Features
A Bilingual Public Sphere of Visual Art Criticism:
SCRAP BOOK OF CHANDRAJEEWA – Part II
by Laleen Jayamanne
Shirani Rajapakse’s short piece has a delicious bit of visual analysis which brings out the playful nature of Sarath’s mati wada, that most folk of craft practices, loved instinctively by many Lankans. She says, ‘the quaint ornamental structure in the picture looks very much like a bird-house, but it’s not [….] It is a lamp stand which the designer says he was inspired to make after seeing the lamps lighted by many and placed in their gardens as a mark of respect for the gods. My friend and colleague Sarath (who I have never met or talked to), gives me the impression of being a very serious, quiet person.
Therefore, ‘playful’ is not a term I associate with his work that I have studied. But when Shirani described her doubled perception of the lamp stand also as a bird house, what came to my mind were his clay toys, the owl and the pussy cat are delightful, but I found his ornamented clay fish a bit disturbing. The fish, with one large eye has its mouth open to either breath or smile (hovering in between the two), but it’s full of fierce Pirana like large sharp teeth, bared. And whenever I re-see it, I smile again, but also see at the same time its mouth full of large murderously sharp teeth such as I have never seen in a fish.
Then I realised that Lankan mati wada must be replete with folk humour, violence and imagination, which is robust and varied in the folk ritual performance modes and masks I am familiar with. The writers understand the importance of Dankotuwa for the tile industry which gets its clay from that region when they situate Sarath in that milieu, to show how he innovates on this traditional craft by experimenting with the more durable red tile clay to make his earthenware pieces.
The late Charith Pelpola is the critic who, I think, writes most profoundly of Sarath’s red earthenware pots and of their painterly qualities, seeing in one pot the colours of nature of pealing bark, for example. He describes how colour is created through experimental firing techniques, which makes Sarath a modern artist, drawing from tradition, but also departing from it decisively, without severing that ‘nourishing umbilical cord’, as AJ might say. Charith was a wildlife photographer who preferred to spend his time in the forest and a poet, gone much too soon. His prose is delicate, nuanced. He also photographed some of these pots for the book on Sarath, Path of Visual Arts (2005), which images are a consolation in the absence of the originals.
I won’t provide more examples of the excellent critical work preserved in this volume, but hope that I have been able to arouse some curiosity in the reader to seek it out, so that new histories (in the plural), of the 90s might be written without self-interest as the main driver. And also, simply to learn the craft of interviewing and writing, so as to engage the mind of the reader with respect, imaginatively.
We academics can learn heaps from good journalists because they are very disciplined in their awareness of time (in minutes and seconds) and space (column inches)! and appear to be more careful with words than we verbose academics, enamoured of ‘Theory’, creating bubbles. Let’s burst them, they are just soap! Don’t get me wrong. Some continental schools of thought are essential for my teaching and researching film and art and many of our students at Sydney University’s Art History and Film Dept. have a voracious appetite for ideas and theories which they seek out. I saw this very thing happening during the Aragalaya thanks to the internet. That excitement requires dedicated, systematic work over years to be of use.
But it’s certainly possible to introduce Benjamin (or anyone), briefly (also mentioning that he was a German Jew writing in the context of the rise of the Nazi party), if a little home work is done first. And to begin with, when addressing people in the public sphere with a mixed audience, at the very least, it’s essential to say, for example, who ‘Walter Benjamin’ was in the context of the ‘Frankfurt school of Critical Theory’ of the mid-20th Century. At the very least, one must introduce and situate a thinker respectfully, like we say in Sinhala when we are introduced to a stranger: ‘me kaude? (Who is this?) Kage kaude? (Whose who is s/he or who is s/he connected with?) Kinde manda?’ (So, what’s s/he on about?), as first steps in intellectual public speech.
If, for example, it was noted that Benjamin was a close friend of Brecht’s and that he wrote a series of essays (Understanding Brecht), defending and explaining his novel idea of ‘Epic Theatre’ (when it was subject to criticism by the progressive German left), it would certainly have helped, for the obvious reason that Brecht is a beloved playwright in Lanka. A critic must create the conditions for open receptivity of ideas. And it is crucial when introducing any concept or idea, to do so with a degree of precision and explain why it’s useful, relevant in that particular context to understand something.
The Bourgeoise Public Sphere of the 18th Century
Before I end, let me say a few words about the derivation of the concept of ‘the public sphere’ in my title. It’s a political idea as theorised by the thinkers of the Frankfurt School of Social Research, Benjamin, Adorno and others, including Habermas who is still alive. Here’s a potted account. The public sphere is the product of the 18th Century European Enlightenment. ‘Bourgeoise’ derived from ‘Bourg’ means the city in French.
So, it’s in the urban centres of European cities that an educated professional and business middle class first emerged, well before the French Revolution separated the public sphere from the control of the Church and the State. With the creation of the press and a journal culture and leisure, conversation on art and politics flourished in coffee houses where new democratic values were discussed. But the separation of the home from the public sphere meant that most bourgeoise women were stuck at home with children, in a private domestic sphere, with domestic ‘servants’ for help. So, the public sphere was largely male even in the 19th century, with most women having very limited access to professional education until the mid-1890s.
The ‘Third Estate’ is the term for this rising middle-class in the French parliament before the revolution, and the ‘Fourth Estate’ became the free press, to express diverse opinions and ideas and news. With industrialisation and modernisation this exclusive class structure changed with mass education, literacy and mass culture. Crucially, the democratic public sphere then included the urban working classes working classes as also consumers, especially of film.
An Australian Feminist Public Sphere: 70s and 80s
I have an impression that, while there are many women speaking publicly in Sinhala on the arts in Lanka, the theoretical discourses are still wielded by a few men (I stand happily corrected here too), as I am a distant observer-participant. This was exactly the case in Australia in the 70s when we began to read what then was called ‘French Theory,’ in translation. It was the case that a few men dominated art forums and spun theory with ease, using obscurantist language, often culled freely from, for example, Jacque Derrida’s philosophy, among others.
His use of language was especially easy to parrot like a manthra. It was intimidating when this happened in Australia, though we were all studying this stuff at the University, in the late 70s and 80s. The men wrote for the art press in an obfuscating theoretical jargon. Their lack of deep contextual understanding, covered up by the jargon, didn’t stop them from speaking in public with a certain masculine bravado. Some were seduced. They created followers. Male narcissism knew no limits.
But our independent public sphere of cinema in Australia changed once some female scholars educated in France returned (having actually studied with some of the major philosophers such as Deleuze, Foucault, Lacan and others), and translated their stuff while worked in both the main stream media as journalists, film reviewers and in the University as casual lecturers, formulating new courses to study this material systematically. They began to write, using the ‘difficult French Theory’, even in the popular press, in a lively prose which made it both accessible and engaging.
They taught us by giving us tools to analyse the rhetoric of ‘male theory-speak’ to see through its tactics, which were undemocratic because mystifying. In contrast, these women used language not as a weapon of seduction and control, but as a means to make ideas accessible. We never looked back, and since then, female intellectuals in Australia, due to many other reasons as well, have become confident and publicly articulate in significant numbers.
I recount this Australian story here as a little parable for the feminist writers and speakers working in the vernacular public sphere of visual culture in Lanka. As a feminist elder I say, do not feed male narcissism of intellectuals (a bottomless well), and allow them to dumb yourself down in the process. Enjoy teaching yourself and others and speaking in public with flare and intelligence and in this way a democratic public sphere of visual culture will be nourished.
Don’t feel shy if you slip up every now and then make a fool of yourself, just get up and brush yourself like Chaplin, and do it again and again if you must, so you get practiced. I’ve been there many times. Ouch! Each time, I had the feeling I got a bit stronger. But we know we can’t do this alone, we need likeminded women and men too.
A respected Lankan academic retiring back home after a career overseas (having reinvented himself as an ‘Asian Film Specialist’ which is how I met him) gave a lecture on Derrida once, which may have been an early example of this trend of fetishizing Theory. He spun bits and pieces of ‘Derridean theory’ which didn’t make any sense to me. There were Sinhala specialist words I didn’t understand but I understood the main thrust.
This specialist (true to a dark Sri Lankan academic trait) tried to obstruct the publication of a book of mine as one of the three readers of my manuscript on The Epic Cinema of Kumar Shahani (Indiana University Press, 2015, 300 pages). His reader’s report stated that I must ‘revise and resubmit’ the text, with further research as outlined by him! Perhaps he didn’t understand my work.
But I did correct the spelling of the Pali word (‘Dhamma Dweepa’) as pointed out by him. The other two readers, one an Indian media scholar from the US and the other an English scholar of Hindi Cinema said that the manuscript was ready to go to press! I had the pleasure of formally rebutting my compatriot’s intellectually feeble report (my democratic right), which the press accepted.
I recall this nasty, intellectually indefensible act today, just a few days after Kumar Shahani (my guru and one of the great visionary film directors of India), passed away at the age of 83. His very first words to me, when I called him to say my book was out, were: ‘Is there something of yourself in it?’ I feel that my book made him happy, the only one so far on his profound and delicate oeuvre of seven films.
We didn’t talk about it. There was no need to. He took great care of me over the decade and more of researching this book, learning about India a little from him. He kept in touch with me, I sought his advice while writing my piece for the Island on Sarath’s book on Karaikkal Ammaiyar of Polonnaruwa, but my last email remained unanswered … but he is present as a shadow guiding me in what I write.
Two women critics I heard recently, speaking (in Matale and Melbourne, in Sinhala), on Manuwarna’s Whispering Mountains, were both fluent and highly sophisticated in their ability to intermesh politics, aesthetics, and also able to evoke the memory of existential dread of that era of national sate violence and shame. It was utterly moving. They made me long to see the film, which is what good criticism can do. That’s on my short list for the next life, if there is one!
To come back to Sarath – I will leave you with his response to Chamila Somirathna’s probing enquiry:
“A sculptor is always a painter but a painter cannot always be a sculptor’.
Go figure!
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
