Features
Jaishankar means Victory of Lord Shiva!
Part II
By Austin Fernando
(Former High Commissioner of Sri Lanka in India)
The title of this article may baffle the readers. I chose it knowing well that the critics of India desirous of seeing Minister Jaishankar lose would be offended.
Dr. Jaishankar, the Indian Minister of External Affairs visited Sri Lanka from 4 to 7 January on the invitation of Minister of Foreign Relations Dinesh Gunawardena hoping for nothing but victory.
The media eagerly awaited press statements. The outcomes of all high-level discussions are not included in the media statements, but observers read between the lines. This article is based on the statements covering three specific areas—devolution, development, and defense/security.
Both ministerial statements were abstract devoid of specifics, save a few on COVID-19. However, the Indian interests are craftily incorporated into ‘partnerships’, ‘infrastructure’, ‘energy’, ‘connectivity,’ ‘Lines of Credit’ ‘fisheries’, etc. Later, the media expressed Indian concerns about specific projects.
Minister Gunawardena spoke of economics, finance, trade, commerce, defense, security, fisheries, religion, and the pandemic. His was a generalized version of what had happened. Since we were not privy to what happened, there could be gaps in this article as well, written three weeks after.
Power-sharing and relationships
Minister Jaishankar in his statement mentioned, among other things:
“It is in Sri Lanka’s own interest that the expectations of the Tamil people for equality, justice, peace, and dignity within a united Sri Lanka are fulfilled. That applies equally to the commitments made by the Sri Lankan Government on meaningful devolution, including the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. The progress and prosperity of Sri Lanka will surely be advanced as a consequence.”
Here, Minister Jaishankar played proxy to the Tamil people, and displayed his concern about Sri Lanka’s “own interest.” Sri Lanka’s own interest” is multi-faceted, e. g., domestic, bilateral, multi-lateral, security, economic, diplomatic, etc. These could turn positive as well as negative. While there was much positive Indian support for Sri Lanka in the past, in 2012 India took a negative decision at the UNHRC. There is no guarantee of similar repetition. Going by the latest UNHRC report, Sri Lanka had better exercise caution.
In an article titled, ‘Crisscrossing 13A Abolition’ (The Island 13/11/2019), I wrote:
“PM Narendra Modi during President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s State Visit, like other interlocutors, said: “I am confident that the Government of Sri Lanka will carry forward the process of reconciliation, to fulfill the aspirations of the Tamils for equality, justice, peace, and respect.”
Dr. Jaishankar repeats what PM Modi has said, the only difference being he uses ‘dignity’ instead of ‘respect’. This message has been repeated by other Indians leaders as well. This message could have been conveyed by amiable High Commissioner (HC) Gopal Baglay. India may have considered it was too serious that it had to be delivered by Dr. Jaishankar himself.
In the aforesaid article, I highlighted the instances where former President Mahinda Rajapaksa, former Minister Basil Rajapaksa, Minister GL Pieris, former PM Ranil Wickremesinghe from our end, and PMs Narendra Modi, Dr. Manmohan Singh, Minister SM Krishna from the Indian end had expressed interest and commitments as regards the implementation of the 13th Amendment. These were recalled by Minister Jaishankar as “commitments made by Sri Lanka”.
Knowing the parliamentary strength of the Sri Lankan government, and the somewhat weakened position of the Tamil Naitional Alliance (TNA) in the Northern and Eastern Provinces, where devolution was demanded vociferously, one may guess that Minister Jaishankar’s top priority would have shifted from 13A. He may have thought Tamil politics was becoming too nationalistic like Sinhala politics as evident from the election of representatives of the fringe political parties in the North. Having previously dealt with parliamentarians like CV Wigneswaran and Gajan Ponnambalam, I know they will be more vociferous than TNA Leader R. Sampanthan, whom I have associated with for decades. Probably, due to the apparent weakening of TNA, Dr. Jaishankar may have volunteered to fill the vacuum.
Anyhow, the Tamil groups have united for a common cause, as seen from the 15-1-2021 communication addressed to Member Missions of the UNHRC. This kind of cooperation may be extended to their campaign for enhanced devolution, too, but Minister Douglas Devananda or Parliamentarian Angajan Ramanathan, despite being in the government, will think twice before backing the anti-13A+ camp.
When bilateral negotiations got tough, the government may have moved faster to address Indian demands as regards 13A, Eastern Container Terminal (ECT), the Trincomalee Oil Tanks, or the Palk Bay fishing. The Presidential Media Unit (13-1-2021) gave the impression that bargaining on ECT had been tougher than what was claimed in ministerial statements. The speed at which the President’s Office proceeded to negotiate with the warring trade unions implied that its primary concern was the ECT. The 13A was secondary and the Presidential Secretariat has made no mention of it to date. Some ruling party backers are criticizing the ETC deal while attempts are being made in government quarters to defend the decision to involve Indian investment in the ECT. State Minister Nalaka Godahewa and Secretary Bandu Priyath have spoken in favour of it; State Minister Nivard Cabraal has put forth more logical arguments. But their positions are not acceptable to the trade unions.
Minister Gunawardena has not mentioned the 13A or devolution as if he had not heard Dr. Jaishankar properly! However, I believe that Dr. Jaishankar would not have incorporated the matter into his statement without a discussion with his Sri Lankan counterpart thereon. Alternatively, there could have been an understanding that each party would ‘mind its priorities,’ and this may explain non-congruence. But will India remain silent on 13A?
If Dr. Jaishankar’s visit had been aimed at discussing the 13A, one of the reasons for it may have been calling for the abolition of the Provincial Council system. If the composition of the Romesh de Silva Committee, some of whose members are openly critical of 13A, is anything to go by, then its proposals may not be in favour of retaining the 13A. However, the question is whether this legislation, introduced 38 years ago, should be allowed to go unrevised, given the socio-political changes the country has undergone.
The TNA has handed over its proposals to this Committee. It is pushing for 13A Plus, to all intents and purposes, historically referring to promises and standpoints as regards power-sharing, even referring to the pre-Independence era. If such powers are devolved to the PCs, there could be extensive support even from the Southerners as these propositions vastly expand the existing devolution package. Nevertheless, India may have sought to address any attitude of negativism toward the TNA demands.
At a recent virtual meeting between PM Mahinda Rajapaksa and PM Modi, the latter insisted: “Sri Lanka must implement its 13th constitutional amendment to achieve peace and reconciliation” and requested our Government to work towards realizing the expectations of Tamils for equality, justice, peace, and dignity.” Dr. Jaishankar has reiterated the keywords in PM Modi’s statement.
Minister Jaishankar’s insistence that the 13A is a prerequisite for ethnic reconciliation may be consequent on demands made by some Sinhala politicians, and Buddhist clergy for its abolition, irrespective of their possible effects on the JRJ-Rajiv Accord and the Indo-Lanka agreement on Kachchativu.
Secondly, even the postponement of the PC elections due to Covid-19 may be viewed as a prelude to the abolition of the 13-A, signifying a dignified scrapping. Dr. Jaishankar must have wondered why the PC polls had been postponed after the successful conclusion of a general election. Therefore, he may have tested the government’s intentions regardless of the legal obstacles to the conduct of the PC polls now.
The postponement of the PC polls could also be due to other factors such as the government’s poor performance in controlling the pandemic, the frustration of the repatriated workers, economic woes of the workforce caused by lockdowns, etc., protests by the Buddhist monks who supported the SLPP at previous elections and the grievances of the farming community such as shortage of fertilizer and failed pest control. But India must have thought of making its stance on the 13A known to Sri Lanka as speculation is rife that the PC system is to be scrapped.
Thirdly, Dr. Jaishankar is under Indian domestic pressures too, especially from Tamil Nadu, which considers the 13A and the JRJ-Rajiv Accord as the constitutional basis and the central means to addressing the Tamil aspirations. The State level pressures were heightened recently with a statement by DMK’s T R Balu, just before Tamil Nadu election season, requesting PM Modi “to ensure that the PC system remains intact.”
Tamil Nadu’s political influence on India could be gauged from the Sri Lankan government’s volte-face on the Jaffna University memorial issue. The rebuilding of the demolished monument commenced after Dr. Jaishankar had left. Simply speaking, PM Modi wants to accommodate the South Indian Tamil sentiments as part of the BJP electoral strategy.
Minister Jaishankar would have been cautious in demanding the enhancement of the powers of the PCs following the Article 370 (of the Indian Constitution) episode in August 2019 where the Indian rulers withdrew shared power from Kashmir. When queried, India bluntly declared that it was an ‘internal affair of India’. The possibility of receiving a similar response from Colombo may have been on Minister Jaishankar’s mind, but such hesitancy was not reflected in his statement. Perhaps, he would have been briefed by the TNA on representations to the Romesh de Silva Committee and the Missions of UNHRC member states and acting confidently.
Two crucial issues as regards power-sharing are police and land powers. The government is highly likely to circumnavigate them when the new Constitution is written. The Indians are aware of this. In Kashmir, land powers have been taken over by the center now. India may have thought Sri Lanka would follow suit. However, Dr. Jaishankar would have known that the TNA would ask for more.
India’s concerns are growing against the background of China’s Ladakh interventions in its northern boundary and the emerging maritime issues in the Indian Ocean Region. Therefore, maybe New Delhi does not want trouble in South India and across the Palk Strait. This issue has been heightened with China investing in the Colombo Port City and already having substantial control over the Hambantota Port. India cannot allow Sri Lanka to further slip into China’s sphere of influence. This would have invariably a burning issue troubling Dr. Jaishankar; this is discussed in Part II of this article.
The political changes in the US should also be taken into consideration. The Joe Biden administration in the US seems to be pro-India as could be seen from statements the new President has made and the inclusion of a considerable number of people of Indian origin in his administration. Further, Samantha Power entering a high position in his administration may revert certain aspects of administrative issues, and the Indian support might become necessary for Sri Lanka especially considering the US India Strategic Partnership in action. Hence what President Gotabaya Rajapaksa mentioned about geopolitics is true.
These will influence decision-making on the 13A or business deals.
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
