Features
What conspiracy?
The recent release of former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s book, ‘The conspiracy to oust me from the Presidency; how internationally sponsored regime change made a mockery of democracy in Sri Lanka has sparked discussions on its content and credibility. Critics argue that the book appears to be predominantly opinion-based, lacking the factual data that are fundamental for establishing credibility.
GR has resorted to numerous unfounded and racially-charged assertions in an attempt to conceal his profound shortcomings and lack of astuteness in governance as a leader. Gotabaya has asserted that his life was in jeopardy before leaving the country, a tendency that is known for perceiving conspiracy theories even in the absence of evidence. Consequently, he fled and subsequently submitted his resignation.
Misinterpretations
GR argues that the key factor in his over 52% victory in the 2019 presidential election was the Sinhala vote. Claiming that the win was only because the Sinhala vote oversimplifies a complex election scenario. Firstly, it is crucial to acknowledge the diversity of Sri Lanka’s population and the multi-faceted nature of the electorate’s decisions. While the Sinhala vote certainly played a significant role, it would be unjust to discount the support garnered from other communities.
Then he claims that Catholic clergy were backers of the aragalaya solely in their capacity as Catholics, not as engaged citizens. Despite pressure from prominent monks of three Buddhist Nikayas to accede to aragalaya demands, the book singularly holds the church accountable for its support of the aragalaya, overlooking broader civic considerations.
He later laments that, from the moment he was nominated as a presidential candidate, significant portions of the Tamil and Muslim populations, overseas Tamil groups, foreign-funded NGOs, and certain countries with substantial expatriate Tamil populations were openly opposed to the idea of him becoming the President of Sri Lanka. Nevertheless, the appointment of several Tamil and Muslim ministers in his cabinet suggests a more complex situation. While certain segments of not only the Tamil and Muslim populations but also a portion of the Sinhala population may have expressed reservations, portraying it as unanimous hostility is an oversimplification.
GR has shown a lack of maturity by asserting that the presidential elections of January 2010 and November 2019 were instances where the people of Sri Lanka triumphed over conspiratorial forces, while conspirators emerged victorious in both the January 2015 presidential election and his resignation in July 2022.
He is trying to distance himself from the rejected members of the Rajapaksa family, admitting that he was reluctant to appoint several family members to various positions. However, he does not provide an explanation for the decisions to appoint them. On the contrary, the appointments made during his tenure reveal a significant concentration of family members in key positions, indicating a departure from the stated intent. as he admit elsewhere saying “One of the accusations levelled at me was that even though I claimed to be doing things differently, that in reality I consolidated the power of the Rajapaksa family further and that under me there were more members of the family holding ministerial office than there was even under Mahinda Rajapaksa. To be sure, under my Presidency, there were five Rajapaksas in the Cabinet…”
Then, he complains, “The fact that I was not leading the party meant that I did not have much political power. For example, I was not involved in preparing the SLPP national list or the district nomination lists.”
However, the reality is that he remains steadfast in his reluctance to heed expert advice, particularly on matters like the “conspiracy” surrounding organic fertiliser, VAT cuts, fixed exchange rate policies, money printing and import duty manipulations.
Also, he successfully managed to influence even staunch factions, such as Wimal Weerawansa, making them feel highly sensitive to his requests for constitutional amendments.
Another one of his amusing assertions is that having 150 MPs became a disadvantage rather than an advantage, as he stated, “This is what made it easier for our opponents to destroy us.”
While it is acknowledged that not leading the party might limit direct control over certain aspects, the claim that the lack of political power resulted from not leading the party requires scrutiny. The assertion that he was not involved in the preparation of the SLPP national list or district nomination lists is a matter of organisational dynamics and internal decision-making processes. It is essential to recognise that political influence can manifest through various channels beyond formal leadership roles, and active involvement in strategic decisions does not solely hinge on holding the party leadership position.
“There were also various individuals and groups that believed that their support was crucial in ensuring that I was elected to power and they expected me to do what they wanted. These are the problems that emerge when somebody like me gets elected to power.” Balancing the demands of different factions is a common challenge in politics, and the difficulties mentioned are not unique to any particular leader. The key lies in effective communication, managing expectations, and making decisions that align with broader national interests.
Then he confesses, “I have openly admitted that the way the organic farming initiative of my government was implemented was a failure and a mistake… Though some think that the ban on the import of chemical fertiliser was taken suddenly and without much consultation, the shift to organic farming was a matter that had been under discussion in my government from the earliest days and it was an integral part of my manifesto ‘Vistas of Prosperity.'” This statement underscores his dishonesty. Despite numerous observations from agricultural experts warning that achieving 100% organic farming is impossible, GR, being shortsighted, chose not to listen. Guided by ill-advice, His motivation was to conserve foreign reserves by banning the importation of fertiliser and agrochemicals, as the evidence suggests.
While the intent may have been present in the manifesto ‘Vistas of Prosperity,’ the abruptness of the ban and the perceived lack of extensive consultation have raised concerns among various stakeholders.
Regarding the aborted attempt to import organic fertiliser from Qingdao Seawin Biotech Group of China, attributing the problems to deliberate sabotage associated with regime change projects is far-fetched It is crucial to differentiate between unforeseen challenges in implementation and intentional sabotage, maintaining a fair and evidence-based approach in assessing the events surrounding the organic fertiliser import.
Passing the buck
The claim that certain so-called apolitical appointees in his government played a major role in funding and organising opposition against his lacks substantial evidence. Labeling individuals as “fifth columnists” within the country and his own government appears to be an oversimplified and baseless characterisation, lacking the complexity and evidence required for a credible argument.
Instead of simply labeling certain appointees as apolitical, it raises questions about the criteria used for their selection and the subsequent evaluation of their actions. It would be enlightening if he could disclose a few names in this regard, helping readers of his book to understand the motivations and actions of the individuals involved and to assess whether their activities were genuinely apolitical or driven by specific political agendas.
Then, as the President and head of National Security, GR attempted to shift the blame to his lieutenants, displaying qualities of a leader lacking courage. He complains about failure of intelligence by stating, “If an organised mob can make its way to Colombo completely unopposed and then proceed to take over the President’s House, the Presidential Secretariat, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Prime Minister’s official residence and to burn down the private residence of the incumbent Prime Minister, that can only be described as a law-and-order debacle.”
The assertion that the intelligence service excelled in pandemic-related duties but failed to detect politically-motivated mobs on social media indicates a lapse in monitoring and raises questions about the effectiveness of intelligence gathering.
The claim that standard operating procedures were not implemented as intended during the critical months of May and July 2022 highlights a breakdown in the response mechanisms. It is crucial to delve into the specifics of these deviations to understand the reasons behind the apparent lapse in adherence to established protocols.
Finally, about the aragalaya, he opines “It would be extremely naïve for anyone to claim that there was no foreign hand in the moves made to oust me from power.”
While acknowledging the existence of foreign interests and influence in global affairs, the assertion that GR’s ousting from power was solely orchestrated by foreign powers requires careful examination. It is crucial to distinguish between legitimate concerns about foreign interference and the potential oversimplification of complex political events.
The claim that foreign powers maintain a cadre of activists to promote their agenda in Sri Lanka is a serious allegation. Furthermore, the idea that foreign trips, research grants, and other incentives induce individuals to act against the national interest merits a thorough investigation to substantiate such claims.
Therefore, according to GR, every political action and ideology opposing his policies is a conspiracy confirming that he lacks the capacity or wisdom to comprehend the intricacies of democracy and citizens’ rights.
The apparent objective of this tactic is to instill fear among the majority Sinhala Buddhist community, fostering division against ethnic and religious minorities in the country. While instances of this divisive ideology may surface in the upcoming Sri Lankan elections, it is premature to determine whether the Rajapaksa family will wholeheartedly embrace it.
(The writer, a senior Chartered Accountant and professional banker, is Professor at SLIIT University, Malabe. He is also the author of the “Doing Social Research and Publishing Results”, a Springer publication (Singapore), and “Samaja Gaveshakaya (in Sinhala). The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the institution he works for. He can be contacted at saliya.a@slit.lk and www.researcher.com)
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )
US sports envoys to Lanka to champion youth development
Rahuman questions sudden cancellation of leave of CEB employees
