‘One country, one law’ and forgotten manuscripts

 

 

If a priest, to toss in another example, claims that someone is guilty of a crime (for example, an act of terrorism), he/she better substantiate the claim — saying ‘Aney, I am also a victim, it was those in my faith-community who suffered most,’ won’t do. 'Victimhood' does not confer special rights to insult anyone and hiding behind a robe or cassock is a coward’s scheme. 

One country, one law. Now there’s something that has to prompt wild cheers from so-called liberals (including ardent UNPers, SJBers, not-so-red JVPers, funded-voices, rent-a-protest agitators and other Colombians). They are not cheering.

Why not? Let’s get that question out of the way first.  Several answers. The more legitimate would be the composition of the Task Force on the subject appointed by the President, in particular its Chairperson, Rev Galabodaaththe Gnanasara Thero. In word and deed the Thero has espoused the notion, but with a caveat. The Thero has ‘Sinhala Buddhist’ instead of the word ‘One.’ That said, the Task Force has since appointment strived to broaden the composition and make it more inclusive. Nevertheless the name and history of its head can be disconcerting.

The objectors, however, haven’t called for a re-composition. They don’t seem to be interested in moving beyond sneer and jeer. The real objection, then, could be that it is their political opponents who have moved on matters they swear by. Well, their ‘swearing’ is essentially about trumping Sinhalese and Buddhists while safeguarding the privileges of other religious and ethnic communities. ‘One country, one law’ for them is just that. The many proposals for constitutional amendment stand witness to this state of mind. They want ‘secular’ applied to some but not for others and so we have both celebration and abuse of specificity. What applies in the general should not be trumped by the specific, but they don’t mind that.

That’s politics and not some high minded philosophical predilection. They want a green Sri Lanka, for example, but would cut down all the trees and poison the land, air and water rather than see this government delivering what they are supposedly fighting for.

So there's a lack of trust. That’s understandable. After all, we don't live in a country where anyone can claim the judiciary is absolutely independent, rule of law rules, there’s due process etc. Such things are promised but laws, institutions, officials and cultures make delivery a tough task. We also have unequal application of statute. There’s also very real and highly visible privileging. We could use the term ‘privilege’ when dissecting religious holidays, but even in the everyday we all know that laws are bent and rules ignored. A significant portion of the Police Force, for example, is deployed for VIP security. We see VIP convoys. Part of the pessimism could be explained by such things.

People are cynical about new laws being promulgated and for good reason. In many cases it’s not that the legislation is absent; there’s sloth or even absence when it comes to application. This does not mean that we should abandon the idea. It’s better to have the laws in place than not.

In this case, moreover, the vast majority of people voted for the notion. A total of 12.6 million voted for ‘one country, one law’ (6.9 million for Gotabaya Rajapaksa and 5.7 million for Sajith Premadasa). The other 33 presidential candidates either echoed this vision in their manifestos and rhetoric or were silent. In other words, 94.24% of the total number who cast valid votes (52.25% for Gotabaya and 41.99% for Sajith), picked candidates who believed that Sri Lanka is a SINGLE COUNTRY and therefore should have ONE LAW for all.    Well, the people have spoken, haven’t they? We are talking of 12.6 million (or 94.24% of those who voted).

What Rajapaksa and Premadasa (and other candidates) promised is that there would be a single corpus of laws. In other words, what applies to a Sinhalese would apply to a Tamil, what applies to a Hindu would apply to a Muslim, etc. In other words, the fundamental concept of ‘Equality’ should be applied across the board.  Alternatively, and this seems to be the most logical course of action, all such regional, ethnicity or religion based laws should be repealed. Anyway, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa has the mandate. And the United National Party (UNP) is honor-bound to support implementation.

Will the Task Force get the job done? That’s left to be seen. In a sense, the logic of setting up this body can be questioned since there’s already a committee tasked to draft a new constitution. That committee would not be ignorant of mandates. It has deliberated for close to two years now.

On the other hand, this is a Task Force. There are ‘tasks’ that can be undertaken. They could, for example, wipe the dust off the report submitted by the Sectoral Oversight Committee on Extremism on February 19, 2020, days before Parliament was dissolved. The mandate is clearly evidenced by the lengthy title: ‘Proposal for formulation and implementation of relevant laws required to ensure national security that will eliminate New Terrorism and extremism by strengthening friendship among races and religions.’ It is about national security and combating extremism, but does speak to the one-country-one-law idea.  

The report contained recommendations on the following areas: 1. Education, 2. Banning face coverings which hinder identification, 3. National Defence Policy, 4. Amending the Immigration and Emigration Law in line with new developments, national and international, 5. Electronic, print and social media, 6. Amending the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Law, 7. Empowering Muslim civil society, 8. Empowerment and legalization of the NGO Secretariat, 9. Amendment of the Wakf Act, 10. Suspension of registration of political parties on ethnic and religious basis, 11. Issuing birth certificates with Sri Lankan Identity Number, 12. Establishment of a ministry of religious affairs that combines all religions, 13. Building and maintaining Dhamma schools and religious centers to ensure inter-religious cohabitation, and 14. Halal certification process. The proposals, then, certainly address the vexed issue which we could headline as ‘One country, many laws.’

There are short and medium measures that could be immediately implemented this side of constitutional amendment. There are several important measures which can be implemented by the ministries of education, defence, media, justice, telecommunications, religious affairs etc. The Task Force could strongly endorse the recommendations of the Sectoral Oversight Committee and this would go a long way in putting lots of things right.

As mentioned, we don’t have to wait for constitutional reform for all things. Existing laws can be implemented. Rules can be enforced. And the onus is especially on those who have made careers for themselves by shouting themselves hoarse about such things.

No one is above the law and no one should have extra privileges. He who is libellous, for example, should be duly charged be he/she a politician or a priest. Citing parliamentary privileges, for example, is like shooting an unarmed person in the back. If a priest, to toss in another example, claims that someone is guilty of a crime (for example, an act of terrorism), he/she better substantiate the claim — saying ‘Aney, I am also a victim, it was those in my faith-community who suffered most,’ won’t do. 'Victimhood' does not confer special rights to insult anyone and hiding behind a robe or cassock is a coward’s scheme. It won’t do in a one-country, one-law situation.

So there are lots of interesting things to talk about in this one-country, one-law business. Among them, hidden manuscripts and even hidden agendas. Keep things in the public domain. Facilitate open discussion. Skeletons may fall out of cupboards. Good for the country, all things considered.

malindasenevi@gmail.com.
[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Physicians heal (and how!)

Years ago I wrote an article titled ‘I will die in the General Hospital.’ I was convinced that the best treatment possible in the country is obtainable from the public hospitals and not private ones. Overworked, understaffed and overcrowded simply on account of free healthcare, these institutions are a testimony to the dedication of the public service.

Obviously they don’t look as pretty as private hospitals but then again the sick are not exactly looking for holiday resorts. There’s 24-7 surveillance and the hospital staff are alert to changes of condition that warrant immediate attention. They may not be at your beck and call simply because they cannot, given workload, and because they are forced to prioritise.

Are they error-free? No they are not. However, we do live in a world where some people love to vilify the public sector and bend over backwards to ensure that the corporate sector is spared embarrassment. Public institutions are named and shamed in the media whereas private companies are not.

Not all doctors are writers and the best among them, typically, let their work speak for itself. They don’t brag. They don’t even write memoirs. If they did, perceptions about doctors and government hospitals would change dramatically. Instead we hear of the sporadic mishap inflated to the point that the excellent services offered and the remarkable achievements are all but blotched.

It’s not that all doctors are paupers, but it does take years for them to actually start earning money. Five years of university with one or more years added on account of political turmoil, followed by internships and further training means that they are usually in the mid thirties when they can really say they are on their feet. They, like anyone else, have lives, they consume and dream. They have aspirations for their children. Most of these things require money.

Dr Mark Amarasinghe once said that he has seen thousands of idealistic freshers who’ve spoken about wanting to serve their fellow human beings and their country who towards the end of their university days talk of securing a remunerative private practice. Life gets in the way of ideals. Reality kicks in. For one and all. Doctors not exempted.

One day, the GMOA will do a survey and tell the country, ‘We have X members of whom Y have a private practice.’ We should not begrudge anyone for wanting to make use of available opportunities to earn money. Indeed, it could even be the case that the doctors with the best private practice also happen to be among those who work tirelessly at their respective ‘day jobs’ and with utmost integrity.

All this is true. The issue is that anything that’s not not voluntarily is, by definition, coloured by self-interest.  Where ‘self-interest’ involves earning oodles of money, reference to the lofty ideals of the vocation and oaths taken therein do sound hollow.

This is not to say that everything said by a doctor or a health official should be taken with a pinch of salt, but as they say it could pay to be cautious when anyone, physician or otherwise, advocates on matters that are not strictly within the ambit defined by training and qualification or on behalf of collectives. The history and agenda of such collectives must be taken into account.

We had doctors (not all) who ridiculed those who spoke of the vaccine. ‘We will never get a single vaccine! so thundered some ‘experts.’ Later, some of these very people were so peeved that they couldn’t be in the forefront of the ‘vaccine drive’ that they bad-mouthed the security forces who were in the thick of things but in a manner way more orderly than the experts could come up with.

We had ‘experts’ making dire predictions. Some, quoting the daily deaths or infections, would state the obvious in somber tones ‘this is the worst period.’ One doesn’t need to be a doctor to read numbers. Some came out with interesting projections: ‘the x stage of the nth wave is nigh’ or something to that effect. No mention of what demarcates x from x-1.

This is known. Some doctors thrived on lockdowns. The GMOA would be able to tell us how many of those who called for lockdowns or their continuations had shifted to online consulting. And let’s not even start about the general ‘practice’ of operating like sales agents of the pharmaceutical industry!

All this said, I am still convinced that we have one of the best health services in the world. It is under-appreciated in the main. It is simply because the health sector is so amazing that some health ‘professionals’ can talk as though they are deities of some sort, pontificating, passing judgment, offering wild extrapolation and such. It works. Politically. It probably works in terms of enhancing economies.

In the long-run though, these things tarnish the vocation. The GMOA is a trade union. Nothing wrong with that. There are rights that need to be secured. There are gains that must be fought for. If it’s alright for others, then it should be so for doctors as well. The GMOA can, I believe, obtain higher moral ground if it turned stethoscope on its own chest (and back) and deployed analytical and enumerative skills its membership so obviously possess to give us a clearer profile of itself. It can say ‘yes, we are not perfect; yes, some of our members do not have integrity; yes, some of them clothe self-interest as public necessity.’

If you are wondering, yes, I still want to die in a ‘general hospital’ treated by doctors and specialists paid by the tax-payers. They are the best when it comes to treating patients. Outside of this noble vocation, I do question intent and of course integrity.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. 

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Of blinders and elephants

In the last match that Sri Lanka played in the ongoing T-20 world cup, against the West Indies, Rostan Chase was caught by Bhanuka Rajapaksa off the bowling of Chamika Karunaratne. A beauty, the commentators said. ‘A blinder’ was how cricinfo described it. It was extraordinary, certainly, and helped Sri Lanka sign off on a relatively high note.

‘Blinder’ has another meaning. Sometimes called ‘blinkers,’ blinders refer to the two flaps on a horse's bridle to keep it from seeing objects at its sides. This is typical in horse racing. You don’t want the horse to see anything but the path ahead. There’s a lot of predetermination involved, obviously. This is why the word is a metaphor.  As a metaphor, it’s about keeping individuals or collectives from even considering alternative pathways. Assertions of the ‘I am the light’ kind, in religion or politics or anything else, essentially precludes or hopes to preclude consideration of anything else that might contradict.

Obviously, in this game, those with power get to define ‘right’ and therefore ‘wrong.’ Bucks speak. And if anyone believes that truth cannot be bucked, one way or another, then simply consider the fact that corporations fund ‘research’ and task ‘researchers’ to obtain happy facts.

Here’s an example that would give an idea of how things work. In the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic the tobacco industry gave a lot of play to a story. Yes, it was not confirmed. Maybe it was true, maybe not. Some village in Europe where there was a relatively high percentage of smokers, the story claimed, showed a rate of infection lower than those of neighbouring villages. Even if the story was true, no study had been conducted to determine the true cause of this ‘anomaly.’ It could have been a spurious relationship. This didn’t stop the tobacco industry from indulging in wild extrapolation!  

Are people so dumb that they can’t see through it all? Well, not really. Sometimes it’s just that they don’t have access to all the information necessary to make a decent call about most things. And it is not something that academics are immune to either. If you have been taught that there are various theories about the way economies or societies function and are transformed but after some of these are mentioned if focus is restricted to one particular paradigm, then that’s what becomes familiar. These theories take people through their ALs, university and postgraduate studies but also ensures that they are required to spend so much time in this restricted ‘world’ that they just don’t have the time to question received wisdom or consider alternative paradigms, and that’s what becomes ‘standard.’ It becomes ‘truth’ and ‘conscience’ demands that such truth be defended.

Wasn’t the Green Revolution marketed as an amazing mantra that would flood the world with prosperity? Wasn’t the white-man’s-way marketed as evidence of civilisation? Wasn’t everything else branded as archaic and obstacles to progress? Wasn’t ‘progress’ defined? These ‘conclusions,’ were they the product of impeccable scientific inquiry? Was ‘science’ itself value-free? If so, why did Western ‘science’ move away from flat-earth theories? Why doesn’t Western ‘science’ swear by Newtonian Physics any longer?

One could argue that new knowledge invariably calls to question prevailing theories and their amendment marks scientific progress. That’s fair. However, not all processes related to knowledge acquisition and subsequent theorisation are above board. These processes are not insulated by manipulation.

Here are some questions that might make us rethink received wisdom. If capitalism is so great and is the best system to generate peace and prosperity, why has the Age of Capitalism been marked by endless wars and insufferable deprivation across the globe and within countries? Teething problems, did someone offer? Is it that or are war and poverty essentials of the capitalist story?

What do blinders (or blinkers if you wish) do? They make us forget the elephant in the room. Elephants, one might say. Herds, then. There’s an elephant called ‘Health’ which we don’t see or are made not to see in a room named ‘Agriculture.’ There’s the health of those who have to be hands-on with chemicals called for by ladies and gentlemen in the consumer side of things and of course the buck-makers in the sector don’t have to worry about. Well, they would worry about it if they could see the elephant called ‘Carcinogens’ or the one called ‘Nutrient-deficient’ in the room called ‘Consumption.’ There’s a vast field called ‘Yield-density’ which economists are fixated about and in it there’s an elephant called ‘Nutrition-density’ whose presence, ironically, is marked by an absence.

So, blinders on, we wallow in the luxury-lap of pontification which essentially is an exercise in regurgitating received ‘wisdom.’ We say ‘run to the IMF.’ We don’t talk of what the IMF did and does and how the IMF conditionalities played out over the past fifty plus years. We talk of scarcity and prices after hounding out elephants we want to wish away. Yes, we call them ‘externalities’ because they are hard to capture. We pick and choose from history, the 1970s for instance, leaving out the relevant global economic context and focusing on errors and egos, which is the easiest way of debunking theories.

We love to talk about the fertilizer crisis, but we don’t ask ourselves the obvious question: should we not revisit the chemical input issue? No one says ‘this should not be attempted at all.’ Right now we are in ‘it can be done, but not this way’ kind of frame. Well, at least we are in that frame, but finding ourselves thus located we ignore the elephants and focus on the things that make for ranting and raving. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is ‘science,’ alright?

We are in a burning room. Someone says, ‘we need to get out’ and does his utmost to carry out an evacuation effort, to the best of his ability, to the best of his knowledge. Funny thing: there are people inside the burning house throwing the would-be evacuator question-grenades: a) are you sure the house is burning? b) will I have a safe and comfortable dwelling if I were to leave the house? c) what is the guarantee that the alternative is a house that is fire-resistant?

The thumb-twiddlers and navel-gazers, the armchair critics and all may have fire insurance. They may be fire-resistant too, who can tell? They are welcome to test the worth of their insurance policies and the substances they’ve coated themselves with. They need not stand in the way of those who want to escape. They should not block the doorway with half-truths and theories specifically designed to ensure the well-being of the few at the cost of ill-feeding and impoverishing the many. Well, the earth itself, one might add.

There are blinders that should be celebrated. The one associated with Bhanuka Rajapaksa for example. We should not forget the etymology though: 'make blind, deprive of sight, deceive.'

malindasenevi@gmail.com. 

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Zeroing in on the ‘Mahamolakaru’

Here’s a sequence of events that makes for interesting commentary: a) Father Cyril Gamini makes a public statement regarding the Easter Sunday Attacks where he points an accusing finger at the Director, State Intelligence Service (SIS), b) the Director lodges a complaint with the Criminal Investigation Department (CID), c) the CID summons Farther Gamini, d) Father Gamini requests a week to prepare himself for any possible questioning, e)  Secretary, Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB) and former Minister of Public Administration and Management and Law and Order (during the time of Sirisena-Wickremesinghe government) Ranjith Maddumabandara issues a statement claiming that the Director and/or the CID was attempting to ‘shoot the messenger,’ that it was an attempt to stymie interventions of the Catholic Church related to the said attacks, that the victims were being tainted as suspects etc., f) Fr Gamini files a Fundamental Rights application seeking a Supreme Court order to prevent imminent arrest.


Yes, there was a before and perhaps an ideal after, and these are parts of the story. First the ‘before.’ Perhaps one should say ‘the “long” before.’ The attacks were carried out by the National Thawheed Jammath (NTJ), an extremist Islamic outfit led by Zahran Hashim. The leader, the followers, the bucks and arms didn’t fall from the sky. They had all that. They were well trained. The ‘operation’ was well-coordinated and execution almost immaculate. So there was a ‘long before' to it. Part of it was ‘warnings.’ Today we know that those in the highest echelons of power were in the know. Maybe they didn’t heed warnings, but they knew. Those responsible for maintaining law and order knew. Maddumabandara, considering his portfolio, had been duly informed about the activities of Zahran and the NTJ by the then Director of the SIS who strongly recommended that a special unit of the Police be deployed to arrest him. This was way back in 2018 (May 19 to be exact). Maddumabandara did nothing. Did someone saw ‘crime of omission’? Did someone else exclaim, ‘complicit!’?

A year later bombs exploded. Those who on account of incompetence and/or criminal negligence paved the way for the attacks were lost in ‘mumblement,’ navel-gazing and thumb-twiddling. The Catholic Church was the principal target. The majority of victims were Catholics. The Catholic Order was naturally very, very upset. The Cardinal, to his credit, did his utmost to calm his flock and prevent retaliatory violence. The Cardinal and others of the faith, very correctly, called for truth and justice. Of course the then opposition played the issue to the max, as oppositions are wont to do. The political landscape changed but it would be silly to put it all down to the Easter Sunday attacks or the ‘role of the Catholic Church.’

Investigations were launched. Many were arrested. Some were enlarged on bail and some were released, perhaps for lack of evidence to warrant prosecution. Indictments were served. The process moves, perhaps not as fast as some would like, but no one can say ‘nothing’s being done.’

Let’s assume, however, that there’s some devious plan to ensure that justice will not be done. Let’s even assume that the Director, SIS, is in fact the so-called ‘Mahamolakaru (‘The Brains’)’ alluded to in the preferred narrative spouted by the current opposition and certain Catholic priests. Since Maddumabandara in his missive on behalf of the SJB talks of proper procedure (claiming that the Director, SIS, should have lodged his protest elsewhere), shouldn’t the proper course of action been for Fr Gamini to make the complaint to the proper authorities (re the Director) and not make public accusations? Maddumabandara knows the basic dictum ‘innocent until proven guilty.’ No guilt has been established. Accusation does not amount to guilt and suspicion and suspects need to be played out through proper procedures.

Fr Gamini’s concerns about truth and justice are well taken. He, like any Catholic or indeed any Sri Lankan, has every reason to feel aggrieved. We all want truth and justice, sooner rather than later. We can insist, but we cannot hurry the judicial process. Grief notwithstanding it is wrong to accuse without substantiation, it is wrong to assume that accusation implies guilt, it is wrong to assassinate characters. Being a priest of whatever denomination is not a cover hidden behind which one can shoot at anyone one believes is a wrongdoer. That’s a matter for other authorities. However, if someone, priest or otherwise, deems that he/she has that right, then the intended victim of such attacks has every right to seek redress from relevant authorities.

What takes the cake, however, is Maddumabandara’s sudden grief about the Easter Sunday attacks. The icing is his (and the SJB’s) ‘high-minded’ umbrage at perceived targeting of Fr Gamini (talk about victims being labeled as culprits!) ignoring the established fact that the good father was out of order. So it’s about forgetting the back story. Is it about a political group in beleaguered circumstances imagining a better ‘later’ and trying to fish in waters they themselves ‘troubled’?

Mahamolakaru. That word. We don’t know if there was such an individual or, say, an organisation apart from Zahran and the NTJ. We can offer half a dozen conspiracy theories of course and blame it all on global politics, international political economy, religious-opiates or Original Sin. Not helpful.

This much is certain. There are lots of kuda-molakarus in the picture. No. ‘Small brained’ would be the direct translation. ‘Small-minded’ could also work.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com.

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]  

 
   

Read more

Cardinal sins

 

Sometime in the year 2012, Wijedasa Rajapaksha, at the time a UNP Member of Parliament, called for constitutional measures prohibiting clergy from entering Parliament. The target was the Buddhist clergy. If such a measure was legislated it would have barred people like Eran Wickramaratne from contesting elections. Indeed, all those belonging to Christian denominations which take membership as qualification sufficient to preach, would be similarly barred.

It’s a tough question of course. Is politics a no-no for the clergy? If so, would someone please elaborate on what is political and what is not? What’s not tough is to identify the selectivity and therefore the political and ideological frames that lend themselves to posturing on the question of permissibility.

A colourful and maverick (one may argue) politician, recently departed, once claimed that he had taken refuge in the ‘Noble Double Gem.’ He was essentially taking potshots at the Sangharatnaya. A grand generalisation which, one might add, indicated that the man’s knowledge of the Buddhavacana was pretty limited. Makes for interesting conjecture on the truth or otherwise of refuges claimed.

Get to the point, did someone insist? Alright. This is about Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith. The Cardinal has not talked of contesting elections. That doesn’t make him apolitical. Neither does it mean that he is unaware of politics, political affiliations and processes. It doesn’t mean that he is apathetic about outcomes either. He’s no god. He’s a man. He has opinions like anyone else. He probably has outcome preferences as well.  

Did I say ‘probably’? Sorry. There’s no question about it. All one has to do is to map his behavioural patterns since the Easter Sunday attacks.

Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith wants truth and justice. That’s good. One might say ‘that’s all up to the omniscient and omnipotent.’ Indeed he could say and do as appropriate following stated religious convictions, but then he’s a man, let us repeat, and he’s frail therefore. Moreover one can interpret scriptures in many ways and some readings will sanction a more proactive role from the flocks and shepherds. We’ve had ‘liberation theology’ long before the term came into vogue in the political lexicon. The Catholic Church, the Cardinal (and the Pope) would agree, has rarely been apolitical. It has had interests. It has played the role of agent provocateur. And worse! It has, let us not forget, significant economic interests as well.

So. We have Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith in a political avatar, if you will. Nothing wrong with this. However, if that’s the garb he chooses to wear (and that’s his choice for the most part over the past two years, let us not forget), he must be read and judged politically.

The Cardinal may, in private, seek divine revelation and dispensation of justice; in public he doesn’t show any faith in astral entities — he wants here-and-now truth and justice from eminently non-divine institutions, processes and persons. The pruthagjanas. Nothing wrong with that. Legitimate expectations from any citizen who is concerned about such things, one could argue.

Here’s the ‘here’ of it. A presidential commission of inquiry completed a fact-finding mission. It can recommend and recommend it certainly did. The Attorney General was instructed to act upon recommendations, which obviously requires formal investigations. That’s ‘here.’  Over 700 persons were arrested in relation to the attacks, over 300 were enlarged on bail and dozens of others released. We have 11 indictments in which over 40 persons have been named.  ‘Here,’ again.

And that’s where we are ‘now.’ If the Cardinal or anyone else wants instant convictions, that’s downright silly and irresponsible. You can ask for it (you can ask for the moon too, it’s not illegal) but to expect it would be optimistic. You can take the existence of god as a fact but that’s essentially a faith-item. You cannot expect the judiciary to be omnipresent and omnipotent. That’s why we have courts. That’s why we have procedures.

And yet, that’s exactly what the Cardinal seems to be demanding. He’s drawn conclusions but if he were to be put on the stand and made to substantiate claims, he would probably embarrass himself, god help him.

So what does he do? He appeals to the Pope. Now, the Pope, officially, is not only the head of the Catholic Church, he rules Vatican City, which is recognised as a country. The Cardinal may believe that the Pope is the direct communicator with god, but that’s a faith-claim; the citizens of Sri Lanka are not compelled to accept such things; indeed, like the Cardinal, anyone else can make wild guesses about such things, anyone else can be aggrieved (tongue-in-cheek like) that god has failed in delivering the last word on truth and justice with respect to the Easter Sunday attacks. It’s subjective, folks.

The Cardinal has every right to appeal to the superiors in his order. However, only someone who is absolutely ignorant of established procedures would expect the courts to give ear to the head of some religious order located in some other country.  

Why then has the Cardinal a) written to the Pope, b) reveal the fact and c) read out the Pope’s response? To put pressure on the judicial process and the Sri Lankan Government, did someone say? Well, the assumption would be that the government is foot-dragging but that is speculation that is not proven; in fact the evidence is to the contrary. Put pressure on the judicial process? Really? That’s a good thing?

Clearly the Cardinal is on a mission and it’s all about opening doors for outside intervention that has nothing to do with truth and justice related to the Easter Sunday attack. It’s about creating conditions that could be manipulated for changing political realities.

The Cardinal, resplendently attired in his political cassock, recently claimed that those who used the Easter Sunday attack for political gain would have to pay. If he was referring to the results of the last two major elections, that’s thin political commentary. The Easter Sunday attacks did reveal the previous governments incompetence on managing national security, but it’s silly to reduce the election results to this fact alone. We need not elaborate.

On the other hand, it is no secret that there’s unholy fraternising between the Cardinal and key members of an opposition wallowing in political misfortune. The commitment to truth and justice of that lot was pretty evident in the heady days of witch-hunting and kangaroo courts between 2015 an 2019. It looks like the Cardinal isn’t checking credentials here. Indeed, one should not be surprised if he retired that dire warning about retribution if the political landscape was transformed as per his outcome preferences.

In Catholic theology there are sins, some of which are given tags such as ‘cardinal’ and ‘deadly.’ The gravest of sins would be turning away from god and destroying charity/love in the heart of the sinner. A mortal sin would be a drastic act committed in full knowledge of its gravity. They include vainglory, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and sloth. There are corresponding virtues too: humility, charity, chastity, gratitude, temperance, patience and diligence. The Cardinal would know.

‘Sins’ in ‘Cardinal sins,’ is a verb. An act. There could be commission and omission here. I do not wish to lecture the Cardinal on things ecclesiastical but would humbly submit that the virtue of humility could be affirmed at all times. In the here and now. In fact, ‘always’ wouldn’t be a bad thing either.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com
[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Easter Sunday Attack: Tragedy and Farce

 

 

Operations are under way to nab the so-called ‘Mahamolakaru,’ the mastermind who planned and executed the Easter Sunday attacks a couple of years ago. Mahamolakaru? Mastermind? Really? Well, technically, there could have been such a person. Outfits, especially terrorist organisations, have leaders. Such persons could be called masterminds, one supposes. Megalomaniacs thought they may be.

Anyway, some people in Italy think there was/is a Mahamolakaru behind the Easter Sunday attacks or else they want others to believe so. A group calling itself United Human Rights Organization (yes, sounds pretty NGOish and the word ‘united’ is a bit of a giveaway, but more on that later.) has organised a demonstration in Milano to call on whoever to help find the Mahamolakaru. Apparently a memo had been submitted to the UN as well on the matter.

On the face of it, there’s nothing wrong with this. Everyone wants justice to be upheld. Everyone wants the truth. The how and why and why now of it and of course the who of it merits some discussion, however.  It’s not as though António Guterres, the ninth Secretary-General of the United Nations is a cop. Neither is Michelle Bachelet. His Holiness Pope Francis doesn’t go around chasing criminals and busting mahamolakaru-headquarters.

Mahamolakaru. Nice title. I couldn’t help but wonder if anyone is interested in capturing the Mahamolakaru of Capitalism, the system that has unleashed depravities, trauma, death, destruction, dismemberment, environmental disasters and cultural erasure across the globe. There could be, theoretically at least, a cabal (probably made of some super rich white men who may or may not confer and/or concur with Chinese counterparts) who meet up now and again or else have some kind of communication arrangement, pulling strings and moving bucks (never mind the collateral) in what is essentially a puppeteering exercise. That would devalue the inherent power of systems and institutions. It’s the same with the Easter Sunday attacks.


Take what the so-called ‘moderate’ Muslims (who were loath to even speculate that Islamic fundamentalism and of course that Wahhabism had something to do with the emergence of the NTJ) had to say in the aftermath of the attacks. They said ‘Western Conspiracy.’ Well, they could be right in a sense. After all Uncle Sam has a long history of funding, arming and training all manner of rogues (monarchs, military juntas, theocrats, dictators and what have you?) In the pursuit of securing strategic and financial objectives. It doesn’t mean, does it, that Zahran Hashim was a brain-dead puppet? It doesn’t mean, does it that everyone in the NTJ, suicide bombers, enablers and approvers included, were briefed by some Mahamolakaru via WhatsApp while, say,  doing the rounds in a golf cart somewhere in Palm Springs, Florida?

Let’s just go with the bogey. Let’s assume there was/is a Mahamolakaru. Warnakulasuriya Lowe Roshan Anton Prasanna believes there was/is. Maybe he is a Catholic and is upset on behalf of that religious community. Maybe he is not, but that’s ok. It was an affront to civilisation and decency, democracy and community; it shocked all communities, religious and otherwise. Is he an outraged citizen demanding action and nothing more, though?

Here’s a bio-brief. Lowe Roshan is from Katuneriya. He was discharged from the Navy. Discharged? Maybe someone got it wrong. He may have retired and quit for legitimate reasons. Anyway, he’s no longer a sailor. Technicalities. What’s important here is that he’s a diehard UNPer. That’s what his social media profile clearly indicates. There’s nothing illegal about someone with political affiliation spearheading a demonstration, but circumstances do tell a story. Yes, the name. UNITED Human Rights Organization. Coincidence? Perhaps. Perhaps not.

Now this Lowe Roshan may or may not have political ambitions (nothing wrong in that) of his own. He probably has preferred political outcomes. Nothing wrong in that either. What’s relevant is that he’s just one of many who have tagged themselves to the Easter Sunday ‘issue.’

Now let’s get some facts straight. We know that the then Government was aware of the threat. We know that nothing was done by way of taking preemptive measures. Every single individual in the Yahapalana Government is culpable, either because he/she was part of the commissioning exercise (who knows, maybe one of them could have been or is the ‘Mahamolakaru’!) or is guilty of the crime of omission — the latter more likely. There’s no way that Maithripala Sirisena, Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sajith Premadasa, Patali Champika Ranawaka or others with presidential hopes can claim to have clean hands in this. They are part of the story. And that ‘story’ also contains a chapter on essentially dismantling the entire security apparatus, the intelligence operations in particular. Some bragged about it. Others kept their mouths shut when the braggarts rendered the entire population vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

We don’t know where this Lowe Roshan was at the time. We don’t know what he said after the attacks. However, if he (or anyone else) is interested in finding answers, there are known addresses that can be visited, known ‘molakaru’ who, although they may not have earned the ‘master’ tag, did have some grey matter which was either misdirected or else kept in cold storage.

More facts. A Presidential Commission of Inquiry was appointed and it produced a report. There are conclusions, but a fact-finding mission does not have the authority to serve indictment. That’s up to the Attorney General’s Department. The Attorney General hasn’t been twiddling his thumbs. The Inspector General of Police hasn’t been either. Over 700 persons were arrested in relation to the attacks; over 300 were enlarged on bail and dozens of others released. There are 11 indictments  in which over 40 persons have been named.

Investigations may lead to the discovery of a Mahamolakaru, if indeed there was someone like that. It’s a process. Investigations may lead us to conclude that it was Zahran. Yes, the man’s dead. The nitpickers might want to know how he became the terrorist who played a key role if not the lead role in the attacks. The nitpickers might be happy if all his teachers, all his friends and all his relatives are arrested and summarily executed. They might even say it’s Islam that’s to blame and might reserve their applause until a demand for the burning of all mosques and Qurans is satisfied. They might party till dawn if there was a Kangaroo court and a set of judges who will dish out convictions by snapping their fingers. More likely, though, they really don’t give a damn about truth, justice, convictions and punishment; if preferred political outcomes materialise they would probably drop the whole thing like a hot potato — after all, there was no talk of a Mahamolakaru until Sajith Premadasa lost, remember?    

What happened that Easter Sunday is tragic. What was perpetrated was barbaric. Treating the whole thing like a beggar’s wound maybe is the best that UNPers, SJBer, JVPers and their followers can do, given severely reduced circumstances. That could be called a tragedy. Only, it’s a farce.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Spit and venom in Geneva (same old, same old)

It’s Bachelet’s hour. That’s Michelle. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The second of her bi-annual Christmas-come-early party in Geneva. Time to get her kicks, probably. The grave countenance, deep tone and malice disguised as concern.  Yes, folks, it’s that time of year of regurgitating tired arguments based on tendentious claims made by unreliable sources with agendas that have little or nothing to do with human rights.  

So she’s done the usual re-hash. She’s dropped the business of the ‘Mannar Mass Graves’ which, in her lust for malicious barbs, made her look quite silly. The rest is there. The concerns, that is. Here’s the nutshell: reconciliation, accountability and militarisation.

It’s essentially an expression of angst over Sri Lanka refusing to inhabit Bachelet’s version (or rather the version touted by her bosses, primarily the USA and its allies in Europe) of Sri Lanka’s reality.

Bachelet is ‘deeply concerned about further deaths in police custody, and in the context of police encounters with alleged drug criminal gangs, as well as continuing reports of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials.’ Death in police custody is not new. In fact there were dozens of cases in the yahapalanaya years. However, if true, these are serious issues that any citizen should be concerned about. The reports need to be tabled. They need to be investigated.

She has singled out certain things. Like the release of Duminda Silva. Yes, that was a strange decision, especially given that he could have appealed his sentence based on statements made by Hirunika Premachandra and what leaked telephone conversations involving one of the judges indicated about due process. However, it is strange isn’t it that she’s not mentioned the fact that 16 LTTE cadres convicted of serious terrorist crimes were also freed? She talks about reconciliation but says nothing of the successful completion of de-mining, the massive reconstruction and resettlement programmes that have been implemented, as was pointed out by Foreign Minister G L Peiris in Geneva.

She talks of Hejaaz Hizbullah and Ahnaf Jazeem. The former has been charged, not the latter. The charges are serious. The process takes time. However, justice, one way or the other, should never be delayed. These are not ideal circumstances for terrorism is not a trivial matter. Indeed, Bachelet herself has referred to the Commission of Inquiry related to the Easter Sunday attacks. The CoI is a fact-finding body. The Attorney General has to act thereafter and there’s nothing to say that things are at a standstill. Politicians and ill-informed priests have every right to demand that cases be completed immediately. Well, that could also lead to justice being compromised. Creating fairy tales about a ‘mastermind’ does not help. Anyway, all that being said, the cases against Hizbullah and Jazeem need to be concluded. Jazeem needs to be charged if indeed there’s evidence. The cases have to be heard.

What’s interesting here is that neither Bachelet nor her local minions have uttered a single word about the years long detention of Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan, the former Chief Minister of the Eastern Provincial Council and the leader of the Tamil Makkal Viduthalai Pulikal alias Pilleyan. Well, if it is about friends and family, bedfellows of the moment, and that kind of thing, it’s best not to talk of justice and certainly not in somber tones, eh? We shouldn’t be surprised, the lady nor her organization has a horse to ride, moral or otherwise.

So yes, if we go down to the details,  this other stuff and these other people are not sexy enough for Michelle, we have to conclude. It’s not stuff her minions operating in Sri Lanka are interested in, probably. Ah yes, the minions. That’s the so-called civil society activists who went silent on rights when their political gods were in power and now, in reduced circumstances and deprived of the toys that they were showered with in the heady days of the yahapalana regime, they whine. They talk of intimidation.

Bachelet says, ‘regrettably, surveillance, intimidation and judicial harassment of human rights defenders, journalists and families of the disappeared had not only continued, but has broadened to a wider spectrum of students, academics, medical professionals and religious leaders critical of government policies.’ Evidence? She’s short on such things. It’s easy to delete context and privilege only that which suits one’s case, but that’s easy and irresponsible. Perhaps she can give the details. Chances are she will not, because if she does, then the government can respond to each and every case cited.

Here are some of the important developments she’s missed and which the Foreign Minister has flagged: 1) The Office on Missing Persons (OMP) as its core function, is finalizing the list of missing persons in collaboration with other agencies. The Office for Reparations (OR) has processed 3,775 claims this year, 2) The Office for National Unity and Reconciliation (ONUR) continues its 8 point action plan, 3) The National Human Rights Commission is carrying on its mandate, 4) A steering committee on SDG 16 is working towards enhancing peace, justice and strong institutions, 5) A Cabinet Sub Committee was appointed to revisit the PTA and to bring it in line with international norms and best practices, 6) A Commission of Inquiry headed by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court was established to address issues on accountability and missing persons and to revisit recommendations by previous Commissions.

There’s an interesting addition to Bichele’s bi-annual litany of woes. She’s mentioned that ‘militarization and lack of accountability (can have) a corrosive impact on social cohesion and sustainable development.’ Wow! What she understands to be ‘social cohesion’ we really don’t know. Perhaps she believes ‘social cohesion’ is some kind of arrangement where all the citizens are forced to live in a state re-constituted to suit the whims and fancies of her Sri Lankan minions. However,

As for sustainable development, Sri Lanka is doing far better than most countries with respect to the goals set and agreed upon. Indeed, things are moving faster and with greater commitment in this regard. Should we applaud militarization, then?

All things considered, Prof Peiris seems to have got it right. He has rejected  the proposal for any external initiatives purportedly established by Resolution 46/1 while domestic processes are vigorously addressing the relevant matters. He warns that this could polarize society, as we experienced with Resolution 30/1.

'The Council must adhere to its founding principles. External initiatives embarked upon without the cooperation of the country concerned cannot achieve their stated goals, and will be subject to politicization. The resources expended on this initiative are unwarranted, especially when they are urgently needed for humanitarian and other constructive purposes in many parts of the world.'

Well said.

As for Bachelet, it's a lot of spit, a lot of venom. Misdirected of course. Yes, misdirected. It's a word to ponder upon.

malindsenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

'Diplomatic' forays into the North and East

If you browsed the internet using the search words ‘terrorism + USA’ you’ll find lots of information including lists of ‘foreign terrorist organizations,’ terrorist attacks in the USA and US travel advisories, among lots of other things. Dig further and you’ll find that there are domestic terrorist organisations as well, where ‘domestic terrorism’ is defined as acts of terrorism carried out within the USA by US citizens or permanent residents.

Interestingly, as far as Washington DC is concerned, those acts carried out by the Feds and various police departments or by police officers with or without sanction from commanding officers are not considered ‘acts of terror’ even though in method and outcome they are no different from those perpetrated by ‘terrorists.’ Interestingly, also, there’s a knee-jerk readiness to use the T-word if the perpetrator happened to be a Muslim, whereas the preferred term is ‘extremism’ if it was, say, a white person belonging to one of the many Christian denominations.

This is also true of Europe.  The 2021 Europol Report on Terrorism in the USA reveals that of the  57 terrorist attempts in the EU, only 10 were jihadist attacks. In other words ethno-nationalist, separatist, left-wing and anarchist organisations or individuals in Austria, France, Italy and Germany out-gunned, so to speak, the ‘Jihadists.’  

There’s ample literature that show the naked racism and even religious fundamentalism in the way terrorism is written and read in these countries. It’s a slanted story or rather what we get are stories skewed courtesy political and ideological bias.  And, get this, it’s a part story. A small-part story, in fact, whose size is determined by definitional exclusion. Factor in US barbarity across the globe not just in terms of wars orchestrated, fought, funded, armed etc., but the scandalous extraction of value through these as well as ‘above the board’ operations through proxies and multilateral instruments and we get Terrorism Plus Plus.

Ah! Europe. Canada. Australia (of late). And of course India (again of late). Well, pawns. Adjuncts. Bid-doers of Washington, essentially. Uncle Sam says and these client states genuflect, mutter ‘Ah! Yes’ or ‘Ah! So!’ And so it is. Indeed, as all good ‘friends’ they provide eyes and ears for the Master. Tongue too, if and when necessary.

Obviously it’s not all covert intelligence. They all do that. Yes, the Indians and Chinese too. It’s good to know terrain, strategic and otherwise, for military as well as economic purposes. Then there are the official channels. The surface, if you will. Obviously those countries that have resources and expendable income are better equipped and positioned to do both. The USA and her minion-nations, specifically.

This is why it is important to keep track of what the officials do and say.  They need to know and we need to know, simply put.

Anyway, over the past week or so, diplo-mats (that’s deliberate, by the way and you can take ‘mat’ as metaphor and interpret as you will) in Colombo have been busy. Busy OUT of Colombo, that is.

On October 12, 2021, the ambassadors of the Netherlands (Tanja Gonggrijp) and Norway (Trine Jøranli Eskedal) visited Batticaloa and had discussions with the Mayor, Thiagarajah Saravanabhavan (TNA) and Member of Parliament Rasamanikyam Sanakiyan (TNA). They also visited the Sarvodaya Centre in Urani to meet with some NGO operatives and had discussions with representatives of Muslim institutions including the Federation of Katttankudy Mosques. A visit to State Minister Sathasivam Viyalanderan (SLPP), in this context seems a courtesy call if one were generous, but probably a token tossed to make it seem like they were checking narratives across the political spectrum.
 
In the meantime, on the same day that is, the High Commissioner of Canada, David McKinnon, visited Jaffna and had discussions with Mayor Vishwakingam Maniwannan about construction and rehabilitation. He also met SLFP MP Angajan Ramanathan and talked ‘development. ’ On the following day, McKinnon went to Kilinochchi where he met TNA MP S Sritharan to talk about celebrating LTTE heroes (yes, terrorists), alleged curtailing of provincial council powers (one wonders if they talked about no one caring about PC elections being indefinitely postponed!), Tamil young leaving the country ‘because of the actions of security forces’ (there are young people off communities leaving Sri Lanka; maybe McKinnon is into migration studies and if so a chapter on global political economy bearing on push and pull factors might be pertinent) and Canada’s stance on Sri Lanka at the UNHRC (aha!).


While McKinnon was making merry in the Northern Province, Gonggrijp and Eskedal were partying in Trincomalee. They met the Easter Province Governor Anuradha Yahampath and the  Naval Commander of the Eastern Province, Rear Admiral Sanjeewa Dias. Maybe they discussed the weather. They also met Rev Father Basil Dunston and some others of the Eastern Human Economic Development Centre. To discuss matters ecclesiastical, perhaps.  

But who are we kidding, ladies and gentlemen? These diplo-mats were essentially abusing diplomatic privileges to violate travel restrictions imposed as part of battling Covid-19.  That’s setting some example, eh? What’s the hurry? Why this, why these people, why now? Were they in some kind of tourist avatar, enjoying what their compatriots cannot courtesy travel advisories and such?

Well, it’s pretty obvious, isn’t it? The USA and her clients (in the form of US diplo-mats and their diplo-minions) are essentially busybodies pushing political, economic and strategic agendas. They don’t give two hoots about people in the countries they operate in. Such people, as there are, are essentially usable pawns with use-by dates. The truth of the bleeding heart humanism they spout can easily be assessed by how easily hearts turn to stone when their governments either bomb or facilitate the bombing of other countries (non-white, exclusively).  

They’ve got problems at home, clearly. Roosters coming to roost, did someone say? Their respective governments aren’t exactly calling terrorists ‘freedom fighters’ are they? They aren’t really worried about the near and dear of the domestic terrorists, are they? They are employing a ‘by any means necessary’ strategy aren’t they? Just imagine if they had to deal with a situation magnified a thousand times or more to mimic what Sri Lanka faced and for as long (almost 30 years). It’s easy to bomb other countries. It is easy to shed tears for terrorists in other countries if that’s what doctrines of preferred political outcomes demand. Not easy when someone’s turning familiar landscapes into rubble and reducing loved ones to numbers without names attached to them.  

We hope Europe and North America (and India, Australia and Japan) won’t have to live through what we had to live through. We hope the diplo-mats mentioned above had a nice time in Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Batticaloa and Trincomalee. We are pretty confident that they got some nice soundbites to be quoted (out of context). We know that molehills can and will be turned into mountains.

Just know, people, that we know. Just know that even as this is annoying, it is also funny. We laughed in the face of terrorism. Machinations we have known. Humor and spirit, we shall always have. Three hearty cheers, therefore for dip-lunacy. Cheers to the diplo-mats. May you live long and prosper. May karma slip (yep, that’s maithri for you — no, not THAT Matithri).

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com.
[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more

Covid-19 and responses: notes for doctoral theses

The Political Economy of Covid-19 and Responses to it. That would be an excellent topic for  doctoral dissertation. Of course ‘Combating Covid-19’ would also be an interesting and important study. We are still in the middle of the pandemic and therefore such exercises would be works in progress. The latter, admittedly, would be best taken on if and when we are out of the Covid-19 woods. The former can be studied at any time. In any event, keeping notes would be useful.

The earliest days were marked by trepidation bordering on panic. The world did hit the panic button soon enough. Countries showed varying degrees of caution and chaos. There was a sense of helplessness followed by hope and then back again to panic stations.  

One could put it down to the obvious and incontrovertible truth that knowledge of the virus, its mutations and related behaviour was sparse. The experts were stumped for a while. The more disciplined among them, went to the basics and approached the issue with fact and method, the more cavalier among them covered up ignorance and sloth with pronouncements that veered towards sloganeering, one way or another.

People and groups endowed with a sense of social responsibility resisted the temptation to self-advertise and make capital of one kind or another. The funds, medicines and medical as well as other urgently required equipment channeled to the health sector by well-meaning individuals and groups alone indicate vibrancy of philanthropy and solidarity. That’s another study for scholars,  students of sociology, for example. Such efforts go under the radar for the most part; there are those that like to advertise largesse of course but by and large such exercises have been devoid of any kind of profit motive.  

Politics. That’s where we find the down and dirty. For those in power, here and elsewhere, Covid-19 offers opportunities to cover up sloth and incompetence. All things considered Sri Lanka’s performance in combating the virus has been exemplary. Critics with other agenda will of course find fault, but what the health sector has done with the support of the security forces have done wonders. Yes, people have died. Did anyone believe that given the country’s resource complement we could have avoided it? On the other hand have the critics or the groups they cheer on directly or indirectly strictly adhered to the basic safety protocols? Are they guilt-free, in other words? A quick example: are those who pooh-poohed the vaccination program un-jabbed as of now? As for ‘experts’ who hold weekly media conferences, do they speak in one voice? If the experts can’t agree, can they say with absolute confidence that this (as opposed to that or another) course of action is non-negotiable?

Economy. That too, for there are bucks being made hand over fist so to speak, globally and locally. Desperation and panic produce great opportunities for exploitation. Life-and-death situations often prompt people to retire reason, embrace ‘gut-feelings’ and fall prey to those who are excellently positioned to create perceptions that push potential customers to their products and services. A crude but highly prevalent example would be of retailers who jack up prices willy nilly citing ‘Covid-19’ or ‘scarcity.’  At the high end we have certain countries which insist that visitors who haven’t been jabbed with particular vaccine brands need to be quarantined for a particular period of time. So there’s business for ‘quarantine hotels.’ Covid-19 has not put big hotels out of business, here in Sri Lanka. It’s the smaller establishments that have got hit and/or gone under.

Political economy, however, is the correct term of course. It’s about bucks and power, the capital monetary and otherwise that’s out there to be secured. Those who keep notes would be amused and those who do not might be persuaded to try it. Here’s a word that operates like a window into the political economy of Covid-19: lockdown. Yes, frequently used by never once defined by its ardent advocates (ever asked why?).

Think back on all the lockdowns we’ve had so far. Remember speculation about when each lockdown would end? Remember how, when the date approached, the usual coterie of experts (union leaders and leaders of political parties) insisted, ‘extend the lockdown!’? Yes, they never defined the parameters of restrictions, we need to repeat. Yes, there were experts too, but as mentioned above they were never in agreement about remedies or remedial measures outside of basic safety protocols. Remember that some of them, when lockdowns were proposed, talked of fundamental rights being violated and wept copious tears about the impact on daily wage earners? Remember how almost all of them said nothing about the effect on the economy and resultant repercussions for one and all as well as the country?

Now. What has happened to those who uttered the ‘lockdown mantra’ with fanatical religious fervour? There’s talk of the lockdown being lifted at the end of the month. There’s no talk of the fact that we have had restrictions of one kind or another since March 2020, but that’s an aside. What’s important is to ask why when we are days away (according to all reports) from restriction-lifting there’s no one saying ‘more of the same medicine!’

Is that some kind of grudging acknowledgment that the government’s ‘vaccination + restrictions’ strategy has worked? Is it that those who saw opportunity for advancement (political or economic)  have made the relevant bucks or have streamlined their affairs for sustained enhancement? Have they, should we dare say, been afflicted by some kind of shame for being self-seeking and pernicious in a time of crisis?

Months ago, there were ‘experts’ saying ‘this is the worst we’ve had.’  Even a child capable of comparing numbers could have concluded the same considering say the number of people infected and the number of deaths. Months ago, there were ‘experts’ saying ‘we will see the beginning of the next wave soon.’ Soothsayers, is that what they are? All this, based on knowledge that’s little more than a speck of dust compared with the universe of information yet to be obtained regarding the virus, its mutations and spread.

Here’s a repeat of a question posed a week ago: how does one account for the fact that the number of deaths (per week, per month) in 2021 has essentially remained the same as the averages over the previous five years? Why won’t ‘experts’ check the details? Are they scared they might encounter some devil that might give them nightmares thereafter?

Politics. Economics. Political economy. These are frames that help us unmask those whose intentions are not as benevolent as they might want us to believe.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindasenevi@gmail.com
[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]


 

Read more

Drop the mask, burst the bubble, unlock the mind

 

The re-opening of wine stores caused quite a stir. Memes of what’s now been called ‘bar pokura (wine store cluster) have done the rounds. Naturally much of the ridicule has emanated from those who are part of the ongoing union action by school teachers and principles as well as from those who support them. The political history of the leaders and their backers make dismal reading and as such the self-righteous chest-beating is rather nauseating. The reverse is also valid. A question would suffice to put things in the right perspective: ‘why are those who talked of the ‘guru pokura (Teachers’ Cluster)’ silent on the ‘bar pokura’ and vice versa?’ The answer: political humbuggery.

The humbuggery doesn’t stop there though. Consider the following comment from a long time activist against tobacco, alcohol and drugs on ‘reaction’ to the opening of liquor stores: ‘Such good fun, watching many of our powerful medical people caught in a dilemma. Those normally inclined to attack any restriction of alcohol sales or promotion, suddenly having to support it, in order to attack Basil R!  The urge to criticize Basil won over their usual, equally political, reflex support for the alcohol trade. So the mainstream medical establishment is quietly acknowledging  that alcohol is not so good for our health. Painful, no doubt - but no worries, it will pass. We can [expect] a revert to [the] usual soon.’

Covid-19 is no laughing matter. Those who have suffered extreme symptoms and recovered know. Those who have lost loved ones to the pandemic know. Caught unawares, the world has quickly pressed the panic button. This is not unusual. Human beings are not happy with the unfamiliar; the familiar, like the dispossession and alienation that’s part and parcel of capitalism, don’t drive people to panic stations. They are either taught to grin and bear or do so nevertheless. Throw something out of the blue and human beings get extremely uneasy. The uneasy are easy prey for all kinds of racketeers and of course those in the business of political manipulation. It’s all trotted out in somber tones, but let’s not fool ourselves: some are serious, decent people with no agenda but the well being of their fellow creatures, but others have something to sell, something that will fatten purses or further political ambitions.

If you are skeptical, consider the fact that some medical ‘professionals’ have been aghast at the plans to inoculate school children while others have insisted that this is absolutely necessary, absolutely non-negotiable. Some have advocated lockdowns but have not explained what they mean by the word. Different countries have implemented different strategies with varying degrees of success. It’s trial and error, mostly. Implication: everyone’s on various locations of a learning curve. And yet, those who propound theories strut around that their word is the first and last on pandemic control!  

Here are some numbers that will (in the very least) indicate the importance of details. The average deaths per month across the districts in Sri Lanka (and these are meticulously maintained — except in times was war and of course the UNP-JVP bheeshanaya of the late eighties) from 2015 to 2021: 11,136 (2015), 11,065 (2016), 11,820 (2017), 11,793 (2018), 12,340 (2019), 11,179 (2020) and 7,125 (until end of July 2021). The daily average across districts are as follows: 371 (2015), 369 (2016), 394 (2017), 393 (2018), 411 (2019), 373 (2020) and 238 (2021). If you broke it down to districts the picture is altered: the Western Province numbers are high and will exceed in all likelihood the average over the previous six years. Now that’s something that those who insisted on egalitarian vaccination can chew on. That said, the drive is an all-island affair. There’s vaccination politics of course and it’s not only about preferences for certain districts; it’s also about some people suddenly getting upset that others have been offered a piece of what they considered exclusive traditional homelands, never mind the fact that a jab does not require a medical degree.
 
How should we read these ‘deaths’? The way some people talk, it’s as if the total deaths in, say, 2021 can be estimated by adding the average annual deaths over, say, the past five or six years to the number of ‘Covid-19 deaths’ until, say, the end of September divided by 9 and multiplied by 12. What would then go missing would be the number of people who already had serious medical conditions and of course the elderly.

Get the numbers wrong (deliberately or out of ignorance) and one would most certainly demand that everyone be vaccinated. Panic doesn’t help obviously; sobriety is of essence in these kinds of situations, one would think. The vaccine is, for example, untested. As mentioned in this column previously, it takes years for any vaccine to be properly certified. As ‘untested’ as Ivermectin. Put another way, Ivermectin is as ‘tested’ as any of the vaccines in terms of combating the Coronavirus. There are lots of for and against arguments for both and this is why we can safely conclude one thing: there’s stuff happening behind the masks, there are back stories that are not being told, there are bubbles that certain people have invested in and in which they would like us to be sequestered.

Let’s finish this with an example too much in the public eye for anyone to plead ignorance about. Lockdown. Well ‘lockdown.’ The JVP and SJB called for a self-lockdown, as did the PHI’s union, the leader of which organization was photographed at one of his almost weekly media conferences without a a mask! Of course Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Sajith Premadasa cannot be expected to enforce such measures on their respective members, but are we to believe that the leaders (say the members of the Politburo, Working Committee or whatever their respective decision-making bodies are called) strictly answered their strident call for self-isolation?

Make no mistake, this is not a call for the dropping of all Covid-19 related safety protocols. We are on a learning curve, but even given ignorance it is, as they say, better safe than sorry, prevention is better than cure and that sort of thing. We must wash hands, use hand-sanitisers, maintain social distance and wear masks. We need to inhabit bubbles in that we cannot indulge in business-as-usual kind of socialising.

We are talking of other kinds of masks. Other kinds of bubbles. Other kinds of 'lockdowns'. The masks of deceit. The bubbles of ignorance. The locking down of minds. The title of this piece is tongue-in-cheek, therefore, but perhaps warrants some reflection. Some masks need to be removed; some people unmasked. Some bubbles need to be burst; so we don’t remain forever in cloud cuckoo land. Some things need to be unlocked; the secrets of the oh-so-other-worldly medical industry.


malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views]

Read more

Do the real mahamolakaarayas want kangaroo courts and lynching?

 

It didn’t take too long for diehard Yahapalanists, who had been gung-ho about what they believed was imminent incarceration of political opponents following the victory of Maithripala Sirisena over Mahinda Rajapaksa in January 2015, to turn their guns on their heroes. They were upset that the ‘wrongdoers’ weren’t being put behind bars en masse.

Now these Yahapalanists weren’t really interested in justice, truth, accountability and other such goodies which lend themselves to easy and disingenuous sloganeering. They weren’t upset about nepotism, cronyism, blatant violation of rights or even daylight robbery perpetrated by their heroes in high positions of power. They had axes to grind and were upset that the ground axes weren’t falling on necks they wanted severed.

At the time, the then Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, made a valid point. He observed, in essence, that one of the principles of good governance was upholding due process. Of course by helping set up the FCID, as quickly became evident in the way that body operated and was in fact made to operate by ‘experts’ housed in Temple Trees, it was pretty clear that valid point notwithstanding he was quietly fuelling the persecution-lust of his backers. Kangaroo courts, for the Yahapalanists, were ‘all good’ as long as the enemy was targeted. There was also the precedence of the bheeshanaya years when the Yahapalanists in their UNP and JVP avatars of that time made an art of extra-judicial execution.  

Nevertheless, Wickremesinghe knew that even a milder version of that process wasn’t possible in the second decade of the millennium. The courts had to determine and courts are not commissions of inquiry of the kind appointed by presidents. While there can be sloth on the part of investigators and prosecutors, even if fact-finding and filing papers were done with utmost efficiency, you can never get convictions overnight. Wickremesinghe knew this. The Yahaplanists either didn’t know or didn’t care. They were in triumphalist mode and what rushed through their veins was persecution-lust.

Let’s fast forward to the present. Well, specifically, prosecution related to the Easter Sunday attacks in 2019. It’s been more than two years. Was justice done? No, says certain individuals and groups. Let’s consider the facts.

National Thowheed Jamath (NTJ) carried out the attacks. Zahran Hasheem led the suicide bombers. This act of terrorism was carried out in the name of Islam. Terrorists have no religion even though they may say they do, we were told. And yet, as recently as last week, even as the New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said it was an act by an individual and not a faith thereby extracting individual from ideology, religion and all other identifiers, she said ‘Sri Lankan national’; never mind the fact that the attacker was a legal resident of her country. The attacker, according to witnesses, repeated the words ‘Allah O Akbar (Allah/God is great(est)’. Well, it seems that the perpetrator’s self-identification doesn’t count! Of course, one must understand that despite such identification it would be absolutely wrong to castigate the entire community such an individual belongs to. It is certainly not right, however, to negate or erase that aspect of his/her identity for this reason alone.

So these things are not just about truth and justice. Politics and ideology are part of the story or indeed become or are made to become so much of the story that the truth can get footnoted or erased. Speculation and speculators often triumph over truth and justice.

Today, for example, there’s no talk of Zahran or the NTJ. Instead there’s talk of a mastermind, a ‘mahamolakaru.’ Sure, there can be and often there is a hidden hand. The actual perpetrator is often but an instrument. As some who wanted to erase the ‘Islamic signature’ of the attacks pointed out, the ISIS (like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda) was directly or indirectly funded by the USA (never mind that the terrorists didn’t know or didn’t care and did it all in the name of Islam and Allah, after praying to their god in a mosque no less!). The point is that conspiracy theories are cheap.

Anyway, all of a sudden, it’s all ‘Gota’s Plan!’ Zahran is off the hook. The NTJ is off the hook.  Who else? Why, the Yahapalana Regime which included the then President, Prime Minister, current leader of the SJB Sajith Premadasa and presidential hopeful Patali Champika Ranawaka and was backed to the hilt by the likes of Anura Kumara Dissanayake? Off the hook! Remember that there is murder and there are murderers. There is murderers and accessories after the fact of murder. The Yahapalana regime not only did their utmost to dismantle the intelligence apparatus in the country but did nothing whatsoever to prevent Zahran and his god-fearing butchers even after being forewarned. They turned a blind eye to what was obvious; so drunk were they with notions of reconciliation that they failed to understand that terrorists and terrorism love it when the guard is dropped. They are all off the hook.

Instead we have this ‘mahamolakaru’ theory to which they’ve attached a name. Fine.

Let’s state some facts here. 1) A presidential commission of inquiry is essentially a fact-finding body — it can recommend, but cannot enforce; it can cast aspersions but there needs to be investigations so that indictment is enabled; indictment does not necessarily imply guilt — courts have to determine. 2) Over 700 persons were arrested in relation to the attacks, over 300 were enlarged on bail and dozens of others released. 3) We have 11 indictments in which over 40 persons have been named.

Now would justice have been served if at the point of the PCoI releasing its report, all those named and shamed are immediately taken to court and the court without hearing and in fact violating the principle ‘innocent until proven guilty’ trotted out convictions? Would justice have been served if all 700 plus persons arrested were summarily executed? Now, what moral principle pertaining to justice is affirmed by ignoring all these things and engaging in conspiracy-talk?

Everyone, including the Cardinal, needs to know about ‘process.’ The words conspiracy and conspirator are easily uttered, but the utterance itself does not constitute proof that any court would ab initio accept.

So what’s this talk of a ‘mahamolakaru’ right now if not the petty and pernicious dabbling by political con artists and those who out of ignorance and arrogance demand some pound of flesh in contravention of the judicial process? We need justice, make no mistake. We need the truth, without a doubt. Kangaroo courts and lynching, no! Justice and truth cannot be obtained by snapping fingers, lynching of course is a without-batting-eyelid matter as the architects of the bheeshanaya and the Easter Sunday attacks know well, as do their victims. We could walk that path at our own peril.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]
 

Read more

Covid-19 and citizenship

 

What should a citizen do in a situation that is certainly worrisome and is probably reason for alarm? What should you do, what should I do? These are questions to which there are many possible answers.

‘Citizen-responsibility’ is has talked about often enough. Indeed, we are all reminded of our responsibilities at every turn, literally. The signs are too numerous and repeated in multiple platforms for anyone to say ‘I didn’t know.’ We know. Period.

That’s at the basic level, though. The necessary, if you will. Whether it is sufficient is another matter. The ‘musts’ are eminently doable. Let’s re-state for good measure: maintain social distance, wash hands frequently, wear a mask and use hand-sanitizer.

Enough? No. Yes, the vaccine. The vast majority of those who have succumbed to the virus were un-vaccinated. The vast majority of the vaccinated who died were either over 60 years of age or had other health issues or both.

Enough? No. Let me elaborate.

We are a resilient nation. At the same time we are a vocal nation. Almost everyone has an opinion on everything. It’s almost as though we have 22 million epidemiologists. Let’s call that an exaggeration. What would not be an exaggeration is that there are literally thousands who have expressed opinions on this matter as though they were experts.

Yes, there are experts. However, we know that even the experts are still learning about the behavior of the virus. Experts in the World Health Organization (WHO) at one point said masks were not important. They changed their position on this. The experts were divided about the safety of burying Covid-19 victims. Some ‘experts’ prevented Sinopharm from being administered, saying that this very same WHO (which, let us repeat, has in word and deed demonstrated that it’s also in a learning process) hadn’t sanctioned the vaccine. Please note, also, that the last word on the efficacy of a vaccine doesn’t come in weeks or months or even a few years. Sometimes it takes decades. Let me elaborate.

Pre-clinical and technology development takes 2-6 years and this after 2-4 years of the first clinical trials. The fist clinical development phase (safety testing, dose/response assessment) takes 1-2 years and the second phase (efficacy testing in controlled studies, immunization schemes for over 100 subjects) another two years. The third phase (field studies under practical conditions in different countries and age groups covering thousands of subjects) takes 2-3 years. Licensing would take another year or more. You can do the math. Just for perspective, take the case of AIDS. When some experts said it would take at least five years for a vaccine to be developed, they were called pessimists. It’s more than thirty years now and we still don’t have a vaccine. In short we are guinea-pigs, all of us, but given circumstances we don’t have much of a choice here.

Back to citizen-responsibility. There are things beyond our control. We cannot force politicians to be responsible, for example. The JVP/SJB for example, called for ‘self-lock downs.’ These outfits either organized, participated in or supported numerous demonstrations where safety protocols were blatantly disregarded.

We can’t force unions to make responsible statements, not even health-sector unions. The PHI union spokespersons are not ‘experts’ on epidemics. Neither do they have to worry about issues such as the economy, maintaining economic activity, arranging food distribution and other such things which constitute logistical nightmares if relevant authorities acted on their demands. The GMOA is a union. Doctors, yes, but unionized doctors whose primary frame of reference is a rights. The GMOA recently ‘the country has reached its worst and highest level in the COVID pandemic.’ Now that’s a statement that anyone can make simply based on verified data that’s in the public domain. One doesn’t have to be a doctor or a spokesperson in a doctors’ union.

Lock down. That term! Easily and frequently uttered. What it entails, they will not say. Do we ask ourselves 'why not?'?

The point here is that it is part of the citizen’s responsibility to be cautious when ‘taking’ what’s in the media, i.e. what is reported (such as a statement) or the representation. Consider the following headline: ‘WHO-linked medical specialists call for lock down extension till Oct 2 to save thousands of lives.’  Yes, keep in mind the ‘learning curve’ alluded to above and the fact that we really cannot tell where the world is in terms of location on that curve. In other words, we know very little and what we do know can become irrelevant quickly. Think ‘variants’ and you’ll know that ‘experts’ are being surprised and challenged.

The headline. It’s about how the ‘call’ has been represented. The moment you say ‘WHO-linked’ which is not untrue, it sounds like a WHO sanctioned statement (which it is not). That’s not atypical, not just in the media but in international politics. The former Secretary General of the UN appointed a committee to advise him about Sri Lanka and the erroneous and even pernicious report that the committee delivered is now referred to as a UN report.  

The ‘WHO-link story is just one. The media (mainstream and social) is full of tendentious stories. It’s not innocent in each and every case. What gets carry is what is politically and ideologically motivated. In purely scientific terms it’s garbage but as is usually the case the stink travels and remains for a long time.

We can do without any of that, but we can’t stop it. We can’t stop the keyboard warriors. We can’t stop the politicians and unionists who have their own interests to further and their own political agendas to promote. We can however be intelligent about engagement of one kind or another with such statements. That too is something that a citizen can and indeed must do in this kind of situation.

We worry. We are scared. It is not unnatural to worry or be scared. On the other hand, the adults in our society must keep in mind that our children, who are probably far less vulnerable to the virus are nevertheless not immunized by the pressures imposed by the situation. The psychological effect, according to some experts, could be telling. Yes, we don’t have to take their word for it, but still. After all, there are similar cases whose psychological impact has been studied enough to draw relevant parallels. It’s not like developing an effective vaccine.  The kids haven’t been able to fraternize with their friends; at least not in the ways they had previously. They are by and large restricted to their homes. Walls are what they see most of the time. It cannot be ‘all good.’ Now should we burden them further by passing on dire-scenarios constructed by the ill-informed and not subjected to rigorous filtering to ensure the hyperbole is sifted out so the true dimensions remain?

That’s your call, citizen, and not just about the impact of our words and deeds on children. Yours and mine.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal view.]

Read more

Terror hubs from Washington DC to Kabul, London to Johannesburg

 

The First Anglo-Afghan War, William Dalrymple observed just a week ago (‘Britain’s fourth Afghan war is a replay of the first infamous retreat 170 years ago), was arguably the greatest military humiliation ever suffered by the West in the East.

‘On the infamous retreat from Kabul, which began on the 6 Jan 1842, of the 18,500 who left the British cantonment, only one British citizen, the surgeon Dr Brydon, made it through to Jalalabad six days later. An entire army of what was then the most powerful military nation in the world utterly destroyed by poorly-equipped tribesmen.

'A year later, the Rev G R Gleig wrote a history of Britain’s first disastrous, expensive and entirely avoidable entanglement with Afghanistan. It was, he wrote, “a war begun for no wise purpose, carried on with a strange mixture of rashness and timidity, brought to a close after suffering and disaster, without much glory attached either to the government which directed, or the great body of troops which waged it. Not one benefit, political or military, has been acquired with this war. Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated.”’

It’s 2021 now. Britain hasn’t operated independently in well over half a century and is essentially Uncle Sam’s side-kick in international affairs, never mind Theresa May’s lament ‘Where was Global Britain in the streets of Kabul.’ Misplaced angst that demonstrates political confusion, nothing else.

There’s ‘retreat’ that’s unmistakable this time around too. That’s only part of the story, though. The footage and photographs from Afghanistan that seem to have been privileged are those of people struggling to get on flights out of that country. They are eminently newsworthy. On the other hand ‘the moment’ of capture is just that. A moment. It is preceded by a long history. There is footage and there are photographs pertaining to that history. There’s a back-story and it’s long. And it has gone under the radar. Newsworthiness notwithstanding, one might add.

And so we are left with a name. Taliban. The narrative is about the failure of the USA and its allies. The US sought to rid Afghanistan of the Taliban. Twenty years and several trillion US tax dollars later, the Taliban are back in power. On the face of it, it is farcical. Humor can reveal, but laughter also hides the tears.  

The USA lost a couple of thousands of troops. Her allies must have lost a few hundreds too. Not too long ago, casualty numbers pertaining to Afghanistan were essentially limited to these deaths. Yes, US soldiers died. So did Afghans. Civilians in particular. A quarter of a million at least. The US backed numerous Afghan militias. Some were absorbed into pro-US Afghan military forces. They also plundered, pillaged, raped, tortured and killed. As an instagram post by someone said to be an Afghan woman put it, ‘Your 9/11 is our 24/7.’ It would be hard to best that nutshell-capture.  

The US taxpayers lost. The US government failed them. On the other hand, George W Bush and Barack Obama won second presidential terms without being charged for war crimes. The true invasion, which followed the men and women in uniform, that is the one led by US business interests, succeeded. It was a resounding success for the military industrial leaders of that country.  At the end of the day, the US may have lost out strategically, but the effort didn’t exactly cripple the US economy. War is about profit and this was a highly profitable war.  

Yes, we are left with ‘Taliban.’  Perhaps this is why the leader of the United National Party and former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has urged the government not to recognise the Taliban administration and to shut down the Sri Lankan mission in Kabul, Afghanistan. After all, the Taliban, by all accounts and not just those churned out in Washington, hasn’t done much to cheer, ever. Indeed, the fear, unease or even mild cynicism the name inspires is a Taliban product more than anything else.

Wickremesinghe has issued a warning: ‘Sri Lanka should focus on Afghanistan, as it could become a hub for terror groups such as Jihads and even Al-Qaeda'. He observes that ‘Afghanistan became a terror hub last time when the Taliban was controlling it,’ and warns,  ‘terrorism might raise its head in Sri Lanka once again if diplomatic ties continue with the new Afghan regime.’

Well. Terrorism raising its head in Sri Lanka (or any other country for that matter) is not dependent on diplomatic ties. It’s not as if the Taliban will channel arms, ammunition and funds to potential terrorists in Sri Lanka through the island’s mission in Kabul. However, Sri Lanka could take a principled stand and break diplomatic ties based on the Taliban’s track record. Afghanistan has not been evicted from SAARC, yet, and there are no moves in that direction either. If the government went along with Wickremesinghe’s proposal it would create a few waves in the regional body, but it is not wrong to cite and stand by a principle.

That opens an interesting can of diplomatic worms though, doesn’t it? The USA hasn’t even considered breaking diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia, a country that has allowed its rich citizens to fund the Taliban and where women are subjected and dissidents violently repressed. The USA has supported and continues to prop military juntas, monarchies, dictatorships, theocracies and such all over the world. They have xcellent diplomatic ties with such regimes!

Well we don’t have to follow the USA of course. We can or should figure things out for ourselves. If we are wary of ‘terror hubs’ and this concern demands diplomatic ties be severed, then we would have to shut down the US Embassy too!  

US Vice President Kamala Harris during the first leg of a South East Asian tour has accused Beijing of coercion and intimidation in the South China Sea. The USA hasn’t broken diplomatic ties with China, though. Yes, that’s the USA and not Sri Lanka; we should do what’s best and if what Wickremesinghe says is indeed the best, then we should talk of coercion and intimidation which, ladies and gentlemen, are bit diplo-terms that describe, yes, terror hubs.

So how should we deal with the new government in Afghanistan, one might ask. Well, as we do with other governments regardless of the political system in place. If the walk-in victory of the Taliban inspires Jihadists at home, that’s an issue which needs to be addressed from a security point of view. Relations with governments are of a different order. Sri Lanka should not and cannot prescribe and neither should Sri Lanka be prescribed this, that or the other either.

That said, we can certainly talk of terror hubs. We can talk of histories of intimidation, bullying, coercion and invasion. We can talk about the relevant political economics as well. From Washington to Kabul, London to Johannesburg and all nations in the quadrants so defined.

malindasenevi@gmail.com. www.malindawords.blogspot.com

[Malinda Seneviratne is the Director/CEO of the Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute. These are his personal views.]

Read more