In a nation long entangled in the chaos of political rivalry, extremism, and public disillusionment, Sri Lanka faces yet another moment of reckoning. With President Anura Kumara Dissanayake at the helm, the country stands at a fragile crossroads between democratic renewal and dangerous relapse. While the government must hold its ground on essential reforms, it must also avoid becoming too idealistic especially in curtailing the benefits of Members of Parliament and state officials. After all, excesses under previous governments should not justify knee-jerk austerity.
A Nation in Need of Unity
Let’s distill the critical takeaways. First, the government must adopt a pragmatic, democratic approach to resolving Sri Lanka’s crises. The burden of this responsibility now rests on President Dissanayake. Second, while tackling corruption remains vital, the political culture must also purge aggression and violence root causes of past national failures. Third, the opposition must cooperate with the government. Without this, Sri Lanka risks repeating the unrest of the 1980s. Fourth, development especially for the impoverished must take precedence over partisan squabbles. Fifth, a consensus must be forged between the government and opposition, especially over the local government crisis. One proposed solution? Allowing the NPP to lead in Colombo, with the opposition managing councils where it holds majorities. Only through such cooperation can peace, harmony, and national progress take root.
Cleaning the Past, Stabilizing the Present
Despite implementation hiccups, this administration cannot be labeled corrupt a sentiment increasingly echoed by international observers. Unlike its predecessors, the current government has taken visible steps to crack down on fraud. True, not every allegation may hold water, but corruption and opulent lifestyles among past leaders were undeniable contributors to economic collapse.
It is important, however, not to swing the pendulum too far. Even in democratic nations, MPs receive reasonable salaries and pensions. Luxury may be curtailed, yes but not dignity. Unfortunately, in their efforts to reform, the NPP risks embracing a Bolshevik mindset. Salaries of their MPs shouldn’t fund the party directly. These practices must be revisited, and President Dissanayake must tread carefully.
Rhetoric vs. Reality
The NPP’s approach to the IMF despite past criticisms is a step in the right direction. They must act in the national interest, even if it contradicts earlier statements. Similarly, the opposition should not exploit shifts in government policy as an excuse for inflammatory rhetoric. Economic stability has been largely maintained without suppressing the private sector, a fact that cannot be dismissed.
The JVP, now the political base of the NPP, has evolved. The radicalism of old is no longer its defining trait. Still, more transformation is needed, especially in resisting the urge to control political discourse through confrontation.
Looking Back to Look Ahead
Blaming the JVP solely for the 1980s violence is intellectually lazy. Government figures including Ranil Wickremesinghe must also bear accountability for events like the Batalanda atrocities. Today, the danger is history repeating itself though this time, the old forces do not hold the reins of power.
Whatever criticisms one may level against the NPP, they have earned a strong electoral mandate. This should be respected. Ranil’s current efforts to mobilize opposition forces do not appear aimed at democratic engagement but rather destabilization. The result? Potential chaos, violence, and irreversible harm to Sri Lanka’s fragile socio-political fabric.
Tracking Success and Failure the Right Way
As someone observing from abroad with no partisan agenda and as a trained political scientist the government’s core mandate remains intact. Objective analysis, not emotional reaction, should guide evaluations of governance. Successes and failures must be measured by actions against promises, and more scientifically, through SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis. Sri Lanka deserves nothing less than critical and rational scrutiny.
The JVP’s Crossroads
It is unprecedented for a JVP-linked party to gain broad-based democratic support. Historically, the JVP was a Marxist insurgency born of rural youth frustration in the 1960s. Its early leadership embraced violence and revolution. As a young lecturer in 1971, I opposed them and nearly paid the price. But decades later, it is evident that even the JVP has matured. Leaders now understand past mistakes and have shifted toward democratic participation.
Culture, Conflict, and a Path Forward
Sri Lanka’s toxic political culture fueled by tribalism, pride, and confrontation runs deep. From heated family debates to public aggression, the country often appears caught in an endless loop of hostility. And despite being a Buddhist-majority nation, the nation’s spiritual ethos seems absent in public conduct. Theravada dogmatism, in particular, has empowered arrogant and militant discourse. Buddhist and even Christian clergy have not been immune, using platforms like YouTube to promote division.
Dogmatism in politics treating beliefs as absolute truths now cripples governance. The government and opposition are deadlocked over forming local councils. Despite winning a majority, the government must recognize public dissatisfaction. Voter bases are already eroding just six months into office. Look at Australia: in May, Labor won an increased majority under Anthony Albanese. Sri Lanka would do well to take notes from such democratic maturity.
