Tag: Sri Lanka

  • Is Sri Lanka quietly drifting back into India’s orbit?

    Is Sri Lanka quietly drifting back into India’s orbit?

    Long wary of being seen as a satellite of India, Sri Lanka has spent decades navigating its foreign alignments—at times courting the West, and more recently, leaning heavily toward China. That pivot, especially during the Rajapaksa era, brought a surge of Chinese investment but also coincided with one of the most severe economic crises in the island’s post-independence history. Now, under the weight of that collapse, Sri Lanka appears to be rebalancing. The island nation is quietly edging back toward New Delhi—not through grand gestures, but via a deliberate flow of strategic agreements and behind-the-scenes diplomacy.

    For Colombo, this shift marks a pragmatic recalibration. What was once seen as a one-sided relationship with India is increasingly viewed as a possible path out of economic despair. For New Delhi, the moment offers both a strategic opening and a pressing imperative. By providing critical aid, essential supplies, and infrastructure investment, India is not only helping to stabilize its southern neighbor but also reinforcing its presence in a region where Beijing’s influence has grown markedly.

    Modi’s visit to Sri Lanka

    Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister who has skillfully crafted diplomatic relationships across the region, recently made a significant visit to Colombo. The trip—his first to Sri Lanka since President Anura Kumara Dissanayake took office in September last year—served as a symbol of the changing dynamics in South Asian geopolitics.

    During the visit, India and Sri Lanka signed seven key agreements spanning defense, energy, digital infrastructure, health, and trade. The move signaled a recalibration in regional alliances, as both nations work to counterbalance China’s growing influence in the Indian Ocean.

    Initially, concerns in New Delhi centered around Dissanayake’s leftist background and potential leanings toward Beijing. However, those apprehensions have since softened. Instead of drifting closer to China, Colombo appears to be re-engaging with New Delhi in a more pragmatic and strategic manner.

    Dissanayake reassured Modi that Sri Lanka would not permit its territory to be used in any way that might threaten India’s security. Modi, in turn, welcomed the gesture, emphasizing the deeply interconnected nature of security interests between the two nations.

    India Backs Sri Lanka’s Core Needs

    Amid an economic collapse and mounting debt to China, India provided vital supplies and assistance when Sri Lankans needed them most. While China invested heavily in large-scale infrastructure projects—many of which offered limited benefits to ordinary citizens—India’s approach focused on immediate relief and practical support. This made a lasting impact on the public and nudged the Sri Lankan government toward rebuilding trust and strengthening ties with New Delhi.

    That relationship is now evolving. Expanding beyond emergency aid, India is investing across multiple sectors. As a symbol of this growing partnership, the two leaders recently inaugurated—virtually—the construction of a 120-megawatt solar power plant, a joint venture funded by India and aimed at advancing Sri Lanka’s energy future.

    Sri Lanka needs to balance

    While Sri Lanka is working to repair its relationship with India, cutting ties with China is far from simple. China remains Sri Lanka’s largest bilateral creditor, accounting for over half of the island’s $14 billion in bilateral debt at the time of its sovereign default in 2022. The economic collapse, however, forced Colombo to rethink its heavy dependence on China—a reliance that had contributed to the crisis—and created space for India to step in with substantial financial and material assistance.

    Nonetheless, China’s role in restructuring Sri Lanka’s infrastructure loans remains vital. President Dissanayake’s first official overseas visit to New Delhi in December signaled a renewed diplomatic warmth, but his subsequent trip to Beijing in January underscored the balancing act Colombo must maintain. That same month, Sri Lanka signed a $3.7 billion investment deal with a Chinese state-owned company to build an oil refinery in the country’s south, reaffirming Beijing’s enduring economic footprint.

    It’s evident that Sri Lanka still looks to China for large-scale funding—support that India, thus far, has been cautious to extend. As such, it would be premature to declare a pro-India tilt in Colombo’s foreign policy. Instead, Sri Lanka appears to be navigating a delicate path, seeking to balance both powers in pursuit of its own national interests.

    What happens next?

    It’s clear that Trump’s trade policies have shaken the global order. China is no longer the China the world once knew; it is now seeking broader relationships rather than maintaining a confrontational posture. This shift will inevitably influence dynamics in South Asia as well. The region, with its massive population, represents a significant market that China cannot afford to ignore. Yet among South Asian nations, India stands out with the strongest purchasing power—making a stable relationship with New Delhi increasingly important for Beijing.

    India, for its part, remains deeply concerned about China’s growing influence in Sri Lanka, which it considers part of its traditional sphere of interest. As China recalibrates its global strategy, it may seek to ease regional tensions with India, potentially stepping back from past hostilities. In this evolving landscape, the groundwork is being laid for improved relations between India and Sri Lanka—an alignment that could help India reclaim its influence in the region. At the same time, it offers Sri Lanka a valuable escape from the strategic and economic trap it has been struggling to navigate.

  • Sri Lanka: The New Communist Hotspot in Asia

    Sri Lanka: The New Communist Hotspot in Asia

    Sri Lanka, once on the brink of collapse, now finds hope in communism. Frustrated with conventional political parties, dynastic politics, and rampant corruption, the people have rallied behind the country’s communist party, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), and its alliance under the banner of the National People’s Power (NPP). Last month, voters elected Anura Kumara Dissanayake, the party leader and former revolutionary, as president. The snap parliamentary elections he called led to a resounding victory for the party, which secured nearly two-thirds of the seats in Parliament.

    This remarkable victory for the JVP marks a significant shift in Sri Lanka’s political landscape, driven by widespread dissatisfaction with previous governments. Sri Lanka’s newly elected communist government now inspires communist parties across the region, who view it as a model for achieving their own political ambitions.

    However, this transformation has alarmed democracy advocates. In a small, politically volatile nation, many fear that Sri Lanka could transition into a one-party communist state, similar to China or Vietnam. The rise of a communist government in South Asia also promises to reshape regional politics, potentially altering the balance of power.

    The election for the 17th Parliament of Sri Lanka, held on November 14, 2024, mirrored the presidential election from two months earlier, but with an even more decisive victory for President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his communist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) party, now led by Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya. The National People’s Power (NPP) emerged as the largest group in Parliament, securing 61.65% of the popular vote and winning a supermajority with 159 seats out of the total 225. The Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) became the main opposition, capturing only 17.66% of the vote and a reduced total of 40 seats.

    Additionally, the Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi won 8 seats, the New Democratic Front secured 5 seats, and the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, the winner of the previous election, fell to just 3 seats—a sharp decline from the 145 seats they had secured in the last election. This outcome reflected public dissatisfaction with the ousted leader Mahinda Rajapaksa and his political dynasty. The NPP’s 159 seats marked a historic achievement, surpassing all other Sri Lankan political parties and securing the second-highest proportion of seats in the nation’s history. The NPP won every district except Batticaloa. This was also the first election since 1977 in which a single party achieved a supermajority, and the first time a non-Tamil political party won the former separatist Jaffna District. The results delivered a clear verdict on how the 2022 Sri Lankan political crisis reshaped the country’s political landscape, as ultra-nationalism gave way to communism, marking a dramatic shift from global trends, or something akin to British politics.

    Sri Lanka’s victory marks the second instance of a fully communist government in South Asia without any coalition with centrist parties, following Nepal. This achievement, in a region once dominated by nationalism, is a significant milestone for communism as a global movement seeking to expand its influence. South Asia, one of the most populous regions in the world, has not embraced communism despite being fertile ground for it. Many hope that the communist victory in Sri Lanka will inspire communist factions in other South Asian countries.

    In India, once a communist hotspot, the movement now has very low or negligible representation in parliament, holding only a small state. Beyond that, communists have no significant role in Indian politics. Nepal, despite having a communist president and prime minister in the past, now experiences large splits within coalitions with centrist parties, holding little power compared to before. While many expected communism to fade from the region, Sri Lanka offers new hope. The country is already deeply tied to China through massive economic debt, making it easier for China to operate and spread communism from this Indian Ocean island, a gateway to the Indian subcontinent.

    Reports indicate that Indian communists are already celebrating this victory as they struggle for survival, particularly in Kerala, the only Indian state still governed by communists. The triumph of communism over nationalism is something they have long desired. In Nepal, the communist party is gaining ground as people grow frustrated with frequent changes in government. In other religiously dominated countries in the region, like Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the Maldives, communist influence remains weak. However, in Bangladesh, there have been reports of communist-linked parties hoping for a communist government. As communism is a pan-nationalist ideology, Sri Lanka’s victory could inspire and support other communist movements across the region.

    While many believe a communist Sri Lanka could emerge through the systematic occupation that communism deploys, others question how long the island can remain united, given its ethnic and cultural divisions and the fact that the population is only united by their hatred of the previous government. The United States will likely oppose the growth of communism, particularly with the Trump administration in charge. The country is highly volatile, and easily influenceable by the U.S., as its people are both educated and, at the same time, hopeless. India, too, would not want a communist government that could align closely with China. They will probably attempt some form of cultural uprising. But for now, it is clear: Sri Lanka is red, and communism has once again opened a door to the Indian subcontinent.

  • Why Is South Asia So Involved in the Israel-Palestine Conflict?

    Why Is South Asia So Involved in the Israel-Palestine Conflict?

    There are countless problems to be fixed in the poor South Asian countries, including India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Maldives, and Nepal. Even though they have different positions and perspectives, they all struggle with poor living conditions, lack of employment, corruption, political dynasties, and more. While these issues dominate the daily lives of their populations, they are increasingly focused on a different concern: the Israel-Palestine conflict, which they seem to adopt as their own. In India, society is divided between pro-Israel and pro-Palestine supporters, and it has become a heated topic in Pakistan, where pro-Israel sentiment is almost unthinkable, but people have taken to the streets in support of Palestine. On September 29, pro-Hezbollah protesters clashed with police in the streets of Karachi, Pakistan’s largest city, after demonstrators attempted to reach the U.S. Consulate. The police fired tear gas as protesters threw stones and attempted to breach barriers. A similar wave of unrest is also rising in Bangladesh. Why? Why are these countries so deeply involved in this conflict?

    The answer is clear and specific: religion. South Asia is deeply intertwined with religion. Both the population and administration are heavily influenced by religious beliefs. The region, which is the birthplace of prominent religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism, is also home to around 600 million Muslims. Clashes between followers of Indian religions and Islam, as well as intra-Islamic conflicts, are common in these countries. Since Palestine is an emotional issue for Muslims globally, it has always featured prominently in South Asian society and politics. The Islamic countries in the region—Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the Maldives – harbor strong animosity toward Israel. Every incident in Gaza and the West Bank brings people to the streets, sparking anti-Israel protests. Calls for tougher actions by their governments against Israel, as well as protests against Western embassies and consulates, are common in these nations. Fundamentalist and terrorist groups unite in their anti-Israel stance, advocating for the boycott of Israeli products. Politicians in these countries are often reluctant to engage with Israeli officials because, regardless of their achievements, they risk being labeled as anti-religious or anti-national. The ongoing events in Gaza and Lebanon have further fueled hatred towards Israel among the population. Many Pakistanis believe that, as a nuclear power, Pakistan could do more to support groups fighting the holy war against Israel by supplying weapons, and they are willing to join the fight. A similar sentiment prevails in Bangladesh. Many believe that if the current conflict escalates into regional wars, people from Pakistan and Bangladesh, who are largely poor, unemployed, but deeply religious, could be recruited by these groups.

    In India, the situation is more complex. The socialist, communist, and Islamist parties, which rely on the votes of the more than 15 million-strong Muslim population, have consistently raised the Israel-Palestine issue in the public sphere. The Indian National Congress (INC), the grand old socialist party that led the government for most of independent India’s history, supported the two-state solution, recognizing both Israel and Palestine. However, the party and its government gave a clear preference to Palestine and its leaders, who were often celebrated as revolutionaries, with the Indian media also contributing to India’s pro-Palestine stance.

    However, when Narendra Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a Hindu nationalist party, came to power in 2014, the situation changed dramatically. While the government did not abandon the two-state solution, it shifted away from its pro-Palestine stance and gave more support to Israel. Modi, who developed a personal friendship with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, strengthened the relationship on a national level as well. Consequently, the Indian government became more aggressive in countering pro-Palestine narratives, promoting India’s historical ties with Jews, and pushing a more pro-Israel perspective.

    Cities in India that once saw massive rallies in solidarity with Palestine now witness almost no demonstrations for the cause. As the public became more educated about the Israel-Palestine conflict from its roots, many began to see Palestine as primarily an Islamist issue. As a result, Islamist organizations in India no longer receive the widespread public support they once did, causing significant disappointment among the country’s Muslim population

    This evolving landscape of distrust and fundamentalism has become another major concern in the region. South Asia has no direct connection to the Israel-Palestine conflict beyond religious ties, but it is now causing further divisions within societies, most visibly in India. India’s shifting stance towards Israel has generated significant discontent among its Islamic neighbors, causing their hatred for Israel to also evolve into hostility towards India. This is clearly evident in social media spaces, where Indian groups and those from neighboring Islamic countries are often in conflict. As always, this deepens the divisions within societies that are already fractured by religious views. Therefore, we can say that, aside from Israel and its immediate neighbors, South Asia is also heating up under the mounting tensions between Israel and Hezbollah.

  • Sri Lankan President to Hold Election for Communist Parliament

    Sri Lankan President to Hold Election for Communist Parliament

    As anticipated, Sri Lanka’s newly elected president, Anura Kumara Dissanayake, took decisive action on Tuesday, dissolving parliament and announcing a date for a general election. According to a government gazette notification, parliamentary elections are set for November 14, with the newly elected assembly convening on November 21. This move is not merely procedural; it is a fulfillment of a promise Dissanayake made during his campaign-to forge a new government.

    He is increasingly confident that the country’s prevailing disillusionment with traditional politics, coupled with the harsh realities of everyday life, may well fuel a rise in communist sentiment among the populace. By expediting the general election, he aims to broaden a voter base that garnered a mere 3% in the previous parliament election, which translated to only three seats out of 225 in parliament. For Dissanayake, the path forward hinges on establishing a legislative body that aligns with his leftist ideology, ensuring not just smooth governance but also a robust platform for policy-making in a time of profound change.

    Following Dissanayake’s swearing-in ceremony, Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena resigned, paving the way for Dissanayake to appoint a new prime minister and cabinet. The dissolution of parliament occurred just hours after Dissanayake swore in Harini Amarasuriya as the new interim prime minister, marking the first time in 24 years that a woman had led a Sri Lankan government. At 54, Amarasuriya, a university lecturer and activist, shares a similar background with Dissanayake and is also a member of his Marxist-leaning coalition party. With the communist party now at the helm, they find themselves in need of a functioning parliament.

    We cannot analyze the upcoming parliamentary election based on the results of the 2020 election, which followed the parliament under Mahinda Rajapaksa. The economic crisis and the mass protests in 2022, which ultimately forced Rajapaksa to flee the country, have fundamentally altered the political landscape of Sri Lanka. In the 2020 election, Rajapaksa’s Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) achieved a resounding victory, winning 145 out of 225 seats amid allegations of malpractices. The opposition, contesting through various alliances, had little impact; Sajith Premadasa, the runner-up in the presidential race, led the Samagi Jana Balawegaya alliance and secured 55 seats. The Tamil National Alliance, representing the ethnic Tamil minority, emerged as another significant player with 10 seats, while Dissanayake’s National People’s Power coalition placed fourth. However, the political landscape in Sri Lanka has undergone a dramatic transformation over the past four years.

    It is more insightful to analyze the recent presidential election, in which the SLPP-despite winning a majority in the last parliamentary elections-nominated a candidate from the Rajapaksa family. Nirmal Rajapaksa managed to garner only 4% of the votes and was ousted in the first round, suggesting the party has lost public support. In contrast, Ranil Wickremesinghe, the former president, contested the election under the banner of the United National Party (UNP)-the country’s long standing political party-receiving 17% of the votes. If the UNP can convert this into parliamentary representation, it could signal a revival for a party that performed poorly in the last parliamentary elections.

    The presidential election indicates that the main contest in the upcoming parliamentary elections will likely be between Dissanayake’s National People’s Power and Premadasa’s Samagi Jana Balawegaya. Both candidates emerged as significant contenders, securing around 40% of the votes in the final round. Dissanayake and his coalition, riding a wave of popularity, may carry this momentum into the upcoming election, while Premadasa, with his established political base and broad support, remains a formidable opponent.

    Sri Lanka’s administrative system, a semi-presidential republic, stands apart from those of its neighboring countries, such as India and the United Kingdom. Instead, it draws parallels to the political structures of France and Portugal, where a president coexists with a prime minister and a cabinet, both of whom are accountable to the legislature. As the country approaches a pivotal parliamentary election, the stakes are particularly high.

    Should Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s National People’s Power (NPP) alliance secure a majority, it could usher in a transformative era, shifting the nation from its entrenched Sinhalese nationalist identity toward a left-leaning governance. However, if the NPP fails to achieve this goal, the potential for unrest looms large.

    The electorate in Sri Lanka is notably responsive to prevailing trends, and currently, the NPP appears to hold the advantage. This sentiment may signal a significant ideological shift for the island nation, suggesting that Sri Lanka’s political trajectory is poised to lean further to the left.

  • Sri Lanka’s Communist President Sworn In

    Sri Lanka’s Communist President Sworn In

    Anura Kumara Dissanayake, a Marxist leader who has emerged victorious in Sri Lanka’s presidential election, has been inaugurated as the nation’s new president. He steps into this role amid a landscape fraught with severe economic distress, dire living conditions, and intricate geopolitical challenges. For many, Dissanayake embodies the hopes of the common people, symbolizing a shift away from the entrenched political dynasties that have long been associated with corruption and mismanagement. The electorate’s decisive rejection of the old political elite, held culpable for the ongoing economic malaise, has paved the way for this momentous change. Dissanayake’s ascendance is not merely a political victory; it signifies a profound desire for accountability and renewal in a country yearning for stability and progress.

    The presidential election advanced to a runoff for the first time in the country’s history, as no candidate managed to secure the requisite 50% of the votes in the initial round. Anura Kumara Dissanayake and opposition leader Sajith Premadasa emerged as the frontrunners, yet neither could claim outright victory, highlighting the hard fought election. As the second-preference votes were counted, Premadasa gained some ground, but Dissanayake’s initial lead proved insurmountable. The final results revealed a significant margin, with Premadasa garnering only 32.76% of the vote, nearly 10% behind Dissanayake, who ultimately won by a commanding lead of over 1.2 million votes. Following the tally of second-choice votes, Dissanayake was declared the victor, marking a pivotal moment for the nation. In stark contrast, Ranil Wickremesinghe, who took office amid the economic turmoil of 2022 and implemented stringent austerity measures, languished in third place with a mere 17.27% of the vote. Meanwhile, a member of the ousted Rajapaksa family trailed far behind, finishing fourth with just 3%, a reflection of the electorate’s growing disenchantment with the Rajapaksa dynasty.

    Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s victory as the leader of the hardline leftist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) and a prominent figure in the broader National People’s Power (NPP) coalition is widely regarded as a watershed moment for his party. In the 2019 presidential election, the NPP managed to secure a mere 3% of the vote, while the JVP currently holds only three seats in parliament. Historically, the JVP has been perceived as an unelectable fringe group, tarnished by its involvement in violent uprisings and targeted assassinations that claimed thousands of lives in the 1980s. The party has also faced multiple bans over the years, further entrenching its reputation as a radical outlier in Sri Lankan politics. Dissanayake’s ascent challenges these long-held perceptions, signaling a potential recalibration of the political landscape.

    Since the early 2020s, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has steadily gained political momentum, driven by Sri Lanka’s deepening economic and political crisis. As the nation declared itself virtually bankrupt, a pervasive disillusionment with the entrenched political parties and leaders that had long held sway began to take root. Anura Kumara Dissanayake adeptly harnessed this growing discontent, dedicating the two years following the protests that ousted Rajapaksa to cultivating grassroots support. Under Dissanayake’s leadership, the National People’s Power (NPP) attracted a wave of new voters, championing an agenda of anti-corruption and transparency while toning down the JVP’s previously extreme Marxist rhetoric. In a deliberate effort to reshape the party’s image, Dissanayake sought to distance it from its violent past, publicly apologizing for the killings committed during earlier insurrections.

    In an election centered on the pressing need for economic recovery, Anura Kumara Dissanayake skillfully tapped into the anger and frustration that had fueled the Aragalaya protests. He wholeheartedly embraced the movement’s critique of the political elite, calling for an end to corruption and political patronage, while assuring the public that those responsible for past wrongdoings would be held accountable. Dissanayake went a step further by pledging to renegotiate the terms of the IMF deal, which many viewed as excessively punitive towards the country’s most vulnerable populations. This clear stance resonated deeply with the electorate, dispelling any lingering doubts and leading them to decisively cast their votes for Dissanayake as the next president.

    Dissanayake’s victory has ignited considerable concern in New Delhi, as the ascent of a pro-communist, pro-China leader in Colombo presents a formidable challenge for India. With Sri Lanka already burdened by significant debt to China, there are fears that Dissanayake may seek to bolster ties with Beijing, a move that could serve China’s strategic interests. Compounding these anxieties is the apprehension among the Tamil community in Sri Lanka, which endured a tragic genocide under the previous Rajapaksa regime. Many Tamils harbor doubts about Dissanayake’s stance, particularly given his prior support for military actions during the civil war. As the situation unfolds, any grievances faced by the Tamil community could pose additional complications for India, underscoring the intricate geopolitical dynamics at play in the region.

    However, political experts believe that Sri Lanka cannot progress without the support of its larger neighbor. They argue that Dissanayake’s brand of communism has been diluted by the need for practicality, suggesting he may ultimately seek to strengthen relationships with India. A strong partnership with India could enable Sri Lanka to effectively navigate its geopolitical landscape, and potentially lift the country out of its economic dilemma.

  • Sri Lanka Heads to Polls to Choose Next President

    Sri Lanka Heads to Polls to Choose Next President

    Sri Lanka is set to hold a crucial presidential election on Saturday, following years of political and economic turmoil that nearly brought the nation to its knees. While this lush, green island is often admired for its natural beauty, it is equally known for its entrenched political dynasties, favoritism, civil war, corruption, and destructive governance. Home to 23 million people, the Indian Ocean nation has endured widespread hunger, medical shortages, and unemployment during the worst economic crisis in its history. In response, a youth-led movement, known locally as the Aragalaya, emerged two years before and successfully ousted the authoritarian president Gotabaya Rajapaksa, bringing an end to his powerful family dynasty. Although two years have passed, improvements have been slow, and the country’s recovery remains incomplete.

    As Sri Lanka gears up to elect a new president on Saturday – the first election since Rajapaksa’s downfall – many believe the economic crisis continues to wreak havoc on daily life, and the optimism that once fueled the Aragalaya movement has largely diminished. Analysts highlight a pervasive disillusionment with traditional politics, suggesting that no single candidate is likely to achieve a decisive victory. However, Three frontrunners have emerged: the current president, Ranil Wickremesinghe, who took office following Rajapaksa’s departure; opposition leader Sajith Premadasa; and Anura Kumara Dissanayake, whose left-wing coalition has recently gained momentum.

    While the Aragalaya movement sparked hopes for change and a break from the corrupt dynastic politics that have long dominated Sri Lanka, many view Wickremesinghe as part of the old, crooked establishment. As an unelected president without a popular mandate or a parliamentary majority, he has relied heavily on the support of the Rajapaksas party to push through his policies. Under Wickremesinghe’s government, none of the Rajapaksas or their close associates have faced investigation or consequences, despite widespread accusations of embezzling state assets and committing human rights abuses. In a telling sign of how little has changed, Namal Rajapaksa, the nephew of former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa and one of those accused of corruption, is also running for president.

    Premadasa, leader of the opposition for the past five years, has built a reputation as a champion of the poor, running on a platform of generous welfare policies. However, for large sections of the electorate, the desire for a decisive break from the past has fueled a surge of support for a former outsider: left-wing leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, head of the Marxist National People’s Power (NPP) coalition. His rallies have drawn large crowds, attracted by bold promises to hold those who looted Sri Lanka’s assets accountable and deliver deep systemic change, including an end to corruption – core demands of the Aragalaya. However, concerns remain over Dissanayake’s Marxist party, which led a bloody armed revolt in the 1980s using guerrilla tactics against its opponents, leaving a legacy that continues to cast suspicion over the party’s intentions.

    Sri Lanka, a nation that endured over 26 years of civil war and remains deeply divided along ethnic lines, has traditionally seen elections dominated by issues of race, religion, and conflict. However, this time, the election is primarily focused on the economy. Ranil Wickremesinghe, a six-time former prime minister who took over as president for the final two years of Rajapaksa’s term, is positioning himself as the candidate of economic stability. He has negotiated a $2.9 billion  bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), strengthened foreign currency reserves, and brought inflation under control.

    Though long queues at petrol stations have vanished and vital foreign imports have resumed, poverty levels have doubled in the past two years, now affecting 25% of the population. Wickremesinghe’s unpopular policies are widely blamed for worsening conditions, hitting the poorest hardest. Many have questioned the strict terms of the IMF loan, including high taxes and limited long-term debt relief, with some analysts criticizing Wickremesinghe for negotiating a flawed deal. However, many believe this election is just another performance by a well-connected political elite, designed to deceive the public.

  • What Caused So Much Anti-India Sentiment in the Indian Subcontinent?

    What Caused So Much Anti-India Sentiment in the Indian Subcontinent?

    Bollywood and Indian policymakers dominated the Indian subcontinent until the last decade. The Indian subcontinent, including Islamic countries like Afghanistan and Pakistan, maintained a good relationship with India. Countries like the Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan acted more like India’s satellites. They developed and evolved using India as a model, and India was generous to its neighbors, offering assistance in areas from education, health, to the satellite services. This collaboration led to the formation of SAARC, which was one of the most effective regional bodies.

    The people of these countries shared a strong cultural bond, enjoying the same movies, music, and cricket and admiring stars from each other’s nations. Despite nationalism, there was a sense of fondness and unity. However, in 2024, the scenario has changed dramatically. The union and sentiments that once bound them together are no longer present. Politicians, people, and even artists are expressing hostility toward each other, with social media filled with hate comments. Anti-India factions are ruling in Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Maldives, and have gained strength in Sri Lanka and Nepal. Recently, a violent riot in Bangladesh toppled an India-supported government, revealing a clear rise in anti-India sentiment. Now, it seems only Bhutan remains allied with India in the subcontinent. What caused such a split between these countries that once seemed as close as in a Bollywood drama?

    India, as the largest secular democratic republic, was a role model for its fellow South Asian states. Even when they had disputes with India, they admired it. While some Islamist countries and the United States, which was opposed to Russia, propagated against India, people in these countries were fond of India, its secularism, and its culture. Indian Bollywood movies facilitated this cultural exchange significantly. Bollywood films, with their family values and cultural closeness, attracted large audiences in these countries, creating hardcore fans who cherished Bombay dreams. Bollywood produced content that appealed to these audiences and included more artists from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and other countries, resulting in significant box office collections for Bollywood movies in these regions. At one point, despite border tensions, Pakistan was one of the largest contributors to Bollywood’s box office revenue.

    Cricket was also a unifying factor, as India provided facilities to promote the sport in these countries. Indian cricket and hockey stars were admired across the region. A similar cultural exchange occurred in reverse, with Pakistani musicians and Sri Lankan cricketers becoming big stars in India. Together, they formed a friendly alliance. The wars at the borders and foreign interests did not disturb this friendly environment.

    But things began to change over the last decade, specifically after Narendra Modi and his Hindu nationalist party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), came to power in 2014. The rise of the Hindu nationalist party caused widespread concern in Islamic countries, leading them to question India’s secular image among their own people. Comments from BJP leaders were widely circulated, giving more spotlight to Islamic factions in countries like Pakistan, the Maldives, and Bangladesh. The public in these countries slowly began to fall out of love with India. Economic downturns in these countries were also redirected into India-hatred by local politicians, who blamed India for various problems. Jealousy played a role as well; in the past, everyone seemed to grow together, but now only India was progressing, leading to the perception that India didn’t care about them and was taking away their opportunities and overshadowing them on the global stage.

    The decline of Bollywood also contributed to this cultural divide. As Bollywood started producing more propaganda-based movies instead of the traditional romantic dramas, the films lost their connection with markets in Pakistan and other regions. Meanwhile, the youth, especially Gen Z, began exploring Hollywood and Korean movies instead of Indian content, further weakening cultural ties.

    But political analysts point to another important factor: the influence of social media on a predominantly young population. As social media spaces are heavily utilized by propagandists, minor incidents in distant places, which mainstream media usually neglect, have started to be highlighted and shape the national mood. This has further strained the already deteriorating connections between people and policymakers. Additionally, outsiders with vested interests have begun to exploit the situation. The United States and the United Kingdom have been culturally disseminating anti-India narratives in the surrounding countries, while Saudi Arabia and Qatar are advancing Islamic interests. Meanwhile, China has heavily invested in the region through infrastructure projects that small-income countries cannot afford to repay, pulling them out of India’s sphere of influence. Anti-Indian groups in these nations are taking advantage of this situation by fostering a new and distinct identity that previously did not exist.

    As a result, India is becoming increasingly isolated in the region, posing significant economic and military risks. With satellite countries bound by Chinese debts, they cannot refuse the influx of Chinese products, causing substantial losses for Indian businesses. Furthermore, infrastructure projects in strategic locations around India provide a military advantage for China. It appears that China is now the dominant player in the region with its partners, putting India in a difficult position.