to me and the other Sri Lankan delegates to be faced, across the table at the first meeting, by armed LTTE cadres in battle fatigues.

Accommodating the LTTE delegation for the talks in Colombo’s five-star hotels itself caused a stir among the public. But it was the logical choice. The Hilton was virtually empty of guests owing to the troubled law and order situation and in addition it was off-season for tourists.

The talks with the LTTE were conducted in two rounds. The first round of nine meetings took place in May and the LTTE was represented by Balasingham, Yogi and Paramu. Then followed a break when the team went back to the jungles. The second round commenced on 16 June and ended on 2 July. In this round Lawrence Thilakar from Paris and Hassan, Karikaran and Ibrahim from the Eastern Province also participated. The only other member from the LTTE leadership to talk with the government in Colombo was Mahattaya, the deputy to Prabhakaran who came to Colombo for a further set of talks in November/December. The interval between the two rounds when the team returned to the jungles also gave Prabhakaran an opportunity of making his input.

On the Sri Lankan side, the negotiating team was led by Minister A C S Hameed. He was supported by Ranjan Wijeratne and several other ministers and a team of officials who were changed as dictated by the agenda for the discussions. Premadasa handpicked the officials for the negotiations as well. They included General Sepals Attygalle, Secretary/Defence; Bernard Tilakaratne, Secretary Foreign Affairs; his Secretary Wijayadasa, and myself, advisor from the president’s office. Ivan Samarawickrema came in when land issues were being discussed. Felix Dias Abeyesinghe, veteran of the former All Party Conference doubled-up as Co-ordinator and Secretary.

At the end of each day, a press release giving the public some idea of how the discussions went was issued, drafted by Dias Abeyesinghe and Balasingham. Premadasa kept in touch with the proceedings through daily briefings and met the LTTE team as and when necessary at his Sucharita office.

Agendas of the Two Sides

Getting the IPKF to withdraw from the country was the primary objective in round one of the talks. Balasingham spent much time dealing with the atrocities of the IPKF and the sufferings of the people of the north and east. This caused the impatient Ranjan Wijeratne, who had come to do some hard bargaining on a political settlement, say that what was going on was “not a dialogue but a monologue”. State sponsored colonization and forced conscription of youth by the EPRLF for the Civilian Volunteer Force (CVF) which the IPKF was training were also issues on which much discussion was centred. Follow up on these by the government was quick.

Premadasa was furious that the IPKF was training an army of Tamil youths. He felt that this could be the nucleus of a rival army under the EPRLF which could lead to immense problems in the future. This would also make it difficult for him to convince the LTTE to give up arms and agree to the eventual absorption of their cadres into the provincial police and units of the military. General A S Kalkat, the officer commanding the IPKF, was called in one day and given a dressing-down on the training of the CVF. Kalkat had an easy relationship with President Jayewardene and had meetings with him to review the security situation. Things were different under Premadasa and there was little contact between the two men.

What Premadasa Felt about Prabhakaran

Although A C S Hameed had the opportunity of meeting Prabhakaran in Jaffna after the IPKF had left the island in March 1990, Premadasa, much as he wanted to, was unable to meet Prabhakaran. During the May and June talks in Colombo, the LTTE had deemed it too dangerous for Prabhakaran to leave his jungle hideout. This inaccessability to Prabhakaran led the irascible Ranjan Wijeratne to opine that Prabhakaran in fact was dead—killed in a duel with his deputy, Mahattaya, and that A C S Hameed had only met Prabhakaran’s double in Jaffna. Be that as it may –Prabhakaran was to die and reappear several times thereafter – this elusive quality added to his charisma and image as a ruthless and implacable military leader whose battle strategies were imaginative and daring. This image was subsequently badly dented by the well-known killings of political foes – the murders of Amirthalingam and Yogeswaran of the TULF in Colombo – the mass staying of the EPRLF leadership in Madras and the 21 May suicide bombing of Rajiv Gandhi at Sriperumpudur, in Which the LTTE were the main suspects.

Premadasa had always wanted to meet Prabhakaran face to face. He had read and heard all about him—a minor official’s son from Valvettiturai, leaving school at 15, joining up with the militants and getting involved in the killing of Mayor Duraiappah in Jaffna in 1972, eliminating his rivals, especially the TELO in 1981, training for guerilla warfare in south India, and then as leader of the LTTE taking on as he called it, “the fourth largest army in the world” in 1987.

Premadasa felt he understood Prabhakaran’s motivations and his determination to achieve something for his people, albeit by terror and violent means. He believed that talking to him face to face would have convinced Prabhakaran of his sincerity in solving the ethnic problem with justice to all. He felt that the personal chemistry which builds trust would manifest itself at such a meeting. He often regretted that he had not had the chance to meet him personally especially after the breakdown in relations which occurred in June 1990.

Prabhakaran’s View of Premadasa

Premadasa’s determination and persistent efforts to get the IPKF to withdraw in 1989 and his achievement of the final deinduction of all troops in March 1990 convinced the LTTE of Premadasa’s

sincerity. They felt they could trust him. At a time when they were really feeling cornered by the IPKF and the TNA – the Tamil National Army– that was being put together by Varadaraja Perumal the chief minister of the NEPC, they decided to ask Premadasa for some arms and ammunition to retaliate against any moves against them. The request was made to Hameed by Balasingham during the second round of the Colombo Talks. As recorded by Adele Balasingham in her book The Will to Freedom’, Hameed had thought it a sensitive and controversial matter which could have been opposed by the military establishment. In her words:

Mr Hameed came along with Gen Attygalle, the Defence Secretary to our hotel. They told Bala that the president was willing to help. Since the matter was very sensitive and controversial, it had to be handled with extreme confidentiality. The army would be outraged. But it would be done covertly, the General said. Attygalle wanted a list of requirements. Bala and Yogi contacted Mr Prabhakaran through our communication channel and produced a list of weapons. Within a week, a substantial quantity of arms and ammunition was delivered to the Tigers through a bordering Sri Lankan army camp in Manal Aru (Welioya) sector in the Mullaitivu district.

Premadasa took a calculated risk in making this decision. But he felt its important in the final design he had in mind, that the LTTE be not completely eliminated and another Tamil force – the EPRLF – be supported by India to become a surrogate for India’s continuing interest in northern Sri Lanka. That to him would have been a worse scenario than the former. This was his convoluted thinking for the high-risk venture he had embarked on, of ensuring that India, or the IPKF, leave Sri Lanka at the earliest opportunity.

The whole affair was kept very much under cover and most of us around the president were very much in the dark until the story broke some months later. I learnt about it from a news story in the Island newspaper. The Indian high commissioner was at my door that morning and sought an explanation. How could it have happened when we had an agreement with India and had invited the IPKF over to restore normalcy in the island? He was not convinced that, if the story was true, it must have been something done at a local field commander level with the “top” completely unaware; that only a small quantity was involved, and that it was to be used against the TNA by the LTTE and not against the IPKF.

Later on, when the war restarted in June 1990, the media brought up the matter again and again, now making out that the arms and ammunition handed over, in or around July/August 1989, were in fact being used against our own security forces. It was an extremely difficult situation for Premadasa to wriggle out of As is the practice of most governments in embarrassing situations such as this, the first line of response was total denial, and later, as the criticism became more strident, a belated statement in Parliament.

LTTE Stance on the Separate State

On the question of ‘them separate state’ itself, the attitude of the LTTE during the talks had been that their striving for that objective would be dependent on the performance and sincerity shown by the government in moving forward with the political measures which had been discussed. These centred firstly around, the repeal of the sixth amendments to the Constitution which decreed that all MPs should take an oath to safeguard the unity, integrity and sovereignty of Sri Lanka and eschew the promotion of separatism.

The other was the early dissolution of the North-East Provincial Council (NEPC). The LTTE’s idea, apparently, was that in such event the LTTE could contest and become legitimate representatives of the people of the north-east. The LTTE maintained that the NEPC elections had been rigged and that the EPRLF had only been able to obtain a majority of seats in the NEPC because of the IPKF’s illegal support, (even stuffing of ballot boxes was alleged) the IPKF being the only effective power in the north and east during that election.

The opportunity for the dissolution of the NEPC presented itself when Vartharajah Perumal, the chief minister, inexplicably announced his intention to unilaterally announce a Declaration of Independence in February 1990. The chief minister did not actually do so but said that if a list of demands was not acceded to before a given date he would.

All political parties in Parliament, except the EPRLF, condemned Vartharajah Perumal’s move. Under the Provincial Council Law of 1987, one of the safeguards to guarantee some autonomy to the Provincial Council had been that the government could not dissolve a Provincial Council by Executive fiat. Vartharajah Perumal’s UDI provided the opportunity for the government to bring on amending legislation which enabled the government to dissolve, where “more than one half of the total membership of a Provincial Council expressly repudiated or manifestly disavowed obedience to the Constitution”. But the amending legislation came too late; after the war had started again on the 11th of June 1990. If Hameed, to whom Premadasa had entrusted the job had been able to push it through Parliament earlier perhaps the sought after “sincerity” would have been overtly displayed and the calamity might have been averted.

(To be continued)

(Excerpted from Rendering unto Caesar, autobiography of Bradman Weerakoon) ✍️



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Peace march and promise of reconciliation

Published

on

Peace walk in progress

The ongoing peace march by a group of international Buddhist monks has captured the sentiment of Sri Lankans in a manner that few public events have done in recent times. It is led by the Vietnamese monk Venerable Thich Pannakara who is associated with a mindfulness movement that has roots in Vietnamese Buddhist practice and actively promoted among diaspora communities in the United States. The peace march by the monks, accompanied by their mascot, the dog Aloka, has generated affection and goodwill within the Buddhist and larger community. It follows earlier peace walks in the United States where monks carried a similar message of mindfulness and compassion across communities but without any government or even media patronage as in Sri Lanka.

This initiative has the potential to unfold into an effort to nurture a culture of peace in Sri Lanka. Such a culture is necessary if the country as the country prepares to move beyond its history of conflict towards a more longlasting reconciliation and a political solution to its ethnic and religious divisions. The government’s support for the peace march can be seen as part of a broader attempt to shape such a culture. The Clean Sri Lanka programme, promoted by the government as a civic responsibility campaign focused on environmental cleanliness, ethical conduct and social discipline, provides a useful framework within which such initiatives can be situated. Its emphasis on collective responsibility and shared public space makes it sit well with the values that peacebuilding requires.

government’s previous plan to promote a culture of peace was on the occasion of “Sri Lanka Day” celebrations which were scheduled to take place on December 12-14 last year but was disrupted by Cyclone Ditwah. The Sri Lanka Day celebrations were to include those talented individuals from each and every community at the district level who had excelled in some field or the other, such as science, business or arts and culture and selected by the District Secretariats in each of the 25 districts. They were to gather in Colombo to engage in cultural performances and community-focused exhibitions. The government’s intention was to build up a discourse around the ideas of unity in diversity as a precursor to addressing the more contentious topics of human rights violations during the war period, and issues of accountability and reparations for wrongs suffered during that dark period.

Positive Response

The invitation to the international monks appears to have emerged from within Buddhist religious networks in Sri Lanka that have long maintained links with the larger international Buddhist community. The strong support extended by leading temples and clergy within the country, including the Buddhists Mahanayakes indicates that this was not an isolated effort but one that resonated with the mainstream Buddhist establishment. Indeed, the involvement of senior Buddhist leaders has been particularly noteworthy. A Joint Declaration for Peace in the world, drawing on Sri Lanka’s own experience, and by the Mahanayakes of all Buddhist Chapters took place in the context of the ongoing peace march at the Gangaramaya Temple in Colombo, with participation from the diplomatic community. The declaration, calling for compassion, dialogue and sustainable peace, reflects an effort by religious leadership to assert a moral voice in favour of coexistence.

The popular response to the peace march has also been striking. Large numbers of people have been gathering along the route, offering flowers, water and support to the monks. Schoolchildren have been lining the roads, and communities from different religious backgrounds extend hospitality. On the way, the monks were hosted by both a Hindu temple and a mosque, where food and refreshments were provided. These acts, though simple, carry a message about the possibility of harmony among Sri Lanka’s diverse communities. It helps to counter the perception that the Buddhist community in Sri Lanka is inherently nationalist and resistant to minority concerns that was shaped during the decades of war and reinforced by political mobilisation that too often exploited ethnic identity.

By way of contrast, the peace march offers a different image. It shows a readiness among ordinary people to embrace values of compassion and coexistence that are deeply embedded in Buddhist teaching. The Metta Sutta, one of the most well-known discourses in Buddhism, calls for boundless goodwill towards all beings. It states that one should cultivate a mind that is “boundless towards all beings, free from hatred and ill will.” This emphasis on universal compassion provides a moral foundation for peace that extends beyond national or ethnic boundaries. The monks themselves emphasised this point repeatedly during the walk. Venerable Thich Pannakara reminded those who gathered that while acts of generosity are commendable, mindfulness in everyday life is even more important. He warned that as people become unmindful, they are more prone to react with anger and hatred, thereby contributing to conflict.

More Initiatives

The presence of political leaders at key moments of the march has emphasised the significance that the government attaches to the event. Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya paid her respects to the peace march monks in Kandy, while President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is expected to do so at the conclusion of the march in Colombo. Such gestures signal an alignment between political authority and moral aspiration, even if the translation of that aspiration into policy remains a work in progress. At the same time, the peace march has not been without its shortcomings. The walk did not engage with the Northern and Eastern parts of the country, regions that were most affected by the war and where the need for reconciliation is most acute. A more inclusive geographic reach would have strengthened the symbolic impact of the initiative.

In addition, the positive impact of the peace march could have been increased if more effort had been taken to coordinate better with other civic and religious groups and include them in the event. Many civil society and religious harmony groups who would have liked to participate in the peace march found themselves unable to do so. There was no place in the programme for them to join. Even government institutions tasked with promoting social cohesion and reconciliation found themselves outside the loop. The Clean Sri Lanka Task Force that organised the peace march may have felt that involving other groups would have made it more complicated to organise the events which have proceeded without problems.

The hope is that the positive energy and goodwill generated by this peace march will not dissipate but will instead inspire further initiatives with the requisite coordination and leadership. The march has generated public discussion, drawn attention to the values of mindfulness and compassion, and created a space in which people can imagine a different future. It has been a special initiative among the many that are needed to build a culture of peace. A culture of peace cannot be imposed from above nor can it emerge overnight. It needs to be nurtured through multiple efforts across society, including education, religious engagement, civic initiatives and political reform. It is within such a culture that the more difficult questions of power sharing, justice and reconciliation can be addressed in a constructive manner.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Regional Universities

Published

on

Development initiatives: Faculty of Technology, University of Jaffna and NCDB

The countryside and peripheral regions have been neglected in the national imagination for many decades. This has also been the case with regional universities which were seen as mere appendages to the university system, and sometimes created to appease political constituencies in the regions. The exclusion of the rural world and the institutions in those regions was not accidental nor inevitable, but the consequence of conscious policies promoted under an extractive and exploitative global order. Neoliberalism globalisation, initiated in the late 1970s with far-reaching policies of free trade and free flow of capital, or the “open economy,” as we call it in Sri Lanka, is now dying. The United States and the Western countries that promoted neoliberalism, as a class project of finance capital to address the falling profits during the long economic downturn in the 1970s, are themselves reversing their policies and are at loggerheads with each other. However, those economic processes will continue to have national consequences into the future.

At the heart of such policies is the neoliberal city, which has become the centre of the economy with expanding financial businesses and a real estate boom. Such financialised cities also had their impact on universities, in lower income countries, where commercialised education with high fees, rising student debt, research for businesses and transnational educational linkages with branch campuses of Western universities, have become a reality.

In the case of Sri Lanka, while neoliberal policies began with the IMF and World Bank Structural Adjustment Programmes, in the late 1970s, the long civil war forestalled the accelerated growth of the neoliberal city. I have argued, over the last decade and a half, that it is with the end of the civil war, in 2009, coinciding with the global financial crisis, that a second wave of neoliberalism in Sri Lanka led to global finance capital being absorbed in infrastructure and real estate in Colombo. The transformation of Colombo into a neoliberal city was overseen by Gotabaya Rajapaksa as Defence Secretary with even the Urban Development Authority brought under the security establishment. While Colombo was drastically changing with a skyline of new buildings and shiny luxury vehicles drawing on massive external debt, there were also moves to promote private higher education institutions. The Board of Investment (BOI) registered many hundred so-called higher education institutions; these were not regulated and many mushroomed like supermarkets and disappeared in no time when they incurred losses.

In contrast to these so-called private higher education institutions that proliferated in and around Colombo, Sri Lanka, drawing on its free education system, has, over the last many decades, also created a number of state universities in peripheral regions. However, these regional universities lack adequate funding and a clear vision and purpose. The current conjuncture with the neoliberal global order unravelling, and the immediate global crisis in energy and transport are grim reminders of the importance of local economies and self-sufficiency. In this column I consider the role of our regional universities and their relationship to the communities within which they are embedded.

Regional context

The necessity and the advantage of robust public services is their reach into peripheral regions and marginalised communities. This is true of public transport, as it is with public hospitals. Private buses will always avoid isolated rural routes as their margins only increase on the busy routes between cities and towns. And private hospitals and clinics flock to the cities to extract from desperate patients, including by unscrupulous doctors who divert patients in public hospitals to be served in the private health facilities they moonlight. Similarly, it is affluent cities and towns that are the attraction for private educational institutions.

Public institutions, including universities, can only ensure their public role if they are adequately funded. Over the last decade and a half, with falling allocations for education, our state universities have been pushed into initiating fee levying courses, both at the post-graduate level and also for undergraduate international students. These programmes are seen as avenues to decrease the dependence of universities on budgetary support. However, the reality is that it is only universities in Colombo that can draw in students capable of paying such high fees. Furthermore, such fee levying courses end up pushing academics into overwork including by offering additional income.

Therefore, allocations for underfunded regional universities need to be steadily increased. Housing facilities and other services for academics working in rural districts would ensure their continued presence and greater engagement with the local communities. Increased time away from teaching and research funding earmarked for community engagement will provide clear direction for academics. Indeed, such funding with a clear vision and role for regional universities can provide considerable social returns. In a time when repeated crises are affecting our society, agricultural production to bolster our food system as well as rural income streams and employment are major issues. Here, regional universities have an important role today in developing social and economic alternatives.

Reimagining development

In recent months, there have been interesting initiatives in the Northern Province, where the Universities of Jaffna and Vavuniya have been engaging state institutions on issues of development. In an initiative to bring different actors together, high level meetings have been convened between the staff of the Agriculture Faculty and officials of the Provincial Agriculture Ministry to figure out solutions for long pending agricultural problems. Similar meetings have also been organised between provincial authorities and the Faculties of Technology and Engineering in Kilinochchi. These initiatives have led to academics engaging communities and co-operatives on their development needs, particularly in formulating new development initiatives and activating idle projects and assets in the region. Such engagement provides opportunities for academics to share their knowledge and skills while learn from communities about challenges that lead to new problems for research.

One of the most rewarding engagements I have been part of is an internship programme for the Technology Faculty of the University of Jaffna, where four batches of final year students, from food technology, green farming and automobile specialities, have been placed for six months within the co-operative movement through the Northern Co-operative Development Bank. This initiative has created a strong relationship between the Technology Faculty and the co-operative movement, with a number of former students now working fulltime in co-operative ventures. They are at the centre of developing solutions for rural co-operatives, including activating idle factories and ensuring quality and standards for their products.

I refer to these concrete initiatives because universities’ role in research and development in Sri Lanka, as in most other countries, are often narrowly conceived to be engagement with private businesses. However, for rural regions, the challenge, even with technological development, is the generation of appropriate technologies that can serve communities.

In Sri Lanka, we have for long emulated the major Western universities and in the process lost sight of the needs of our own youth and communities. Rethinking the development of our universities may have to begin with an understanding of the real challenges and context of our people. Our universities and their academics, if provided with a progressive vision and adequate resources and time to engage their communities, have the potential to address the many economic and social challenges that the next decade of global turmoil is bound to create.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies)

by Ahilan Kadirgamar

Continue Reading

Features

‘Disco Lady’ hitmaker now doing it for Climate Change

Published

on

The name Alston Koch is generally associated with the hit song ‘Disco Lady.’ Yes, he has had several other top-notch songs to his credit but how many music lovers are aware that Alston is one of the few Asian-born entertainers using music for climate advocacy, since 2008.

He is back in the ‘climate change’ scene, with SUNx Malta, to celebrate Earth Day 2026, with the release of ‘A Symphony for Change’ – a vibrant Dodo4Kids video by Alston.

The inspiring musical video highlights ocean conservation and empowers children as future climate champions, honouring Maurice Strong’s legacy through education, creativity, and global collaboration for a sustainable planet.

The four-minute animated musical, composed and performed by platinum award-winning artiste Alston Koch, brings to life a resurrected Dodo, guiding children on a mission to clean up marine environments.

With a catchy melody and an uplifting message, the video blends entertainment with education—making climate awareness accessible and engaging for the next generation.

SUNx Malta is a Climate Friendly Travel system, focused on transforming the global tourism sector that is low-carbon, SDG-linked, and nature-positive.

Professor Geoffrey Lipman, President of SUNx Malta, described the project as a joyful collaboration with purpose:

“It’s always a pleasure to produce music with Alston for the good of our planet. And this time, to incorporate our Dodo4Kids in the video urging the next generation of young climate champions to help save our seas.”

For Alston, now based in Australia, the collaboration continues a long-standing journey of climate-focused creativity:

Says Alston: “I have been working on climate songs since the first release, in 2009, of the video ‘Act Now.’ Since then, I’ve performed at major global events—from Bali to Glasgow. I wrote this song because the climate horizon is darkening, and our kids and grandkids are our best hope for a brighter future.”

Alston’s very first climate song is ‘Can We Take This Climate Change,’ released in 2008.

It was written by Alston for the World Trade Organisation presentation, in London, and presented at ‘Live the Deal Climate Change’ conference in Copenhagen.

The Sri Lankan-born singer was goodwill ambassador for the campaign, and the then UK Minister Barbara Follett called it a “gift in song to the world suffering due to climate change.”

Alston said he wrote it after noticing butterflies, birds, and fruit trees disappearing from his childhood days.

In 2017, his creation ‘Make a Change’ was released in connection with World Tourism Day 2017.

Alston Koch’s work on climate advocacy is pretty inspiring, especially as climate change is now creating horrifying problems worldwide, and in Sri Lanka, too.

Alston also indicated to us that he has plans to visit Sri Lanka, sometime this year, and, maybe, even plan out a date for an Alston Koch special … a concert, no doubt.

Can’t wait for it!

Continue Reading

Trending