Features
WHEN INFORMATION BECOMES INTELLIGENCE
by Merril Gunaratne
The investigations which followed the Easter Sunday carnage in 2019 gave rise to considerable speculation and inquiry concerning the manner in which the State Intelligence Service (SIS) handled information received from India about plans of the National Thowheed Jamath (NTJ) to commit terror strikes. The manner in which those handling as well as receiving such information at various levels sought to shift responsibility may have culminated in considerable confusion in the mind of the observer.
I therefore thought it apt to discuss the essential differences between ‘information’ and ‘intelligence’ because therein appears to lie the clue to identifying why the public have been left in a state of confusion. In fact when appearing before the Presidential Commission, I had the opportunity to clarify the essential differences between ‘information’ and ‘intelligence’.
ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ‘INFORMATION’ AND ‘INTELLIGENCE’
All sleuths in intelligence agencies including the SIS, the premier agency, commence their careers by being taught to discern the difference between information and intelligence. An intelligence career cannot advance without absorbing this fundamental lesson. When an informer provides a piece of information, the officer has to test whether it is suitable to be converted into intelligence. In other words, an intelligence officer has to determine whether the information is credible or reliable.
This test requires the sleuth to take cognizance of the previous record of the informer, and whether he had previously been consistent with procuring and providing reliable information. The officer has also to check abundant records of subversives and terror groups available in the subject and personal files stored in the “Registry” of the SIS to buttress his convictions further.
Once satisfied about the credibility of the piece of information received, his next step would be to put it down on paper. He would, in the same document, assign reasons why he believes the information received to be credible. This is done to convince those above him in the hierarchy to whom he would be reporting of the credibility of what is submitted. We call this part of the report ” assessment or analysis”, where the reasons adduced would help convince the recipient that the information is credible, and should be viewed seriously.
A piece of information can therefore emerge as “Intelligence” only if the writer can offer reasons to convince his superior of the credibility of information. I would quote from the book ‘Army of Evil’ by Adrian Weale to illustrate the point at which information converts to intelligence: “Broadly speaking, intelligence is information that is gathered and analyzed before informing decisions. Without the crucial analysis step, it is of no value”.
To express this in simple terms, the officer has to first satisfy himself about the credibility of the information received. He then converts it to intelligence. In fact the CIA sent officers in 2002 to help SIS officers here to polish the art of analysis by setting up an ” Analytic Unit”. It helped improve our ‘analytical’ capabilities considerably.
The process of ‘marketing’ the product (Information) begins at the point the officer prepares the intelligence report embodying his assessment . In the case of the SIS, the first such classified report has necessarily to be despatched to the president, with a copy to secretary of defence. Depending on the nature of intelligence, copies may also be sent to the IGP (as should have been the case with Easter Sunday), secretary to president, minister of defence and the service chiefs. Such highly classified reports have necessarily to embody intelligence, not mere scraps of untested information replete with ambiguity which the highly placed recipients will not bother to waste their time on.
If the intelligence in a report is of a grave and urgent nature, the SIS has to simultaneously alert the president, the secretary of defence and the IGP (as in the case of Easter Sunday) on the telephone without any delay. In the matter of intelligence pertaining to the terror plans of National Thowheed Jamat for Easter Sunday, the point could also have been made that an immediate discussion was warranted. The SIS had to act as the spur to goad, galvanize and energize the recipients to believe the intelligence and swing into action immediately. The process commences with the despatch of INTELLIGENCE Reports to the president and secretary of defence, the IGP etc, and would extend towards addressing them on the phone as well.
SIS RESPONSE TO INFORMATION FROM INDIA
Did the SIS deviate from established standards? The memo sent by Chief of National Intelligence( CNI) on behalf of secretary of defence to IGP dated April 9, 2019 refers to attacks planned on ‘some important churches’, and the ‘Indian High Commission’. To his letter was attached an unsigned note of the SIS where the modes of attack, and the leading figures of the NTJ have also been reflected. At paragraph four, this note had stated, “The input maybe kindly enquired into on priority and a feedback given to us.”
What required inclusion in assessing this information should have been the following: (1) whether the information was reliable or not, and the reasons for such a conclusion; and (2) a proposal to plan immediate security safeguards if the threat was likely to manifest. Instead of proceeding on these lines, what had been suggested was the conduct of “inquiries”. There was no sense of urgency shown here. It may therefore not be wrong to assume that priorities appeared to have been mixed up in the note of the SIS. Therefore, since the two papers of (CNI and the SIS) did not provide ‘assessments’, they were NOT INTELLIGENCE reports, but mere reports embodying untested information.
Besides, the SIS, if it believed a piece of information to be credible, had to submit serial or special Intelligence reports to the president, secretary of defence, and the IGP . This step had also not been taken. The process convincing those who mattered had therefore been incomplete. This is because on the face of the memorandum of April 9, 2019, there is no indication that the writers had decided to energize, galvanize and push the secretary of defence and the IGP to act without delay. In a nutshell, the reports of April 9, 2021 appeared vague and hazy. They were not ‘wake up’ calls.
Was it possible that the SIS may not have been sufficiently convinced of the credibility of the information received for whatever reason? It is difficult to understand why they had deviated from the standards that had been observed by the national intelligence agency for countless years. For many years, heads and senior officers of the premier Intelligence service, Cyril Herath, Ana Seneviratne, , Edward Gunawardene, A T Fonseka, Zernie Wijesuriya, B A Jeyanathan , Felix Alles, Kingsley Wickramasuriya, Pat Swaris, SBW de Silva, M A Jayatillake, Sathkunarajah, Deva Corea, Indradasa, Wakista, Gajanayake, Punya de Silva etc, had only furnished intelligence reports to the authorities, not untested pieces of information. They had been accomplished practitioners of this unbroken tradition of assessing information.
It is also surprising that the SIS omitted to crosscheck the information received with it’s Indian counterparts, or to take into consideration the ample records of the activities of the NTJ ( Mawanella, Kattankudi, Vanathavillu), stored in its registry. The adoption of such steps may have convinced officers that the information was of a serious and credible nature.
PUBLIC OUTCRY AGAINST THE FORMER PRESIDENT
President Sirisena has been at the center of a storm over perceived omissions on his part. In fairness to him, the question that requires an answer is whether the director of SIS, despite speaking on a monotonously regular basis to the president (I believe this proximate connection did exist), informed him that the information was of a reliable nature, even if we assume that he had made reference to the information perfunctorily. In my view, director of SIS may not have done so, for he had not, either in writing or orally, proceeded to convince even secretary of defence, Chief of National Intelligence and the IGP of the credibility of information received. Therefore, would he have briefed the president differently? The fact that an intelligence report had not been despatched to the president as had been the usual practice, may further support this point of view.
OMISSIONS OF OFFICIALDOM
Secretary of Defence, the IGP and his deputies who had received the flawed information reports should have examined the material by initiating discussions in their enclaves. These officials were assigned national security and defence responsibilities, and could not have chosen to ignore even the untested information which spoke of planned terror attacks. If secretary of Defence and IGP had held discussions with the participation of SIS officers, convincing material about the background of the NTJ may have come to light, leading to an awareness of dangers, and the need to prepare security plans. The inertia of Secretary of Defence, IGP, and his deputies to desist from engaging in conferences to test the veracity of the untested information is baffling. On the other hand, had the SIS made a proper intelligence report as should have been the case, it was possible that the officials concerned may have swung into action without being complacent.
IDENTIFYING ROOTS AND RAMIFICATIONS OF NATIONAL THOWHEED JAMAT (NTJ)
The Presidential Commission was required to explore the roots and ramifications of the NTJ. This is a vast tract. In effect, the process requires a study of many fields: the causes or grievances which sustained the NTJ, their local and foreign links and patrons, financiers; procurement and storage of arms, arms training and indoctrination, safe houses, methods of communication, district operational cells etc. Most information in such spheres in respect of clandestine, highly sophisticated terror groups emerge from intelligence received from secret sources, not from those who can provide overt, peripheral information. Even material which accrue from open police investigations are inadequate to build up a convincing dossier.
I therefore believe that about 60-70 % of intelligence about the roots and ramifications of a terror group can be procured from covert agents and informers, rather than from overt sources. Unfortunately the SIS has always shown great reluctance to permit access to such classified intelligence stored in their Registry. A study of roots and ramifications in former days was done by the national intelligence agency itself where periodic comprehensive reports were prepared and furnished for the National Security Council to take suitable remedial measures to thwart threats. I think this discipline was in vogue only up to the late 1980s. The point that such studies are usually handled by those with expertise in subjects of national security, intelligence, terror and subversion needs emphasis for findings and conclusions have invariably to be based more on intelligence (60-70%), than on oral evidence. Evidence is a scarce commodity with terror groups.
(The writer is a retired Senior DIG Police who had held important intelligence positions is the course of a long career. He testified before the Presidential Commission probing the Easter attacks.)
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
