Features
The Ethnic or Tamil question in Sri Lanka
by Jayadhamma Athukorala
(Continued from last week)
The first recorded South Indian invasion occurred when two Tamils, Sena and Guttika, wrested the kingdom from King Suratissa in the 2nd Century B.C. The Mahavansa ( Geiger translation – p 142/143) says ” Two Damilas Sena and Guttika….conquered the king Suratissa …..and reigned…. for twenty two years justly” (my emphasis) There is no denouncing of the Tamil conquerors. The description of the reign of the next Tamil conqueror, Elara, was even more generous. The Mahavansa (Geiger -p 143-145) devotes no less than 20 Pali stanzas to extol his virtues (some, obviously exaggerated).
Then, after Dutugemunu’s victory over him, the first act of the victor, to his eternal credit, was to perform the funeral rites of his fallen enemy with royal honours, erect a monument in his honour and decree that even royals passing that site must pay due honour – MV p. 175 ( a decree that even as late as 1818 Keppetipola Nilame fleeing the British after the failure of his rebellion is reported to have obeyed). Many Sinhala kings sought their consorts or consorts for their siblings in the Dravidian royal courts of South India – at the beginning, even Vijaya himself reportedly sought and obtained his queen from the royal court of Madura in South India.
Vijayabahu I whose own queen was from Kalinga gave his sister Mitta in marriage to a Pandyan prince who became eventually the paternal grandfather of Parakramabahu the Great (who therefore had Pandyan blood in his veins). Parakramabahu had two generals named Rakkha and Aditya who are both referred to in the Mahavansa as Demala Adhikari ( Ch. 75 & 76) . In the Kotte royal court of later times, we see the presence of many Perumals in responsible positions.
Even Sapumal Kumaraya was originally Sembahap Perumal, reportedly the orphaned son of an aristocratic Keralite warrior who died in combat in the service of Parakramabahu VI. Sapumal ascended the throne later as Buvanekabahu VI. In the early Kotte period, it is also intriguing that the Chinese admiral Zhen He, who carried off Vira Alakeshvara to China as a prisoner, erected in Galle a trilingual stone inscription, using the Chinese, Persian and Tamil languages. In the Kandyan kingdom, kings from Rajasinghe II appear to have sought consorts from Madura resulting in the mothers of Vimaladharmasurya II and Narendrasingha- the reputed last Sinhala king, being South Indian Tamil princess).
I have already referred to the in-migration of large groups from South India in the 14th or 15th centuries, now indistinguishably part of the mainstream. It is known that certain Kandyan aristrocrats of the present day have acknowledged their South Indian (though Brahmanic) provenance. Few knowledgeable people in the country today are not aware of the comparatively recent, documented and admitted, South Indian antecedents of some very prominent Sinhala leaders of the present day. Such information has even ceased to be of much interest.
What I have been trying to point out is that historically the relations between the Sinhalas and Tamils have far from being hostile all the time. We are not congenital enemies. We have no tradition of enmity to pursue – as it was between the Montagues and the Capulets in Romeo and Juliet.
The emergence of a Tamil kingdom
in the North
It is time to turn to another aspect of history – the establishment of a Tamil kingdom in the North. By about the 10th century, Sinhala kings appear to have lost control over the territory beyond Anuradhapura and by about the 14th century an independent Tamil kingdom appears to have been established in the Jaffna peninsula, with the intervening Vanni being under many semi-independent Vanniyars. Only once for a brief period under Parakramabahu VI the overlordship of Sinhala kings had been re-established thereafter in Jaffna (-Sapumal Kumaraya’s famous conquest of Yapapatuna). Once Sapumal left Jaffna to become King in Kotte, the Sinhala suzerainty over the Jaffna peninsula again lapsed.
To make matters worse some Jaffna kings (like Arya Chakravarti) became so powerful even to challenge the Gampola period Sinhala kings and exact taxes in some areas of their kingdom, up to about Matale. Arya Chakravarti even overran the western seaboard up to at least Panadura at one time. He was only checked by Alakeshvara, (who himself may have been an immigrant) who founded the capital at Kotte. This sequence of events is no doubt painful to any Sinhala brought up on the tradition of Tri Sinhala, but these are solid historical facts that we have to accept whether we like them or not.
The Jaffna kingdom so established surrendered finally only to the Portuguese. The Dutch took over from them and finally the British. The important legal/constitutional point to note here is the ground reality of Jaffna coming under colonial rule not as part of a subsisting all-island Sinhala kingdom but as a separate sovereign entity. This is what makes it incumbent on us to refrain from summarily dismissing the claim of Northern Tamils to some kind of special consideration. We should be happy that they did not press a claim to separate status at the time we achieved independence from the last colonial ruler (although there were some rumblings, it did not go far).
The British, to repeat, held the northern areas by right of conquest, a conquest that was separate from their subsequent conquest/annexation of the Sinhala areas. We should not be foolish to think that anybody will take us seriously in the modern world if we try to press the long obsolete all island Tri Sinhala claim. That is the bitter truth. (The situation in the Eastern province is different. Even later Kandyan kings continued to exercise suzerainty there, as is documented in treaties with colonial powers)
Sinhala-Tamil Co-operation during colonial times
During the British period, up to about the twenties of the 20th century Sinhala and Tamil leaders have co-operated with each other in their interactions with the colonial government as well as in other public work. In order to avoid a long exposition on this point, the following extracts from the unpublished diaries of Anagarika Dharmapala may be cited as a testament to that fact:
1889 Nov 14th
……..Went to see Muhandiram. Talked about the proposed College for the Sinhalese and Buddhists to be founded by the Hon’ble Mr. Rama Nathan and the Muhandiram promised to help it as much as he can. ………….
1911 Dec 20
………Then I went see Ramanathan and he greeted me cordially and spent about two hours in discussing over spiritual and economic subjects. A wonderfully clever man he is but he is insufficiently informed about the Dharma. …..
1915 Oct 21st
October 14
Historic meeting of the Ceylon Legislative Council. Ramanathan on behalf of the suffering Sinhalese spoke for two hours denouncing the Govt. officials for the atrocities committed on the helpless villagers during the Court Martial trials. ……
The above references are to Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan, Member, Ceylon Legislative Council, the ‘grandfather legislature’ of Sri Lanka. His brother Sir Ponnambalam Arunachalam took the lead in forming the Ceylon National Congress and was its first President. I have heard from my father that when Sir Ponnambalam Ramanathan returned from England once, after a mission on behalf of Sri Lanka, Sinhala leaders unharnessed the horses of the carriage he was to ride home from the Colombo Jetty and pulled it themselves. Prof. K.M.de Silva has quoted in his book History of Sri Lanka, the fulsome praise given to Ramanathan by Sarasavi Sanderasa the leading Sinhala Buddhist journal of the day, ending up by saying ‘Buddhists owe Mr. Ramanathan a deep debt of gratitude’, for Ramanathan’s espousal of the cause of Sinhala Buddhists in the legislature- vide p. 461)
These fraternal relations soured later for reasons I need not go into but suffice it to say that one reason was an act of breach of faith by two Sinhala leaders who went back on a promise to help secure a seat in the legislature for Tamils in the Western Province. (vide History of Sri Lanka – K.M.de Silva, p.480) In this connection we might note that at the present time Mr. Mano Ganesan has been an elected member of Parliament for the Colombo District for a long time, without there being any special reservation either, thus providing ample justification for the old aspiration of Western Province Tamils. May not the keeping of that old promise by Sinhala leaders have changed the whole course of subsequent events, even saving many lives?
Special position of Tamils under colonial rule
However, it must be recognized that Tamils appeared to enjoy a privileged position under the colonial regime. This may have been due to two reasons – (a) compared with the magnitude of the population and the extent of territory occupied, Tamils seemed to enjoy more facilities for an English education than the Sinhalas. As English education was provided mostly by Christian missions and not by government I am unable to say whether this was due to deliberate colonial policy or otherwise.
However the fact that the Sinhala elite of the last decades of the 19th century did not wish the ordinary people to have an advanced education is proved by the following reference made by Prof. K.M.de Silva, to a speech made by J.P.Obeyesekere, Sinhala representative in the Legislative Council, sometime in the 1880s: ..And he argued forcefully for the imposition of the severest restrictions for entry to all schools, so that the children of the rural poor would be forced ‘to follow such avocations as they are fitted for by nature’ – ‘A History of Sri Lanka’ p.419. Tamils at that time apparently had no such ‘far sighted’ representatives of theirs to bother about!
Anyway, the indisputable fact is that in the matter of placement in the professions and in government employment, Tamils due to greater numbers of them being English literate, in addition to any other reasons, came to enjoy a position in excess of their ratio in the population. (b) The colonial government, as all colonial governments do, undoubtedly followed a policy of divide and rule and in this matter discriminating in favour of a minority would have been a very attractive tool. I must say I am only hypothesizing but there may be those who have researched the subject.
However, I must qualify the above statements by saying that any such privilege was enjoyed by only English educated middle-class Tamils and not the ordinary Tamil peasant, artisan and the fisherman. Their lot was the same as that of their counterparts among the Sinhalas. Anyway another point that needs emphasis is that hardly any Tamil living today had enjoyed such privilege in colonial times. ‘Sins’ of fathers should not visit innocent progeny. Resentment on that score is completely unwarranted.
Reversal after Independence
Whatever privilege English educated Tamils may have enjoyed in colonial times, they lost it after Independence. We made the plight of Tamils worse since then, by going in the reverse direction and denying them even what they were entitled to. Such was the imposition of the Official Language Act (‘Sinhala Only’ Act) in 1958. One example will illustrate this in practical terms. In colonial times, Sinhala and Tamil villagers, whenever they received an official letter or a telegram, had to go in search of an English educated mahattaya to get it translated.
After the full implementation of the Sinhala Only Act, a Tamil villager had still to go in search of a Sinhala knowing dorai. That was a needless harassment and humiliation. Now (after 1978) both Sinhala and Tamil have been made official languages, after many lives have been sacrificed over the issue in the subsequent decades (However still the legal position has not been made practical reality universally, as was forcefully impressed on me when I had to shamefacedly send a Treasury circular in Sinhala, on an important subject, to a Tamil University Chancellor friend, who sought my assistance to get a copy of that circular.
I had to do so because a Tamil or even an English version had apparently never been issued. I also failed in my attempts to get at least an English translation of the Minutes of the monthly Government Agents conference issued to the eight participating Tamil speaking GAs, because the senior officer responsible stubbornly avoided doing so despite the repeated instructions of her official superior.
It is worth mentioning here that at the time the Sinhala Only Act was passed, most schools in Jaffna taught Sinhala as a subject. Prof. Karthigesu Indrapala has said that Sagara Palansuriya, poet and one time MP, was his Sinhala teacher. A senior Tamil clerk of mine once taunted his Sinhala colleagues saying that he unlike them learnt Kumaratunga Sinhala in school. However, immediately after the humiliation of Sinhala being forced down their throats by the Sinhala Only Act, all that changed. Jaffna schools stopped teaching Sinhala. (At a recent gathering a Tamil engineer told me that when that happened, his father being a practical man took him to the Jaffna Buddhist temple and requested the monk to teach him Sinhala).
This whole sorry episode could have been handled differently if statesmanship had prevailed. The majority of ordinary Tamils, just like the majority of ordinary Sinhalas, are practical men, minding their own business and not playing politics. But as a self-respecting people they resented being humiliated. It was this humiliation, coupled with intransigence and stupidity on both sides that finally led to the war and the loss of so many lives on both sides. At the 1952 General Election, at a time when there was yet no language problem, the Federal Party which first raised the devolution of power issue, fared very poorly. The Northern Tamils were not so much bothered about the state power structure. However once humiliated they lost confidence in the majority dominated state structure.
The present generation, which has not lived through the gradual evolution of the so-called ethnic problem, like many of us elders have done, must not let themselves be deluded to think that everything started with a maniac called Prabhakaran. ‘Prabhakaran’ was long in the making and our Sinhala ‘leaders’ (including many Buddhist monks) have made a ‘generous’ contribution to that outcome.
In any case, when a war was forced on the country through political stupidity and lack of statesmanship, it had to be fought. In the Bhagavat Gita. Krishna explains to Arjuna that, once war has come about with his kinsmen, the Kurus, it was his duty to fight it, regardless. So, it was for our soldiers and they fought bravely. They fought suffering much hardship. We owe them much. Their victory was the basis on which we should have built a peaceful and prosperous New Sri Lanka. That was primarily what we owed the Ranavirus. We should have ensured that their children also would not be fated to get into flooded trenches and there to die. So far, we have failed them.
(Continued next week)
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
