Climate resilience takes centre stage as Sajith urges a national plan while the IMF warns Sri Lanka against delaying reforms.
Climate resilience has entered the centre of Sri Lanka’s political debate as Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa urged a presidential action plan on disaster preparedness, while the IMF warned that economic recovery cannot survive without deep governance and institutional reform.
The week also revealed how several separate storylines are now converging. Natural disaster planning, China’s reading of Sri Lanka’s political future, the next United States ambassador, the IMF’s tougher reform message, the Catholic Church’s succession process and the Tilvin-Waruna dispute all pointed to a single reality. The government and opposition are moving through a period where institutions, alliances and public trust are being tested at the same time.
The developments came during a week when the country’s political conversation was already dominated by arrests of ministers, officials and political figures accused of corruption. Former Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe’s son, Rakhitha Rajapakshe, and Charith Abeysinghe were taken into custody over allegations of receiving money from underworld figure “Harak Kata”. Media reports also suggested that several other powerful figures from the Rajapaksa family could face arrest. As these events unfolded, one main opposition bloc appeared visibly shaken.
Opposition Splits Into Two Camps
Sri Lanka’s opposition now appears divided into two broad camps. One group includes politicians who have contested repeatedly without success, lost public trust, held ministerial office under different governments, and now face corruption allegations or lawsuits. Though they describe themselves as the “United Opposition” or the “Common Opposition”, many voters view them as politically weakened.
By contrast, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya, or SJB, remains the main opposition force. Its MPs have not faced corruption charges, and the party has positioned itself as the principal clean opposition movement against the government. In the public mind, the two dominant political poles now appear to be the ruling “Malimawa” alliance and the SJB.
The government has built its current political identity around cracking down on crime and arresting those accused of theft. The SJB, meanwhile, has sought to expose government failures, file cases in court, and organise protests inside and outside Parliament.
Although both sides hold distinct political identities, there have been moments of cooperation. During the destructive Ditva cyclone, the SJB set aside party divisions to assist the government in helping affected people. Critics mocked this as “Sajith cutting deals with the government”. However, in other cases, including the former Speaker’s scandal, the Container 323 issue, the coal import controversy, and attempts to extend judges’ retirement age, the SJB strongly mobilised public opinion against the government.
Sajith Meets Anura Over Climate Resilience
Against this tense background, a significant meeting took place last week between President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa. Media outlets reported the meeting, but few knew the story behind it.
The discussion began after the President convened the National Disaster Management Council on June 30 at the Presidential Secretariat. Sajith, as an official member of the council, received an invitation.
Sajith has long been recognised by supporters as a politician who studies natural disasters and gives early warnings to the country. He did so during COVID-19 and again during the Ditva cyclone. In Parliament, he was also the first to warn about the possible impact of the El Niño climate phenomenon. Given earlier weaknesses in disaster response, the government did not ignore that warning and moved to convene the council.
Inside the SJB, some urged Sajith not to attend. They argued that the government was persecuting the opposition. Sajith, however, took a different position. He insisted that during a national crisis, the opposition must act for the people rather than through partisan calculations.
He prepared heavily for the meeting. He studied past disasters, including the tsunami, floods and cyclones. He also drafted proposals on how political authority should respond, what measures should protect citizens, and what relief systems should reach affected communities.
Yet Sajith faced a practical problem on the same day. His wife Jalani’s family had organised a religious almsgiving ceremony at their home. To manage both obligations, Sajith telephoned the President that morning and requested permission to present his report first at the council meeting. He explained that he needed to leave afterwards for the family event.
The President agreed. It was a rare concession, because opposition leaders traditionally speak after the President, Prime Minister and ministers.
A Warning on El Niño and Disaster Risk
At the meeting, the President informed those present that Sajith would speak first because he had another urgent duty. Sajith then delivered a detailed presentation on El Niño, which reportedly impressed council members.
He stressed that disaster preparedness and climate resilience must become national responsibilities above party politics.
“When our people’s lives and livelihoods are at risk, there must be only one side: Sri Lanka.”
Sajith warned that the 2026-2027 El Niño could become one of the strongest in decades. He said Sri Lanka could face drought followed by severe floods, creating what he described as a “climate double blow”. Therefore, he urged the country to move away from reactive disaster response and adopt proactive risk management based on scientific forecasts and early preparedness.
He presented three central messages. First, Sri Lanka must invest before disasters strike, because doing so saves lives, protects livelihoods, and reduces recovery costs. Second, the response must involve the whole government. Agriculture, water, energy, health, finance, security and local governance must coordinate closely. Third, resilience must be integrated. Food security, water, energy, health, infrastructure, biodiversity and financial stability are connected and must fit into one national policy framework.
Sajith also highlighted key priority areas. They included stronger national disaster preparedness and risk management, better water security through integrated reservoir management, climate-resilient agriculture and food security, modern early warning systems, improved disaster risk financing, heatwave and public health readiness, resilient critical infrastructure, and the mainstreaming of climate adaptation across government policy.
He noted that countries more exposed to climate risks now invest in anticipatory governance, integrated climate intelligence and science-based planning. Sri Lanka, he said, could learn from India’s improved climate forecasting and agricultural contingency planning. It could also study Australia’s broader resilience frameworks.
Presidential White Paper Proposed
Sajith emphasised that the government alone cannot build climate resilience. He said Parliament, state institutions, provincial councils, local authorities, scientists, academics, universities, the private sector, civil society, international development partners and local communities must work together.
Looking beyond the immediate risks of the 2026-2027 El Niño-Southern Oscillation, he proposed a comprehensive Presidential White Paper on national climate resilience and disaster preparedness. Such a document, he argued, could create a long-term, whole-of-government policy framework. It could also rise above political cycles and provide a clear national roadmap for future generations.
He expressed confidence that this effort could become a national doctrine. In his view, it could unite the government, Parliament, scientists, the private sector and civil society around a safer, better prepared and more resilient Sri Lanka.
Premadasa concluded by repeating that climate disruptions do not recognise party lines.
“Climate change does not see political divides. Floods do not vary by party. Drought affects every farmer. Heatwaves affect every family. Therefore, protecting our people must be a shared national responsibility.”
He said his ideas and recommendations would support the deliberations of the National Disaster Management Council. He also pledged readiness to back every initiative that protects the lives, livelihoods and future prosperity of Sri Lankans.
Sajith then sought permission to leave the meeting. Observers said his intervention left a positive impression on those present. Even government representatives reportedly acknowledged that his conduct during a national crisis was exemplary. Members from both sides saw it as a healthy political trend.
Has the JVP Moved Away From the Left?
When the JVP and NPP formed a government after winning the last election with a sweeping mandate, many Sri Lankans believed the country had elected a powerful leftist administration for the first time. Many also expected the new government to maintain close ties with China, the world’s most influential major socialist power.
Given the JVP’s historical relationship with China, some assumed that Chinese support would help build a strong socialist-oriented state. Others expected the JVP to deepen relations with the Chinese Communist Party and formally integrate itself into that network.
However, several developments at the 105th anniversary celebration of the Chinese Communist Party in Colombo last week have now raised questions about that assumption.
Several past Sri Lankan governments maintained close relations with China. During Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency, the relationship became especially strong. Maithripala Sirisena also continued that close engagement. Under both governments, China regularly marked the anniversary of the Communist Party in Sri Lanka, and priority at those events usually went to the sitting government and president. The main speech also tended to come from a pro-left figure within the government.
This year’s anniversary presented a different picture. Although a two-thirds left-leaning government now holds power, China appeared to give prominence not to the NPP government but to the SJB led by Sajith Premadasa. The SJB represents a right-wing, “humanitarian capitalist” position that differs sharply from Communist Party ideology.
The Chinese Embassy in Sri Lanka invited Sajith and informed him that he would receive a special speaking slot as a guest of honour.
Sajith Draws Attention at Chinese Event
The embassy also invited the President. However, he did not attend because of prior official commitments. JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva represented the government and delivered a speech in Sinhala from a prepared text.
Sajith, by contrast, delivered a fluent English speech without notes. His use of Chinese terms attracted attention and drew praise from the Chinese ambassador and other officials.
Another notable moment occurred when Tilvin Silva stood up and left the venue as soon as Sajith began speaking.
Former presidents Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who previously maintained close ties with China, attended the event. Namal Rajapaksa did not. Sagara Kariyawasam, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna party secretary, represented the Pohottuwa and delivered a speech.
Instead of treating the occasion purely as a diplomatic event, Sagara launched a political attack on the JVP-led government.
“It was during our government that we worked closely with China and brought massive development to the country. With Chinese assistance, we built the Southern Expressway, Hambantota Port, and Mattala Airport. But at that time, JVP MPs in the opposition accused us of corruption. Today, that same JVP is continuing the projects we started…”
Vajira Abeywardena then spoke for the UNP. He also spoke in English while using a prepared text, but few people appeared to pay attention. Veerasumana Weerasinghe delivered remarks on behalf of the Communist Party.
Sajith’s relationship with China did not begin recently. It goes back to the period when his father, Prime Minister Ranasinghe Premadasa, served in office. When J.R. Jayewardene was President, countries such as the United States, Britain and several Scandinavian nations supported Sri Lanka. During that period, Prime Minister Premadasa worked closely with China to secure Chinese aid. As a result, the Premadasa family formed a special relationship with China early on.
After the UNP government came to power in 2001, Ranil Wickremesinghe, then seen as a strongly right-leaning leader, received an opportunity to visit China. He included Sajith Premadasa, who was then a deputy minister, to balance relations with China and secure assistance. During that visit, Ranil reportedly presented Sajith as an important political figure to Chinese leaders.
Whether China gave Sajith a special guest speech because of those old ties, or because it was reading possible future political shifts, remains unclear. What is clear is that the prominence given to Sajith at the event was politically significant.
China Signals Unease With the Government
According to available information, even members of the ruling “Malima” government who attended the event questioned China’s decision. Some interpreted it as the beginning of a larger political shift. Others viewed it as a subtle warning from China to the ruling party.
The question is clear. In a country governed by a left-wing party, why did China give more visible importance to Sajith and the SJB, which are seen as supporters of “humanitarian capitalism”?
One possible explanation involves alleged failures by the current government to fulfil commitments made to China. Many expected China to expand investments significantly under the NPP/JVP administration. China was among the first countries to offer support when the current government took office. During the President’s first official visit to China, several agreements were signed, including major investment projects.
One major project discussed was a multi-billion-dollar oil refinery in Hambantota. Several other initiatives were also considered.
At that time, China reportedly had one main condition. It wanted Sri Lanka to lift restrictions imposed during the Ranil Wickremesinghe administration on Chinese research vessels entering Sri Lankan waters. The President is said to have responded positively. He reportedly agreed to remove the ban and revise the relevant agreements.
However, nearly two years later, the revised agreement has still not been formally implemented. China has reportedly sent repeated reminders, but the government has delayed the process for different reasons.
A committee appointed by the President has already completed drafting the agreement. Yet officials have not officially released it. According to available reports, China learned of this delay about two weeks ago. Some now suggest that China’s decision to give greater prominence to the opposition at the Communist Party anniversary may have flowed from this frustration.
Washington Post and Ambassador Question
Last week, this column reported that American representatives were preparing major investments in Colombo Port, Hambantota, Mattala Airport and Trincomalee Harbour. It also reported that the United States was planning several maritime-related projects in Sri Lanka.
This week, further information suggests that the initial stages of those investments are already underway.
Earlier, this column also reported that Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to the United States, Mahinda Samarasinghe, had decided to step down before completing his term. He had served under Presidents Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Anura Kumara Dissanayake. He submitted his resignation to the Foreign Ministry.
It is now reported that the Foreign Ministry has formally accepted that resignation and informed Washington.
This leaves the government with a crucial question: who will become Sri Lanka’s next ambassador to the United States?
According to information reaching this column, the President has already identified a suitable candidate. The person is said to be very close to him. The plan is reportedly to appoint a trusted confidant who can strengthen direct ties between Sri Lanka and the United States.
IMF Warns Against Delaying Reform
Last week, a delegation from the International Monetary Fund visited Sri Lanka. It held talks with the President and then addressed the media. During its public comments, the delegation praised Sri Lanka for recovering after a severe economic crisis.
However, after leaving the country, the IMF released its final report on Sri Lanka’s economy. That report contained serious warnings. The difference between the public praise and the written report has created speculation that the IMF deliberately adopted a tougher tone in its official assessment.
The report said Sri Lanka has achieved short-term stability. However, it warned that political leaders must not delay structural reforms for political reasons.
The IMF highlighted several concerns. It said subsidies, including fuel, electricity, fertiliser support and cash transfers such as “Aswesuma”, must remain temporary. It warned that Sri Lanka must maintain strict fiscal discipline to meet the target of a 2.3% primary budget surplus by 2027. Continued politically motivated spending, it said, could reverse progress in debt recovery.
Early signs of economic strain are already visible. Inflation rose sharply from 1.6% in February to 5.5% in May, driven by global energy price increases. Tourist arrivals, a key source of foreign exchange, have slowed. Foreign reserve accumulation has also weakened. The Central Bank was forced to raise interest rates by 100 basis points to control inflation.
The IMF also stressed that reforms must move beyond economic targets. It said governance and institutional restructuring must form part of the reform programme.
It called for stronger financial sector supervision, improved cybersecurity systems and tougher anti-money laundering laws. It also warned that job creation and poverty reduction will not remain sustainable without deep reforms in taxation, labour laws, trade policy and the investment environment.
The report also criticised delays in rebuilding infrastructure in disaster-affected areas, citing administrative inefficiency.
Although debt restructuring is nearing completion, the IMF stressed the need to strengthen an independent public debt management office. It said such an office would help Sri Lanka avoid future debt traps.
As Sri Lanka prepares for the seventh review under the Extended Fund Facility, the release of the next loan tranche will depend on whether the government makes these difficult decisions.
Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith’s Retirement Moves Forward
This column previously reported that Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith was nearing the end of his term and would soon retire. Although some expected his retirement earlier, after the 2019 Easter attacks, the late Pope reportedly extended his service because of his role in the campaign for justice.
However, after the election of Pope Leo, a stricter position emerged. All cardinals above the age of 75 would have to retire. This column also reported earlier that the Vatican had requested three names for the next Archbishop of Colombo.
That process now appears to be moving ahead. The Catholic Church recently issued a statement confirming that Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith submitted his retirement letter after reaching the age limit. This was the first official confirmation made public in Sri Lanka.
Several months ago, through the “Inside Politics” column, we exclusively reported what took place during Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith’s final visit to the Vatican. We reported that he briefly met Pope Leo and requested an extension of his tenure. We also reported that the Pope declined the request, citing the long-standing tradition that archbishops retire after turning 75.
At that same meeting, Pope Leo reportedly instructed Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith to submit three names for consideration as the next Archbishop. This column reported that through State Secrets at the time.
Pope Leo has now summoned cardinals from around the world to the Vatican for meetings on the 26th and 27th of this month. A total of 237 cardinals are expected to attend. Several important matters are scheduled for discussion.
According to information available to this column, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith is also preparing to attend the Vatican gathering. During the meeting, he is expected to present three nominees to the Pope for consideration as the next Archbishop.
Unofficial information suggests that the three names are Bishop Anthony, Auxiliary Archbishop of Colombo; Anton Ranjith, Auxiliary Archbishop of Colombo; and Reginald Wickramasinghe, Bishop of Galle. We have also learned that Pope Leo has allocated only three minutes for each cardinal during these meetings.
Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith’s term as Archbishop is due to end on November 15 this year. Therefore, the Pope is expected to give an indication about the new appointment about two months before that date. As a result, Sri Lanka is expected to begin 2027 with a new Archbishop for the first time in many years.
After his Vatican visit, Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith is expected to make his customary tour of Europe before returning to Sri Lanka.
The disclosure made by this column in “Inside Politics” on June 7 has now been supported by a letter released to the media by the Catholic Church last week. One section of that letter states that Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith submitted his resignation to the Pope immediately after reaching 75. This marks the first public confirmation that he formally sent his resignation to the Pope.
Tilvin Silva and Waruna Rajapaksa Clash
Another political controversy now centres on allegations linked to lawyer Rakhitha Rajapaksa and former SJB organiser Charith Abeysinghe. Both were arrested by the Bribery Commission over a claim involving Rs. 20 million allegedly connected to underworld figure “Harak Kata”.
After the arrest, the SJB removed Charith Abeysinghe from all party positions.
However, SJB organiser Waruna Deeptha Rajapaksa later made a controversial claim at a press briefing. He alleged that JVP General Secretary Tilvin Silva had telephoned Charith Abeysinghe.
Tilvin Silva immediately denied the claim. He said it was completely false and announced legal action.
Waruna Rajapaksa then responded on social media. He challenged the denial and questioned the wording of the JVP’s official statement. He also argued sarcastically that the language used in the statement was confusing. He claimed the party had misinterpreted his remarks and continued to question its position, escalating the political exchange further.
The JVP’s media unit issued a statement saying it was necessary to clarify what it called a serious false statement made by Waruna Rajapaksa at a Samagi Jana Balawegaya media briefing held on the 26th.
According to the JVP, Waruna had claimed that Charith Abeysinghe, who was arrested on the 25th on bribery charges, had received a telephone call two months earlier from party General Secretary Tilvin Silva and had been invited to meet the President.
The JVP said the claim was completely false. It argued that the statement reflected the confusion and political bankruptcy of the SJB in the face of a corruption case linked to underworld connections. The party also said it was regrettable that the SJB had reached a point where it relied on Waruna Rajapaksa to repeat what it described as baseless stories at a media briefing.
The statement added that while other parties may recruit people without considering their background for political reasons, the JVP had no need or intention to include criminals in its party or in governance. It said attempts to divert attention from criminal cases and whitewash criminals through false claims would fail.
The JVP strongly condemned what it called attempts by certain SJB members to spread falsehoods and defame the party. It also said it would not hesitate to take legal action.
The statement was issued by the Media Unit of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna on 2026.06.26.
Soon after the statement appeared, Waruna again challenged it publicly on social media. He asked viewers to verify whether it was real or fake. He suggested that it sounded unlike something the JVP would usually do. However, because it had gone to the media, he said he assumed it was genuine.
He sarcastically thanked the JVP media unit and said it was “next level” for the party to issue a press release responding to his media briefing. He added that the attention itself helped promote his press conference.
Waruna also questioned the wording of the JVP release. He said the statement referred to Tilvin Silva calling Charith Abeysinghe and inviting him to meet the President. According to Waruna, that was exactly what he had said. Therefore, he argued, the wording confirmed his claim instead of denying it.
He then mocked the language used in the statement. He said that if the JVP leadership did not understand Sinhala properly, it should either improve its language skills or hire staff who could understand it correctly.
On recruitment, Waruna referred to the JVP’s claim that it does not include criminals in governance. He countered by recalling remarks attributed to President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in Parliament regarding Ibrahim Nana. He used that example to suggest inconsistency in the party’s position.
Finally, Waruna responded to the JVP’s threat of legal action. He said using legal procedures was appropriate and preferable. He then made a sarcastic remark contrasting legal action with what he described as other enforcement methods used in politics.
As the disputes over climate policy, China, the IMF, the Vatican and anti-corruption arrests continue to unfold, Sri Lankan politics is entering another unpredictable week. Sajith’s call for a national disaster plan showed a rare moment of bipartisan engagement. Yet the battles around governance, foreign policy and corruption show that the country’s larger political fractures remain unresolved.
