Political Commentary

The visit by IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva to Sri Lanka was widely described as a success for the government. She was fulsome in her praise of the country and its developmental potential. The grounds for this success and collaborative spirit go back to the inception of the agreement signed in March 2023 in the aftermath of Sri Lanka’s declaration of international bankruptcy. The IMF came in to fulfil its role as lender of last resort. The government of the day bit the bullet. It imposed unpopular policies on the people, most notably significant tax increases. At a moment when the country had run out of foreign exchange, defaulted on its debt, and faced shortages of fuel, medicine and food, the IMF programme restored a measure of confidence both within the country and internationally.

Problems and solutions in plural societies like Sri Lanka’s which have deep rooted ethnic, religious and linguistic cleavages cannot be decided unilaterally by one party. Instead they require a consciously inclusive approach. A major challenge for any government in Sri Lanka is to correctly identify the problems faced by different groups with strong identities and find solutions to them. The durability of democratic systems in divided societies depends less on electoral victories than on institutionalised inclusion, consultation, and negotiated compromise. When problems are defined only through the lens of a single political formation, even one that enjoys a large electoral mandate such as obtained by the NPP government, the policy prescriptions derived from that diagnosis will likely overlook the experiences of communities that may remain outside the ruling party. The result could end up being resistance to those policies, uneven implementation and eventual political backlash.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been investing his political capital in going to the public to explain some of the most politically sensitive and controversial issues. At a time when easier political choices are available, the president is choosing the harder path of confronting ethnic suspicion and communal fears. There are three issues in particular on which the president’s words have generated strong reactions. These are first with regard to Buddhist pilgrims going to the north of the country with nationalist motivations. Second is the controversy relating to the expansion of the Tissa Raja Maha Viharaya, a recently constructed Buddhist temple in Kankesanturai which has become a flashpoint between local Tamil residents and Sinhala nationalist groups. Third is the decision not to give the war victory a central place in the Independence Day celebrations.

The Constitutional Council stands out as one of Sri Lanka’s most important governance mechanisms particularly at a time when even long‑established democracies are struggling with the dangers of executive overreach. Sri Lanka’s attempt to balance democratic mandate with independent oversight places it within a small but important group of constitutional arrangements that seek to protect the integrity of key state institutions without paralysing elected governments. Democratic power must be exercised, but it must also be restrained by institutions that command broad confidence. In each case, performance has been uneven, but the underlying principle is shared.

In the space of 15 months, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has visited the North of the country more than any other president or prime minister. These were not flying visits either. The president’s most recent visit to Jaffna last week was on the occasion of Thai Pongal to celebrate the harvest and the dawning of a new season. During the two days he spent in Jaffna, the president launched the national housing project, announced plans to renovate Palaly Airport, to expedite operations at the Kankesanthurai Port, and pledged once again that racism would have no place in the country.

A positive feature of the government that is emerging is its responsiveness to public opinion. The manner in which it has been responding to the furor over the Grade 6 English Reader, in which a weblink to a gay dating site was inserted, has been constructive. Government leaders have taken pains to explain the mishap and reassure everyone concerned that it was not meant to be there and would be removed. They have been meeting religious prelates, educationists and community leaders. In a context where public trust in institutions has been badly eroded over many years, such responsiveness matters. It signals that the government sees itself as accountable to society, including to parents, teachers, and those concerned about the values transmitted through the school system.

Looking back at the past year, the anxiety among influential sections of the population that the NPP government would destabilise the country has largely been dispelled. There was concern that a government led by the JVP might not be respectful of private property in the Marxist tradition. These fears have not materialised. The transition of power was smooth, with no upheavals and no breakdown of governance. This continuity has contributed to trust building. Smooth political transitions following decisive electoral change are widely regarded as indicators of democratic consolidation rather than disruption. Democratic legitimacy is strengthened when new governments respect inherited institutions rather than seek to dismantle them. On this score, the government’s first year has been reassuring.

The government is rebuilding the cyclone-devastated lives, livelihoods and infrastructure in the country after the immense destruction caused by Cyclone Ditwah. The President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has been providing exceptional leadership by going into the cyclone affected communities in person, to mingle directly with the people there and to offer encouragement and hope to them. A president who can be in the midst of people when they are suffering and in sorrow is a true leader. In a political culture where leaders have often been distant from the everyday hardships of ordinary people, this visible presence would have a reassuring psychological effect.

Some opposition political parties have strived hard to turn the disaster of Cyclone Ditwah to their advantage. A calamity of such unanticipated proportions ought to have enabled all political parties to come together to deal with this tragedy. Failure to do so would indicate both political and moral bankruptcy. The main issue they have forcefully brought up is the government’s failure to take early action on the meteorological department’s warnings. The opposition even convened a meeting of their own with former president Ranil Wickremesinghe and other senior politicians who shared their experience of dealing with natural and man-made disasters of the past, and the present government’s failures to match them.

Sri Lanka was one of four Asian countries to be hit by cyclones at virtually the same time. The international media reported that cyclone-fueled downpours battered parts of Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia while Sri Lanka was struck by a separate storm. In those countries too, which are visited more regularly by cyclones than Sri Lanka, the death toll reached the hundreds. The death toll is presently 390 with a similar number remaining missing. The final death toll is likely to be a multiple of this figure as hitherto inaccessible place are reached. The full scale of the disaster wreaked on Sri Lanka by Cyclone Ditwah is still to be realised. Initial assessments indicate that more than 20,000 homes have been destroyed. Over 200 roads remain impassable, at least 10 bridges have been damaged, and sections of the rail network and national power grid affected.

The government has been continuously demonstrating an ambivalence to the implementation of the 13th Amendment to the constitution under which the provincial council system has been established. In its election manifesto, the NPP said it did not agree that provincial councils were the answer to the ethnic conflict. However, it also recognised that the Tamil and Muslim communities believed the provincial council system was in their interests. Therefore, the NPP promised to continue with it until they replaced it with something better. Government leaders have been articulating the same view more recently as well. They have also been issuing ambivalent statements on the timing of provincial council elections. The current position of the government appears to be that they will conduct the elections after the redemarcation of electorates takes place.

The budget for 2026 proposed by the government has been generally well received. The Ceylon Chamber of Commerce praised the plan, with its chairperson Krishan Balendra stating that “from a prrivate-sector perspective this Budget provides stability” and emphasising that “with the steps that were taken and the discipline we have seen since 2022, Sri Lanka avoided going down the same path as countries that suffered years of high inflation and collapsing exchange rates. This budget continues that stability.” On the opposition side, Harsha de Silva of the SJB acknowledged that the government “has shown prudence in aligning with international financial institutions”, even though his party will continue to scrutinise the human cost of the measures and the absence of a clear programme to achieve growth.

This past October 30 marked the 35th anniversary of a mass crime that has all but faded from public memory. The British High Commission, in collaboration with Collective for Historical Dialogue & Memory hosted a documentary screening and panel discussion to mark 35 years since the expulsion of Northern Muslims. On that day in 1990 the entire Muslim population of the Northern Province was ordered by the LTTE to leave their homes within hours. In Jaffna, the cultural capital of the Tamil people, families were given only two hours to leave. In other parts of the North the time ranged from one to two days. They were told they could take only their clothes and a few belongings. The LTTE justified the expulsion of the Muslims by claiming it was a security measure against collaboration with the government. At checkpoints, LTTE cadres seized money, jewellery, and deeds to property. Some women had their wedding necklaces pulled from their necks. Those who attempted to reason or plead were told that everything earned in Tamil Eelam belonged to Tamil Eelam.

Once again, Sri Lanka is at the crossroads. After decades of missed opportunities and delayed reforms, the conditions are there for a lasting political resolution of the ethnic conflict. The NPP government has the chance to resolve the country’s longest and most divisive conflict through Sri Lankan institutions, on its own terms. The government holds a two-thirds majority in parliament that allows it to amend the constitution and introduce the reforms that past governments promised but failed to deliver. It came to power on the back of a popular demand for system change, and the public expectation that followed that election was not for minor adjustments but for a deep restructuring of the state. The opposition is neither strong nor dominated by the racist and extremist voices that in the past sabotaged every attempt at reconciliation.

The present government is keenly aware it came to office with an overwhelming mandate from the people that is widely interpreted as one for “system change”. Its leaders often speak as if this mandate is a form of ownership, held in trust by them. This attitude is creating problems for both the government and the country. In democratic theory, legitimacy arises not solely from electoral victory but from the ongoing consent and participation of all citizens. The principle of democracy entails governance that reflects the will of the people, not just the majority, and ensures that minority voices are heard and respected.

In contrast to intolerance in governance and towards others who are deemed to be outsiders that is increasingly being manifested in the world, Sri Lanka is taking a different path. It is adopting an inclusive approach to all communities that is in the national interest and is winning international support. The country’s recent conduct at the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is a case in point. Rather than forcing a vote that would have been divisive and that would have pitted Sri Lanka against the Western countries promoting the resolution, the government opted for cooperation over confrontation. By doing so it signaled to the international community that the country is not taking sides internationally and prefers engagement and dialogue to confrontation and defiance.