Sri Lanka Guardian

Syria: Assad’s Final Stand — The Last Gambit of a Beleaguered Regime?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:37:00 +0000

Assad’s survival, though remarkable, is increasingly precarious. He has weathered storms with the help of foreign allies who have sacrificed heavily to keep him afloat. Whether Iran and Russia will continue to bear this burden is unclear. But even if Assad falls, Syria’s agony is far from over.

This editorial was originally published in our edition on November 30

Editorial

The Syrian conflict has never been merely about territory—it is a profound struggle for the very identity of a nation, and a theatre for the ambitions of global powers. Assad’s survival or demise will not determine Syria’s future; the forces fracturing the country are far too entrenched for any single outcome to provide resolution. As an ancient Syrian proverb says, “He who digs a well for his brother, falls into it himself.” Every participant in this war—Assad, the rebels, the West, Russia, Turkey, and Iran—is digging wells of ambition and betrayal. The true question is not who will fall in, but how many will drown before it’s over.

This handout picture provided by the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) on November, 2023, shows Syrian President Bashar Assad attending an emergency meeting of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), in Riyadh.[Saudi Press Agency/AFP]

In a plea for survival, the Syrian regime has called on Iran for urgent military support. This request comes amid a decisive offensive by opposition forces under the “Deterrence of Aggression” operation, which has shattered the Syrian Arab Army’s (SAA) defences, sweeping through Aleppo and Idlib. For years, Assad has relied on foreign intervention to remain in power, and now, as the tide of battle turns, he turns once more to his closest ally. But this appeal reeks of desperation—and irony. Iran, already exhausted from years of proxy warfare, is itself near breaking point. The recent death of Iranian Brigadier General Keyomarth Pourhashemi in Aleppo and the ongoing Israeli airstrikes show that Tehran has already paid a heavy price in Syria. The question now is whether Iran can afford to sink deeper into this quicksand, or if Syria will become just another casualty in the age-old game of empire-building.

For Assad, the stakes could not be higher. The rebels are not only challenging his military dominance—they are undermining his legitimacy. As the opposition makes unexpected gains in western Aleppo, the SAA, once a symbol of Assad’s iron-fisted control, is faltering. The strength of the opposition exposes the fragility of the regime’s hold on power, revealing that the Syrian state, at least in its current form, has always been more mirage than reality. As opposition forces gain ground in areas thought secure, cracks in Assad’s facade grow wider, laying bare the vulnerability of a regime that has relied on violence, fear, and foreign backing to stay afloat.

The true irony, however, lies in Assad’s greatest strength—his ability to endure. Over the years, he has outlasted Western sanctions, uprisings, airstrikes, and even assassination attempts. As the Syrian proverb goes, “Patience is bitter, but its fruit is sweet.” Assad has weathered countless storms, knowing that each phase of crisis offers a new chance to survive. But this strategy, which has served him well in the past, is now facing its greatest test. With his foreign backers—Russia and Iran—stretched thin, the question is whether Assad can withstand a rising tide of opposition, one that is not merely threatening his rule but shaping a new order for Syria.

In this geopolitical contest, Syria is not merely the battleground for Assad’s regime; it is a pawn in a larger contest for power. The United States, despite its supposed mission to promote democracy and fight terrorism, has embedded itself in Syria’s oil-rich northeast. The fight against ISIS has become little more than a pretext for controlling vital resources and countering Russian and Iranian influence. Through its Timber Sycamore program, Washington through its CIA armed opposition groups, yet the disarray within those groups led to many of these weapons being co-opted by radical Islamists, undermining its goal of a stable Syria. The U.S. also collaborated with Kurdish-led forces to combat ISIS, despite the tensions this relationship created with NATO ally Turkey, which regards Kurdish factions as terrorists. Meanwhile, the U.S. imposed sanctions on Assad’s regime, and conducted missile strikes in 2017 and 2018 in retaliation for alleged “chemical weapons attacks.” Despite its military presence, American efforts often seem incoherent, leaving Syria fragmented, with U.S. interests shifting from one administration to the next.

Russia’s role as Assad’s protector serves a broader agenda of securing its Mediterranean foothold and expanding influence in the West Asia. Yet even Moscow is growing weary of the Syrian quagmire. Its ties with both Turkey and Iran are strained, and Syria increasingly appears as a costly military and political deadlock. Each Russian strike is an attempt to preserve its influence, but the rewards of this costly engagement become less clear with time.

Turkey, hosting millions of Syrian refugees, has also carved out its own role in the conflict—but it is driven not by humanitarian concern, but by territorial ambitions. Its incursions into northern Syria, framed as efforts to create a “safe zone” for refugees, are aimed at eliminating Kurdish autonomy and securing strategic territory. Turkey has leveraged the refugee crisis to gain political leverage in Europe, while pushing its own agenda in Syria. Erdoğan’s pursuit of territorial gains is as much about consolidating domestic political power as it is about reshaping the region’s borders. In this endeavour, he has found common cause with Western powers that have long supported his ambitions, further complicating NATO-Russia relations.

Iran, too, is at a crossroads. Once Assad’s most steadfast ally, Tehran now finds itself caught in a conflict that is draining its resources. The cost of supporting Assad has been immense—financially, militarily, and in human lives. The deaths of top Iranian commanders, alongside the increasing frequency of Israeli strikes, highlight the toll on Tehran’s involvement. Yet, Iran cannot afford to abandon Assad. The collapse of his regime would be a blow to Iran’s regional strategy, but at what cost? This dilemma grows more urgent by the day. Will Iran continue to bleed for Assad’s survival, or will it begin to withdraw, leaving the regime to face its fate?

What is often overlooked in the analysis of foreign interventions is that Syria has always been a prize—not only for regional powers, but for empires throughout history. Positioned at the crossroads of Europe, Asia, and Africa, Syria has always held immense strategic value. Its rich history and cultural significance make it a coveted prize. The United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey—all have sought to carve out their place in Syria, each driven by different goals. The suffering of the Syrian people has always been collateral damage in this wider game of geopolitical chess.

In the end, the real tragedy of Syria lies not in the ambitions of foreign powers, but in the plight of its people. What began as a peaceful uprising in 2011, a cry for dignity and freedom, has devolved into a battlefield of competing foreign interests. The Syrian opposition, fragmented and often infiltrated by extremist factions, has failed to present any coherent vision for the country’s future. Armed by the West, only to be abandoned when convenient, the opposition has become as much a part of the problem as the regime it seeks to overthrow.

Meanwhile, the regime’s survival has become a matter of personal and political survival for its leaders. The prospects for rebuilding Syria under Assad’s leadership seem increasingly bleak. The very notion of a unified, secular Syria has been shattered by years of war, sectarianism, and foreign interference. Even if Assad manages to survive this crisis, it is hard to see how he can restore Syria to any semblance of the unity and stability it once knew. His rule has shattered the fabric of Syrian society, leaving a fragmented, war-torn state behind.

The insurgents’ capture of Aleppo is more than a tactical victory—it is a sign of the shifting power balance in Syria. For Assad, the loss of Aleppo is not merely a military defeat; it is a blow to his regime’s legitimacy. Aleppo, once Syria’s cultural and economic heart, has become a key prize in the contest for Syria’s future. Its fall may mark a turning point, but whether it signals Assad’s downfall or simply another chapter in his prolonged survival remains uncertain.

At this precipice, Syria’s future hangs in the balance. Will the country be rebuilt, and if so, on whose terms? Will the Syrian government evolve, or will the insurgents, having gained ground, seize control of the country? Assad’s survival, though remarkable, is increasingly precarious. He has weathered storms with the help of foreign allies who have sacrificed heavily to keep him afloat. Whether Iran and Russia will continue to bear this burden is unclear. But even if Assad falls, Syria’s agony is far from over. What follows will likely be a chaotic power struggle, where no faction can predict its place, and the Syrian people will once again bear the weight of a conflict they did not start.

Syria’s fate, like its history, is wrapped up in the power struggles of empires. Whether it rises from the ashes or remains buried under foreign ambitions will not depend on the strength of its people but on the will of the external powers that control its future. And as the cycle of destruction continues, the real question remains: how many more will suffer before Syria finds peace—if such a thing is even possible?

Breaking: Rebels Claim Control of Damascus, Announce Fall of Assad Regime

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sun, 08 Dec 2024 07:32:00 +0000

With Assad’s regime in freefall, the future of Syria remains uncertain as regional powers and rebel factions vie for influence in the aftermath of the regime’s collapse.

by Our Correspondent in Doha

In a dramatic televised address, opposition rebel factions in Syria declared that they had taken control of Damascus and overthrown President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The announcement marked a decisive shift in the Syrian conflict, with rebels asserting victory in the capital after years of resistance.

Opposition rebel factions in Syria declared that they had taken control of Damascus and overthrown President Bashar al-Assad’s regime

According to Reuters, the Syrian army command informed officers that Assad’s rule has come to an end. The situation escalated further when Syria’s Prime Minister confirmed to Al Arabiya TV that the government was engaged in negotiations with Syrian militant leaders. Amid the turmoil, reports circulated suggesting that Assad may have fled to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on the same day as an IL-76T aircraft crash in Al-Suwairy, though nothing has been definitively confirmed.

Click here to read the latest updates on Syria and other issues on our main website.

The fall of Damascus represents a major milestone in the Syrian Civil War, with the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) reportedly surrendering to rebel forces. Rebel factions are now focused on taking control of the remaining government-held areas along the Mediterranean coast.

The HTS-led Command Military Operations Room revealed that key officials within Syrian government intelligence had reached agreements with the rebels to facilitate their control over the capital. Meanwhile, the Syrian National Army (SNA) launched further attacks on the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in northern Syria.

As the situation evolves, the United States is closely monitoring the developments. White House National Security Council spokesperson Sean Savett affirmed that the U.S. is staying in contact with regional allies but is refraining from direct interference. U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan emphasized efforts to prevent any potential ISIS resurgence.

In the Golan Heights, Israeli forces have begun tightening security. Israeli tanks entered Al-Hamdiyah in Quneitra, and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) set up checkpoints along the border, declaring agricultural areas as closed military zones. The Israeli Home Front Command also imposed restrictions on schools and work in the Druze villages of the region.

Click here to read the latest updates on Syria and other issues on our main website.

From Kane Ella to Baba’s Place: The Rise of SMEs by Young Entrepreneurs in Sri Lanka

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 09:56:00 +0000

The rise of SMEs in Sri Lanka’s tourism sector marks an exciting new phase in the industry’s development. Entrepreneurs such as Akila Malith Silva and Malindu Abeygunasekara are showing how young locals can tap into the growing tourism market by creating innovative, high-quality businesses that cater to the diverse needs of tourists.

by Our Economic Affairs Editor

“Tourism is about making connections—connections between people, between cultures, and between a traveller and a place.” — Rosita Missoni

The tourism sector in Sri Lanka has long been a significant driver of economic growth, providing employment opportunities and helping to promote the island’s rich cultural heritage. With its exceptional natural beauty, diverse culture, and vibrant history, Sri Lanka is home to many globally sought-after tourist destinations. However, it is the rise of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the tourism and hospitality sector, particularly those founded by young local entrepreneurs, that is providing new avenues for economic development in the post-pandemic landscape.

Inside the Bab’s Place, Matara and Kane Ella, Ella [ Photos: Sri Lanka Guardian]

Entrepreneurs like Akila Malith Silva, the founder and owner of KANE ELLA, and Malindu Abeygunasekara, the visionary behind Baba’s Place in Madiha, are at the forefront of this movement. Their ventures, located in popular tourist hotspots such as Ella and Matara, represent an exciting shift in Sri Lanka’s tourism industry—one that combines innovation, local culture, and the entrepreneurial spirit to create lasting impacts on both the local economy and the national tourism scene. Their businesses are not only contributing to the national economy but also providing valuable lessons in the importance of supporting SMEs in the tourism sector.

The Boom in Sri Lanka’s Tourism Sector

Sri Lanka’s tourism industry has seen a steady growth trajectory in recent years, with the island nation being recognised globally for its scenic landscapes, pristine beaches, and historic ....

Click Here to Read the Complete Article in our main website

Snake Pit Diplomacy: The Bitter Truth Behind Recalling ‘Political Appointees’

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:06:00 +0000

by Luxman Aravind

Sri Lanka’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has become synonymous with corruption, betrayal, and political cronyism. A retired high-ranking official described the Ministry as “one of the biggest cans of disgusting worms,” a “pit of snakes” where treachery reigns supreme. This is not hyperbole; it’s a stark indictment of an institution that should embody national loyalty but instead epitomises self-serving ambition. Career diplomats and political appointees alike have transformed Sri Lanka’s diplomatic corps into a feeding ground for personal gain, with the interests of the nation falling by the wayside.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sri Lanka [File Photo]

The selfish greed festering within the Ministry is staggering. Career diplomats, ostensibly appointed to serve the nation, have instead used their positions to bolster their private fortunes. Many have manoeuvred to establish their families comfortably overseas, raising an important question: how do government officials, on relatively modest salaries, afford luxurious lifestyles in Western countries? Their children thrive abroad, enjoying lives bankrolled by public funds, while these diplomats, whose contributions are minimal at best, continue to reap rewards. For them, public service is not a duty—it’s a loophole to secure privilege.

Recent events illustrate the deeply political nature of these foreign appointments. A list of “political appointees” has recently surfaced in the media, revealing the Ministry’s bias. Numerous ambassadors, high commissioners, and heads of missions have been instructed to return to Colombo by December 1, mere two weeks after the upcoming parliamentary elections. Interestingly, some distinguished military officers and other government officials, who have honourably served the country, have been recalled, while certain politically secure figures—such as Sri Lanka’s ambassador to the United States—are conspicuously absent from the recall list. This glaring inconsistency screams of cronyism and raises an urgent question: who prepared this list? How were these individuals chosen, and what kind of vendetta fuelled this purge?

The answer is dishearteningly clear: personal vendetta and political calculations, not merit or service to the country, dictate the Ministry’s decisions. Among those recalled are highly respected military figures whose dedication to the country is unquestionable.

Consider the case of the Sri Lankan mission in Islamabad, for instance. Generals Anton Muthukumaru, H.W.H. Wijekoon, G.H. de Silva, and Srilal Weerasooriya each served with distinction, were honoured during their diplomatic postings, and allowed to complete their terms. Alongside figures like Air Chief Marshal Jayalath Weerakkody and Major General Jayanath Lokukatagoda, they were appointed for their expertise, not political affiliations. Most recently, Vice Admiral Mohan Wijewickrama, former Navy Chief of Staff and Eastern Province Governor, served as High Commissioner from 2020 to 2023, demonstrating exceptional integrity. None of these officials endured the humiliation of an early recall. For successive governments, retaining retired military commanders in Islamabad has been a deliberate, strategic choice aligned with critical national interests.

The case of Admiral Ravindra C. Wijegunaratne, however, is an exception—and a shameful one at that. Admiral Wijegunaratne, a former Navy Commander and Chief of Defence Staff who earned the prestigious Nishan-e-Imtiaz medal from Pakistan, was recalled after only ten months. In stark contrast to his predecessors, who were allowed to complete their terms, he was abruptly pulled back, a slap in the face for a man whose service to Sri Lanka is unmatched. His recall is not just an insult; it’s a blatant display of political vendetta. Unlike his predecessors, who enjoyed the respect they deserved, Admiral Wijegunaratne has been treated with contempt, his dignity trampled by bureaucrats and politicians acting out of sheer malice.

Adding to the outrage, this recall list omitted certain diplomats with questionable records but strong political ties. The Ministry’s decision to remove some ambassadors while sparing others reeks of cronyism. The embassy in the United States, for example, remains untouched, its politically favoured ambassador secure in a post protected by backroom deals. Meanwhile, Admiral Wijegunaratne, whose appointment strengthened ties with Pakistan—a crucial ally—has been sacrificed on the altar of petty politics. It is an act of disgrace, illustrating the Ministry’s systemic corruption and utter disregard for merit or service.

This political vendetta extends beyond Admiral Wijegunaratne and permeates Sri Lanka’s diplomatic corps. In Cuba and Nepal, for instance, former military leaders, individuals with rich experience in defence and security, serve as ambassadors. These are not political appointments but strategic placements of individuals who understand the intricacies of security, an invaluable skill in regions where Sri Lanka has critical strategic interests. Both countries have benefitted from these appointments, as the former Air Force and Navy leaders posted there bring unparalleled expertise. However, these positions are precarious in a Ministry that views all non-career diplomats with suspicion and contempt.

Sri Lanka’s foreign missions have long been tainted by political interests, and this manipulation only deepens the crisis. Political appointees treat their posts as personal assets, exploiting public funds for private gain with shameless audacity. But the issue goes further: many so-called “career diplomats” are equally complicit, using their paper qualifications to climb the ranks without ever serving the nation’s interests. They may submit token reports to Colombo for annual appraisals, but their true contributions are virtually nil. In host countries, they engage minimally with the local community, foster no strategic ties, and build no beneficial networks. They are diplomats in title alone, filling their time with personal indulgences rather than advancing Sri Lanka’s interests.

The Foreign Ministry’s decision to recall non-career diplomats is not only short-sighted but self-sabotaging. History has shown that, in times of national crisis, non-career diplomats have stepped in to achieve what their career counterparts could not. Figures like Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka, who represented Sri Lanka during the civil war, understood the nuances of his role and advocated effectively for the nation on the world stage. Non-career diplomats often bring a level of expertise, pragmatism, and integrity sorely lacking among many career diplomats. The Ministry’s dismissal of these appointees is nothing short of suicidal; it’s as if they would rather protect their insular circle than allow capable outsiders to contribute.

The global norm supports the strategic use of non-career diplomats. Nations like India routinely appoint non-career professionals, providing them the freedom and authority necessary to serve effectively. In Sri Lanka, however, the Ministry’s bureaucratic elitism resents such appointments. Career diplomats, many of whom are unfit for their roles, view non-career appointees as threats to their privileged positions. This resentment breeds hostility, making it impossible for Sri Lanka’s foreign missions to operate as cohesive units. Instead, the Ministry is rife with scheming and backstabbing, leading one official to describe it as a “vicious pit of snakes” where personal vendettas are prioritised over national duty.

These early signs of immaturity and vindictiveness in the government’s foreign policy approach are alarming. The Ministry’s bias, its political patronage, and its continuous failure to prioritise competence over connections all signal a looming crisis for Sri Lanka’s foreign relations. If this government persists in manipulating the diplomatic corps to advance short-term political goals, it will jeopardise the nation’s stability and security. As Sun Tzu aptly stated, “In war, the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory.” By treating diplomacy as a mere tool for political games, the Ministry is setting Sri Lanka up for failure on the international stage. Their petty battles may bring fleeting wins, but the cost will be borne by the Sri Lankan people, who deserve a foreign service that protects and represents their interests—not one that feeds off their sacrifice.

The Ministry’s toxic culture and the government’s disregard for meritocracy threaten not just Sri Lanka’s diplomatic reputation but its future. By prioritising personal vendettas and party loyalty over genuine talent and service, the Ministry has betrayed the public trust. Incompetent career diplomats and politically connected appointees will continue to squander public funds, indulge in self-promotion, and exploit their positions while the nation’s true interests are left to languish. The latest unjust recall and the humiliation endured by numerous dedicated non-career diplomats highlight the betrayal within the Ministry—a betrayal that poisons Sri Lanka’s future with each new act of political retribution.

Until the Foreign Ministry undergoes a drastic overhaul and shifts its focus to genuine merit, integrity, and national service, it will remain what it is today: a cesspool of corruption, manipulation, and incompetence. Without immediate reform, Sri Lanka’s diplomatic corps will continue to function as a private club for the well-connected, where public funds are squandered, and the nation’s reputation is tarnished. The Foreign Ministry, a “viper’s nest” as it stands, will keep poisoning Sri Lanka’s future one corrupt decision at a time, while the people pay the price of their leaders’ insatiable greed.

Trump Resurrection: America Just Produced the Most Dangerous President Ever

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:03:00 +0000

Trump’s victory is the death knell for the republic. Trump’s return is not a comeback for a man wronged, nor is it a second chance for a reformed leader. This is something far darker. What we are witnessing is the rise of a man who has learned from his first failed attempt and emerged even more dangerous, more determined, and more unhinged.

by Luxman Aravind

Donald Trump is back, and with him comes the most dangerous, divisive, and unpredictable presidency in modern American history. His re-election, which has defied every expectation, has paved the way for a president who, after two near-death experiences — both literal and political — is returning with an unquenchable thirst for revenge and a blueprint to dismantle the nation as we know it.

Trump’s second term will not be an echo of his first — it will be a radical overhaul of American society, government, and, most terrifyingly, its democratic institutions. In his own words, it will be “nasty a little bit at times, and maybe at the beginning in particular.” And given the agenda he’s already outlined, we can only expect chaos, authoritarianism, and devastation for the United States and the world beyond. The story of Trump’s political comeback isn’t just a tribute to his tenacity; it is a chilling indictment of the nation’s descent into chaos and a disturbing reflection of the failure of democracy itself.

After the historic victory

Trump’s return is not a comeback for a man wronged, nor is it a second chance for a reformed leader. This is something far darker. What we are witnessing is the rise of a man who has learned from his first failed attempt and emerged even more dangerous, more determined, and more unhinged. The nightmare that America faced during his first tenure—the corruption, the lies, the embrace of authoritarianism, the fuel of racial animus—is back, but this time, it’s more polished, more refined, and more threatening. His rise from the ashes of defeat in 2020 is not simply a return to power. It is a heralding of America’s future, one where democracy stands on its last legs, clinging to a fragile existence, and where the will of the people is replaced by the will of one man—Donald Trump.

The fact that we are even discussing a second Trump presidency speaks volumes about the decay of American democracy. After two impeachments, multiple criminal investigations, and an assault on the Capitol that shook the world to its core, the American people are once again giving Trump the power to reshape the nation in his image. His return is a grotesque symbol of how low the political discourse has sunk and how willing the nation is to embrace authoritarianism in the name of misguided populism. Trump is not a man who respects the rule of law, but a man who has weaponized it for his own benefit—transforming the judiciary into a tool of political retribution, and bending every system of governance to his whims. The fact that he remains a popular figure after all of this, that he can ride a wave of populist rage into the White House once again, is a reflection of just how far we have fallen.

To understand the significance of Trump’s return, one must examine the state of the nation that has embraced him once more. America in 2024 is a deeply fractured country, one that has been torn apart by polarization, economic instability, and the breakdown of social cohesion. The middle class, long considered the backbone of American society, is crumbling under the weight of inflation, wage stagnation, and the erosion of opportunity. The political establishment, with its elite connections and detachment from the concerns of the average citizen, is no longer seen as a vehicle for change but as the enemy of the people. Enter Trump—whose entire political brand is built on the rejection of the elite establishment and the promise of a new order where the concerns of “real” Americans are front and center. His political language is one of grievance and resentment, and his message is clear: the elites have failed, and only a strongman like Trump can restore order.

This rhetoric resonates with millions of voters who feel left behind and unheard. Trump speaks to their anger, their frustration, and their sense of disillusionment. His promise to “Make America Great Again” was never just about policy; it was about validation. It was about telling people that their anger, their sense of abandonment, and their need for retribution were justified. In a country where economic inequality has reached new heights and political representation seems more like a charade, Trump becomes a beacon of hope for those who feel that their voices have been silenced by a corrupt system. This is not a vision for a more just society. It is a vision for revenge—against the elites, against minorities, and against the very idea of democracy itself.

Trump’s victory in 2024 will not be a victory for American democracy—it will be its undoing. His campaign has been marked by divisiveness, vitriol, and the exploitation of America’s worst impulses. The promises he has made to his base—mass deportations, a crackdown on dissent, the dismantling of social safety nets, and a return to a time when American identity was defined by whiteness and nationalism—are all aimed at consolidating his power, stoking fear, and further fragmenting the nation. His strategy has always been to divide, to pit Americans against each other, and to exploit their differences for political gain. And it is working.

Kamala Harris, the Democrats’ chosen candidate to carry the mantle of progressivism and a more inclusive future, has utterly failed to match the energy, the drive, or the vision of her opponent. Harris’s campaign in 2024 was a disaster from the start. Rather than offering a bold vision for America’s future, she played it safe with empty platitudes and weak promises of progress. Her candidacy lacked fire, lacked the urgency needed to combat Trump’s populist fervor, and lacked the understanding of the real fears and frustrations plaguing the country. Her inability to rise above the noise, to offer concrete solutions for America’s economic pain, and her reluctance to confront the forces of racism, xenophobia, and extremism allowed Trump’s vision to dominate.

Kamala Harris’s loss is not just the loss of an individual politician; it is the failure of an entire political establishment. It is the failure of a system that has become so entrenched in its own power that it no longer understands the needs of the people. Harris’s inability to face the reality of her defeat, her refusal to acknowledge the depth of the political crisis facing her party, reflects the broader inability of the Democrats to evolve and address the very issues that Trump has so expertly exploited. Her defeat is not an isolated failure—it is the culmination of a political system that has long since lost touch with the electorate. The Democrats’ focus on identity politics, on appeasing a vocal minority, and on maintaining the status quo has cost them the election, and more importantly, it has cost the country its future.

In the aftermath of Trump’s victory, the United States will be forced to reckon with the consequences of its choices. The institutions of democracy, from the judiciary to the media to the civil service, will come under assault as Trump embarks on his plan to reshape America in his image. His promises to purge the government, to silence dissent, and to root out “radical leftists” from all positions of power will lead to an era of political repression unlike anything America has seen since the darkest days of the McCarthy era. The Constitution, once a symbol of democracy and freedom, will be trampled underfoot in the name of “law and order.” The rule of law will mean whatever Trump says it does.

The world will be forced to watch as America’s experiment in democracy comes to a close. The international order that has been built on the ideals of freedom, democracy, and human rights will be imperiled as Trump’s authoritarian vision spreads beyond America’s borders. What we are witnessing is not just the rebirth of a single man’s political career. It is the death of democracy itself. The global order will tremble as Trump’s message of hate, division, and nationalism infects other countries. The rise of right-wing populism will not be confined to the United States. It will spread like a disease, infecting democracies around the world, leading to a dark new age of authoritarianism.

Trump’s victory is the death knell for the republic. As he ascends to the presidency once again, “Democracy: Your Fire; Now Go and Die.” The flames of freedom are about to be extinguished, and the world will witness the end of an era. Mors tua vita mea. Your death is my life. The revolution has begun. Will you survive the fallout, or will you too fall into the ashes?

Top German Spy Warns: Putin’s Russia Poses an Unprecedented Threat to the West

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 04:01:00 +0000

German intelligence leaders fear that Putin's strategies could destabilize Europe and challenge democratic values.

On October 14, 2024, Germany’s Parliamentary Control Committee (PKGr) convened for a rare public hearing, marking the eighth such instance in its history. The event served as a critical platform for the heads of Germany’s federal intelligence agencies—the Federal Intelligence Service (BND), the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), and the Federal Office for Military Counterintelligence (MAD)—to address the increasingly precarious security landscape, particularly in relation to Russia’s actions under President Vladimir Putin.

[BND President Bruno Kahl during the hearing]

At the hearing, BND President Bruno Kahl, BfV President Thomas Haldenwang, and MAD President Martina Rosenberg painted a stark picture of the escalating threats posed by Russia. Kahl articulated a deep-seated concern that the Kremlin views Germany as an adversary, primarily due to its staunch support for Ukraine amid Russia’s ongoing aggression. This perception of Germany as an enemy is compounded by Russia’s broader strategic aim to realign the global order, a theme echoed throughout the testimony.

Kahl warned of “direct kinetic measures” initiated by Russia against Western nations, asserting that Russian intelligence agencies are operating with impunity and a state mandate to execute hybrid warfare against the West. He elaborated on the Kremlin’s extensive military rearmament and reorganizational efforts, predicting that by the end of the decade, Russia could mount a substantial military offensive against NATO. “Putin will test the West’s red lines,” Kahl stated, indicating a calculated strategy aimed at fracturing NATO solidarity before any direct conflict could ensue.

BfV President Haldenwang elaborated on the “influence operations” orchestrated by Russian intelligence. He described disinformation campaigns designed to undermine Western support for Ukraine and destabilize democratic processes in Germany. Notably, he highlighted the emergence of manipulated media outlets that masquerade as reputable sources to spread false narratives. This manipulation is not merely an information war; it is a strategic endeavor to sway political discourse and foster pro-Russian sentiment among European lawmakers.

The intelligence leaders expressed heightened alarm over increasing espionage efforts targeting Germany’s military and critical infrastructure. Rosenberg, as the MAD president, highlighted concerns over drone reconnaissance activities aimed at military installations, warning that these operations could swiftly escalate into acts of sabotage. The intelligence community is now confronted with a dual threat: not only are they tasked with identifying and neutralizing espionage, but they must also prepare for potential sabotage operations that could disrupt national security.

Kahl’s commentary underscored the simultaneous challenges Germany faces on multiple fronts. Beyond Russian threats, he mentioned rising tensions in the Middle East, particularly the escalating conflict involving Iran and its regional allies. This complexity extends to security issues arising from climate change, migration, and energy security, presenting a multifaceted challenge that demands an agile and well-resourced intelligence apparatus.

In their testimonies, the intelligence chiefs also touched upon domestic security concerns. Haldenwang highlighted the resurgence of Islamist terrorism in Europe, exacerbated by the ongoing crises in the Middle East. He noted that social media serves as a conduit for radicalization, posing a significant risk of self-radicalized individuals executing attacks within Germany. The alarming rise in anti-Semitic incidents, driven by the current geopolitical climate, further complicates the security landscape. Moreover, Haldenwang pointed to right-wing extremism as an ongoing threat to democratic processes in Germany, illustrating the urgent need for vigilant oversight and intervention in politically charged environments.

In light of these evolving threats, both Kahl and Rosenberg implored parliamentarians not to further restrict the operational capabilities of intelligence services. They argued that the proposed security legislation should enhance rather than hinder the ability of these agencies to perform their mandates effectively. “The truth must not become more difficult to find,” Kahl asserted, emphasizing the necessity for operational latitude in an increasingly hostile environment. Rosenberg echoed this sentiment, calling for a comprehensive evaluation of legal frameworks to ensure that intelligence operations remain responsive to emerging threats. “Effective counter-espionage is more important than ever,” she insisted, signaling a collective recognition that the stakes have never been higher.

Palestine: A Wound That Propaganda Can’t Hide

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:59:00 +0000

I refuse to play the condemnation game. Let me make myself clear. I do not tell oppressed people how to resist their oppression or who their allies should be.'

by Arundhati Roy

Writer and activist Arundhati Roy has been awarded the PEN Pinter Prize 2024. This is an annual award set up by English PEN in the memory of playwright Harold Pinter. Shortly after having been named for the prize, Roy announced that her share of the prize money will be donated to the Palestinian Children’s Relief Fund. She named Alaa Abd el-Fattah, British-Egyptian writer and activist, a ‘Writer of Courage’ who she would share her award with. The following is her acceptance speech for the prize, delivered on the evening of October 10, 2024, at the British Library.

Children use candles for lighting in the southern Gaza Strip city of Khan Younis, on Oct. 20, 2023. (Photo by Rizek Abdeljawad/Xinhua)

I thank you, members of English PEN and members of the jury, for honouring me with the PEN Pinter Prize. I would like to begin by announcing the name of this year’s Writer of Courage who I have chosen to share this award with.

My greetings to you, Alaa Abd El-Fattah, writer of courage and my fellow awardee. We hoped and prayed that you would be released in September, but the Egyptian government decided that you were too beautiful a writer and too dangerous a thinker to be freed yet. But you are here in this room with us. You are the most important person here. From prison you wrote, “[M]y words lost any power and yet they continued to pour out of me. I still had a voice, even if only a handful would listen.” We are listening, Alaa. Closely.

Greetings to you, too, my beloved Naomi Klein, friend to both Alaa and me. Thank you for being here tonight. It means the world to me.

Greetings to all of you gathered here, as well to as those who are invisible perhaps to this wonderful audience but as visible to me as anybody else in this room. I am speaking of my friends and comrades in prison in India – lawyers, academics, students, journalists – Umar Khalid, Gulfisha Fatima, Khalid Saifi, Sharjeel Imam, Rona Wilson, Surendra Gadling, Mahesh Raut. I speak to you, my friend Khurram Parvaiz, one of the most remarkable people I know, you’ve been in prison for three years, and to you too Irfan Mehraj and to the thousands incarcerated in Kashmir and across the country whose lives have been devastated.

When Ruth Borthwick, Chair of English PEN and of the Pinter panel first wrote to me about this honour, she said the Pinter Prize is awarded to a writer who has sought to define ‘the real truth of our lives and our societies’ through ‘unflinching, unswerving, fierce intellectual determination’. That is a quote from Harold Pinter’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech.

The word ‘unflinching’ made me pause for a moment, because I think of myself as someone who is almost permanently flinching.

I would like to dwell a little on the theme of ‘flinching’ and ‘unflinching’. Which may be best illustrated by Harold Pinter himself:

“I was present at a meeting at the US embassy in London in the late 1980s.

“The United States Congress was about to decide whether to give more money to the Contras in their campaign against the state of Nicaragua. I was a member of a delegation speaking on behalf of Nicaragua but the most important member of this delegation was a Father John Metcalf. The leader of the US body was Raymond Seitz (then number two to the ambassador, later ambassador himself). Father Metcalf said: ‘Sir, I am in charge of a parish in the north of Nicaragua. My parishioners built a school, a health centre, a cultural centre. We have lived in peace. A few months ago a Contra force attacked the parish. They destroyed everything: the school, the health centre, the cultural centre. They raped nurses and teachers, slaughtered doctors, in the most brutal manner. They behaved like savages. Please demand that the US government withdraw its support from this shocking terrorist activity.’

“Raymond Seitz had a very good reputation as a rational, responsible and highly sophisticated man. He was greatly respected in diplomatic circles. He listened, paused and then spoke with some gravity. ‘Father,’ he said, ‘let me tell you something. In war, innocent people always suffer.’ There was a frozen silence. We stared at him. He did not flinch.”

Remember that President Reagan called the Contras “the moral equivalent of our Founding Fathers.” A turn of phrase that he was clearly fond of. He also used it to describe the CIA-backed Afghan Mujahideen, who then morphed into the Taliban. And it is the Taliban who rule Afghanistan today after waging a twenty-year-long war against the US invasion and occupation. Before the Contras and the Mujahideen, there was the war in Vietnam and the unflinching US military doctrine that ordered its soldiers to ‘Kill Anything That Moves’. If you read the Pentagon Papers and other documents on US war aims in Vietnam, you can enjoy some lively unflinching discussions about how to commit genocide – is it better to kill people outright or to starve them slowly? Which would look better? The problem that the compassionate mandarins in the Pentagon faced was that, unlike Americans, who, according to them, want ‘life, happiness, wealth, power’, Asians ‘stoically accept…the destruction of wealth and the loss of lives’ – and force America to carry their ‘strategic logic to its conclusion, which is genocide.’ A terrible burden to be borne unflinchingly.

And here we are, all these years later, more than a year into yet another genocide. The US and Israel’s unflinching and ongoing televised genocide in Gaza and now Lebanon in defence of a colonial occupation and an Apartheid state. The death toll so far, is officially 42,000, a majority of them women and children. This does not include those who died screaming under the rubble of buildings, neighbourhoods, whole cities, and those whose bodies have not yet been recovered. A recent study by Oxfam says that more children have been killed by Israel in Gaza than in the equivalent period of any other war in the last twenty years.

To assuage their collective guilt for their early years of indifference towards one genocide – the Nazi extermination of millions of European Jews – the United States and Europe have prepared the grounds for another.

Like every state that has carried out ethnic cleansing and genocide in history, Zionists in Israel – who believe themselves to be “the chosen people” – began by dehumanising Palestinians before driving them off their land and murdering them.

Prime Minister Menachem Begin called Palestinians ‘two-legged beasts’, Yitzhak Rabin called them ‘grasshoppers’ who ‘could be crushed’ and Golda Meir said ‘There was no such thing as Palestinians’. Winston Churchill, that famous warrior against fascism, said, ‘I do not admit that the dog in the manger has the final right to the manger, even though he may have lain there for a very long time’ and then went on to declare that a ‘higher race’ had the final right to the manger. Once those two-legged beasts, grasshoppers, dogs and non-existent people were murdered, ethnically cleansed, and ghettoised, a new country was born. It was celebrated as a ‘land without people for people without a land’. The nuclear-armed state of Israel was to serve as a military outpost and gateway to the natural wealth and resources of the Middle East for US and Europe. A lovely coincidence of aims and objectives.

The new state was supported unhesitatingly and unflinchingly, armed and bankrolled, coddled and applauded, no matter what crimes it committed. It grew up like a protected child in a wealthy home whose parents smile proudly as it commits atrocity upon atrocity. No wonder today it feels free to boast openly about committing genocide. (At least The Pentagon Papers were secret. They had to be stolen. And leaked.) No wonder Israeli soldiers seem to have lost all sense of decency. No wonder they flood the social media with depraved videos of themselves wearing the lingerie of women they have killed or displaced, videos of themselves mimicking dying Palestinians and wounded children or raped and tortured prisoners, images of themselves blowing up buildings while they smoke cigarettes or jive to music on their headphones. Who are these people?

What can possibly justify what Israel is doing?

The answer, according to Israel and its allies, as well as the Western media, is the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7th last year. The killing of Israeli civilians and the taking of Israeli hostages. According to them, history only began a year ago.

So, this is the part in my speech where I am expected to equivocate to protect myself, my ‘neutrality’, my intellectual standing. This is the part where I am meant to lapse into moral equivalence and condemn Hamas, the other militant groups in Gaza and their ally Hezbollah, in Lebanon, for killing civilians and taking people hostage. And to condemn the people of Gaza who celebrated the Hamas attack. Once that’s done it all becomes easy, doesn’t it? Ah well. Everybody is terrible, what can one do? Let’s go shopping instead…

I refuse to play the condemnation game. Let me make myself clear. I do not tell oppressed people how to resist their oppression or who their allies should be.

When US President Joe Biden met with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli war cabinet during a visit to Israel in October 2023, he said, ‘I don’t believe you have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, and I am a Zionist.’

Unlike President Joe Biden, who calls himself a non-Jewish Zionist and unflinchingly bankrolls and arms Israel while it commits its war crimes, I am not going to declare myself or define myself in any way that is narrower than my writing. I am what I write.

I am acutely aware that being the writer that I am, the non-Muslim that I am and the woman that I am, it would be very difficult, perhaps impossible for me to survive very long under the rule of Hamas, Hezbollah, or the Iranian regime. But that is not the point here. The point is to educate ourselves about the history and the circumstances under which they came to exist. The point is that right now they are fighting against an ongoing genocide. The point is to ask ourselves whether a liberal, secular fighting force can go up against a genocidal war machine. Because, when all the powers of the world are against them, who do they have to turn to but God? I am aware that Hezbollah and the Iranian regime have vocal detractors in their own countries, some who also languish in jails or have faced far worse outcomes. I am aware that some of their actions – the killing of civilians and the taking of hostages on October 7th by Hamas – constitute war crimes. However, there cannot be an equivalence between this and what Israel and the United States are doing in Gaza, in the West Bank and now in Lebanon. The root of all the violence, including the violence of October 7th, is Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land and its subjugation of the Palestinian people. History did not begin on 7 October 2023.

I ask you, which of us sitting in this hall would willingly submit to the indignity that Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank have been subjected to for decades? What peaceful means have the Palestinian people not tried? What compromise have they not accepted—other than the one that requires them to crawl on their knees and eat dirt?

Israel is not fighting a war of self-defence. It is fighting a war of aggression. A war to occupy more territory, to strengthen its Apartheid apparatus and tighten its control on Palestinian people and the region.

‘Polls show that a majority of the citizens in the countries whose governments enable the Israeli genocide have made it clear that they do not agree with this.’ Photo: Ahmed Abu Hameeda/Wikimedia commons

Since October 7th 2023, apart from the tens of thousands of people it has killed, Israel has displaced the majority of Gaza’s population, many times over. It has bombed hospitals. It has deliberately targeted and killed doctors, aid workers and journalists. A whole population is being starved – their history is sought to be erased. All this is supported both morally and materially by the wealthiest, most powerful governments in the world. And their media. (Here I include my country, India, which supplies Israel with weapons, as well as thousands of workers.) There is no daylight between these countries and Israel. In the last year alone, the US has spent 17.9 billion dollars in military aid to Israel. So, let us once and for all dispense with the lie about the US being a mediator, a restraining influence, or as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (considered to be on the extreme Left of mainstream US politics) put it, ‘working tirelessly for a ceasefire’. A party to the genocide cannot be a mediator.

Not all the power and money, not all the weapons and propaganda on earth can any longer hide the wound that is Palestine. The wound through which the whole world, including Israel, bleeds.

Polls show that a majority of the citizens in the countries whose governments enable the Israeli genocide have made it clear that they do not agree with this. We have watched those marches of hundreds of thousands of people – including a young generation of Jews who are tired of being used, tired of being lied to. Who would have imagined that we would live to see the day when German police would arrest Jewish citizens for protesting against Israel and Zionism and accuse them of anti-Semitism? Who would have thought the US government would, in the service of the Israeli state, undermine its cardinal principle of Free Speech by banning pro-Palestine slogans? The so-called moral architecture of western democracies – with a few honourable exceptions – has become a grim laughingstock in the rest of the world.

When Benjamin Netanyahu holds up a map of the Middle East in which Palestine has been erased and Israel stretches from the river to the sea, he is applauded as a visionary who is working to realize the dream of a Jewish homeland.

But when Palestinians and their supporters chant ‘From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’, they are accused of explicitly calling for the genocide of Jews.

Are they really? Or is that a sick imagination projecting its own darkness onto others? An imagination that cannot countenance diversity, cannot countenance the idea of living in a country alongside other people, equally, with equal rights. Like everybody else in the world does. An imagination that cannot afford to acknowledge that Palestinians want to be free, like South Africa is, like India is, like all countries that have thrown off the yoke of colonialism are. Countries that are diverse, deeply, maybe even fatally, flawed, but free. When South Africans were chanting their popular rallying cry, Amandla! Power to the people, were they calling for the genocide of white people? They were not. They were calling for the dismantling of the Apartheid state. Just as the Palestinians are.

‘Neither the ballot boxes not the palaces or the ministries or the prisons or even the graves are big enough for our dreams’. Photo: Shome Basu in Dhaka.

The war that has now begun will be terrible. But it will eventually dismantle Israeli Apartheid. The whole world will be far safer for everyone – including for Jewish people – and far more just. It will be like pulling an arrow from our wounded heart.

If the US government withdrew its support of Israel, the war could stop today. Hostilities could end right this minute. Israeli hostages could be freed, Palestinian prisoners could be released. The negotiations with Hamas and the other Palestinian stakeholders that must inevitably follow the war could instead take place now and prevent the suffering of millions of people. How sad that most people would consider this a naïve, laughable proposition.

As I conclude, let me turn to your words, Alaa Abd El-Fatah, from your book of prison writing, You Have Not Yet Been Defeated. I have rarely read such beautiful words about the meaning of victory and defeat – and the political necessity of honestly looking despair in the eye. I have rarely seen writing in which a citizen separates himself from the state, from the generals and even from the slogans of the Square with such bell-like clarity.

“The centre is treason because there’s room in it only for the General…The centre is treason and I have never been a traitor. They think they’ve pushed us back into the margins. They don’t realize that we never left it, we just got lost for a brief while. Neither the ballot boxes not the palaces or the ministries or the prisons or even the graves are big enough for our dreams. We never sought the centre because it has no room except for those who abandon the dream. Even the square was not big enough for us, so most of the battles of the revolution happened outside it, and most of the heroes remained outside the frame.”

As the horror we are witnessing in Gaza, and now Lebanon, quickly escalates into a regional war, its real heroes remain outside the frame. But they fight on because they know that one day—

From the river to the sea

Palestine will be Free.

It will.

Keep your eye on your calendar. Not on your clock.

That’s how the people – not the generals – the people fighting for their liberation measure time.

Arundhati Roy is an author, with novels including “The Ministry of Utmost Happiness.” Her most recent work is the essay collection “Azadi: Freedom. Fascism. Fiction.”

The Propaganda Circus: Why Sri Lankans Prefer Illusion Over Reality?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:56:00 +0000

In the wake of political upheaval, it is tempting to blame the puppets on the stage while ignoring the marionettes pulling the strings.

by Laxman Aravind

In the aftermath of political turmoil, Sri Lanka finds itself caught in a vicious cycle of deception, with the National People’s Power (NPP) party presenting a leadership characterised by superficial rhetoric and a profound lack of substance. This is not merely an examination of party politics; it is a damning indictment of the collective ignorance that seems to grip the electorate. The rise of the NPP’s presidential candidate, now the ninth president of Sri Lanka, is emblematic of a deeper malaise—an unsettling phenomenon wherein a population remains enraptured by empty promises, sacrificing their capacity for critical thought on the altar of charismatic oratory.

Nilanthi Kottahachchi, a master of monologue in the NPP’s propaganda machinery, whose recent proclamations illustrate the absurdity of the current political discourse. [Image Courtesy: NPP Media]

The NPP’s ascendance is predicated on two insidious factors: a relentless propaganda machine and the pervasive egocentrism that suffocates meaningful political discourse. Their campaign has been an exercise in manipulation, utilising every conceivable medium—from glossy posters to viral social media posts—to sway public sentiment. It is an alarming reminder of Pascal’s assertion that “the greatest minds are capable of the greatest vices as well as of the greatest virtues.” In a climate where political narratives eclipse reason, the ability to deceive becomes a sought-after skill, elevating charlatans while leaving the populace in a state of stupor.

This leads to a disconcerting truth: the Sri Lankan electorate appears to be willingly complicit in its own deception. As the country teetered on the brink of bankruptcy, the very politicians who steered it towards disaster were unceremoniously cast aside in favour of new leaders who, despite their lack of experience or competence, wield the allure of fresh promises. The irony is as rich as it is tragic; like Churchill post-war, those who navigate crises often find themselves discarded, replaced by figures who, devoid of true vision, merely offer a different brand of empty rhetoric.

Consider Nilanthi Kottahachchi, a master of monologue in the NPP’s propaganda machinery, whose recent proclamations illustrate the absurdity of the current political discourse. Her plans for an asset restoration institution sound commendable but are ultimately vapid in the face of pressing national crises. When she speaks of recovering funds allegedly stored in Uganda by former Rajapaksa regimes, one cannot help but question the audacity of such claims. Does she genuinely believe that a government, which has repeatedly failed to confront systemic issues, could effortlessly reclaim hidden assets abroad? Not really. Two weeks after the new president assumed duty, she is now eyeing a parliamentary seat, confessing that she knows nothing but the whole truth about this Ugandan saga, yet deceived the public by lying to them. An attorney by profession, does she have no shame? Or is it the people who lack it? Do you think these so-called reformists will serve the country, or will they lead it to the brink of an abyss while the majority remain in deep slumber? It is a spectacle of delusion, reminiscent of Chekhov’s assertion that “man will only be better when you make him see what he is, and not what he should be.” The disconnect between political promises and reality is staggering.

In her attempts to justify the NPP’s actions, Kottahachchi mirrors the very absurdities she seeks to condemn. The superficiality of her rhetoric, filled with grandiose claims, belies a deeper truth: she, like many others, is doing exactly what most traditional politicians do, albeit in different forms and with different tricks—entraping the public and ensnaring them in a relentless cycle of self-deception in critical political decisions and theatrical posturing. This manipulation leads to a distortion of reality, resulting in politically stupid decisions that serve only the interests of those in power. In other words, this group of deceivers is nothing but the other side of the same coin, where most clowns believe that the place will turn into a kingdom when the clowns are enthroned. It is shocking to consider how easily the electorate has fallen prey to such manipulations. Lincoln’s assertion that “you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time” resonates painfully in this context. For the people of Sri Lanka, however, it appears that the vast majority remain content to be fooled, willingly surrendering their critical faculties in the face of convenient narratives.

As this new form of shamelessness takes root in Sri Lanka, the alarming reality is that the electorate is seemingly immune to the lessons of history. The superficial gestures, like the recent announcement of providing 50 million rupees to those affected by floods, only serve to highlight the immaturity of a reactive political environment. Is this what the people of Sri Lanka have come to accept? According to the Disaster Management Center, 152,424 people belonging to 39,123 families in 12 districts and 80 divisional secretariats have been affected by the bad weather. So far, three people have died due to the disaster, and one total house loss along with 318 partial house losses has been reported. Additionally, 7,918 people are staying in 69 shelters, with 1,927 families affected by the disaster. The Gampaha district has been the most affected, with 20,553 families and 82,839 people impacted. Meanwhile, the Disaster Management Center reports that flood disaster relief teams have been deployed for relief work in the flooded areas. To calculate how much each affected person could receive from the 50 million rupees, we find that with 152,424 affected individuals, each person would receive approximately 328.26 rupees (about 1.12 dollars), emphasizing the inadequacy of such relief efforts and highlighting the immaturity of the leadership. Yet, these are earlier symptoms of what is to come.

A governance model that is reactionary rather than proactive, addressing symptoms rather than the underlying malaise? The spectacle of politicians engaging in petty squabbles while national issues languish unaddressed raises an urgent question: how much longer can this charade continue before the very fabric of society unravels? The forthcoming parliamentary elections will serve as a litmus test for the populace’s capacity to discern truth from fiction. The political landscape is replete with empty promises and hollow aspirations, yet the electorate seems paralyzed by an enduring allegiance to illusion over reality. Nietzsche’s observation that “sometimes people don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed” rings painfully true in this context.

It is evident that these propagandists have mastered the art of deception, skillfully diverting attention away from the pressing structural issues plaguing society. Instead of engaging in meaningful dialogue about reform and collective responsibility, they inundate the public with a cacophony of noise, effectively drowning out any critical discourse.

The reality is stark and unforgiving: the current political climate is a reflection of a populace that has willingly embraced ignorance, allowing itself to be lulled into complacency by a parade of empty rhetoric. The resurrection of the old guard is not just a failure of leadership; it is a profound indictment of a society that appears all too ready to accept mediocrity in place of merit. The imperative for the citizens of Sri Lanka is to awaken from this stupor, to rise up against the political theatre that serves only to distract and deceive. The question remains: will the people of Sri Lanka finally demand something more substantial than the perfumed promises of politicians who seem more concerned with their narratives than the realities of governance? The answer to this question will shape the nation’s future.

Nobel Peace Prize to Nihon Hidankyo: Long Overdue, Militarism Looms

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:55:00 +0000

The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to organisations like Nihon Hidankyo must not only recognise the voices of war's victims but also serve as a clarion call for deeper introspection and action.

Editorial

Do you still remember how Harry Truman, in his twilight years as President of the United States, brazenly bragged in front of TV cameras about the latest innovations in killing—specifically, the atomic bombs dropped on defenceless civilians in Japan? This spectacle of pride stands as a grotesque testament to the moral bankruptcy that underpins U.S. foreign policy. As we confront the dire state of global affairs, we must acknowledge a grim reality: the United States, alongside its Western allies, has systematically dismantled the very foundations of world peace while profiting from the chaos it creates.

People walk past the Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, on August 6, 1945, in this handout photo taken by the U.S. Army in November, 1945, and distributed by the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. Mandatory credit REUTERS/U.S. Army/Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum

Take, for instance, the recent awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize on 11 October 2024 to Nihon Hidankyo, the Japanese Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organisations. This recognition of atomic bomb survivors and their struggle for disarmament is a much-needed acknowledgment of their suffering. However, it starkly contrasts with the violent legacy left in the wake of American militarism. As historian Howard Zinn aptly noted, “There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.” This hypocrisy is a bitter pill to swallow.

From the moment the atomic bombs were unleashed on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. charted a course of violence disguised as liberation. The justifications offered for these appalling acts—claims of saving lives and hastening the end of the war—fall flat against the backdrop of the unimaginable horror inflicted upon over 200,000 civilians who perished instantly, along with countless others condemned to a lifetime of suffering due to radiation. This was not merely a tactical manoeuvre but a calculated show of force, a warning shot that set the tone for future military interventions.

Fast forward to 2003: the catastrophic invasion of Iraq, propelled by lies about weapons of mass destruction, resulted in the toppling of a sovereign government and unleashed chaos that claimed hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. As former President Jimmy Carter lamented, “We have been a nation at war for most of my life… we cannot be a great nation unless we find a way to make peace.” Yet, under the guise of peace and democracy, the West perpetuates a cycle of violence, destabilising entire regions while masquerading as a force for good. This raises serious questions about war crimes and the concept of victor’s justice, which allows aggressors to evade accountability while innocent victims are left to bear the brunt of their actions.

The hypocrisy does not stop here. While it is commendable to award the Nobel Peace Prize to organisations like Nihon Hidankyo, it also highlights a glaring contradiction: how can we celebrate peace in a world where military intervention and aggression are the status quo? The Nobel Peace Prize has often been wielded as a political tool, awarded to figures who have aligned with Western interests rather than genuinely promoting peace. A prime example is Barack Obama, who received the prize in 2009 yet continued military operations in countries like Libya, where his administration’s actions led to significant loss of life and ongoing chaos. This bitter irony exemplifies how the prize can mask war crimes under the guise of “victor’s justice.” Similarly, other laureates have been selected based on their roles in furthering Western agendas, raising serious doubts about the integrity and intent behind such awards.

As former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated, “The use of force is an act of last resort. War is the ultimate failure of humanity.” Yet here we are, with the U.S. maintaining over 900 military bases worldwide, spending more on defence than the next ten countries combined, and continuing to pursue a foreign policy rooted in militarism rather than diplomacy.

With the recent election of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba in Japan, who took office on 1 October 2024, we are witnessing an alarming resurgence of militarism, Asian NATO, in Asia. Ishiba’s administration appears eager to forge military alliances that echo a dark history many believed had been left behind. Rather than nurturing collaboration and peace, these initiatives threaten to reignite old animosities and escalate tensions with neighbouring countries. In light of these disturbing realities, it is imperative to confront the uncomfortable truths regarding the role of the United States and its allies in fostering conflict instead of peace. The time has come for a critical evaluation of policies that have perpetuated suffering and instability on a global scale.

This year Nobel Peace Prize awarded must not only recognise the voices of war’s victims but also serve as a clarion call for deeper introspection and action. The global community must demand genuine peace-building efforts that prioritise diplomacy over militarism, humanitarian needs over strategic interests, and an end to the cycle of hypocrisy that allows powerful nations to act with impunity while the innocent continue to suffer.

The Persistent Grip of Dynastic Rule in Asia

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 16 Oct 2024 03:53:00 +0000

The psychological dynamics of dependency on political families, coupled with the dangers of corruption and authoritarianism, present significant challenges to the establishment of genuine democratic governance.

by Luxman Aravind

Dynastic politics in Asia extend beyond mere familial legacies; they constitute a profound issue that shapes the socio-political realities of numerous nations. Prominent families such as the Bandaranaikes, the Rajapaksas, the Senanayakes, the Gunawardenas, the Jayawardenes, all in Sri Lanka, the Marcoses in the Philippines, the Nehrus and Gandhis in India, the Kims in North Korea, and the Hasinas and Zias in Bangladesh have significantly influenced their countries’ political trajectories. While these families have maintained their hold on power through various means, they have also experienced significant declines, often precipitated by economic mismanagement, public discontent, and civil unrest. This decline does not negate the potential for resurgence; rather, it highlights the cyclical nature of dynastic politics that can easily re-emerge if societies do not actively work to prevent it.

The philosophical discourse surrounding governance provides valuable insights into this phenomenon. Plato, in The Republic, argued that the ideal state should be governed by philosopher-kings, individuals best equipped to lead due to their wisdom and virtue. This perspective raises important questions about the consequences of dynastic rule, which often prioritises family lineage over merit. As Plato stated, “The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” This highlights the danger of complacency in the face of corruption, particularly in societies that accept dynastic authority as a norm.

The psychological dynamics underpinning the acceptance of dynastic rule are complex and deeply rooted. Citizens frequently develop a cognitive bias that equates well-known family names with stability and national identity. In India, the Nehru-Gandhi family’s historical significance and its connection to independence leader Jawaharlal Nehru have enabled them to present themselves as embodiments of continuity amid political turmoil. Similarly, in Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League party leverage the legacy of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, portraying themselves as custodians of his vision for the country. As Aristotle pointed out in Politics, when governance becomes synonymous with family loyalty, it often results in tyranny: “What is a tyrant? He is one who, disregarding the common good, acts solely in the interests of his own family.” This psychological dependency creates an environment in which voters are often hesitant to question the capabilities or integrity of these dynasties, leading to unchallenged authority.

The hold of dynastic families can result in significant corruption and abuse of power. For instance, the Marcos regime in the Philippines was notorious for its corrupt practices and human rights violations, serving as a critical example of how dynastic politics can devolve into authoritarianism. Despite the Marcos family’s notorious past, Bongbong Marcos’s rise to the presidency in 2022 exemplifies the challenges societies face in dismantling the influence of entrenched political families. The use of historical revisionism to craft a narrative of a “golden era” during the Marcos regime is a strategic move that exploits collective memory and nostalgia, complicating efforts to hold dynasties accountable.

Sheikh Hasina’s tenure in Bangladesh is similarly illustrative. While she has managed to consolidate power, her administration has been marred by allegations of authoritarianism and violence against political opponents. Notably, she was compelled to resign in this year amid one of the bloodiest political crises in the country’s history. The violent clashes between opposition parties and law enforcement were a stark reminder of the potential for upheaval when governance becomes synonymous with repression and familial loyalty. Confucius taught that “The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones,” reminding us that meaningful change requires persistent effort. Despite Hasina’s loss of power, the legacy of violence and political turmoil remains a significant factor influencing public perception. As economic challenges persist, the potential for renewed civil unrest looms, with extremism on the rise. External parties, such as the U.S., have greater manipulations than ever before, suggesting that the political environment remains volatile and deeply divided.

The risks associated with the resurgence of dynastic politics are significant. Political families possess not only substantial resources but also the capacity to manipulate public sentiment, further entrenching their influence. Nietzsche remarked, “He who has a why to live can bear almost any how,” emphasising the necessity of purpose and agency in overcoming oppression. The psychological conditioning of the populace can lead to a form of learned helplessness, where citizens perceive political change as unattainable. This mindset is often reinforced by controlled media narratives that glorify dynastic leaders while vilifying their opponents, thus stifling dissent and normalising the notion that governance is a familial enterprise rather than a civic duty.

To prevent the re-emergence of dynastic rule, societies must actively dismantle the frameworks that support such power structures. A crucial initial step is to eliminate the perception of public governance as a profitable business. Robust reforms should be implemented to ensure transparency and accountability in political financing. Establishing stringent regulations around campaign financing and lobbying can significantly diminish the influence of wealth in politics, fostering an environment where political power is not viewed as a commodity. As Machiavelli cautioned in The Prince, appearances can be deceptive, and leaders must maintain the facade of virtue while being prepared to act immorally if necessary.

Encouraging grassroots movements and civic engagement is equally vital. Citizens should be motivated to participate actively in the political process—not merely as voters but as informed advocates for change. Initiatives focusing on civic education can empower individuals to understand their rights and responsibilities, fostering a more politically engaged populace. In India, for instance, various non-governmental organisations work to educate citizens about the importance of accountability in governance, highlighting the impact of corruption and the necessity for demanding more from political leaders.

Moreover, a culture of non-violent resistance is essential for challenging entrenched power. Historical precedents, such as the people power movements that challenged dictatorships in the Philippines, serve as powerful reminders of the efficacy of collective action. Non-violent movements can galvanise public support without resorting to chaos, enabling citizens to confront dynastic rule effectively and advocate for more equitable governance. The teachings of Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita resonate here, as he emphasises the moral obligation to fight against injustice. As he asserts, “When righteousness declines and unrighteousness rises, I manifest myself,” suggesting that change can occur when citizens act to restore justice.

Strengthening the independence of the judiciary and law enforcement is another crucial strategy for preventing the resurgence of dynastic politics. An impartial judicial system is essential for holding political elites accountable, ensuring that laws apply equally to all citizens, including those from powerful families. Countries with strong institutions, such as Singapore, provide compelling examples of how integrity in governance can contribute to political stability.

It is crucial to recognise that eradicating corruption is not only vital for dismantling the foundations of dynastic politics, but that psychological dependency and feelings of insecurity towards ‘newly-formed’ or immature political entities often leave the public vulnerable to deceptive, short-sighted propaganda. These factors are instrumental in sustaining and even revitalising dynastic politics in a new guise. When governance is viewed merely as a vehicle for personal gain, the integrity of the political system is profoundly undermined.

Lex Esto And Tikkun Olam: Some Thoughts For The New Government

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 11 Oct 2024 03:56:00 +0000

A key component of a democratic society is the active involvement of citizens in governance.

by Ruwantissa Abeyratne

Lex esto, the pillars stand,

Old stones on broken land.

Yet where the cracks of time appear,

Tikkun Olam whispers near.

Now that there are palpable signs of proactive and progressive initial measures being taken by the new government in Sri Lanka, here are some thoughts.

The Latin phrase “lex esto,” meaning “let the law stand,” represents a fundamental idea in governance, suggesting that laws should be stable, serving as the pillars of justice, order, and societal cohesion. In any functional government, laws are indispensable, as they provide the necessary structure and enforce norms. However, in countries where corruption and incompetence have taken root, existing laws often become ineffective or are manipulated to maintain corrupt practices. When a new government takes charge with the intention of transforming such a broken system, it faces the dual challenge of upholding laws that support justice and societal welfare while introducing new legal frameworks to eliminate corruption and increase efficiency.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake

Closely linked to this is the concept of Tikkun Olam, a Hebrew term, which translates to “repairing the world” or “healing the world.” Rooted in Jewish tradition, it encompasses the idea of improving the world through individual actions, social justice initiatives, and shared responsibility. It calls on both individuals and communities to work towards creating a more ethical, just, and compassionate society, emphasizing the importance of addressing inequalities and showing care for others.

Historically, in Jewish thought, Tikkun Olam was linked to religious, moral, and legal duties, particularly focused on following Jewish laws to “fix” the world. However, its meaning has since expanded into a universal call for justice and humanitarian work, extending beyond religious obligations to include a broader ethical and societal scope.

Today, Tikkun Olam drives social justice efforts, charitable initiatives, environmental sustainability, and other endeavors aimed at reducing suffering and promoting equality. Whether it is through advocating for human rights, supporting disadvantaged groups, or protecting the planet, it reflects the ongoing effort to create a fairer, more peaceful, and balanced world for everyone.

In light of this, the principle of lex esto offers guidance on how to balance the application of established laws with the need for new legislation aimed at reforming a dysfunctional system. This balance is crucial for creating a governance model that is just, transparent, and efficient. Though laws provide essential continuity, they must also be flexible enough to evolve in response to changing moral and social imperatives. This is particularly relevant when considering Tikkun Olam, which is focused on repairing the world, which calls for the active pursuit of justice and restoration of a broken society.

The Rule of Law

The rule of law lies at the heart of any democracy, functioning as the primary tool through which justice is administered, disputes are resolved, and individual rights are upheld. When a new government rises to power, especially after a regime notorious for corruption and incompetence, it must prioritize reestablishing faith in the rule of law. This task begins by reaffirming the principle of lex esto, ensuring that the legal frameworks that promote justice, equality, and public welfare are respected and properly enforced.

A corrupt system does not necessarily reflect inadequacies in the laws themselves but, more often, failures in their application. Laws might be selectively enforced, ignored, or even weaponized. Therefore, a new government must identify which laws have been undermined and restore their integrity. This could involve strengthening judicial independence, eliminating officials complicit in corruption, and ensuring that laws are enforced without political influence.

To truly uphold lex esto in a corrupt system, the new government must focus on enforcing laws that had previously been disregarded or misused. These laws often include those that deal with transparency, public accountability, anti-corruption efforts, and the protection of human rights. For instance, many countries with corrupt systems already have anti-corruption laws in place, but their enforcement is often undermined by political interference. A newly established government must demonstrate its dedication to the rule of law by ensuring that these laws are applied consistently and effectively.

Part of this effort involves creating independent bodies like anti-corruption agencies and watchdog organizations with the power to investigate and prosecute officials, regardless of their status or political connections. Strengthening whistleblower protections is also critical, as it encourages individuals to expose corruption without fear of retribution. Additionally, ensuring transparency in public contracts by subjecting them to public scrutiny can help curb corruption, which frequently thrives in the opaque processes of large-scale government procurement.

In many corrupt systems, laws designed to protect vulnerable communities—such as those focused on human rights and social justice—are often ignored or undermined. A government serious about reform must recommit to enforcing these laws, ensuring they protect minorities, promote access to essential services like healthcare and education, and guarantee fair labor practices. This demonstrates the government’s commitment to justice not just for the elite but for all its citizens.

While lex esto emphasizes the importance of upholding existing laws, it is also essential to recognize that some laws may be outdated or insufficient, and in some cases, even complicit in maintaining corrupt practices. In such instances, the government must introduce new laws that reflect values such as transparency, accountability, and social justice.

Accountability

One of the most effective ways to prevent corruption and inefficiency is to embed accountability within the legal system. Public officials, including both elected representatives and civil servants, should be held accountable for their actions through laws that mandate regular financial disclosures, for instance. Such disclosures ensure transparency by helping to detect conflicts of interest. New laws could also impose term limits on elected officials to prevent the concentration of power and create a system that encourages fresh leadership and perspectives.

Regular audits of government agencies and officials should be made mandatory by law, with consequences for those found engaging in corrupt practices or underperforming in their duties. Similarly, the government should strengthen protections for whistleblowers and journalists. In corrupt systems, those who expose wrongdoing often face harassment, violence, or even death. New legislation could include anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) measures to protect individuals from being silenced by powerful entities. Whistleblower protections might also include mechanisms for anonymous reporting to protect those who might otherwise face retaliation.

My Take

A key component of a democratic society is the active involvement of citizens in governance. A new government should focus on laws that encourage citizen participation, offering mechanisms like referendums and initiatives that allow people to propose or repeal laws directly. This enhances the democratic process and gives citizens a more active role in shaping their government. Open data laws could also be implemented, requiring the government to publish detailed information about its activities, budgets, and decision-making processes in an accessible format. Such transparency allows civil society organizations and citizens to monitor government operations effectively.

In the effort to reform a corrupt and incompetent system, lex esto must be considered alongside the recognition that laws, though enduring, are not fixed. As societies evolve, so too must their legal systems, particularly when these systems have been compromised or fail to address new challenges. The Jewish principle of Tikkun Olam, meaning “repairing the world,” encourages the active pursuit of justice and the restoration of broken systems, including legal ones.

For a new government, embracing Tikkun Olam means recognizing when existing laws fail to serve the public good and taking steps to amend or replace them. This could involve revisiting colonial-era laws that may still exist in post-colonial states, perpetuating injustice or inequality. Reforming such laws to reflect modern values of dignity and equality is crucial. Additionally, new laws must address economic systems that disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor. Economic justice can be pursued by promoting fair wages and creating opportunities for all citizens to prosper.

While lex esto emphasizes stability, the legal system must also be dynamic, evolving to remain a tool for justice and fairness. Periodic reviews of laws should be mandated to ensure they still serve their intended purposes and are not being misused. The lawmaking process must also be inclusive, involving marginalized communities to ensure new laws reflect the needs and aspirations of all citizens.

Ultimately, lex esto serves as a guiding principle for a government seeking to transform a corrupt system, providing a foundation for order and justice. However, as this analysis shows, the principle must be balanced with the need for reform and adaptation, as well as the pursuit of justice through Tikkun Olam. By rigorously applying existing laws that promote transparency, accountability, and social justice while enacting new ones to address deficiencies, the new government can begin the process of transforming a broken system into one that serves the common good.

Dr. Abeyratne teaches aerospace law at McGill University. Among the numerous books he has published are Air Navigation Law (2012) and Aviation Safety Law and Regulation (to be published in 2023). He is a former Senior Legal Counsel at the International Civil Aviation Organization.

They Now Know What Real Bombing Means

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 11 Oct 2024 03:54:00 +0000

You might ask: what about the rockets fired on Israel by Hezbollah and Iran? Are they not part of the brutality of war?

by Vijay Prashad

On 1 October, US Representative Michael McCaul, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee issued a statement urging US President Joe Biden to ‘place maximum pressure on Iran and its proxies, rather than pressure Israel for a ceasefire. We need to expedite arms transfers to Israel that this administration has delayed for months, including 2,000-pound bombs, to ensure Israel has all the tools to deter these threats’. McCaul’s belligerent call came days after Israel used over eighty US-made 2,000-pound bombs and other munitions on 27 September, to strike a residential neighbourhood in Beirut and kill – amongst hundreds of civilians – Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (1960–2024), the leader of Hezbollah. In this one bombing raid, Israel dropped more of these ‘bunker buster’ bombs than the United States military used in its 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Ayman Baalbaki (Lebanon), Untitled, 2020.

A former US aviator, Commander Graham Scarbro of the US Navy, reviewed the evidence of the Israeli strikes for the US Naval Institute. In a very revealing article, Scarbro notes that Israel ‘seems to have taken a notably different approach to collateral damage than US forces over the past few decades’. While the US has never demonstrated any significant concern for civilian casualties or ‘collateral damage’, it is worth noting that even senior US military officials have raised their eyebrows at the degree of Israel’s disregard for human life. Israel’s military, Scarbro writes, ‘seems to have a higher threshold for collateral damage… meaning they strike even when chances are higher for civilian casualties’.

Despite Washington’s knowledge that the Israelis have been bombing Gaza, and now Lebanon, with complete abandon – and even after the International Court of Justice ruled that it is ‘plausible’ that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza – the United States has continued to arm the Israelis with deadly weaponry. On 10 October 2023, Biden said, ‘We’re surging additional military assistance’, which has amounted to a record-level of at least $17.9 billion during the past year of genocide. In March 2024, The Washington Post reported that the US had ‘quietly approved and delivered more than 100 separate foreign military sales to Israel that amounted to ‘thousands of precision-guided munitions, small-diameter bombs, bunker busters, small arms and other lethal aid’. These ‘small’ sales fell below the minimum threshold under US law which requires the president to approach Congress for approval (which anyway would not have been denied). These sales amounted to the transfer of at least 14,000 of the 2,000 pound MK-84 bombs and 6,500 500-pound bombs that Israel has used in both Gaza and Lebanon.

In Gaza, the Israelis have routinely used the 2,000-pound bombs to strike areas populated by civilians – who had been told to take refuge at these locations by the Israeli authorities themselves. ‘In the first two weeks of the war’, The New York Times reported, ‘roughly 90 percent of the munitions Israel dropped in Gaza were satellite-guided bombs of 1,000 or 2,000 pounds’. In March 2024, US Senator Bernie Sanders tweeted, ‘The US cannot beg Netanyahu to stop bombing civilians one day and the next send him thousands more 2,000 lb. bombs that can level entire city blocks. This is obscene’. A 2016 report by Action on Armed Violence offered the following assessment of these weapons of mass destruction:

These are extremely powerful bombs, with a large destructive capacity when used in populated areas. They can blow apart buildings and kill and injure people hundreds of metres from the point of detonation. The fragmentation pattern and range of a 2,000lb MK 84 bomb are difficult to predict, but it is generally said that this weapon has a ‘lethal radius’ (i.e. the distance in which it is likely to kill people in the vicinity) of up to 360m. The blast waves of such a weapon can create a great concussive effect; a 2,000lb bomb can be expected to cause severe injury and damage as far as 800 metres from the point of impact.

I have several times walked around the Beirut neighbourhood of Haret Hreik in Dahiyeh, which was struck by Israeli bombs in the attack on the Hezbollah leadership. This is a highly congested area, with barely a few metres between high-rise residential buildings. To strike a complex of these buildings with over eighty of these powerful bombs cannot be called ‘precise’. Israel’s bombing of Beirut mirrors its harsh attacks on Gaza and symbolises the disdain for human life that characterises both Israeli and US warfare. On 23 September, Israel bombarded Lebanon at a rate of more than one airstrike per minute. In days, Israel’s ‘intense airstrikes’ displaced over a million people, a fifth of the entire population of Lebanon.

The first bomb to ever fall from an aircraft was a Haasen hand grenade (Denmark) dropped by Lieutenant Giulio Cavotti of the Italian Air Force on 1 November 1911 onto the town of Tagiura, near Tripoli, Libya. A hundred years later, in a grotesque commemoration of sorts, French and US aircraft bombed Libya once more as part of their war to overthrow the government of Muammar Gaddafi. The ferocity of aerial bombing was understood from the very outset, as Sven Lindqvist documented in his book, A History of Bombing (2003). In March 1924, UK Squadron Leader Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris authored a report (later expunged) about his bombings in Iraq and the ‘real’ meaning of aerial bombardment:

Where the Arab and Kurd had just begun to realise that if they could stand a little noise, they could stand bombing… they now know what real bombing means, in casualties and damage; they now know that within forty-five minutes a full-sized village … can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured by four or five machines which offer them no real target, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no effective means of escape.

A hundred years later, these words of ‘Bomber’ Harris aptly describe the kind of ruthlessness inflicted on both Palestine and Lebanon.

You might ask: what about the rockets fired on Israel by Hezbollah and Iran? Are they not part of the brutality of war? Certainly, these are part of the ugliness of warfare, but an easy parallel cannot be drawn. Iran’s ballistic missiles followed Israel’s attack on an Iranian diplomatic facility in Syria (April 2024), the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran following the inauguration of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian (July 2024), the assassination of Nasrallah in Beirut (September 2024), and the killing of several Iranian military officials. Significantly, whereas Israel has launched countless strikes targeting civilians, medical personnel, journalists, and aid workers, Iran’s missiles exclusively targeted Israeli military and intelligence facilities and not civilian areas. Hezbollah, meanwhile, targeted Israel’s Ramat David Airbase, east of Haifa, in September 2024. Neither Iran nor Hezbollah have fired their munitions into congested neighbourhoods of Israeli cities. Since 8 October 2023, Israeli airstrikes against Lebanon have far outnumbered Hezbollah’s strikes against Israel. Before the current wave of hostilities, by 10 September, Israel had killed 137 Lebanese civilians and displaced hundreds of thousands of Lebanese from their homes; meanwhile, Hezbollah rockets had by then killed 14 Israeli civilians, with their rockets leading to the evacuation of 63,000 Israeli civilians. There has been not only a quantitative difference in the number of strikes and death toll, but a qualitative difference in the use of violence. Violence that is directed largely at military targets, is permissible in certain conditions under international law; violence that is indiscriminate, such as when massive bombs are used against civilians, violates the laws of war.

Etel Adnan (1925–2021), a Lebanese poet and artist, grew up in Beirut after her parents fled the collapsing Ottoman Empire that became modern day Turkey. She dug deep into the soil of conflict and pain, the ingredients for her poetry. Her voice resonated from the balcony of her apartment in Ashrafieh, the ‘little mountain’, from where she could see the ships come in and out of the port. When Etel Adnan died, the novelist Elias Khoury (1948–2024), who himself died just before Beirut was again bombarded, wrote that he mourned a woman who would not die, but he feared for his city which was suffering alone. Here are a few extracts from Etel’s poem, ‘Beirut, 1982’, to remind us that we are as angry as a storm.

I never believed

that vengeance

would be a tree

growing in my garden

Trees grow in all directions

So do Palestinians:

uprooted

and unlike butterflies

wingless,

earthbound,

heavy with love

for their borders and their

misery,

no people can go forever behind

bars

or under the rain.

…

We shall never cry with tears

but with blood.

…

It is not on cemeteries that we shall

plant grain

nor in the palm of my hand

We are as angry as a storm.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter. He is an editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including The Darker Nations and The Poorer Nations. His latest books are Struggle Makes Us Human: Learning from Movements for Socialism and (with Noam Chomsky) The Withdrawal: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Fragility of U.S. Power.

The Absurdity of Political Stamps: Why We Must Reject This Wasteful Spectacle

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 11 Oct 2024 03:52:00 +0000

It is unlikely that either Harini or Vijitha personally demanded this homage, but they bear responsibility for the unnecessary indulgence.

Editorial

In a baffling and tone-deaf move, the Sri Lanka Postal Department has chosen to waste public money by releasing two commemorative stamps featuring the faces of Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya and Minister Vijitha Herath. Supposedly issued to mark World Postal Day, this absurd gesture is nothing more than a glaring example of political vanity, wrapped in the guise of a ‘celebration’. This is not about honouring public service but idolising politicians who, as of yet, have no claim to any such commemoration. Both individuals are yet to face the public mandate in the upcoming elections, yet their faces are being plastered on stamps as if they have already secured their places in history.

Supposedly issued to mark World Postal Day, this absurd gesture is nothing more than a glaring example of political vanity, wrapped in the guise of a ‘celebration’.

As a Turkish proverb warns, “An empty can makes the most noise,” and this act exemplifies the emptiness at the heart of our political culture. Harini Amarasuriya, who climbed to power not through the people’s vote but by virtue of her inclusion on a national list, is now the Prime Minister thanks to sheer political luck. Vijitha Herath, on the other hand, has climbed the political ladder with more effort, but neither can justify their sudden elevation to the status of national symbols. The people of Sri Lanka did not elect these two to be immortalised on stamps, and yet, here we are—wasting public funds on their undeserved glorification.

An African proverb says, “A man who uses force is afraid of reasoning,” and this sentiment is reflected in this ridiculous display of political idolatry. It is unlikely that either Harini or Vijitha personally demanded this homage, but they bear responsibility for the unnecessary indulgence. The Postal Department, funded by the public, has spent resources celebrating politicians, rather than paying tribute to the hardworking postal workers who keep the country’s communication infrastructure running. This misuse of public money is not just offensive, it is emblematic of the disconnect between our leaders and the people they claim to serve.

Let us not fool ourselves: this is not a mere harmless gesture. This is part of a larger culture in which political figures are exalted at the expense of the people they represent. As the Sri Lankan economy struggles, and the average citizen battles inflation and daily hardship, we are being asked to celebrate two politicians who have done nothing of note yet, and who are still to be tested in the upcoming elections. This is not leadership. This is political theatre of the most cynical kind.

Around the world, we have seen the dangers of political worship. History teaches us that leaders who seek to elevate themselves prematurely often do so to distract from their inadequacies. Whether it was Mao Zedong’s cult of personality in China or the grotesque self-adulation of Nicolae Ceaușescu in Romania, such spectacles are designed to create an illusion of power and inevitability. Our own history is no exception. We have witnessed certain personalities who were desperately lacking in intelligence but highly adept at body politics. They desired to have every national construction named after them and even went so far as to print national currency with absurd political photographs to demonstrate their power. Today, the people have decided their path, and nature has determined their fates. Therefore, the new government must not follow this disastrous and shameless path. We must resist the temptation to glorify politicians who have not earned it and instead hold our leaders to the standard of service they are meant to provide.

This act is an insult to democracy. The upcoming elections are the true test of Harini and Vijitha’s worth, not a stamp issued by a government department. A leader must earn respect, not demand it through superficial tokens. As an Asian proverb wisely puts it, “The emperor is far away, but the mountains are high.” Our leaders sit atop their pedestals, removed from the realities of ordinary life, and this distance is only widened by absurd acts of self-glorification like this.

Harini Amarasuriya seems to be desperately attempting to emulate the political characteristics of the late Mangala Samaraweera, a respected and seasoned leader who tragically passed away due to Covid-19. However, what she fails to grasp is that Mangala’s rise was shaped by a complex set of circumstances that she neither understands nor shares. Mangala was a political heavyweight, deeply rooted in Sri Lankan politics, and known for his ability to navigate its treacherous waters with both charisma and a genuine commitment to progress. His legacy is not just about the words he spoke or the symbolic gestures he made—it was built on years of hard-earned political maturity, international diplomacy, and a fearless stance on issues others avoided.

Harini, on the other hand, has arrived at the helm through sheer luck, without the battle-hardened experience Mangala had. By mimicking his rhetoric and borrowing certain actions, she reveals her political immaturity and her failure to understand that leadership is not about copying popular figures but about forging one’s own path. Mangala’s legacy offers lessons to be studied and learned from, not parroted by those who have yet to face the crucible of public judgment. Her shallow imitation only highlights her unpreparedness for the role, and it is an insult to a leader whose political vision was forged in a vastly different—and far more challenging—era. The stamps drama is but a simple incident, and there are more yet to come.

The cost of printing these stamps, borne by the people of Sri Lanka, is just the beginning. The true price we pay is the erosion of accountability in our political system. When politicians are celebrated without having proven their worth, when they are placed on pedestals before they have earned the people’s trust, it sets a dangerous precedent. It normalises a culture where power is worshipped rather than questioned. As we approach the elections on 14 November, this incident should serve as a warning to voters: do not be swayed by these shallow attempts at creating political icons. Instead, demand real leadership, real service, and real accountability.

The Postal Department’s decision to print these stamps is a wasteful, reckless act that exemplifies the very worst of our political culture. The people of Sri Lanka deserve better than this farce. It is time to reject the hollow glorification of politicians who have not yet earned the people’s mandate. As the African saying goes, “When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you.” It is not Harini and Vijitha’s faces that need to be stamped onto our future, but rather the realisation that democracy thrives only when we resist the urge to idolise and instead hold our leaders to account.

In two months, the people will finally have their say. Let these stamps serve not as souvenirs, but as symbols of what we must reject: the blind worship of politicians, the misuse of public money, and the hollow spectacle of leadership.

Che Guevara: The Revolutionary Legacy in a Globalised World

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 11 Oct 2024 03:50:00 +0000

Che’s concept of the “New Man”, a human being motivated by ethical and social consciousness rather than personal wealth, speaks to the broader ethical dimension of his revolutionary vision.

Editorial

On October 9, 1967, Che Guevara, the iconic revolutionary, was executed in the jungles of Bolivia. More than five decades later, his legacy continues to resonate worldwide, inspiring movements for social justice, anti-imperialism, and global solidarity. In Colombo, Sri Lanka, a special event was held to commemorate this significant anniversary, where the Cuban Ambassador to Sri Lanka participated in paying tribute to Che Guevara. The event was not just a remembrance of a man, but of an enduring symbol of resistance, celebrated by those who still look to his life and ideas for inspiration.

At a commemorative event in Colombo honouring Che Guevara’s legacy, Cuban Ambassador to Sri Lanka Andrés Marcelo Garrido and Comrade Tilvin Silva, General Secretary of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), paid tribute to the revolutionary icon [ Photo: Sri Lanka Guardian]

Che Guevara’s connection to Sri Lanka is rooted in the lesser-known chapter of his life when, during his travels as a revolutionary diplomat, he briefly visited the island. During his stay, he planted a rubber tree in one of the suburbs of Colombo, symbolising his solidarity with the agricultural workers of the region. This gesture, however small, reflected his broader vision of internationalism, where the struggles of the oppressed were interconnected, transcending national borders. The commemoration event in Colombo, held more than fifty years after his death, reaffirmed that Che’s ideals remain relevant, not only in Cuba but across the world.

Che Guevara’s life was defined by a fierce commitment to revolutionary change. Born Ernesto Guevara de la Serna in Argentina in 1928, Che’s early years were marked by a restless curiosity and a growing awareness of social inequality. His transformation from a medical student to a revolutionary leader was shaped by his travels across Latin America, where he witnessed firsthand the devastating effects of poverty, exploitation, and imperialism. These experiences, particularly his time in Guatemala and the overthrow of its democratically elected government by the United States, solidified his belief that true change could not be achieved through peaceful means but required armed struggle.

This conviction led him to Cuba, where, alongside Fidel Castro, Che played a central role in the Cuban Revolution. His dedication, bravery, and strategic acumen earned him a place not only as a military leader but as a symbol of the revolution itself. Che’s involvement in overthrowing the U.S.-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959 marked the beginning of a new chapter in his life, as he became one of the key figures in shaping Cuba’s post-revolutionary society.

But Che was never content to remain confined to one revolution. His vision was global. After the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, he turned his attention to other parts of the world, particularly Latin America and Africa, where he believed the fight against imperialism and for socialism needed to continue. His theory of guerrilla warfare, focalism (or foco theory), which argued that small groups of committed revolutionaries could spark broader uprisings, became a blueprint for revolutionary movements across the globe. Yet, as with many aspects of Che’s life, his theories were not without their challenges and failures.

Che’s attempts to ignite revolutions beyond Cuba, first in the Congo and later in Bolivia, ended in failure, with his final campaign in Bolivia leading to his capture and execution. On October 9, 1967, after being captured by the Bolivian army, Che was executed with the tacit support of the CIA. His death, however, did not mark the end of his influence. If anything, it cemented his status as a martyr for the cause of revolution. His life and ideas continued to inspire movements around the world, from Latin American guerrillas to African liberation fighters and even to the student uprisings of Europe in the 1960s.

The revolutionary fervour that Che embodied was driven not only by his experiences in Latin America but by a deep ideological commitment to Marxism. He believed that the global capitalist system, spearheaded by U.S. imperialism, was responsible for the exploitation of the masses in the Global South. His disdain for imperialism was not limited to a critique of foreign policy but extended to a condemnation of the economic structures that allowed powerful nations to plunder the resources and labour of weaker ones. Che’s vision for the world was one in which nations would be free from foreign domination, and the wealth of the world would be shared equitably among all people.

This anti-imperialist worldview remains deeply relevant today. The global inequality that Che Guevara railed against has not only persisted but, in many ways, intensified. Globalisation, which has brought unprecedented economic growth to some parts of the world, has also deepened the divide between rich and poor, with multinational corporations wielding more power than many nation-states. The environmental destruction that accompanies this unchecked pursuit of profit is yet another issue that resonates with Che’s critique of capitalism. While he may not have been an environmentalist in the contemporary sense, his opposition to overconsumption and materialism aligns closely with the concerns of today’s climate activists.

In addition to his role as a guerrilla leader, Che Guevara was also a profound thinker and writer. His works, particularly on guerrilla warfare and socialist economics, continue to be studied by those seeking alternatives to the capitalist system. Che’s economic vision for Cuba, where he served as Minister of Industries, was one that sought to reject the material incentives of capitalism and replace them with moral incentives—where the motivation to work and contribute to society came not from individual gain but from a sense of collective responsibility. This vision, while utopian and difficult to implement in practice, reflected Che’s deep belief in the potential for human beings to transcend selfishness and greed in pursuit of a more just and equitable society.

Che’s concept of the “New Man”, a human being motivated by ethical and social consciousness rather than personal wealth, speaks to the broader ethical dimension of his revolutionary vision. In a world increasingly dominated by consumerism and individualism, Che’s call for a society rooted in solidarity, self-sacrifice, and social responsibility is a reminder of the need for alternative values. His critique of capitalist values, which prioritise profit over people and material gain over collective well-being, continues to resonate in an age where social alienation, economic inequality, and environmental degradation have reached unprecedented levels.

However, Che Guevara’s legacy is not without controversy. His involvement in the Cuban government’s execution of counter-revolutionaries and his advocacy of armed struggle raise difficult questions about the morality of revolutionary violence. To some, Che’s willingness to use violence to achieve his political goals is a reminder of the dangers of ideological extremism. To others, his actions were justified within the context of the brutal realities of imperialism and capitalist oppression. These contradictions make Che a complex figure whose life and ideas defy easy categorisation.

In Sri Lanka, where his brief visit and the symbolic planting of a rubber tree are remembered with pride, Che Guevara’s legacy serves as a reminder of the global reach of his revolutionary vision. The struggles of the Sri Lankan people, particularly in the context of colonialism and post-colonial economic challenges, resonate with Che’s broader critique of imperialism and his call for global solidarity among oppressed nations. The tribute paid to him in Colombo, with the participation of the Cuban ambassador, highlights the enduring relevance of Che’s ideals in a world that continues to grapple with many of the same issues he fought against.

On this anniversary of his death, it is clear that Che Guevara’s influence has not waned. His face remains a ubiquitous symbol of rebellion and defiance, but more importantly, his ideas continue to inspire those who seek a world free from exploitation and oppression. Whether one agrees with his methods or not, there is no denying the profound impact he has had on global struggles for justice. In a time of growing inequality, environmental crisis, and resurgent imperialism, Che’s critique of capitalism and his vision of a more just and equitable world remain as relevant as ever. As the world commemorates the anniversary of his death, it is worth reflecting not only on the man but on the ideals he stood for—and the enduring fight for a better world.

Debunking the Myth of a Deep State in Sri Lanka

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 11 Oct 2024 03:48:00 +0000

The idea of a deep state in Sri Lanka lacks substantive evidence and stands contradicted by our historical experience. The 1962 coup attempt remains the last significant indication of military insurrection, one that was decisively quelled.

by Luxman Aravind

The concept of a “deep state”—a clandestine network of military and intelligence officials acting beyond the constraints of democratic oversight—has gained significant traction in political discourse globally, particularly in Sri Lanka. In the wake of the tragic Easter Sunday attacks in 2019, the invocation of this notion has intensified, raising questions about the legitimacy and authority of our political institutions. However, a rigorous examination of Sri Lanka’s historical context reveals that the idea of a deep state is little more than a myth, perpetuated by critics seemingly intent on undermining the integrity of our democratic framework.

File Illustration [ Shutterstock]

The term “deep state” originated in Turkey, embodied by “Derin Devlet,” which signified the clandestine alliances among military, bureaucratic, and elite interests that exerted influence from the shadows to manipulate political outcomes. This concept arose amidst the power struggles of the late Ottoman Empire and persisted after its dissolution in 1923. In the modern Turkish Republic, military and elite factions wielded substantial power, often distorting the political landscape to serve their own interests. The full extent of this influence was unveiled through military coups and political scandals, cementing the perception of a deep state embedded within the fabric of Turkish governance.

Globally, the notion proliferated during the Cold War, particularly in the United States and Europe, as suspicions grew regarding the roles of intelligence agencies and military power. President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s admonition in his 1961 farewell address regarding the military-industrial complex articulated anxieties over unelected officials potentially wielding more power than those elected to govern. He warned, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.” This concern intensified following the Watergate scandal, which exposed covert operations and manipulations by intelligence agencies. The waning of the Cold War saw the concept of the deep state intertwined with the rise of populism and disillusionment with established political elites, as exemplified by figures like Donald Trump, who framed their political battles as noble struggles against insidious conspiracies that threatened democratic governance.

In contemporary discourse, “deep state” has morphed to encompass a spectrum of interpretations, from legitimate critiques of bureaucratic influence to conspiracy theories positing secretive cabals orchestrating government actions. While it is undeniable that elements within governments—such as bureaucrats and intelligence officials—can exert disproportionate influence, invoking the term “deep state” can risk undermining vital institutions and exacerbating societal polarization. This discourse resonates across various contexts, including Pakistan and Latin America, where military and intelligence services often hold considerable power. As societies navigate the complexities of governance and accountability, it becomes essential to distinguish between genuine concerns regarding state influence and baseless conspiracy theories, fostering an informed public dialogue that safeguards the integrity of democratic processes.

The historical narrative of Sri Lanka illustrates a consistent theme: military and other institutions have operated under the purview of political leadership, particularly since independence in 1948. The last notable attempt at military insurrection—the 1962 coup d’état—serves as a pivotal moment in our political history. Orchestrated by disenchanted military and police officers feeling marginalised in a rapidly evolving political landscape, the coup was swiftly thwarted by Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike and her government. This decisive response not only preserved democratic governance but also communicated a resolute message: any attempt to undermine civilian authority would be met with unwavering resistance.

In the decades following this thwarted coup, Sri Lanka confronted myriad challenges, including a protracted civil war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), lasting nearly three decades and culminating in 2009. Despite the complex intricacies surrounding this conflict, one fundamental truth remains clear: throughout this turbulent period, the military consistently operated under civilian control. The leadership of the armed forces remained steadfastly aligned with the directives of elected officials, exemplifying a commitment to democratic principles even amid extraordinary adversity.

Critics who cite the military’s expanded role during the civil war as evidence of a deep state conveniently overlook the context of national security and the existential threats posed by the LTTE. The prioritisation of military action was not indicative of a shadowy agenda but rather a necessary response to a perilous situation that demanded unity and a robust defensive strategy. The military’s actions were framed within a constitutional mandate, executed under the supervision and guidance of democratically elected leadership.

The spectre of a deep state has resurfaced in discussions surrounding the Easter Sunday attacks, where some hastily ascribe blame to alleged elements within the state apparatus. This narrative not only undermines accountability for the actual perpetrators—Islamic extremists—but also diverts attention from the substantial strides Sri Lanka has made towards transparency and effective governance. In the aftermath of the attacks, our security forces worked diligently to dismantle networks of extremism, reaffirming their loyalty to the nation and its democratic institutions.

The persistence of conspiracy theories surrounding these events reveals a deeper political malaise: a refusal to engage with the complexities of terrorism and extremism, coupled with an unfounded inclination to simplify blame. Rather than fostering constructive discourse about the necessity for enhanced security measures or social cohesion, critics cling to the allure of conspiracies, ultimately undermining the legitimate institutions that safeguard our democracy. As Karl Popper astutely remarked, “We must be able to reject theories which cannot be tested and that are not refutable by any conceivable event.” In this light, the rejection of unfounded conspiracy theories is essential in upholding the integrity of our democratic discourse.

Why so much ‘Kunu Harupa’ (Filthy Language)? Protect Children from Abuse

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:35:00 +0000

There was a time that Sri Lanka very clearly distinguished between adult material and open material. That time the main transmission was limited to films.

by Laksiri Fernando

Sri Lanka celebrated the International Children’s Day on 1 October with several events in Colombo with the participation of the new Prime Minister, Dr Harini Amarasuriya, and other officials related to children’s issues. Both the PM and the new President, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, issued commendable statements related to broad children’s issues, but the two issues that I am raising here now were not directly addressed.

Representational Photo: School kids in Sri Lanka [ Photo © Javier Saint Jean/ Unsplash ]

One is the so much of Kunu Harupa (filthy language) used by the social media and online program personnel, and the other is the lack of a proper distinction made between ‘adults only’ material and other open material.

Let me take first the President’s press release for the day. It begins with the statement “The future belongs to our children.” Therefore, “Let’s dedicate ourselves to creating a better world for them.” Immediately thereafter, the statement identified eight significant challenges, focusing mainly on socio-economic issues, and commendably reports on “risks associated with substance abuse and technology misuse.” But these were not explained. What do we mean by ‘substance abuse’? I would consider some peoples’ intentional use of ‘Kunu Harupa’ as substance abuse.

The ‘technological misuse’ is similarly related to the breakdown of limitations between adult material and child material that is one I am focusing on today. It is not merely the use of technology, which is the culprit, but its misuse. This is high in urban areas than in villages. For this situation not only the teachers or the Ministry that is responsible, but also parents.

There is of course a broader mission advocated in the President’s statement for children. One of them is to ‘free them from the ‘pressures of exam-focused education.’ Whether this is desirable, or practical would depend on the way this is implemented.

In the Prime Minister’s official statement, she opted to cover both the Children’s and Elders’ Day, a little bit confusing the two. Apparently, it was her first statement as the PM. Her speech at the ceremony held at the Nagananda International Buddhist University (NIBU) was much focused and motivational for school students as children. She argued that “Investing in our future means investing in our children.” This appears to be a common vision of the government which appeared both in the President’s and PM’s statements. In her written statement, the PM emphasized “We are committed to providing a high-quality, public education system that benefits every child in Sri Lanka.”

Most relevant to my theme was her statement that “Moreover, we strongly oppose all forms of physical and mental abuse directed at children, particularly within educational institutions.” Only qualification that I can make is that this is not limited to the educational institutions. Family, extended family, neighborhood, apparent friends can be culprits of child abuse. This I have experienced during my own childhood although I managed to resist them strongly and successfully.

I am referring to early 1950s where the situation was quite under control, in my opinion, compared to the present conditions. Under the present conditions, the children’s minds are largely abused before they are physically or sexually abused. During the Children’s Day celebrations at the NIBU, the DIG Renuka Jayasundara who oversees Child and Women Abuse, Investigation and Prevention Division of the Police mentioned that annually they have been receiving over 10,000 child abuse cases in recent times. This is apparently only a small part of the cases and most of the cases are not reported.

There was a time that Sri Lanka very clearly distinguished between adult material and open material. That time the main transmission was limited to films. The National Films Corporation used to do this job. Cinemas even used this as a propaganda measure to promote attendance. When a film was advertised as ‘adults only,’ obviously many people (men) used to flock around cinema halls! After the appearance of TV, teledramas and YouTube, this control has gone haywire. No one appears to do this job.

Let me give you one recent example. I was extremely surprised to see, otherwise socially responsible Swarnewahini, broadcasting the teledrama named ‘Reconditioned Kella’ (Girl) without categorizing it as ‘Adults Only.’ It is not merely Urani Noshika’s acting which is adults only, but almost the whole story. It begins with the father of the Kella (Dinu) dies with heart attack and a new doctor (Kusal) in the hospital comes across Dinu during the treatment process.

What transpires thereafter is how gender relations or sexuality work in the village, true or not in Sri Lanka’s village areas. It is not only Bappa (father’s younger brother) who is after the girl, but even several ‘grandfathers.’ There were indications at the beginning that Dinu was apprehensive about her own father for similar or other reasons. To me all these are adult material. Swarnewahini broadcasted the 15th episode yesterday (5th Saturday), when Dinu is ready to go for modeling after coming to Colombo with the doctor and her mother.

It is not only ‘Reconditioned Kella’ that is adults only, to my view, among various teledramas, TV shows, movies and other YouTube programs, but so many others. The teledrama called ‘Take Care’ also could be ‘adults only’ considering some of the episodes and the story in general. ‘National Film Corporation’ or similar institution should better take measure to categorize them ‘Adults Only’ (AO) or require ‘Parents Guidance’ (PG). In Australia, when I open the TV for programs or films, those are categorized as AO or PG. At present, the Australian government is also keen in brining legislation to prevent children (under 14 or 15) from having access to social media completely. This is to prevent their minds getting distorted from various unwarranted material and programs. Violence is also a major concern, even common to Sri Lanka.

Mix up between adult and children performance and dialogues is also controversial in Sri Lanka. For example, Peshala Manoj’s jokes particularly in Champion Star Unlimited program are extremely humorous and enjoyable. But one obvious weakness appears to be his sometimes uttering of adult jokes when children are present or taking even children into the jocular performances. Some of the utterances are also filthy.

During our school days at Moratuwa, we were prevented from even uttering ‘Umba Bang.’ This was the case at the University of Peradeniya (1964-68) although some of our friends used to utter that vocabulary. My roommate was so decent, if he was a bit angry with someone, he addressed the person as ‘Yushmatha’ instead of ‘Umba.’ However, it seems that the things have changed a lot today. Perhaps the politicians are the main culprits. In Parliament and in political rallies and platforms, many politicians utter hate speech using sometimes vulgar language. This is also common in some websites.

Sudanththa Thilaksiri who runs a website as ‘Sudaa Creations’ is far extreme in this regard. His behavior is also aggressive or violent when he reports on political events even in the presence of police. A similar website is Sudanthaka Vlog. A strange coincidence is not only their similar names, but their apparent support to AKD and Malimava. There are so many other similar ‘kunu harupa’ programs. Wishwaya Dakimu is another one even without a person appearing on the show. This is against AKD and the government. Gune Aiyage Kamare is also the same.

Although I am not able to write regularly to Colombo Telegraph, Sri Lanka Guardian or other printed newspapers these days, what I wish to point out to the President and the Prime Minister is the paramount importance of protecting children from adult material and Kunu Harupa (filthy) language spreading in the country.

Laksiri Fernando, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, is a specialist on human rights having completed his PhD on the subject at the University of Sydney. His major books include, Human Rights, Politics and States in Burma, Cambodia and Sri Lanka; A Political Science Approach to Human Rights; Academic Freedom 1990; Police Civil Relations for Good Governance; Sri Lanka’s Ethnic Conflict in the Global Context among others. Having served as Dean, Faculty of Graduate Studies (FGS Colombo), he is a promoter of post graduate studies.

Spy Chief Ousted: Political Sabotage Over National Security?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:33:00 +0000

How Conspiracy Theories and YouTube Stars Are Influencing Public Opinion and Undermining Sri Lanka’s National Security Framework

by Luxman Aravind

The forced discontinuation of Major General Tuvan Suresh Sallay’s service extension as Director General of the State Intelligence Service (SIS), Sri Lanka’s leading intelligence agency, marks a grave moment of fragility in the country’s state decisions—driven by mounting pressure from politically motivated groups fuelled by conspiracy theories. This is not just the sudden conclusion of a decorated officer’s career but an alarming indication of how easily the country’s most critical institutions can be sabotaged by political opportunism, social media misinformation, and baseless conspiracy theories. Sallay’s premature departure was, we believe, not voluntary; it was the result of sustained pressure from political actors and social groups who know little about national security but are determined to control it.

During the 29th-anniversary commemoration of the Military Intelligence Corps (MIC), held in January 2022 at the MIC Headquarters in Karandeniya, Ambalangoda, Maj. Gen. Sallay, the then Colonel Commandant of the MIC, paid tribute to the fallen MIC War Heroes. [ File Photo: Sri Lanka Army]

Major General Sallay’s career is a proof to the dedication and sacrifice demanded of Sri Lanka’s intelligence officers. A highly decorated officer, he joined the Sri Lankan Army in the 1980s, rising swiftly through the ranks. His expertise in intelligence became invaluable during the country’s civil war, where he played a pivotal role in dismantling the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), one of the most feared terrorist organisations of the time. Sallay was not only instrumental in neutralising key figures within the LTTE but also in securing the defection of Karuna Amman and other senior figures to mainstream politics, thus weakening the group’s internal cohesion.

Among Sallay’s most notable achievements was his role in capturing and rehabilitating Shanmugam Kumaran Tharmalingam, also known as Selvarasa Pathmanathan or KP. KP, who had become the leader of the LTTE after Velupillai Prabhakaran’s death, was the organisation’s chief procurer of arms. He ran a sophisticated global network engaged in weapons procurement, logistics, and money laundering to finance the LTTE’s bloody insurgency. KP had been one of the most elusive figures in international terrorism, and Sallay’s role in bringing him into custody and facilitating his transition into civilian life is nothing short of extraordinary. In the aftermath of the war, KP even went on to establish social initiatives, such as orphanages for war-affected children in the North and East, a project Sallay encouraged as part of his broader mission of national reconciliation.

Yet, despite his decades of service to the country, Sallay has been repeatedly subjected to unsubstantiated allegations. In 2015, during the tenure of President Maithripala Sirisena, Sallay was targeted by a political campaign fuelled by conspiracy theories. Those very political factions, which were in opposition at the time, are now back in power, and rather than honour their earlier praise of Sallay’s contributions, they have fallen back on the same tactics of victimisation and character assassination. The so-called civil society groups and self-appointed social media pundits—who believe they hold the expertise to dictate national security policy—are the very forces that have undermined Sallay’s position and, by extension, the security of the nation itself.

Major General Sallay’s speech at the United Nations High-Level Conference on Counter-Terrorism in June 2023 offers a sobering perspective on the challenges of modern security. “Terrorism has emerged as one of the greatest challenges to international security in the 21st century, undermining stability, affecting social trust, and disrupting peace across the globe,” Sallay warned, pointing to the growing dangers of extremism, organised crime, and the misuse of digital platforms to radicalise populations. His words carry particular weight when viewed in the context of Sri Lanka’s own struggles with terrorism and the tragic 2019 Easter Sunday attacks, which claimed the lives of 269 innocent civilians. This tragic episode highlights a critical point: political meddling in intelligence matters has deadly consequences.

It is deeply ironic that those who shout loudest about the so-called “deep state” are the ones doing the most damage to the state’s ability to function. The idea of a deep state in Sri Lanka is a complete fabrication—an invention designed to discredit the military, intelligence, and law enforcement institutions that have kept the country stable and secure. If there truly were a “deep state” powerful enough to influence the political landscape, Sri Lanka would not be the vibrant, functioning democracy it is today. Instead, it is the very people who denounce this phantom deep state—YouTube stars, religious leaders, and so-called civil society groups—who are manipulating public opinion and pressuring political leaders to make decisions that undermine the country’s security.

These informal actors, who operate outside the bounds of any formal institution, are the real threat to Sri Lanka’s future. They have weaponised social media to defame individuals like Sallay and have taken it upon themselves to prosecute those they disagree with in the court of public opinion. Their influence over political leadership is deeply troubling. The dismissal of an officer as decorated as Sallay is a clear indication that these forces have far too much power, and their meddling in national security matters is pushing the country toward a dangerous precipice.

Sallay himself articulated the broader dangers of allowing political and social forces to dictate security policy during his UN speech: “We are fast approaching a time when these rising threats may create an even more volatile environment.” The global rise of extremism, the growing influence of organised crime, and the misuse of technology to destabilise governments are all threats that no nation can confront alone. But instead of bolstering its intelligence capabilities and fostering greater cooperation with international allies, Sri Lanka is tearing down its own security infrastructure from within.

If Sri Lanka continues down this path, the country will once again pay a high price for allowing political opportunism to trump sound intelligence practices. The removal of Major General Sallay is not just a loss for the intelligence community; it is a loss for the nation. His integrity, professionalism, and unrelenting commitment to his country’s safety should have made him an indispensable asset in these perilous times. Instead, he has been discarded by a government more interested in pandering to its loudest critics than in safeguarding its people.

Sri Lanka is at a critical and risky turning point.. It can either continue to allow conspiracy theories, social media pundits, and political opportunists to shape its security policies, or it can return to a course of professionalism and integrity. The dismissal of Sallay is a symptom of a larger disease—a growing disregard for the expertise and sacrifice required to keep the nation safe. It is imperative that the country realises the gravity of this moment and works to reverse the damage before it is too late.

In the end, the legacy of Major General Tuvan Suresh Sallay will not be defined by the unproven allegations or the unjust end to his service. It will be defined by the countless lives he protected and the vital role he played in defending Sri Lanka from the threats that lurk both within and beyond its borders. His contributions to the defeat of the LTTE and his efforts in international counter-terrorism cooperation will not be forgotten. What will echo through history is how, once again, Sri Lanka’s immature politicians, intoxicated by their unchecked power, sacrificed one of their finest for fleeting political gain, leaving the nation vulnerable to imminent dangers. This political shortsightedness has revealed the insidious agendas of conspiracy theorists and exposed the failures of those who have neglected their sacred responsibilities. It is a sobering reminder of how the pursuit of power, when divorced from integrity and foresight, can result in the disintegration of a society.

‘Soldiers of Christ’– The bizarre world of Christian Zionism

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:31:00 +0000

The Scofield Bible is the world’s largest-selling Bible version. Over the subsequent decades this “interpretation” of the Bible made it a Christian imperative to support creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This bizarre tie between USA Christian Evangelicals and Israel sheds light on Washington backing, especially by Republicans, for the Netanyahu Israeli military actions against Palestinian Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and Iran.

by F. William Engdahl

Praying for Armageddon

It was impossible to grasp how such a drastic foreign policy shift could occur between the time of Eisenhower in the 1950’s and George W. Bush after 2001, without one little-known element: understanding the political power base that a faction of the US establishment created together with the Israeli right-wing Likud Zionist lobby that had built up around the American Christian Born-Again right-wing.

The most striking and paradoxical feature of the Likud-USA strategic alliance was the fanatical backing for the militant expansion of the State of Israel from the side of various nominally Christian denominations and organizations in the United States. Behind the religious façade, was a well-organized political machine directly tied to Tel Aviv and Washington power centers.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945), 32nd President of the USA (right) and Winston Churchill (1874-1965), British Prime Minister, meeting in Quebec in 1944. (Colorised black and white print). (Photo by Print Collector/Getty Images)

In 1977, the Israeli intelligence services, under the direction of Dr. Jonah Malachy, quietly began to conduct a detailed profile of all the many different Christian organizations in the United States, and profiled them according to how they regarded the existence of Israel, in terms of their Christian belief.

The Israeli researchers found their most fertile soil in the Southern US states, which traditionally had been based on cotton or tobacco slavery, and whose white elites had been shaped over generations on a belief in white superiority over blacks, or other whites such as Catholics or Jews. These white protestants, whether Southern Baptist, Methodist or one of the growing number of Born Again charismatic sects proliferating in the South after World War II, were ripe for manipulation on the subject of Israel. All it needed was some fine adjustments of their theology.

Ironically, many of these Born-Again Christians were anti-semitic, anti-Jewish. Their new Israeli “friends” knew this well, and cynically proceeded to forge a strategic alliance in which the Israeli or pro-Israeli think-tanks they created in Washington would be supported in their Israel political agenda by the growing army of “Born Again” Christian voters.

Under ordinary conditions, the American Christian Zionists would have remained one of many tiny sects in America calling themselves Christian. The events surrounding the shocking terror attacks of September 11, 2001 and the demagogic manipulation of those events by a nominally Born-Again President George W. Bush, dramatically changed that and made Christian Zionism a far more serious political force within US politics, more so because most of its members were white, upper middle-class Republicans. They had built a highly organized national political machine and had leveraged their influence to an almost decisive factor, often deciding whether a given candidate for national office would win or lose.

As Jewish scholar Barbara Tuchman documented in her famous account of British Zionism, Bible and Sword, the roots of Christian Zionism went back to the British Imperial ideology, in which certain very prominent British establishment figures including Lord Palmerston, Lords Balfour and Shaftesbury saw support for a Jewish home in Palestine as part of a manufactured or synthetic ideology in which, bizarrely, they claimed the British people to be the ‘Chosen People’, to be the ‘Lost Tribe of Israel.’ It gave British Imperialism a powerful pseudo-religious justification.

The Roots of Christian Zionism

John Nelson Darby, a renegade Irish priest who died in 1881, had created the idea of ‘the Rapture” as he founded a new brand of Christian Zionism. In his vision, special people whom he called ‘Born-Again Christians” would be taken up to Heaven before the second coming of Christ—their ‘rapture.’ Darby also put Israel at the heart of his strange new theology, claiming that an actual Jewish state of Israel would become the ‘central instrument for God to fulfil his plans for a final Battle of Armageddon.’

Darby travelled widely in the United States and won adherents to his bizarre sect, creating the beginnings of American Christian Zionism, including the famous US Bible interpreters Cyrus Scofield, Dwight L. Moody, who founded the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, and the 1930’s preacher, Billy Sunday. In 1909 Scofield published the Scofield Bible, with footnotes interpreting Bible passages according to the Darby Christian Zionist world. By the end of the 20th Century that Scofield Bible was the basis for all US Christian Zionist and Born Again teaching in what was becoming the fastest growing sector of the Christian faith in the USA.

Christian Zionists like Reverend Jerry Falwell and Rev. Pat Robertson could be traced back to a project of British Secret Intelligence services and the British establishment. That project was designed to use the Zion ideology to advance Empire and power in North America. American Christian Zionists in the period of American Empire in the 1950’s and later, merely adopted this ideology and gave it an American name. It was the religious counterpart of the Anglo-American “Special Relation” which had been built up between Winston Churchill and Roosevelt during World War II.

The peculiar Christians, who called themselves Christian Zionists, and who formed the core activist voter base of the Bush Presidency in 2000, preached a doctrine quite different from the traditional Christian Gospel of love for fellow men and tolerance. They preached hate and war, a militant brand of belief that had more similarity with the 12th Century bloody Crusades than with modern Christianity. The soil it bred in was the bitter race hatreds of the post-Civil War US South held by generations of whites against blacks and against Catholics and, ironically, against Jews as ‘inferior’ races. Their religion was the religion of a coming Final Battle of Armageddon, of a Rapture in which the elect would be swept up to Heaven while the ‘infidels’ would die in mutual slaughter.

A Palestinian Christian described them: “Christian Zionism, on the political level, is crassly simplistic and unabashedly biased. It is supportive of the most extreme political positions of right wing Israelis, and deliberately ignores political realities, and the interest, or even existence, of other groups, including Palestinian Christians. In its total bias, it also ignores the requirements of international law, ethical principles, violations of human rights, and the requirements of simple justice.”

In the months following the US September 11 attacks, Rev. Pat Robertson openly preached that Muslims were “worse than the Nazis.” On his Christian Broadcasting Network in November 2002, Robertson declared, “Adolf Hitler was bad, but what the Muslims want to do to the Jews is worse.” Robertson, claiming to be a man of God, refused to retract the hate speech despite much public outcry. In other comments, he compared the Qu’ran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf as a blueprint for world domination. They were hardly constructive words to heal the wounds of a nation still in shock after September 11, or to win friends abroad.

In an October 2002 CBS ‘Sixty Minutes’ TV broadcast, Robertson’s Christian Zion friend, Rev. Jerry Falwell declared, “I think Muhammed was a terrorist, a violent man, a man of war…” Bush’s War on Terror was being defined by his Christian Zionist base as a holy “Crusade” against Islam, Sir Bernard Lewis’s Clash of Civilization, adapted by Harvard Professor Samuel Huntington in a famous 1993 Foreign Affairs article as the “clash of civilizations.” It asserted that following the collapse of the Soviet Union the main conflict in the world would be between opposing cultural and religious identities.

In his 1993 article, Huntington had argued, “World politics is entering a new phase, in which the great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of international conflict will be cultural. Civilizations–the highest cultural groupings of people–are differentiated from each other by religion, history, language and tradition. These divisions are deep and increasing in importance. From Yugoslavia to the Middle East to Central Asia, the fault lines of civilizations are the battle lines of the future. In this emerging era of cultural conflict the United States must forge alliances with similar cultures and spread its values wherever possible. With alien civilizations the West must be accommodating if possible, but confrontational if necessary.”

The new “enemy image” was being defined by the US establishment as early as 1993, only months after the collapse of the Soviet Union, as Islam. It was the prelude to the 2001 War on Terrorism, a thinly-disguised War on Islam.

Echoing the anti-Islam fervor of Falwell and Robertson, Rev. Franklin Graham, son of the famous Christian evangelist and Bush family friend, Reverend Billy Graham, declared after September 11 that Islam was “a very evil and wicked religion.” The large US Southern Baptist Convention’s former President, Jerry Vines, called the Prophet Mohammed the most vile names imaginable. It was all about stirring Americans in a time of fear into hate against the Islamic world, in order to rev up Bush’s War on Terror.

Graham, who controlled an organization known as the Samaritan Purse, was a close religious adviser to George W. Bush. In 2003 Graham got permission from the US occupation authorities to bring his Evangelical anti-Islam form of Christianity into Iraq to win “converts” to his fanatical brand of Christianity.

According to author Grace Halsell, Christian Zionists believed that “every act taken by Israel is orchestrated by God, and should be condoned, supported, and even praised by the rest of us.” It was all beginning to sound far too much like a new Holy Crusade against more than one billion followers of the Islamic faith.

The Likud’s Christian Zionists in America

After the Likud government of Menachim Begin realized in 1977 that President Carter was intent on human rights for Palestinians, including statehood, Likud and their neo-conservative allies in the US began to look for support outside the liberal Democratic Party of Carter. The Israeli Labour Party had supported land-for-peace, but the Likud backed a Greater Israel, which would include the occupied Palestinian territories of West Bank and Gaza, which they call Judea and Samaria. The pro-Likud neo-conservatives around Irving Kristol, Richard Perle and others left the Democratic Party at that time to found what they later would call ‘Neo-conservativism’, and to build their base inside the Republican Party of Ronald Reagan, a man who was very much influenced by the Christian Right himself.

In 1978, Prof. Yona Malachy of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, published his major research profile on American evangelical Protestant groups, titled, ‘American Fundamentalism and Israel: The Relation of Fundamentalist Churches to Zionism and the State of Israel.’

Malachy discovered numerous American Protestant sects, most in the rural Southern states, who linked their theology to the State of Israel, through a strange, literal interpretation of the Bible. Their ministers were typically trained at the Moody Bible Institute or, often, the ultra-conservative Dallas Theological Seminary of John Walvoord in Texas. They diligently read the 1909 Scofield Reference Bible, whose footnotes ‘explain’ the Bible texts in their arcane prophecy terms.

Leaders of the Likud and select Israeli religious leaders, went to work after 1977 to bring the most charismatic, and often most corruptible, leaders of these US Christian groups to Israel, where they developed direct links between Likud leaders and the Christian Right in the US.

Menachim Begin began to attend Washington ‘prayer breakfasts for Israel’ with fundamentalist ministers including Rev. Jerry Falwell, then head of Moral Majority, and Rev. Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition and the Christian Broadcasting Network. When another Jew pointed out that these Christians were anti-semitic, Begin reportedly snapped back to the effect he did not care so long as they supported Israel in the US.

Conservative Christian support for Israel is based largely on various prophecies about the Jewish people during the ‘end-times’ which they believe are found throughout the Bible. They are viewed as playing a major role in ‘TEOTWAWKI’ (the end of the world as we know it).

Representative of some most often-cited Bible passages used by the Christian Zionists to support their end-times prophesy are the following passages taken from the King James Version of the Bible:

* Zechariah 12:3: ‘And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.’ The implication is that the Jewish people would return to Israel; this happened in 1948 with the creation of the State of Israel. Later, all the nations of the earth will gather against her. Some believe that we are near that point today. But God will make Jerusalem an immovable rock. This came to pass when the Camp David peace talks found that the future status of Jerusalem became a major stumbling block.

* Zechariah 12:9-10: ‘And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” Many conservative Christians interpret this as saying that Jews will be humbled, will accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, and become Christians.

* Revelation 4:4: ‘And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.” Conservative Christians view the 24 as being composed of the patriarchs of each of the twelve ancient tribes of Israel, along with the twelve apostles. To emphasize their unity, they are gathered in a circle around the throne of God. All are believed to be Christians at that time.

* Revelation 7:3-4: ‘Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.’

* Revelation 14:1-4: ‘And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads….These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the first fruits unto God and to the Lamb.’

The passages seemed to imply that 144,000 Jewish virgins — their gender was not mentioned — would convert to Christianity and be ‘sealed.’ They would have God’s name written on their forehead, and be followers of the Lamb — i.e. of Christ. Some Christians interpreted these phrases as implying that 144,000 Jews will convert to Christianity and then attempt to convert the remaining Jews in Israel.

The vast majority of American and international Christian churches were highly critical of the theological claims of the Christian Zionists. The Middle East Council of Churches, representing Oriental and Eastern Christian churches in the Middle East, charged that the Christian Zionists, “aggressively imposed an aberrant expression of the Christian faith, and an erroneous interpretation of the Bible which is subservient to the political agenda of the modern State of Israel.” Christian Zionism, they said, “rejects the movement of Christian unity and inter-religious understanding.”

Rapture for God’s ‘Chosen People’

Christian Zionism existed even before Theodor Herzl founded modern Jewish Zionism in the late 1800’s. Certain Protestant dissenter sects during the English Civil War in the 1600’s believed themselves to be God’s Chosen People, the ‘lost tribe of Israel.’

A number of prominent British Imperialists were Christian Zionists, including Lord Palmerston, Lord Shaftesbury, Lloyd George and Lord Balfour, who issued the 1917 Balfour Declaration giving Jews a homeland in British-protected Palestine. For them, the ideology justified British Imperialism as a religious mission.

Christian Zionists argued that the Land of Israel had been given to the Jewish people by God, and that in order for the Second Coming of Christ to occur, all Jews must return to Israel for a Final Battle of Armageddon, a kind of a Manichean slug-out between the Forces of Good and the Forces of Evil.

They admitted it would destroy the Earth. They even called it the End Times. But the ‘good news’ for Christian Zionists was that they, the true believers, would be suddenly caught up into Heaven in a holy ‘Rapture.’ They would be spared the messy aspects of a nuclear holocaust at Armageddon.

Their theology was a dangerous brew of Manichean absolutist black and white—good versus evil—which saw the alliance of the USA, under their direction, of course, and Israel, battling the forces of ‘evil’, especially Islam and Muslims. It was reminiscent of the statements by George W. Bush in the wake of September 11, 2001 where he declared, “either you’re with America or you are against us,” as he spoke of a “new Crusade.”

Ironically, behind their pro-Israel facade Christian Zionists like Falwell and Robertson cynically used their links to Israeli Jews to push an anti-semitic agenda of their own.

Uri Avnery, leader of the Israeli peace group Gush Shalom, describing the theology of these supposed Christian friends of Israel, stated, ‘According to its theological beliefs the Jews must congregate in Palestine and establish a Jewish state on all its territory so as to make the Second Coming of Jesus Christ possible…The evangelists don’t like to dwell openly on what comes next: before the coming (of the Messiah), the Jews must convert to Christianity. Those who don’t will perish in a gigantic holocaust in the battle of Armageddon. This is basically an anti-semitic teaching…,’ namely that Jews who remain true to their Old Testament beliefs will all be killed.

This organized lobby of the Christian ‘Born Again’ ultra-conservative voters was credited with securing the re-election of George W. Bush in 2004 and Donald Trump in 2016. A study undertaken of American voting blocs in 2003 found that the Christian Right comprised the largest active social movement in the United States and the largest voting bloc within George Bush’s Republican Party.

On October 19, 2004 Dr. Daniel Akin, President of the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary issued an Open Letter signed by 72 Evangelical leaders urging the American people to ‘use Biblical values in their selection of candidates.’ The letter cited gay marriage, stem-cell research, and Democrats’ alleged defense of ‘terrorists’ as reasons to vote Republican not Democrat. The letter was signed by the most prominent members of the Christian Zion right backing Bush and backing Sharon as, ‘fulfilment of Bible prophesy.’

The crucial new element in the emergence of the Christian Right in recent years in America was their focus on organized political influence, not merely on religious life-style and church piety.

In 1979, Reverend Jerry Falwell, a member of the Committee on National Policy and a Christian Zionist leading figure, launched an organisation known as the Moral Majority with the aim ‘to mobilize the Christian church on behalf of moral and social issues and to encourage participation by people of faith in the political process.’

The Moral Majority quickly became a household name. Through its charismatic public leader, Falwell, the organisation mobilised thousands of churches and millions of registered voters to form a Christian political bloc, and what came to be known as the Christian-Right.

Falwell was soon sought out by aspiring politicians hungry for his approval and potential votes. Falwell in turn, rated candidates on their acceptability on issues considered of priority to the Israeli Likud, with whom he had in the meantime become quite close. Falwell flew across the US in a luxurious private jet given him as a gift on a trip to Israel by Likud Prime Minister Menachim Begin.

It was also around this same time, in the late 1970’s that the formal Christian-Right was established and certain Israeli organisations began understanding that an alliance with the Christian Zionists in the US could bolster their image and prominence on the international level through a stronger influence in US politics.

The fervency of the Christian-Right towards support of the State of Israel, coupled with its strong American presence, captured the attention of Israeli interest groups. Though aware of their diametric opposite social and religious views, some Israeli political organisations saw an alliance with the Christian Zionists as a crucial element in promoting a positive image of Israel in US politics and among the American mainstream.

Jewish-American leaders were initially opposed to an alliance with the Christian-Right and perceived the movement as a possible adversary. However, when the formal establishment of the Christian-Right solidified this movement as an influential political bloc in the US, these feelings of trepidation were soon dissipated and various Israeli groups recognised that an alliance with this bloc would be advantageous to their political interests.

These US religious spokesmen claimed they had been told by God such things as whether the US should go to war against Iraq. In an article, ‘Should We Go To War With Iraq?’ Roy A. Reinhold on February 5, 2003 wrote of his discussion with his God: ‘Many people wonder whether this coming showdown with Iraq, by the USA and a coalition of nations, is worthwhile and whether it is the right thing to do.

‘On Saturday, February 1, 2003, I lifted my hands to begin praying and the Lord spoke to me… I wanted to know whether the God the Father’s direction was to go to war or not go to war. ..The Lord said, ‘I am saying to go to war with Iraq’.

Reinhold added, ‘I put the above on my message boards and what everyone wanted to know was, ‘what is God’s reason(s) for going to war with Iraq?’ That question hadn’t occurred to me, because I personally just accepted God’s direction.’

The raw hate ideology of the US Christian Zionists, claiming personal support from God, represented a dangerous shift in US politics to the extreme right. Some circles around Bush and his trusted political advisor, Karl Rove, sought to create out of American fears and uncertainty regarding such issues as gay marriage, a core theocratic state, just opposite what most Americans wished. Rove had been the architect of Bush’s relationship with the Christian Zionist fundamentalist Right when Bush was still Texas Governor.

Rebuilding the Temple of Salomon

The US Christian Zionists and their allies have a long-term agenda which well might trigger a new World War. Some neo-conservatives say that war began on September 11, 2001. They refer to it as World War IV, claiming that the Cold War was actually World War III.

These circles wanted to destroy the holy Islamic Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem and rebuild the Biblical Temple of Salomon on the site, where they would resume animal sacrifice. Michael Ledeen, a close adviser to the Bush White House, was at the heart of the dangerous lunacy.

During the 1970’s the face of Christian practice in the United States was transformed by new ‘television-evangelists’ with names such as Rev. Jerry Falwell with his organization, the Moral Majority or Rev. Pat Robertson with his tax-exempt TV ‘700 Club’ broadcasts, which bring his organization hundreds of millions dollars a year, or author Hal Lindsey, with his ‘Rapture’ series of fiction novels about the end of civilization around a final Battle of Armageddon in what is today’s Israel. These Born Again Christians, as they called themselves, began to dominate the US airwaves. It later emerged that many of these, including the anti-Islamic Falwell and Robertson, were intimately linked to the Israeli right-wing. Some also had ties to the CIA.

Grace Halsell, who died on 2000, grew up on the same Texas soil where the Christian fundamentalism that captured George W. Bush, was dominant. She went on to become a White House speech writer in the 1960’s, and later a courageous journalist who devoted her last years to exposing the dangerous ties of Falwell and other so-called born-again Christians to the Israeli right-wing.

During the 1980’s, to understand the Born-Again phenomenon then sweeping across the United States, Halsell went to Israel with a group led by Falwell. As she described it, ‘My inquiry led me to ask why does a Christian such as Jerry Falwell pray for the end of the world? Must we totally destroy this world in order to usher in a ‘new heaven and a new earth?’ Her conclusions were alarming.

She found that Falwell had become a close friend of the Israeli right, when she went on their joint Bible tour of Israel and the Holy Land in 1983. Halsell noted the curious fact that, rather than concentrate the tour on Christian sites in the Holy Land, Falwell’s tour was entirely run by Israeli guides and toured only Israeli sites of interest. Moreover, Falwell was given as a gift by the Israeli government his personal Lear private jet to make his US tours.

Falwell and other US Christian Born Again fundamentalists said they believed that it was ‘God’s Will’ that Israel move to establish its greater domination in the Mideast, as that will bring the world that much closer to the Biblical ‘Day of Final Judgment,’ when the ‘true-believers’ will be saved in a mystical ‘rapture,’ being swept up to Heaven, as the unsaved perish in the final Battle of Armageddon. That battle, according to Falwell and his friends, will pit Jews against Muslims.

Halsell interviewed a number of Americans actively involved in trying to ‘speed up’ the final Armageddon. One was Terry Risenhoover, an Oklahoma oilman and Born Again Christian Zionist, who was close to the Reagan White House. Risenhoover was open about his views. He financed people in Israel and elsewhere who would rebuild the destroyed Temple of Salomon, the so-called Third Temple, on one of Islam’s most holy sites, the Al-Aqsa Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem.

In 1985 Risenhoover was chairman of the American Forum for Jewish-Christian Cooperation, along with its director, Doug Krieger and American Rabbi David Ben-Ami, a close friend of Israel’s Ariel Sharon. Risenhoover was also, chairman of the Jerusalem Temple Foundation, ‘whose sole purpose is the rebuilding of a temple on the site of the present Muslim shrine.’

Risenhoover selected Stanley Goldfoot as his International Secretary of Temple Mount Foundation. Goldfoot was a former member of the terrorist Stern Gang, denounced by Ben-Gurion as Nazis. Goldfoot was the person, according to Israeli newspaper, Davar, who placed the bomb in Jerusalem’s King David Hotel in July 1946 which killed some 100 British citizens.

Risenhoover boasted to Halsell in an interview on Goldfoot that, ‘He’s a very solid, legitimate terrorist. He has the qualifications for clearing a site for the Temple.’ A Goldfoot deputy, Yisrael Meida, told Halsell, ‘He who controls the Temple Mount, controls Jerusalem. Who controls Jerusalem, controls the Land of Israel,’ a new twist on the famous dictum of geopolitics of Sir Halford MacKinder: “Who controls Central Europe controls the Heartland; who controls the Heartland (Russia etc) controls the World Island; who controls the World Island controls the world…”

In 1998, an Israeli newsletter posted on the Voice of Temple Mount website, announced that its goal is the ‘liberation’ of the Muslim shrines around Al Aqsa, and the building of a Jewish Temple on the site. ‘Now the time is ripe for the Temple to be rebuilt,’ they announced. They then called on the Israeli government to ‘end the pagan (sic) Islamic occupation’ of lands where the mosque stands. ‘The building of the Third Temple is near,’ they proclaimed in 1998.

Hal Lindsey, in The Late Great Planet Earth, wrote that ‘there remains but one more event to completely set the stage for Israel’s part in the last great act of her historical drama. This is to rebuild the ancient Temple of worship upon its old site. There is only one place that this Temple can be built, according to the Law of Moses. This is upon Mt. Moriah. It is there that the two previous Temples were built.’

Grace Halsell added, ‘Fanatics who belong to what the vast majority of Christians and Jews might term a crazy minority – and numbering no more than five percent of the total Israeli population – are nevertheless capable of destroying Islam’s most holy shrine in Jerusalem, an act that could easily trigger a worldwide war involving Russia and the United States.’

This fanatical Pre-millennial Dispensationalism had come to dominate American Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, especially through the influence of Dallas Theological Seminary and the Moody Bible Institute. The movement had grown in popularity within evangelical circles, particularly in America and especially since 1967, coinciding with the Arab-Israel Six Day War and a few years later in 1970 with the publication of Hal Lindsey’s ‘The Late Great Planet Earth.’

Crucial to their reading of biblical prophecy, drawn principally from Daniel, Zechariah and the Book of Revelation, was the assertion that the Jewish Temple will be rebuilt on the Temple Mount as a precursor to the Lord returning to restore the Kingdom of Israel centred on Jerusalem. This pivotal event was also seen as the trigger for the start of the War of Armageddon.

These beliefs soured relations between Moslem Arabs and Christian Arabs perpetuating fears of a revived Western military adventurism dating back to the Crusades.

The 1967 watershed war

The 1967 Six Day War and its aftermath marked a watershed in Evangelical Christian interest in Israel and Zionism. Jerry Falwell did not begin to speak about modern-day Israel until after Israel’s 1967 military victory.

Falwell then changed completely. He entered into politics and became an avid supporter of the Zionist State. In 1967, the United States was mired in the Vietnam war. Many felt a sense of defeat, helplessness and discouragement. Many Americans, including Falwell, turned worshipful glances toward Israel, which they viewed as militarily strong and invincible.

The combination of the founding of the state of Israel in 1948, the capture of Jerusalem and the West Bank in 1967, and the defeat on both occasions of the combined Arab armies, increasingly came to be seen as significant fulfilment of biblical prophecy by a new generation of American and European dispensational pre-millennialists.

Rev. Billy Graham’s father-in-law, Nelson Bell, editor of the authoritative mouthpiece of conservative Evangelicalism, Christianity Today, wrote in an editorial in 1967, ‘That for the first time in more than 2,000 years Jerusalem is now completely in the hands of the Jews gives a student of the Bible a thrill and a renewed faith in the accuracy and validity of the Bible.’

Bush, Christian Zion and Freemasonry

A most difficult area to illuminate regarding American relations to right-wing Israeli Zionists and the ties between Israel and Christian Zionists such as Jerry Falwell, Rev. Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Gary Bauer and other US backers of the Right-wing Israeli Likud policies, was the role of international esoteric freemasonry.

Freemasonry has been defined as a secret or occult society which conceals its goals even from most of its own members, members who often are recruited naively as lower level members, unaware they are being steered from behind the curtains. The most powerful Freemasonic Order in the United States is believed to be the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite, or the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, with its world headquarters now in Washington, DC.

Key Bush family adviser, James Baker III, of the Texas law firm Baker & Botts and of the Carlyle Group, was a Scottish Rite high ranking mason. George Bush was known to be a high ranking mason as was his father, George Herbert Walker Bush.

Freemasonry was the secret network which allows manipulation of much behind the scenes. Were people openly known as masons, their power would vanish as others would see through their blatant schemes such as assassinations, wars, blackmail, fraud and above all, what seems to be a project to destroy real religious belief among ordinary people.

There was a special role played by one of the two major branches of Anglo-Saxon Freemasonry, that of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite. Its history goes back far, but in the late 1800’s its leader was a Confederate General, Albert Pike. Pike founded the racist Ku Klux Klan as a secret Scottish Rite project to control the South through race hate and fear, after the American Civil War.

The Scottish Rite enjoyed an active branch in Israel, even though it was nominally a Christian society. It spoke of its tradition going back to ‘the early masons who built King Salomon’s Temple.’ The fact that American Christian Zionists typically were concentrated in the South and came from the similar white racist strata as the Scottish Rite, and that they actively backed the Israeli fanatics who seek to rebuild the Third Temple of Salomon at the site of the sacred Al Aqsa Mosque and thereby ignite the Final Battle of Armageddon cannot be coincidence. All evidence suggested that the Jewish advocates of destroying Al Aqsa and rebuilding the Temple of Salomon there were being supported by the Scottish Rite masons in the United States and Britain.

Indeed, there was circumstantial evidence that much of the organized American Christian Right that backs Israeli right-wing policies was secretly backed by Scottish Rite masonry. The Southern Baptist Convention recently had a heated debate over allegations that some 500,000 of their members were also masons, reportedly most Scottish Rite. The Southern Baptist organization is well-known for its racial hatred of blacks. Cecil Rhodes, the man who was backed by Rothschild to create the mining empire of South Africa was a Scottish Rite member as was Lord Palmerston, also himself a British Israelite.

F. William Engdahl is an award-winning geopolitical analyst, strategic risk consultant, author, professor and lecturer. He has been researching and writing about the world political scene for more than thirty years. His various books on geopolitics—the interaction between international power politics, economics and geography—have been translated into 14 foreign languages from Chinese to French, from German to Japanese.

Premadasa and Anura’s Quest for Power

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:29:00 +0000

The 2022 aragalaya arose to once again take someone like Premadasa to the Presidential palace. Although Premadasa’s son Sajith was qualified for this, Anura dressed himself in the image of Premadasa and went to the palace. Sajith, by trying to wear Ranil’s and J.R.’s shoes, went home.

by Upul Joseph Fernando

“Ranasinghe Premadasa, a poor boy, rose to the pinnacle of politics dominated by the aristocracy through the urban labour movement and became the President. He was born in a slum area in Colombo, and his family came from an oppressed caste in Sri Lanka. Although caste oppression in Sri Lanka wasn’t as severe as in India, where literacy was less common, Premadasa was an outsider to the land-owning aristocracy that controlled politics. ~ New York Times, 21 December 1988

This is how the New York Times described Ranasinghe Premadasa’s victory when he became President. Exactly 36 years later, the international media describes Anura Kumara’s victory similarly, as a man from a humble family who broke through the political system dominated by elites to become President. However, no media outlet claims that Sajith Premadasa lost because he, like Anura, was an outsider challenging the political system controlled by the elite.

Anura Kumara Dissanayake with Sajith Premadasa [File Photo]

Why?

Because Sajith failed to convince the people that he and his family, including his father, were outsiders to the aristocratic system.

The JVP uprising of 1988–89 was launched against Indian expansionism, but its roots lay in opposition to the aristocratic political system. J.R. Jayewardene believed Premadasa was the best candidate to face the JVP uprising because his close allies, Lalith and Gamini, were seen as part of the elite political system. At that time, the country demanded a small man from a humble family, which J.R. understood perfectly in his political calculations. He knew if Lalith or Gamini were candidates, Mrs Bandaranaike would win because, even though they were major figures in the elite political system, the party she represented, the SLFP, was seen as more progressive than the UNP. J.R. used a man like Premadasa, a small man, to blast away Mrs Bandaranaike, the elite leader of the progressive class. His calculations were correct.

Premadasa used a single slogan throughout his presidential campaign: that he was a small man from a humble family challenging the aristocratic system. He once challenged Mrs Bandaranaike to walk with him along a village dirt road, to bathe in a stream, and to eat in a humble home. By doing so, he implied that he was an ordinary man used to living simply.

Unable to tolerate such talk, Anura once said that his mother didn’t choose to be born into an aristocratic family.

At that time, the people saw Premadasa as a small man from their own class. They thought, “Let’s give this man a chance.” The JVP uprising brought the country to that point. The uprising was fuelled not by the elite class youth but by the young men and women from small families oppressed by caste in rural areas. Listening to their voices, the people made a man from a small family President.

The 2022 aragalaya was also a struggle of small people, the children of small families. They demanded an outsider— not someone who had been corrupted by the political elite system, but someone who stood outside it, untainted.

From that perspective, Sajith was better suited than Anura to be that outsider. Anura’s faction had brought Chandrika, Mahinda, and Ranil to power, protecting the system. But Sajith had no such deals with Chandrika, Mahinda, or Ranil. He was the leader who rebelled against Ranil’s elite leadership in the UNP. While he was leading that rebellion, Mahinda and Chandrika were supporting Ranil. Even Anura Kumara was helping Ranil at that time. In that scenario, Sajith was the real outsider.

So why didn’t Sajith market himself as the outsider?

I don’t know. What really happened is that while Anura was trying to wear Ranasinghe Premadasa’s shoes, Sajith tried to wear Ranil’s and J.R.’s.

The tragedy of Sajith is that he didn’t realise the 2022 struggle was demanding an outsider to change the system. Sajith thought people wanted someone like Ranil or J.R., an elite figure with international connections who could revive the economy. As soon as Ranil became President, Sajith came forward to stand for the struggle, but his party’s leadership advised that the struggle was damaging the economy and should be suppressed, as business leaders were saying.

‘There’s no point in the aragalaya anymore. Now, everyone is talking about the economy…’

This was the advice given by Sajith’s party leaders.

‘Let’s support the IMF. Let’s say Ranil’s economic policy is our economic policy…’

These were the types of suggestions given to Sajith. During the debate on Ranil’s first budget, Sajith and the SJB said the government’s direction was correct.

‘This is our party’s policy. Today, the Pohottuwa party has adopted our economic policies…’

Sajith and the other SJB MPs declared this in Parliament during the budget debate. Anura and the JVP, on the other hand, said they would bring back the wealth stolen by the country’s corrupt elites and build a new economy instead of continuing the failed policies that had bankrupted the country for 70 years. They spoke about the luxury lives of the elite ruling class, their Prado cars, bodyguards, foreign trips, and official residences, contrasting this with the JVP’s simple, austere lifestyle. Anura once mentioned wearing second-hand clothes and clothes with holes, showing they represented the working class. The SJB laughed at this, mocking how Anura and the JVP leaders would negotiate internationally in English.

The Vanishing of Truth—Sri Lanka’s Attorney General’s Credibility in Jeopardy

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:25:00 +0000

In legal doctrine, there is a principle known as res ipsa loquitur—“the thing speaks for itself.” And what speaks louder than the disappearance of a report so vital to the truth?

Editorial

The role of the Attorney General (AG) in any democratic society is to uphold the principles of justice and maintain the sanctity of the rule of law, untainted by political influence. When that role is compromised, it strikes at the very core of national trust. Recent allegations by Father Cyril Gamini Fernando, Director of Communications for the Archdiocese of Colombo, have cast a dark and damning shadow over Sri Lanka’s Attorney General’s Department—a shadow so deep that the credibility of this vital institution now stands in ruins.

Father Fernando’s claims are nothing short of explosive. He asserts that the report from the Presidential Commission, which delved into the horrific Easter Sunday attacks of 2019, has mysteriously disappeared after being handed to the Attorney General’s Department. Let that sink in for a moment. This is not some innocuous piece of bureaucratic paperwork that has gone astray. This is a report containing critical evidence about an attack that shattered the country, killing hundreds and leaving a permanent scar on its soul. And it has vanished.

What makes this situation even more chilling is the content of the report itself, which, according to Fr. Fernando, exposes those truly responsible for the massacre—politicians, security officials, and those who conspired in the darkest corridors of power. “Several politicians would be behind bars,” he declared, had the contents of the report been fully investigated. These are not the words of a man making idle speculation; they are the voice of an institution demanding justice for its people, yet receiving nothing but silence in return.

At the centre of this storm lies the AG’s Department, now facing an accusation that can only be described as catastrophic—obstructing justice. It is impossible to overstate the seriousness of these allegations. If true, this is no mere administrative lapse; it is a deliberate, calculated effort to prevent justice from being served. Such an act would constitute a gross breach of public duty, an assault on the very foundations of the legal system, and, arguably, an act of treason against the state and its people.

The disappearance of this report raises profound and uncomfortable questions about the integrity of those in power. Is the Attorney General’s office so compromised, so deeply enmeshed in political machinations, that it has ceased to function as an independent legal authority? This is not a question to be taken lightly, for it strikes at the heart of the nation’s ability to trust its own institutions. The AG’s Department is constitutionally bound to operate independently, free from the pernicious influence of the political class. Yet, this allegation suggests that it has become nothing more than a puppet, serving the interests of the powerful while sacrificing the truth on the altar of expediency.

It is said that Fiat justitia, ruat caelum—“Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.” This timeless maxim demands that justice must prevail, regardless of the consequences. Yet, in Sri Lanka today, it appears that those entrusted with the delivery of justice have chosen, instead, to shield the guilty. It begs the question: in a nation where politicians can manipulate investigations, where reports can disappear without explanation, can we still claim to live under the rule of law? Or has the law itself become another tool of oppression, wielded not to protect the innocent but to exonerate the guilty?

Fr. Fernando’s claims are not just a cry for accountability but a searing indictment of the structural rot within the Attorney General’s office. This is a department that is meant to act as the final bulwark against corruption, injustice, and impunity. And yet, it is precisely this institution that now finds itself accused of playing a direct role in covering up one of the most heinous acts of terrorism in the country’s history. The allegations do not just threaten the credibility of the AG’s office—they obliterate it.

One cannot help but recall the famous words of Lord Acton: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” It seems that those within the highest echelons of power in Sri Lanka have allowed corruption to seep so deeply into the legal system that even the victims of a national tragedy are denied their rightful justice. This is not just an institutional failure; it is a moral collapse of the highest order.

In legal doctrine, there is a principle known as res ipsa loquitur—“the thing speaks for itself.” And what speaks louder than the disappearance of a report so vital to the truth? This is not a case of ambiguity or conjecture; the facts are damning, and they point directly to a dereliction of duty, a wilful act to obstruct the course of justice. It is an affront not only to the victims of the Easter Sunday attacks but to every citizen of Sri Lanka who believes in the fundamental promise of justice.

It is high time the Attorney General’s Department steps out of the shadows and into the light. It must answer these allegations clearly, definitively, and without delay. Silence, in this case, is tantamount to an admission of guilt. The people of Sri Lanka will not—and should not—accept anything less than full transparency. If the AG’s office continues to hide behind a veil of secrecy, it will confirm what many already fear: that justice in Sri Lanka is not blind, but selectively so, depending on who stands in the dock.

The vanishing of this report is not an administrative hiccup; it is a national disgrace. The Attorney General’s Department must immediately restore its integrity by locating this document, presenting it to the public, and ensuring that all those implicated, regardless of their rank or influence, are held to account. The victims of the Easter Sunday attacks deserve more than hollow platitudes and unfulfilled promises—they deserve justice. The truth cannot be buried forever, and the longer it remains obscured, the deeper the wound in the nation’s soul becomes. Fiat justitia, ruat caelum. Let justice be done, no matter the cost, or face the devastating consequences of its collapse.

Once Again on Stage: Cardinal’s Political Blasphemy

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 07 Oct 2024 14:22:00 +0000

The blasphemy of political collusion is evident, and it is a call for Cardinal Ranjith to reclaim his sacred duty by renouncing his ties to temporal power and returning to the true mission of the Church.

Editorial

The drama is unfolding yet again on the stage, with no end in sight. This morning, at Katuwapitiya Church, where the sacred echoes of worship were once drowned out by the cacophony of violence on that fateful Easter Sunday in 2019, a darker spectre still haunts the hallowed ground. The victims of this unspeakable atrocity continue to suffer, not only from the loss of loved ones but also from the moral and spiritual betrayal festering in political manipulation. His Eminence, Malcolm Cardinal Ranjith, who should be a beacon of solace and justice for these grieving souls, now stands accused of political manoeuvring that stains the very cloth of his sacred office.

Fake it until you make it [donec id factus sis, id esse videre]

This morning’s gathering at the same Katuwapitiya Church, attended by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, reeks of opportunism. The symbolism of this meeting is not lost on those who remember the blood-soaked pews and the cries of the innocent. How could a place of such profound loss become the stage for yet another political spectacle? It is not merely a matter of insensitivity; it is a grotesque misalignment of priorities. Cardinal Ranjith, now extending his service under the Vatican’s grace, has allowed the pulpit to become a platform for power, rather than a refuge for truth. The Gospel sternly reminds us in Matthew 6:24, “No one can serve two masters.” Yet, here we find the Church, or at least its current leadership, courting temporal power while abandoning the eternal cause of justice.

What is even more disturbing is the Cardinal’s apparent alignment with the very forces that have commodified the Easter Sunday tragedy for political gain. The voice of a survivor—who refused to participate in the Mass upon seeing political figures such as President Dissanayake—rings out as a prophetic cry in the wilderness. This protest, though it may seem insignificant in local media or political circles, speaks volumes about the deep betrayal felt by those who demand accountability, not political grandstanding.

The Church, by its very nature, must be the voice of the oppressed and the marginalised. Christ Himself, in Luke 4:18, declared that He was sent “to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed.” And yet, where is the liberation for those who still seek justice for the bombings? Where is the transparency in the financial contributions that poured into the Church after the carnage? The accusations of financial opacity are not just bureaucratic quibbles—they cut to the heart of the Church’s credibility. The very institution that should embody Christ’s call for truth and righteousness has become, in this instance, a pawn in the chess game of political manoeuvring.

It is here that we must confront an uncomfortable truth: the Easter Sunday attacks, a moment of national and spiritual crisis, have been reduced to political currency. Successive governments have failed to provide clarity or accountability, and the Church’s leadership, rather than acting as a moral compass, has allowed itself to be complicit in this obfuscation. Two critical reports, submitted to the Attorney General’s Department by respected committees, remain shrouded in mystery. These reports, we are told, contain vital information about the negligence that allowed the attacks to happen, as well as the facts behind the deeper conspiracies that swirl around the event. Yet, rather than advocating for their release with the fierce determination of a shepherd defending his flock, Cardinal Ranjith remains entangled in a web of political alliances.

This collusion between the sacred and the secular is not only dangerous—it is heretical. The Book of Proverbs warns us in 17:15, “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the Lord.” If the Church continues to play this “pathetic political game,” as some have called it, it risks becoming an abomination in the eyes of God and man. The Church, in its silence, is implicitly condemning the righteous pursuit of truth while justifying the wickedness of political expediency.

The conspiracy theories surrounding the Easter Sunday attacks are not mere flights of fancy—they are fuelled by the very absence of facts. When those in power, whether political or religious, refuse to confront the truth, they leave a vacuum that is quickly filled by suspicion, fear, and extremism. The Church, once a bastion of stability, risks becoming complicit in the very violence it seeks to condemn by allowing these falsehoods to proliferate. For as long as the truth remains hidden, the cycle of violence will continue, not just in the form of bombs, but in the erosion of trust, faith, and justice.

Cardinal Ranjith has no shame, for his record of political manipulation and bootlicking is well-documented, favouring whichever politician best serves his personal interests, often at the cost of the Catholic community in Sri Lanka. His actions betray the very people he claims to shepherd, turning sacred spaces into platforms for power-hungry agendas. This shameful behaviour must be brought to an end. The Catholic Church is not a Hyde Park corner, where every Tom, Dick, and Harry can parade their political battles. It is a sacred place, where the faithful seek justice, freedom, and liberty, and where they must find refuge and confidence, even in their most intimate confessions. To degrade the Church into a political battleground is to desecrate the trust that binds it to the hearts of its people, and this desecration cannot be allowed to continue.

Cardinal Ranjith must, for the sake of his flock and his faith, renounce this unholy alliance with political power. He must demand the full release of the investigative reports and lead a movement of accountability, not just within the political realm, but within his own institution. The Church must return to its true calling—not as a political actor, but as the body of Christ on earth. The words of the prophet Amos ring out with undeniable clarity: “Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (Amos 5:24). This is the task before the Church—to ensure that justice is not a dry trickle, controlled by the whims of political expediency, but an unstoppable flood that washes away corruption, deceit, and betrayal.

In this moment of profound crisis, the Church has a choice: continue down the path of complicity, or stand boldly for truth, even at the cost of political influence. The Easter Sunday victims deserve more than silence; they deserve the full force of the Church’s moral authority and financial transparency. Cardinal Ranjith, and indeed the entire Catholic hierarchy, must choose whom they serve—God or Caesar. The time for playing games is over. It is time for the Church to rise again as the voice of the voiceless, the defender of the oppressed, and the seeker of truth. Let it be so. Amen!

The Time for Honourable Retirement Has Come for Ranil Wickremesinghe

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 08:46:00 +0000

His legacy will be judged not by the titles he held, but by how he chose to leave them behind.

by Luxman Aravind

In politics, there comes a moment when a leader must recognise that their time has passed. This is not a matter of letting go with grace but understanding, deep within, that the era in which they once thrived is over. For Ranil Wickremesinghe, that moment has long arrived. It is not about anyone allowing him to step aside; he must make the decision to bow out voluntarily, without further political scheming or intrigue. His contributions to Sri Lankan politics are undeniable, but clinging to power now is neither honourable nor beneficial. The political winds have shifted, and it is time for him to acknowledge that his days of influence have ended.

Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sri Lanka's president, during an interview at the Presidential Secretariat in Colombo, Sri Lanka, on Friday, Sept. 20, 2024.

Wickremesinghe’s career, spanning decades, was crowned not by the people’s will but by circumstance. The collapse of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s presidency in 2022 thrust him into the highest office, not as a chosen leader of the people but as a figurehead brought in to stabilise a fractured state. His rise to the presidency in that moment of crisis was more a testament to the vacuum of leadership than to any popular mandate. That situation served its purpose, and the country needed his experience in that dark hour. But those days are gone. The nation has moved on, and Wickremesinghe must move with it, not continue plotting his survival in a political landscape that no longer belongs to him.

“For everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under heaven,” goes the ancient wisdom. Wickremesinghe’s season of relevance has passed. The political scene now demands new leadership, fresh energy, and innovative ideas—qualities that Wickremesinghe, once known for his sharp intellect and strategic manoeuvring, can no longer deliver in a meaningful way. His era belongs to history, and history will judge him for his contributions, but also for how he chooses to exit.

The burden of his legacy, however, is heavy. Allegations of corruption have dogged him throughout his career, not just through his own actions but through his protection of those whose hands were far from clean. The people of Sri Lanka, who suffered the economic devastation of recent years, have seen their frustrations compounded by the perception that Wickremesinghe stood by as corruption flourished. His tenure has not been one of transformational leadership, but of calculated survival, and that cold reality has left a bitter taste in the mouths of many Sri Lankans.

In his long political career, Wickremesinghe has undermined rivals and stifled potential leaders within his own party, the United National Party (UNP). Most notable is his relationship with Sajith Premadasa, a man who has managed to survive despite Wickremesinghe’s repeated efforts to sideline him. Premadasa represents the future of the UNP, a future Wickremesinghe can no longer be a part of. His failure to foster new leadership, to reconcile with Premadasa, and to heal the deep wounds within the party has weakened it to the point of near collapse. It is a tragedy that the party, once a bastion of Sri Lankan democracy, has been reduced to this state.

Now is the time for Wickremesinghe to make his final exit, not through the forced hand of political defeat but by recognising that his continued presence is a hindrance to the revival of the UNP and the nation. He should walk away from politics altogether, not just from the presidency or party leadership. His hands must be free from the levers of power, and he must refrain from engaging in any behind-the-scenes political machinations. As Confucius wisely said, “A man who does not think and plan long ahead will find trouble right at his door.” If Wickremesinghe continues to linger, plotting from the shadows, he will find that his legacy is further tarnished, his accomplishments forgotten in the mire of irrelevance.

The enmity between Wickremesinghe and Premadasa is an open wound that must be healed for the sake of Sri Lankan politics. Wickremesinghe must now accept that the baton of leadership belongs to Premadasa and others of his generation. By continuing to obstruct, even passively, Wickremesinghe ensures only the prolonged suffering of a party that desperately needs renewal. He must make way, and in doing so, take a decisive step towards reconciliation. His refusal to sign the Rome Statute, to protect Sri Lanka from external political pressures, and his balancing of relations between China, India, and the United States were calculated moves, but now he must calculate his exit with the same precision. “Old age is a crown of dignity when it is found in the way of righteousness,” teaches the ancient text. Wickremesinghe’s legacy, his crown, now depends on his wisdom to step away.

Wickremesinghe has been in power for far too long, not just holding office but exerting influence in ways that have prevented the natural evolution of Sri Lanka’s political landscape. His persistence in staying active behind the scenes, weaving plots and strategies to maintain his foothold, has not only damaged his own reputation but has stunted the growth of younger leaders like Premadasa. For the good of the country and the party, Wickremesinghe must retire fully, without the slightest inclination to return or manipulate the political process.

It is not about allowing Ranil Wickremesinghe to retire with dignity—he must seize this moment and retire of his own accord. His continued engagement in politics would only serve to drag down the UNP further and keep Sri Lanka chained to the past. His era is over. It is time for him to leave without further interference, and allow the next generation to lead Sri Lanka into the future.

His legacy will be judged not by the titles he held, but by how he chose to leave them behind.

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah: The Man Who Defeated Israel

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 08:45:00 +0000

The assassination of Nasrallah produced a sense of shock across Lebanon because a view had been growing that he could not be killed.

by Vijay Prashad

Israel assassinated Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah (1960-2024) because he refused to stop the attacks on northern Israel until the Israelis ended the genocide against the Palestinians. During the brief Israeli ceasefire, Nasrallah’s organization—Hezbollah—paused their attacks also. When the Israelis resumed fighting, so did Hezbollah.

Sayed Hassan Nasrallah as a young militant in the early 1980s, I assume on the streets of Beirut. Thank you to @Fereshteh Sadeghi for posting on “X”.

Nasrallah was killed because he was unrelenting in his support for Palestine. Unlike every other Arab leader, Nasrallah had led the fight against Israel twice, which led to its defeat: first, when Israel was forced to withdraw from Lebanon in 2000 and second when Israel could not vanquish Hezbollah in 2006. The man who defeated Israel was finally killed on September 27, 2024, along with thousands of his fellow Lebanese.

In 2013, as the war in Syria escalated, I walked with a friend into a crowded area in Dahieh, a neighborhood of Beirut, Lebanon. We had come to listen to a speech being given by Nasrallah. I had been told that Nasrallah would address the reason why Hezbollah—which is both a political party in Lebanon and a military group formed to defend Lebanon from the constant Israeli incursions—had decided to enter Syria. A large television screen had been erected in the open space, and eventually, Nasrallah appeared on it and was greeted by loud cheers. Similar scenes would have been observed in other parts of Lebanon where Nasrallah would have appeared on television screens to address people about this consequential decision.

The reason Nasrallah was not there in person is that Israel had targeted to assassinate him ever since he was appointed to lead Hezbollah in 1992 at the age of 32. It would have been suicidal for him to appear in person. For that reason, his exact location was unknown, but it was clear where people could gather to listen to him. The speech began slowly, with Nasrallah laying out the complexities of the war in Syria, and the dangers posed to Lebanon’s people by the assaults of Jabhat al-Nusra, the Al Qaeda front, near the borders. If al-Nusra entered Lebanon, Nasrallah said, the group would target the Shia community, but also Christians and others. It is to protect Lebanon, Nasrallah said, that Hezbollah fighters would have to cross the border and fight in Syria’s Qalamoun Mountains.

Later, I went with another journalist into those mountains to observe the clashes between Hezbollah fighters and those of Jabhat al-Nusra. The reverence with which the Hezbollah men spoke of Nasrallah was impressive, and their own sense of destiny—to defend Lebanon from the scourge of al-Nusra—was commanding. If the Sayyed told them to do it, they said it would be done. And so, they were there, far from their homes, caught in difficult fights with al-Nusra fighters who were motivated by martyrdom rather than by the need to gain territory. If there was a poll among Hezbollah members and their families, Nasrallah would universally have the highest approval rating.

In his speech, Nasrallah said it was vital for Hezbollah to protect the Sayyida Zainab Mosque at al-Sitt, just outside Damascus. This mosque is said by the Twelver Shia to be the burial place of Zaynab bint Ali, the daughter of Ali and Fatima, and, therefore, the granddaughter of the Prophet Muhammad. Since the shrine is revered by the Shia community, and Al Qaeda groups had been terrorizing the Shia population in Syria and attacking Shia shrines, Nasrallah’s concern resonated with his followers.

It is vital to understand that in interview after interview, Nasrallah said that sectarian divides are anathema and that coexistence is essential. The entry of Hezbollah into Syria was partly about protecting Lebanon from al-Nusra and partly about protecting the Shia community in Syria and Shia shrines. It is emblematic of Hezbollah’s location in Lebanon both as a Lebanese national force and as the Islamic (not Shia) resistance. Throughout his leadership of Hezbollah, Nasrallah moved between these two aspects of the organization deftly.

Driving through Lebanon’s southern towns, it is clear that the depth of support for Hezbollah is unshakable. The reason is that it was Hezbollah’s military ingenuity that led to Lebanon being able to end the Israeli occupation by force of a large part of Lebanon in 2000, which had begun when Israel invaded Lebanon in 1982. Hezbollah was born during that conflict and demonstrated both military prowess and political acumen as well as courage in the face of repression. Nasrallah had been in Iran from 1989 to 1991, studying at the Shia seminary in Qom. When he returned to Lebanon in 1991, he threw himself into Hezbollah and the next year—after the assassination of Hezbollah leader Abbas al-Musawi (1952-1992) by the United States—Nasrallah became the leader of the organization.

Nasrallah immediately set in motion a policy that remained in place until his assassination: Hezbollah would only hit Israeli military targets, but if Israel struck Lebanese civilians, then Hezbollah would retaliate against Israeli civilians. When Israel withdrew in defeat in 2000, Hezbollah made a public statement that it would not target anybody in Lebanon who collaborated with the Israeli occupation. The Lebanese had to heal and become a nation.

In the Lebanese coastal city of Sur (Tyre), unknown people bombed a number of restaurants that serve alcohol in late 2012. I went down to talk to some of the owners of these restaurants and of a brewery, all of whom told me that they had been visited by people from Hezbollah who offered to pay for the damages even though the attacks were not by their members. Nasrallah had said that though he opposed the consumption of alcohol, he did not believe that Lebanese society must conform to the social views of any group but should learn to tolerate the mores of each other.

For all the talk of Nasrallah and antisemitism, it would be worth considering that it was Hezbollah under Nasrallah that helped the reconstruction of Beirut’s Maghen Abraham Synagogue. “[It] is a religious place of worship,” Nasrallah said, “and its restoration is welcome,” stated Arab News. It is this attitude that partly led to Nasrallah telling Julian Assange during a discussion about Palestine in 2012 that “the only solution is the establishment of one state—one state on the land on Palestine in which the Muslims and the Jews and the Christians live in peace in a democratic state. Any other solution will simply not be viable, and it won’t be sustained.”

When Israel, with U.S. support, began its bombardment of Lebanon in 2006, it appeared certain that Hezbollah would be demolished. But it withstood the attack and counterattacked Israel. Years earlier, friends in the Arab states would ask me, “Why can’t we produce a Hugo Chávez?” meaning why could they not have a leader who would stand up against the interference of the West and the occupation of the Palestinians by Israel. During the 2006 war, these same people began to say that Nasrallah was their Chávez, that he was the incarnation of Gamal Abdel Nasser. The fact that Hezbollah was not destroyed and was able to stand up for itself proved to large sections of the Arab world that Israel lost that war.

The victory is partly attributed to Nasrallah’s ability to convert Hezbollah from a military force into an integral part of the “resistance society” (mujtama’ al-muqawama) in large parts of Lebanon; this resistance society shaped the worldview of the villages of southern Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley, where they committed themselves to the long-term struggle to end the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the Israeli interventions in southern Lebanon. It is this resistance community that defines Hezbollah’s endurance rather than the thousands of missiles it has hidden away in tunnels across Lebanon’s southern region. The Israelis tried to kill Nasrallah many times during and after 2006 but did not succeed. He would often talk about how one of his speeches was his last since it was unclear when the Israelis might succeed.

The assassination of Nasrallah produced a sense of shock across Lebanon because a view had been growing that he could not be killed. But Nasrallah was a man, and human beings die one way or the other. Robert Fisk asked him to explain what it meant to prepare for martyrdom, according to a 2001 article by him. “Imagine you are in a sauna,” Nasrallah said. “It is very hot but you know that in the next room there is air conditioning, an armchair, classical music, and a cocktail.” That would have been his attitude when the Israeli bombs landed.

In 1997, his eldest son—Muhammad Hadi—was killed in an Israeli ambush in Mlikh. It was a personal loss for him. The day after his death, Jawad Nasrallah, his son, went to the site of the gruesome crater resulting from 85 2,000-pound and 500-pound bombs dropped by Israeli planes and screamed in torment looking at the obliterated bodies. So far, Israel’s continued bombardment has taken the lives of more than 1,000 people in Lebanon and displaced more than half a million others. A society that lives in anticipation of war now struggles with the ruthlessness bestowed upon it by a desperate leadership in Israel that would like to make its genocide of the Palestinians into a war against Lebanon and eventually Iran. Israel’s actions have pried open the jaws of hell.

Meanwhile, black flags were flown from the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, Iran, and the Sayyida Zeinab shrine outside Damascus, Syria; this is an honor that few receive, not even Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1902-1989) got this honor. The shock that now pervades the Arab world will soon dissipate. Hezbollah will try to recover. But it will not be able to easily replace Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the only Arab leader who could legitimately claim to defeat Israel.

Source: Globetrotter

China’s Historic Journey: From Revolution to Global Superpower

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 08:43:00 +0000

As China celebrates its 75th anniversary, we wish the people of China continued prosperity and resilience. May they maintain peace in the region despite all attempts by adversaries to provoke China into new modes of conflict.

Editorial

Over the past 75 years, China has undergone a monumental transformation, evolving from a fragmented nation emerging from civil war and foreign invasion into one of the most powerful countries on the global stage. This journey is not merely a tale of economic growth and political change but a profound narrative rooted in resilience, cultural revival, and a reassertion of national identity. The history of modern China is woven with themes of struggle, transformation, and a deep philosophical understanding of governance and society. It reflects a unique path that defies simplistic categorizations and reveals the intricacies of a civilization that has navigated immense challenges while maintaining its core values.

People visit the Tian'anmen Square in Beijing, capital of China, July 9, 2023. (Xinhua/Ren Chao)

To appreciate China’s extraordinary evolution, one must delve into the historical context that shaped its trajectory. The establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1949 marked the dawn of a new era, led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) under the stewardship of Mao Zedong. In the wake of decades of turmoil, including the Opium Wars, the Boxer Rebellion, and a devastating civil war, the founding of the PRC symbolized a collective aspiration for stability, sovereignty, and national rejuvenation.

The early years of the PRC were defined by the radical vision of Mao, who sought to create a socialist state. This period was marked by ambition, experimentation, and, ultimately, tragic miscalculations. The Great Leap Forward (1958–1962) aimed at transforming China into an industrialized nation through collective farming and massive infrastructure projects. However, this ambitious campaign resulted in one of the deadliest famines in history, causing the deaths of an estimated 15 to 45 million people. Following this, the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976) sought to eradicate perceived bourgeois influences, resulting in societal upheaval, widespread persecution, and a severe setback for China’s cultural heritage.

Despite these upheavals, the resilience of the Chinese people and the CCP’s ability to adapt ultimately laid the groundwork for a more pragmatic approach to governance. After Mao’s death, Deng Xiaoping emerged as a transformative leader who would guide China into a new era of reform and opening-up.

Deng Xiaoping’s reforms, initiated in 1978, marked a pivotal shift in China’s trajectory. Rejecting the rigidities of Maoist ideology, Deng introduced market-oriented reforms that catalyzed rapid economic growth. His famous phrase, “It doesn’t matter whether a cat is black or white, as long as it catches mice,” encapsulated the pragmatic approach that prioritized results over rigid adherence to ideology.

This period of reform was characterized by a return to the core Confucian values that emphasize hard work, education, and social harmony. The introduction of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) attracted foreign investment, fostering a culture of entrepreneurship that enabled millions to improve their livelihoods. By blending state control with market dynamics, China demonstrated a unique model of development, reflecting its deep cultural heritage and adaptability.

During this time, China experienced unprecedented economic growth, with average annual GDP growth rates reaching nearly 10% for over three decades. Over 800 million people were lifted out of poverty, representing one of the largest reductions in poverty in human history. This transformation was not merely a product of external factors; it stemmed from the resilience of the Chinese populace and the strategic foresight of the CCP.

Moreover, the rapid urbanization that accompanied economic reform fundamentally changed the social landscape. Cities expanded at an astonishing rate, with more than 65% of the population now living in urban areas. This shift not only improved living standards but also fostered a sense of national pride and collective identity, resonating deeply with the Chinese ethos of communal success.

To understand the success of modern China, one must explore the philosophical underpinnings that have guided its development. Central to this is Confucianism, which emphasizes values such as hierarchy, respect for authority, and social harmony. These principles have historically shaped Chinese governance, providing a framework for collective well-being and stability.

The CCP has adeptly harnessed Confucian ideals, emphasizing the importance of the state and the community over the individual. This perspective fosters a sense of unity and purpose among the Chinese people, creating a social contract where citizens accept state authority in exchange for economic stability and national pride. This contrasts sharply with Western notions of individualism and democracy, which often prioritize personal freedoms over collective goals.

Moreover, the concept of “tianxia” (天下), meaning “all under heaven,” plays a crucial role in Chinese political philosophy. It reflects the idea that the state is responsible for maintaining harmony and order in society. This worldview encourages a sense of belonging to a larger national community, reinforcing the legitimacy of the CCP’s leadership as a guardian of social stability and progress. In this context, governance becomes a moral obligation, and leaders are expected to embody virtues that promote the common good.

As China entered the 21st century, the emergence of Xi Jinping as a leader marked a new chapter in this historic journey. Xi, who rose to power in 2012, built upon the foundations laid by his predecessors while introducing a comprehensive vision for China’s future. His leadership philosophy, known as “Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era,” emphasizes national rejuvenation, modernization, and the importance of the CCP’s leadership role.

Under Xi’s stewardship, China has not only continued its economic ascent but has also positioned itself as a global leader in innovation and infrastructure development. Initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) exemplify this approach, seeking to establish China as a leader in global trade and connectivity. By investing in infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, and Europe, China is reshaping the global economic landscape and fostering a multipolar world where it plays a central role.

Moreover, Xi has underscored the importance of self-reliance in technology and innovation, advocating for a comprehensive strategy that aims to position China at the forefront of the technological revolution. The country’s emphasis on becoming a global leader in artificial intelligence, renewable energy, and high-tech manufacturing is indicative of its long-term vision to not only compete with but also surpass established powers.

The achievements of China over the past 75 years are nothing short of extraordinary. Since the launch of economic reforms, China has witnessed transformative advancements in various sectors. The nation has become the world’s second-largest economy, with a GDP exceeding $18 trillion, reflecting a remarkable journey of growth and development. China is also now a global leader in renewable energy production, investing heavily in solar and wind power, while also aiming to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060.

China’s commitment to technological advancement is further evidenced by its growing influence in artificial intelligence, telecommunications, and space exploration. The successful launch of the Tiangong Space Station and ambitious plans for lunar exploration demonstrate China’s intention to assert itself as a dominant player in the new space age.

Beyond economic indicators, China’s soft power has expanded significantly through cultural exchanges, international cooperation, and diplomatic engagement. The Confucius Institutes established worldwide have promoted Chinese language and culture, fostering a deeper understanding of China among global audiences. The nation’s rich cultural heritage, encompassing philosophies, art, and literature, has become an integral part of its global identity.

While China’s achievements are significant, the nation faces challenges as it navigates an increasingly complex global landscape. Issues such as environmental degradation, income inequality, and demographic shifts present formidable obstacles. However, the resilience of the Chinese people, combined with the CCP’s capacity for adaptive governance, positions China to address these challenges proactively.

The Chinese model of governance, characterized by centralized leadership and a focus on collective well-being, has often been mischaracterized as authoritarianism by Western commentators. However, this narrative overlooks the historical and cultural factors that underpin China’s unique political system. The CCP’s ability to maintain stability, promote economic growth, and respond to the needs of its citizens is rooted in a deep understanding of Chinese history and the collective aspirations of the populace.

Moreover, China’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic showcased its governance strengths. Rapid mobilization of resources, widespread testing, and stringent public health measures demonstrated the efficacy of a system that prioritizes public health and safety. While challenges remain, the swift and decisive response underscored the potential for centralized governance to address crises effectively.

As China continues to assert its influence on the global stage, the future remains bright yet uncertain. The path forward will require a delicate balance between maintaining economic growth and addressing the myriad challenges arising from rapid development. Xi Jinping’s vision for a “moderately prosperous society” and a “community of shared future for mankind” accentuates the commitment to fostering inclusive growth and international cooperation.

China’s future will likely involve not only continuing to expand its economic footprint but also actively participating in shaping global governance. As the world grapples with pressing issues such as climate change, public health, and geopolitical tensions, China’s role as a responsible global leader will be crucial. By advocating for multilateralism and cooperation, China can contribute to addressing these challenges while promoting a more equitable and sustainable world. As China celebrates its 75th anniversary, we wish the people of China continued prosperity and resilience. May they maintain peace in the region despite all attempts by adversaries to provoke China into new modes of conflict.

China-Sri Lanka Economic and Trade Cooperation

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Wed, 02 Oct 2024 08:41:00 +0000

Under the “Belt and Road” initiative proposed by China, China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation has ushered in unprecedented development opportunities.

by Qiang Zhu, Lanlan Gui, Sujing Guo

School of Economics and Management, Huzhou University, China

This paper systematically explores the economic and trade cooperation between China and Sri Lanka based on the SWOT analysis framework. Against the backdrop of globalization and the “Belt and Road” initiative, China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation shows great potential and broad prospects. By using the SWOT analysis method, the paper comprehensively analyzes the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation. The strengths include complementary geographical locations, complementary trade structures, and a solid foundation of political mutual trust; the weaknesses mainly lie in trade imbalances, unstable investment environments, and cultural and communication barriers. Opportunities mainly arise from the promotion of the “Belt and Road” initiative, the deepening of regional cooperation, and changes in the global trade pattern; threats mainly come from changes in the international political and economic environment, external shocks such as pandemics, and the rise of trade protectionism. Finally, the paper proposes targeted strategic suggestions based on the actual situation, aiming to promote the sustainable and healthy development of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation and enhance the economic prosperity and well-being of the two countries.

Yuan Wang 5 is leaving Hambantota Port after replenishment [ Photo: Sri Lanka Guardian]

1. Introduction

In today’s world, where global economic integration and regional cooperation are deepening, economic and trade cooperation between countries has become not only an important driving force for economic growth but also a key factor in promoting international political stability and cultural exchange. China, as the world’s second-largest economy, has always been in the spotlight for its foreign opening strategy and global layout. Sri Lanka, an island nation in the Indian Ocean, occupies an important position in China’s foreign economic and trade cooperation map due to its unique geographical location, rich natural resources, and long history and culture. Especially under the “Belt and Road” initiative proposed by China, China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation has ushered in unprecedented development opportunities. In the era of globalization, economic ties between countries are becoming increasingly close, and trade and investment liberalization and facilitation have become the general trend. As an active participant and promoter of globalization, China has achieved rapid economic growth and comprehensive social progress by continuously expanding its opening-up and deepening economic and trade cooperation with countries around the world.

The “Belt and Road” initiative is an important upgrade of China’s foreign opening strategy, aiming to build an all-round, multi-level, and composite connectivity network through policy communication, infrastructure connectivity, trade connectivity, financial connectivity, and people-to-people connectivity, promoting the common prosperity of countries along the route. As an important node country of the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road,” Sri Lanka’s economic and trade cooperation with China not only aligns with the common interests of both sides but is also a key link in promoting the in-depth implementation of the “Belt and Road” initiative. China and Sri Lanka have a long history of friendly exchanges, with close cultural exchanges and economic and trade interactions since ancient times. In the new era, with China’s sustained rapid economic development and Sri Lanka’s steady economic growth, the economic and trade cooperation between the two countries has been continuously deepened and expanded. From traditional commodity trade to infrastructure construction, agricultural development, manufacturing investment, financial cooperation, and cultural tourism, China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation presents an all-round and multi-level characteristic.

This cooperation not only meets the practical needs of economic development of both sides but also brings tangible benefits to the people of both countries. In the current international situation, China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation faces new opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, the weak recovery of the global economy, the rise of trade protectionism, and the intensification of geopolitical risks bring uncertainties and risks to China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation. On the other hand, with the in-depth advancement of the “Belt and Road” initiative, the cooperation potential in infrastructure construction, capacity cooperation, and financial investment between China and Sri Lanka is huge, and the cooperation space is broad. Therefore, in-depth research on the current situation, problems, opportunities, and challenges of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation, and proposing targeted strategic suggestions are of great practical significance and urgency for promoting the sustainable and healthy development of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation and enhancing the economic prosperity and well-being of the two countries.

2. Strengths of China-Sri Lanka Economic and Trade Cooperation

2.1. Geographical Advantages and Strategic Location

Sri Lanka is located in the central part of the Indian Ocean, serving as an important maritime traffic hub connecting Southeast Asia, South Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. This strategic location not only makes Sri Lanka an important node in international shipping routes but also provides China with a natural geographical advantage in implementing the Maritime Silk Road strategy through the “Belt and Road” initiative. Sri Lanka’s port facilities, such as Colombo Port and Hambantota Port, due to their superior geographical location, have become important transit points for China’s maritime trade and energy transportation. This geographical advantage lays a solid foundation for China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation and promotes deep cooperation between the two sides in the fields of marine economy and port logistics.

2.2. Economic Complementarity

The economic structures of China and Sri Lanka are highly complementary. China is the world’s largest manufacturing country, with strong industrial production capacity and a vast consumer market, while Sri Lanka is mainly based on agriculture and services, particularly having global competitiveness in tea, rubber, and textiles. China’s demand for raw materials and specialty agricultural products provides a stable market for Sri Lanka, while Sri Lanka relies on China’s technology, machinery, and infrastructure investment. This complementarity creates broad prospects for economic and trade cooperation between the two countries, promoting Sri Lanka’s economic diversification and meeting China’s economic development needs.

2.3. Stability of Political and Diplomatic Relations

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations, China and Sri Lanka have maintained long-term friendly political and diplomatic relations. China has always been an important partner for Sri Lanka, providing support not only in the economic field but also in political assistance. Sri Lanka has consistently supported China’s core interests in international affairs, and this mutual trust in political relations provides a solid guarantee for economic and trade cooperation between the two sides. Additionally, a series of bilateral cooperation agreements and memorandums of understanding signed between the two governments provide policy support and legal guarantees for the smooth development of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation. Stable political and diplomatic relations ensure the long-term interests of both sides in economic and trade cooperation, allowing them to maintain continuity and stability in cooperation in a complex international environment.

2.4. China’s Technical and Financial Support

China has significant advantages in infrastructure construction and technological innovation, providing strong support for Sri Lanka’s economic development. Several large-scale projects invested and constructed by China in Sri Lanka, such as ports, highways, and power facilities, have not only improved Sri Lanka’s infrastructure level but also brought a large number of employment opportunities and economic benefits. At the same time, China’s financial support has helped Sri Lanka address the funding shortages faced in development, promoting rapid local economic growth. This technical and financial support is an important advantage of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation, enabling Sri Lanka to achieve economic transformation and development by leveraging China’s resources.

3. Weaknesses of China-Sri Lanka Economic and Trade Cooperation

3.1. Insufficient Infrastructure and Development Bottlenecks

Although Sri Lanka has made some progress in infrastructure construction in recent years, overall, the lack of infrastructure remains a major bottleneck in the country’s economic development. Particularly in key areas such as transportation, power supply, and information communication, Sri Lanka’s infrastructure level still cannot meet the needs of modern economic activities. Since infrastructure construction requires substantial capital investment and technical support, Sri Lanka is highly dependent on external assistance in these areas, and these deficiencies also limit the return on China’s investment in Sri Lanka. Additionally, some completed infrastructure projects, such as Hambantota Port, have not fully realized their economic benefits due to poor operational management, further exacerbating investment risks.

3.2. Market Size and Consumption Capacity Limitations

As an economy with a population of about 20 million, Sri Lanka’s market size is relatively small, and its consumption capacity is limited. Although Sri Lanka’s economy has grown in recent years, its per capita income level remains low, limiting the country’s demand for foreign products and services. This situation poses certain market limitations for China’s investment and exports in Sri Lanka, especially in high-end consumer goods, technology-intensive products, and services. Additionally, Sri Lanka’s weak industrial base and lagging development in manufacturing and high-tech industries limit the country’s ability to absorb Chinese technology and equipment, thereby affecting the depth and breadth of bilateral economic and trade cooperation.

3.3. Single Structure of Bilateral Trade

The trade structure between China and Sri Lanka is relatively single, with Sri Lanka mainly exporting primary agricultural products and low-value-added raw materials to China, while importing mainly machinery, textiles, and daily necessities from China. This unbalanced trade structure not only exacerbates Sri Lanka’s trade deficit but also makes its economy overly dependent on the Chinese market. If international market demand changes, Sri Lanka’s exports will face significant volatility risks. Additionally, Sri Lanka’s limited range of export products and lack of high-value-added processed products and technology-intensive products make it difficult for China-Sri Lanka trade to achieve high-level value chain cooperation, thereby limiting the further deepening of bilateral economic and trade relations.

3.4. Domestic Political and Social Risks

Sri Lanka’s domestic political and social environment is somewhat unstable, having experienced multiple regime changes and political turmoil in recent years. This political uncertainty increases the operational risks for foreign investors in Sri Lanka, especially in large infrastructure projects and long-term investments. Besides political risks, Sri Lanka’s social conflicts are also prominent, with issues such as income disparity, ethnic conflicts, and labor rights frequently occurring, which may adversely affect the normal operations of foreign enterprises. Chinese enterprises in Sri Lanka have also faced situations where projects were suspended or renegotiated due to local social unrest and policy changes, further increasing the complexity and uncertainty of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation.

4. Opportunities for China-Sri Lanka Economic and Trade Cooperation

4.1. Strategic Opportunities from the “Belt and Road” Initiative

The “Belt and Road” initiative proposed by China provides unprecedented strategic opportunities for China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation. As an important node country in the Indian Ocean, Sri Lanka holds significant geographical and strategic importance in the construction of the Maritime Silk Road under the “Belt and Road” initiative. Through this initiative, China has increased its investment in Sri Lanka’s infrastructure construction, including ports, railways, and highways. These investments not only promote Sri Lanka’s economic development but also strengthen cooperation between China and Sri Lanka in trade, logistics, and energy. Additionally, connectivity projects under the “Belt and Road” initiative will promote regional economic integration, expand the trade scope and cooperation depth between China and Sri Lanka, and provide more business and investment opportunities for both sides.

4.2. Deepening Regional Economic Cooperation

With the continuous deepening of regional economic cooperation, Sri Lanka’s role in regional organizations such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) is gradually increasing. China has already established extensive economic and trade relations with the member countries of these organizations, and China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation can be further expanded through these regional cooperation platforms. For example, trade facilitation measures and tariff preferential policies between China and South Asian countries provide favorable conditions for bilateral trade between China and Sri Lanka. At the same time, Sri Lanka, as a gateway to the South Asian and Southeast Asian markets, allows Chinese enterprises to enter broader regional markets through Sri Lanka, thereby increasing trade opportunities and investment returns.

4.3. Opportunities from Sri Lanka’s Economic Reforms and Industrial Upgrading

In recent years, the Sri Lankan government has actively promoted economic reforms, striving to improve the investment environment and attract foreign investment to drive industrial upgrading. This provides good opportunities for Chinese enterprises to invest in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka’s industrial structure is gradually shifting from being primarily agriculture-based to a more diversified economic model, especially in manufacturing, services, and high-value-added industries, which have enormous development potential. Chinese enterprises can leverage their advantages in technology, capital, and management experience to participate in Sri Lanka’s industrial upgrading process, promoting local economic development while achieving mutual benefits. For example, Chinese investments in high-tech manufacturing, e-commerce, and green energy can help Sri Lanka achieve industrial transformation and enhance its international competitiveness.

4.4. Cooperation Potential in Tourism and Cultural Industries

Sri Lanka attracts a large number of international tourists with its rich natural resources and cultural heritage, making tourism increasingly important in the country. With the continuous deepening of cultural exchanges between China and Sri Lanka, more and more Chinese tourists are choosing Sri Lanka as a travel destination. This provides broad space for cooperation between China and Sri Lanka in tourism and cultural industries. Chinese enterprises can further explore the Sri Lankan tourism market by investing in tourism infrastructure, developing tourism projects, and promoting cultural exchange activities. Additionally, there is potential for cooperation between China and Sri Lanka in film, creative products, and other cultural industries. Both sides can jointly develop culturally distinctive products, enhancing mutual understanding and cultural recognition between the peoples of the two countries.

5. Threats to China-Sri Lanka Economic and Trade Cooperation

5.1. Geopolitical Risks and External Interference

Sri Lanka’s strategic location in the Indian Ocean attracts the attention of multiple major powers. Countries like India, the United States, and other Western nations are increasing their influence in Sri Lanka, creating complex geopolitical risks for Sri Lanka’s foreign economic cooperation. Particularly, India, as a regional power in South Asia, views Sri Lanka as its “backyard” and holds a cautious or even resistant attitude towards China-Sri Lanka cooperation, which may affect the smooth implementation of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade projects. Additionally, the strategic layout of the United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific region may exert political, economic, and even security pressures on China-Sri Lanka cooperation. These external interferences increase the uncertainty of China-Sri Lanka cooperation, making China’s investments and project advancements in Sri Lanka face greater political risks.

5.2. Sri Lanka’s Economic Vulnerability and External Debt Issues

Sri Lanka’s economy is relatively small and highly dependent on external markets and international capital, with a relatively single economic structure mainly relying on agriculture, textile exports, and tourism. Sri Lanka’s heavy external debt burden has led to a severe debt crisis in recent years due to over-reliance on external loans for infrastructure construction. The worsening debt problem may further weaken Sri Lanka’s fiscal situation, affecting its ability to fulfill international cooperation commitments. China’s large investment projects in Sri Lanka may face investment return risks due to Sri Lanka’s insufficient debt repayment capacity. Additionally, Sri Lanka’s economic vulnerability makes it susceptible to global economic fluctuations, further increasing the risks of China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation.

5.3. Domestic Political Instability and Social Unrest

Sri Lanka’s domestic political environment is unstable, with frequent regime changes and political struggles in recent years, affecting policy continuity. This political uncertainty may lead to the suspension, adjustment, or even cancellation of projects in cooperation with China due to policy changes. Meanwhile, Sri Lanka’s social conflicts remain prominent, with issues such as income disparity, rising unemployment, and ethnic and religious conflicts occurring frequently. These social problems may trigger large-scale protests and unrest, affecting the normal implementation of China-Sri Lanka cooperation projects. Particularly for large infrastructure projects and long-term investment plans, political and social instability pose serious threats.

5.4. International Market Fluctuations and Trade Protectionism

The increasing uncertainty of the global economy raises the risk of international market fluctuations, especially in the context where both China and Sri Lanka rely on foreign trade and exports. Changes in international market demand, fluctuations in raw material prices, and exchange rate volatility may negatively impact China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation. Additionally, the rise of global trade protectionism in recent years, with many countries strengthening their scrutiny and restrictions on foreign investment, may affect China’s exports and investments in Sri Lanka. As a small economy, Sri Lanka’s ability to withstand global market changes is weak, and this uncertainty in the external market environment poses potential threats to China-Sri Lanka economic and trade cooperation.

6. Strategic Suggestions

6.1. Fully Utilize Advantages to Promote In-depth Cooperation

China should continue to leverage its advantages in capital, technology, and management to actively participate in Sri Lanka’s infrastructure construction, especially in key areas such as ports, railways, and highways. This will not only help Sri Lanka improve its infrastructure but also promote economic and trade ties between the two countries. Meanwhile, China should strengthen its research on the Sri Lankan market and seek more areas of cooperation, such as green energy and the digital economy, to promote diversified and high-quality development of bilateral cooperation.

6.2. Mitigate Weaknesses and Risks to Enhance Cooperation Resilience

To address the weaknesses of Sri Lanka’s limited market size and insufficient infrastructure, Chinese enterprises should adopt a phased investment strategy to gradually expand their market share in Sri Lanka. Additionally, during project implementation, they should strengthen communication with local governments and communities to ensure the sustainability and social acceptance of the projects. Furthermore, China can help Sri Lanka enhance the competitiveness of local industries through technology transfer and capacity building, gradually changing the single structure of bilateral trade.

6.3. Seize Strategic Opportunities to Expand Cooperation Areas

The “Belt and Road” initiative and the process of regional economic integration provide broad space for China-Sri Lanka cooperation. China should seize this opportunity to further deepen cooperation with Sri Lanka in trade, investment, and cultural exchanges. Particularly in tourism and cultural industries, China and Sri Lanka can enhance mutual understanding and strengthen the social foundation of bilateral relations by jointly developing tourism resources and promoting cultural exchange activities.

6.4. Address Threats and Establish Long-term Cooperation Mechanisms

To address geopolitical risks and Sri Lanka’s economic vulnerability, China should adopt a multilateral cooperation approach, working with other countries and international organizations to jointly support Sri Lanka’s economic development and social stability. Additionally, a long-term risk management mechanism should be established to enhance the resilience of China-Sri Lanka cooperation. Environmental and sustainable development issues also require special attention. Chinese enterprises should prioritize environmental protection in their investments in Sri Lanka, adopting green technologies and sustainable development models to ensure the long-term success of the projects.

Acknowledgments

2022 Huanggang Normal University Sino-Sri Lanka Cultural Exchange and Economic Development Research Center Project (202212304); National Ethnic Affairs Commission “Belt and Road” Country and Regional Research Center—Japan Emergency Management Research Center Funding (Research on the Response Mechanism of People’s Livelihood Security under Major Emergencies in Japan 2023RBYJGL-9); Xihua Normal University Pakistan Research Center 2023 Annual Project Funding (PSC23YB09); National Ethnic Affairs Commission “Belt and Road” Country and Regional Research Center Sichuan Normal University Southeast Asia Research Center 2024 Annual Project (2024DNYZC031); Ministry of Education Country and Regional Research Filing Center—Chengdu University Thailand Research Center 2024 Annual Project (SPRIT S202409).

References:

Yao Jinglong, Chen Haitao, Zhang Changsheng, et al. Practicing the New Development Concept of the “Belt and Road” Initiative: Promoting the High-Quality Development of the “China-Sri Lanka Joint Science and Education Center” [J]. Bulletin of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2024, 39(02): 373-378.

Xie Liangcai, Gao Song. Research on the National Vocational Qualification Framework System of Sri Lanka [J]. Vocational Education Forum, 2023, 38(11): 112-120.

Sun Xianpu, Yang Lu. The Evolution, Causes, and Development Trends of the Sri Lankan Crisis [J]. Indian Ocean Economic Studies, 2023(02): 82-96+154.

Du Min. New Trends in the Socialist Movement in Sri Lanka [J]. Marxism Studies, 2023(03): 141-150.

Liu Yidan, Wang Min. The Functional Changes of Political Parties in the Nation-Building Process of Sri Lanka [J]. South Asian Studies Quarterly, 2023(01): 80-98+158-159.