Yasitha, Dineshkanthan defy defending champions to win doubles title
Wanidu Hasaranga among nominees for ICC Men’s T20I Player of the Year
Sri Lanka Youth cricket encounter called off due to Covid 19 scare
Maliyadewa North Western Province Cup Champs
Sri Lanka clinch Central Asian Volleyball title
AIA provides safe and easy options for customers to pay insurance premiums
Gnanam Education Trust empowering employment and self-reliance
Emirates delivers premium lounge experience with re-opening of over 20 airport lounges across its network
Samsung’s focus for CES 2022
Sampath Bank, exclusive project funding partner for development of Galle Face Icon
by Professor W.A.J.M. De Costa Senior Professor and Chair of Crop Science University of Peradeniya (continued from yesterday)
Measures that contravene the principles of organic agriculture
According to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, one of the key advantages of converting Sri Lanka’s agriculture into 100% organic is the expectation of a higher price premium for its agricultural products in the global market. It was also argued that any reduction in yield would be off-set by the higher price premium for organic food products. However, with the realisation that crop requirements of potassium and phosphorus, two major plant nutrients which are essential for production of any crop on an economically viable scale, could not be supplied with organic fertilisers, the government decided to import Potassium Chloride (KCl) and to use Eppawala Rock Phosphate (ERP) as sources of potassium and phosphorus, respectively.
Similarly, it dawned upon the advocates of 100% organic agriculture that some of the key pests, diseases and weeds, in large scale agricultural crops, in Sri Lanka, cannot be controlled by exclusively organic means. Blights and soft rots in a range of vegetable crops caused by various bacteria (including Erwinia species) are a case in point. Consequently, the government has allowed the import of certain synthetic pesticides and herbicides.
These are rational moves that bring the initial idealism of 100% organic agriculture back to reality. However, the downside is that despite the rhetoric of 100% organic agriculture, Sri Lankan agricultural products will not receive international certification as ‘Organic’. Therefore, the expected higher price premiums will not materialise and farmer incomes will plummet because of the decreased crop yields.
Many soil scientists, who have expertise on fertiliser, have pointed out that the claimed concentrations of nitrogen, the foremost plant nutrient that is required for crop production, in the organic fertiliser that was to be imported from China, could not have come exclusively from its organic source, the seaweeds. They expressed the strong possibility of this organic fertiliser being fortified with an inorganic source of nitrogen, such as urea, to raise its nitrogen concentration to the levels that were claimed. Therefore, it is possible that this consignment was ‘organic fertiliser’ only by name.
A darker side of this issue emanates from reports of these agrochemicals being smuggled into the country, from India, via the Southern coast. It is reported that the government, and the relevant regulatory authorities and armed forces, are turning a blind eye to this activity. Such tacit approval by the government is akin to how it managed the COVID19-related restrictions during recent months. Therefore, while the government tells the whole world that it promotes 100% organic agriculture, agrochemicals are used on the ground. A similar situation prevailed when the ban on Glyphosate imports was in place, from 2015 to 2018, where smuggled Glyphosate, of dubious quality, was available in the blackmarket.
On 13 October, a government media release claimed commencement of the distribution of 30,000 tons of ‘organic potassium chloride’ imported from Lithuania. It is difficult to determine whether this is a demonstration of ignorance or an attempt to delude the farming community and the general public. There is nothing called ‘organic potassium chloride’. Potassium chloride (KCl) is an inorganic fertiliser obtained from the Earth’s mineral deposits. For well over 50 years, KCl has been the main form of potassium fertiliser for agricultural crops all over the world, including Sri Lanka. In organic agriculture, potassium is supplied in the form of crop residues (e.g. rice straw) which contain potassium as a component of their tissues.
Promised payment of compensation to farmers for loss of crop yield
In the immediate aftermath of the issuance of the Gazette notification, in May, when the strong possibility of plummeting crop yields was pointed out by several stakeholder groups, the Cabinet Minister said that farmers would be compensated for loss of yield due to the absence inorganic of fertiliser and synthetic agrochemicals. The advisors to the Minister, and the few hard-core organic agriculture advocates, claimed that these compensations could be paid from the substantial savings of foreign exchange that would become available because of the ban. However, to this date, this promise has not been fulfilled, despite a significant proportion of the national farmer population, growing a wide range of crops, including paddy, pulses, onions, potato, low-country and up-country vegetables, tea and various horticultural crops, including cutflower and pasture, already incurring substantial losses of production due to the ban of inorganic fertiliser and synthetic agrochemicals during the yala season of 2021.
Ministry officials, task forces and advisory panels
The dis-jointed management (or mis-management) of this vital national issue is exemplified by various personnel in-charge of the Ministry of Agriculture and in advisory panels to the President and the Minister. The Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture, at the time of implementation of the ban, who showed enthusiasm and optimism for successfully implementing the conversion to 100% organic agriculture, resigned after three months in office, reportedly over a disagreement with a key proponent of the inorganic fertiliser and agrochemical ban who was functioning as the top advisor to the Minister, on importing organic fertiliser in contravention of the Plant Protection Act. Following this resignation, a senior academic, who is an agricultural economist by training, has been appointed as the Ministry Secretary to oversee implementation of the organic agriculture policy. Despite his brilliant academic record as an undergraduate in the Faculty of Agriculture of the University of Peradeniya, in the early 1990s, this official has so far demonstrated little understanding of the biological realities of meeting the national food production targets with the limited nutrients from organic fertiliser and in the absence of commonly-used synthetic agrochemicals to control pests, diseases and weeds of crops.
In the week following the issuance of the Gazette notification, in early May, a Presidential Task Force, consisting of 46 members, which included 20 politicians, several hard-core activists promoting organic agriculture and a miscellaneous collection of agriculture practitioners, academics, industrialists and businessmen, was appointed with the task of transforming Sri Lanka’s economy into a green socio-economy with sustainable solutions to climate change. Preparing a roadmap for the complete transition from ‘chemical farming’ to organic farming (as per the Media Release from the Presidential Secretariat on 10 May) was listed as one task of this Task Force. However, it is notable that the Gazette notification, banning the import of inorganic fertiliser and synthetic agrochemicals, had already been issued on 06 May, effectively transforming Sri Lankan agriculture from the so-called ‘chemical farming’ to organic farming overnight. On examining the track record of the personnel in this Task Force, it is clear that it lacked the balanced scientific expertise to analyse all aspects of a complex issue and plan a difficult operation and provide advice to the President. This deficiency has been borne out by the absence of meaningful action taken by the Task Force and the news of some its members expressing the impossibility of their task. Events of the last five months have shown that there certainly is no roadmap developed and put in place.
In September, the Cabinet Minister of Agriculture also appointed a 14-member Task Force for Sustainable Agriculture, consisting of academics and a few administrators and entrepreneurs. This Task Force also has the same weaknesses of the larger Presidential Task Force in terms of balance and competence in expertise. As expected, no tangible outcomes have emanated from this Ministerial Task Forc, as well.
Given the national importance of the plantation sector of agriculture, the Cabinet Minister of Plantation Agriculture has been conspicuous by his silence and inaction in the Cabinet, the Parliament and in public forums that address this critical national issue.
Visible impacts on different crop sectors and prognosis for next year
The yala cropping season, which immediately followed the implementation of the ban, was completed largely with inorganic fertiliser stocks that had been imported before the ban, but were sold to farmers at exorbitant prices by traders. Although the production statistics are not yet available, it is highly likely that, for a majority of crops, both yields per unit land area and total production in yala 2021 have been below-average. This is because of the yield reductions due to lower rates of fertiliser application and increased yield losses caused by pests, diseases and weeds, which are predominantly controlled by agrochemicals in large-scale crop cultivations. There are reports and images of vegetable crops, both in the up-country and low-country areas, shrunken in size by shortage of nutrition and decimated by diseases and pests in the absence of agrochemicals for their control.
The prognosis for the coming maha season is frightening. There are daily media reports of farmers, from almost all parts of the country, expressing either reluctance or point blank refusal at Pre-Seasonal Meetings (i.e. Kanne Rasweem) to start crop cultivation in the absence of an assured supply of fertiliser and agrochemicals. In a majority of these occasions, farmers specifically request inorganic fertiliser saying that organic fertiliser is simply not suitable for cultivation of paddy and some of the key other field crops such as maize. The government officials at these meetings are unable to provide the assurances that the farmers are seeking. If this situation prevails in the next month and a half, the area cultivated with paddy and maize during this major cropping season will decrease substantially. When coupled with the lower expected yields per unit land area because of the lower nutrition from organic fertilizers and non-chemical control of pests, diseases and weeds, a substantial decline in the total production of paddy, maize and almost all other crops is inevitable. Repercussions of this will be felt in many related food sectors. For example, reduced maize production and the resulting shortage of animal feed in which maize is a major component will cause a reduction in poultry products (eggs, chicken).
The potential social consequences of an overall shortage of essential food items are disturbing to the say the least. A population that has been inducted recently to queuing for rice, sugar, milk powder and gas will have to get used to queues for many essential food items. How disciplined the people will be in the face of this situation over a prolonged period is anybody’s guess.
How has the President and the government responded to this situation?
It is patently clear that the authority to make situation-changing decisions lies with the President. It is also clear that the President has been wrongly-advised by his advisors. More depressing is the observation that members of the Presidential and Ministerial Task Forces are either ignorant or incompetent to analyse the situation and recommend appropriate action or lack strength of character to tell the truth to the President and advise him about what should be done immediately without delay. The bottom line is that the current uncertainty in national food security undermines the national security, the very platform on which the President campaigned and got elected.
After towing the President’s line for a long time, a few government lawmakers have started to acknowledge the reality and have started making noises about being prepared to listen to the ‘peoples’ voice’ and ‘take a step back’. Last week, the immediate-past President went on record saying that Sri Lankan agriculture is at a historic low and that a day may come when he would not be able to go to his home town. Following these statements from those in his own ranks, there was expectation that the President would review his decision. However, his latest reference to the current fertiliser and agrochemical policy during his speech at the Sri Lanka Army’s 72nd Anniversary showed that nothing has changed. While acknowledging that it is difficult, he still wants the current policy to continue.
The President’s argument that he received a mandate from the people to embark on the current policy on fertiliser and agrochemicals because he had included it (even though not to be operationalised in this specific manner), in his manifesto, is a flawed argument. The people do not approve manifestos in their entirety. In an election, people make their choices based on a few key aspects (e.g. national security on the most recent occasion) without reading each and every statement in a manifesto. Therefore, it is nothing more than self-delusion to still take up the position that he has the peoples’ endorsement to continue the current policy.
What should be done immediately?
In view of the clear and present danger of a nationwide crop failure in the coming maha season and the possibility of food shortages, the President has no option but to reverse the ban on inorganic fertiliser and synthetic agrochemicals. Steps should be taken immediately to import, at least 50% of the requirement of inorganic nitrogen fertiliser (i.e. urea). This is assuming that at least a limited fraction of the nitrogen requirement will be supplied from the organic fertiliser that has been produced in-country. In view of the shortage of foreign exchange for importation of nitrogen and potassium fertiliser, crops in the current maha season will have to be managed with 50-60% of the recommendations of inorganic fertiliser, which will provide an economically-viable crop yield to the farmer and a level of food supply to the consumers to avert the impending food crisis and social unrest.
Distribution of this fertiliser among farmers, should be strictly regulated and should be done in phases during the cropping season. This is to prevent their over-application and encourage split-application (i.e. providing the requirement in several splits) and thereby minimise leaching and evaporation losses of urea. The same should be done for potassium chloride fertiliser (the so-called ‘organic potassium chloride’), which is equally vulnerable to leaching losses.
What should be done on medium- and long-term?
Continuation of recent initiatives to expand the share of organic agriculture in the local agricultural production
The drive to produce organic fertiliser, by a wide range of stakeholders and entrepreneurs, in both public and private sectors, is one positive outcome of the ban on inorganic fertiliser and synthetic agrochemicals. These initiatives should be continued. An important step in this regard will be to develop and implement quality standards for organic fertilisers that are locally-produced.
In parallel to the production of organic fertilisers, a drive to produce a variety of organic-based agrochemicals has been initiated. These initiatives should be incentivised and continued with a view to reduce the use of synthetic agrochemicals to expand the practicing of Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
Phased out reduction or complete withdrawal of the subsidies on inorganic fertiliser
The nearly 100% subsidy of inorganic fertiliser that was in place for nearly three decades in Sri Lanka contributed to their over-use and excessive farmer reliance on them while diminishing their interest in adding organic amendments for natural regeneration of soil fertility. While being a financial drain of public funds and foreign exchange, the fertiliser subsidy also inflated the true economic profitability of farming in Sri Lanka. Its gradual reduction (or complete withdrawal) will prompt farmers to seek ways of increasing the profitability of their farming by improving crop management with efficient cultivation practices (collectively called ‘Good Agricultural Practices’).
Promotion and support of research on an economically-viable mixture of conventional and organic agriculture
Excessive reliance of the farmers on subsidized inorganic fertiliser and widely-available, commercially-supported synthetic agrochemicals contributed indirectly to suppression of research on eco-friendly farming practices with less reliance on inorganic fertiliser and agrochemicals. This has contributed to the failure of the current drive to ‘go 100% organic overnight’ because the researchers in the Department of Agriculture had not developed sufficiently effective alternative cultivation technologies when the ban came into effect. However, researchers in the universities and other research institutions (e.g. National Institute of Fundamental Studies, Sri Lanka Institute of Nanotechnology) have carried out useful work over a prolonged period and developed useful technologies, which to a large extent, have been ignored by researchers in the Department of Agriculture and higher officials in the Ministry of Agriculture. Some of these technologies are: (a) biofertilisers and biopesticides developed from microorganisms isolated from local soils and plants; (b) chemicals which are generally regarded as safe to human health (called GRAS chemicals). These technologies and products that are already developed have to be up-scaled and commercialised with government support.
The level of inorganic fertiliser that needs to be used for viable crop production and the feasibility of organic agriculture depends on the soil fertility status of a land and the market needs for an organically-produced product. Therefore, a comprehensive survey of these aspects needs to be undertaken with a view to develop a rational mixture of conventional and organic agriculture in different regions of Sri Lanka.
The hard-core proponents of 100% organic agriculture should realise that it is just not biologically possible. It is turning out to be a costly experiment which is leading to a national disaster. (Concluded)
COVID-19: Contradicting caregivers, confused civilians, complementary curatives
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
By Emeritus Professor Upali Samarajeewa
International expert on food safety
In the list of words most feared by many Sri Lankans, Arsenic stands among the top10. Historically, arsenic was a rat poison. This potential of arsenic was illegally employed later to get rid of unwanted friends and even spouses by some of the humans. However, arsenic had positive use and reputation as a health care agent. It is reported that Hippocrates used arsenic sulfide in the form of natural crystalline minerals, namely realgar and orpiment, to treat ulcers. Later, the arsenic containing minerals were used in making creams to remove unwanted hair in the human body. Since then, arsenides and arsenic salts in the form of creams for external application have been in use for centuries, in treatment of ulcers and syphilis. In the 1700s solutions of arsenic trioxide in potassium bicarbonate has been prescribed to treat asthma, chorea, psoriasis, anemia, and leukemia among several other health ailments. Some drugs containing arsenic have been prescribed to be inhaled as vapour, injected, or administered intravenously in the 19th century. Though the International Agency for Cancer Research classified arsenic in its pure form, and certain arsenic compound as a human carcinogens, Food and Drugs Administration of the USA approved the use of injectable arsenic trioxide for human treatment for relapsed acute promyelocytic leukemia. It may be considered an exceptional condition, but arsenic compounds do not deserve a total taboo without understanding their effects on the human body under each situation, beneficial or harmful. Arsenic trioxide was withdrawn from human treatment in 1950. There is evidence today on the effects of long- term exposure of humans to inorganic arsenic through food, water, or air leading to increased risk on bladder, lung, and skin cancers.
The World Health Organization records on incidence of cancer in Sri Lanka for 2020 shows 7% lung cancer, 2.1% bladder cancer and 0.4% skin cancer, out of the total annual cancer cases. Almost all incidences of lung cancer are among males predominantly associated with smoking. The same percentage distribution of all cancers was visible in records over the previous 20 years, with fluctuations only in incidence of lung cancer. Arsenophobia was created in Sri Lanka in relation to the chronic kidney disease of unknown origin, identified as CKDU. The global literature on kidney diseases do not consider arsenic as a crucial factor in chronic kidney diseases similar to CKDU. Sri Lanka is not the only country having chronic kidney disease of this nature. There are parallels in “Chronic interstitial nephritis in agricultural communities” (CINAC) in El Salvador and Nicaragua. CINAC is also described as Mesoamerican nephropathy (MeN) in several other central and south American countries, mostly along the Pacific coastline. Scientific studies in the USA on the above chronic kidney diseases have identified relationship with a few pesticides. Some of the pesticides were banned in Sri Lanka decades back, and one still in use though to a limited extent. The studies in the USA have not been able to recognise links between arsenic or other heavy metals with the chronic kidney diseases described above.
Arsenic was used as an ingredient in weedicides and wood preservatives in the past. Registration of companies producing pesticides containing inorganic arsenic were cancelled in 1988 in the developed world. Sri Lanka does not permit the use of pesticides containing inorganic arsenic. If there is violation of this condition, there is a way to handle it rather than banning everything. The registrar of pesticides operates an accredited testing laboratory for arsenic and other heavy metals in pesticides. If law makers possess doubts on arsenic entering our food system through pesticides, what is needed simply is to provide more facilities and activate the office of the registrar of pesticides to bring in necessary controls. That is the scientific mechanism used in the developed countries to maintain food safety in the production chains. Pesticides came into existence because it had a role in agriculture. Replacing pesticides needs to identify a scientifically equivalent substitute. The World has not been successful in it. What is needed is to implement checks and controls at the appropriate levels and locations.
If arsenic is the cause of CKDU, it should enter the humans through our main staple rice and drinking water. In Bangladesh and West Bengal, heavy and unacceptable concentrations of arsenic were reported in rice and water leading to major investigations by the United Nation bodies responsible for food and health. In the two locations the symptoms due to arsenic were quite different from the symptoms of CKDU reported in Sri Lanka. The writer, having examined 50 peer reviewed research publications and scientific reviews of acceptable quality by Sri Lankan and foreign scientists, found the arsenic concentrations in rice and water in Sri Lanka are far below the globally implemented tolerance limits of 0.2 milligrams per kilogram for rice, and 10 micrograms per litre for water. The average concentrations of arsenic in Sri Lankan rice are less than 25% of the tolerance limits for rice. The concentrations of arsenic in drinking water are less than 15% of the tolerance limit. The perused studies cover a period from 2005 to 2021. The scientific evidence has clearly proved that the arsenic concentrations in our foods pose no risk to health to Sri Lankans.
There are occasional reports on rejection of imported and locally produced canned fish due to presence of total arsenic. Total arsenic consists of inorganic arsenic and organic arsenic. Organic arsenic is present mainly in prawns and other crustaceans. Some fish carry lower concentrations of organic arsenic than crustaceans. Foods containing almost non-toxic organic arsenic carries no health risk unlike highly toxic inorganic arsenic in foods. Organic arsenic moves unabsorbed through our digestive system, getting excreted fast. Arsenic may be present in the environment and food in different inorganic forms and almost non-toxic organic forms. Main organic arsenic compound in fish is arsenobetaine. Arsenobetaine is of no toxicological concern. The issue of arsenic in fish need to be understood from a deep scientific angle before implementing controls.
The regulations implemented by our standards and food regulatory authorities apply 0.2 milligrams per kilogram as the limit for total arsenic concentration in all foods. Regulations unfortunately takes no recognition on the toxicity difference between the organic and inorganic forms of arsenic. Arsenic appears in different forms food. Of them the inorganic forms are the culprit with high toxicity. The organic forms are of negligible toxicity. Our authorities need to distinguish between inorganic arsenic (which is 50-90% of total arsenic in rice) and organic arsenic which is approximately 95% of the total arsenic in fish. This raises an important question as to whether application of the general limit of 0.2 milligrams per kilogram of total arsenic to canned fish, which contains less than around 5% of the toxic inorganic arsenic. Interpretation of regulations needs much more scientific thinking than blind interpretations. Research scientists understand that there is no world free of arsenic and other toxic compounds. Arguing for zero arsenic or any other harmful ingredients in food and water is an indication of ignorance on basic principles of risk based regulatory approach. The tolerance limits are fixed for each and every harmful agent is to ensure food security meeting only required level of food safety.
In arriving at decisions on food safety, the authorities consider the possible outcome of their decisions on food security of the country. First, there should be food for people to eat and live. Then comes the levels of risks associated with presence of harmful constituents. A good example is presented in the research by the USA scientists on problems linked to arsenic in rice. The mean arsenic concentrations expressed in milligrams per kilogram of rice in USA was 0.193 for white rice and 0.205 for brown rice against the regulatory limit of 0.200. The USA arsenic concentrations are at least 5 times higher than the values reported for rice in Sri Lanka. Applying the values to daily exposure of Americans consuming rice in 2-3 meals a day, it was postulated that they could reach high-risk level leading to bladder and lung cancer of the more vulnerable populations, especially the elderly and pregnant mothers. It was shown, using models, that reducing the tolerance level from current 0.200 to 0.100, would result in reduction of rice availability in the American market by a factor up to 90%, creating a food security risk. The study also postulated a reduction of regulatory limit from current 0.200 to 0.075 would bring down the food safety risk due to arsenic in rice from 11% to 79%. The regulations are maintained therefore, at 0.200 to ensure rice availability. The arsenic concentrations in Sri Lankan rice (approximately 0.04 milligrams per kilogram), is still far below the hypothetical USA limit of 0.075 limit, worked as a theoretical possibility. With all the scientific evidence, USA did not reduce the limit to 0.100. The scientific evidence clearly suggests that the ‘arsenophobia’ created in the minds of Sri Lankans is a hoax. It is continued even today by vociferous persons with scientific ignorance.
Arsenic enters food chain from soil or irrigation water. The earth crust is not free of arsenic. The crust contains 1.8 milligrams of arsenic per kilogram of soil on the average. It could take the range from 1-40. Arsenic concentrations above five milligrams per kilogram of soil make soils unsuitable for cultivation. The arsenic content in agricultural soils in Sri Lanka average around one milligram per kilogram, implying no food safety threat through local rice. The arsenic toxicity in rice occurred in West Bengal and Bangladesh due to high arsenic concentrations rising to the order of 15 milligrams per kilogram in their soils. Their irrigation water contained 10-fold higher arsenic than the permitted limit, leading to serious health problems. Sri Lankan situation is not at all comparable with the situation in West Bengal and Bangladesh. Unfortunately, we import rice from time to time from Bangladesh and other countries having arsenic contaminations.
If the food chain in a country gets contaminated with arsenic or any other toxic entities, they get detected in the exports at the foreign border check points, resulting in rejections and notifications. Information on global trade does not show instances of Sri Lanka tea or any other food getting rejected due to arsenic, or other heavy metals, or unpermitted pesticide residues.
It speaks on the Sri Lankan agricultural system was managed. Unfortunately, there are pseudo-scientists with no understanding on agriculture and food production, all out to create doubts in the minds of public.
This brings in the question as to where Sri Lanka went wrong in its science. It started with a vociferous student reading for a postgraduate degree in a university in Sri Lanka, working totally outside the specialty of his first degree in 2011. In desperation, he went to a soothsayer in a ‘Devalaya’ reputed to utter to the gullible people, under trans state of the mind. She was given some soil from Rajarata. She yelled “asan asan” perhaps asking him to listen. The student came back and started testing for arsenic using equipment of inadequate sophistication, applying unrefined test methods, ultimately “innovating” non-existent arsenic in rice. Tabloid media were fast to capture information. The ‘innovation’ was further supported by a media-oriented professor, who excelled in many fields other than his trained expertise.
carried an article around May 2011 under the title “Arsenic in Rice: Playing God”. The article highlighted the seriousness of statements arrived at without following basic principles of analytical chemistry and risk assessments, misleading the public. The materials released to the press have not gone through scientific scrutiny and was obviously questionable. The ‘arsenophobia’ next entered the august house with appearance of a reddish colour in “Kohila” curry in the meals served to members of the Parliament. The reddish colour is a common biological phenomenon on foods exposed to oxygen from air under certain preparation practices. It was October 2012 and The Island carried a note titled “Arsenic and cyanide everywhere”. The news on innovation of so-called arsenic in rice was next carried to the ears of the first citizen of the country at that time. He with his usual smile and tact said, “I eat rice three meals a day.” The message was clear to the student. Later the first citizen warned the media professor on the dangers Sri Lanka would face in our export trade, with this kind of utterances through the media. At that time there was already a shipment containing rice from Sri Lanka which was detained at a port in Turkey pending testing for arsenic. However, the stock did not get rejected as no arsenic was detected. The arsenophobia did not get marketed with the next first citizen either. Later the innovator of arsenic story reached the august house with a promise to provide “Better Health for Rajarata.” Arsenic is forgotten at least in the public eyes.
The baton was taken up by another relay team consisting of a priest, medical professional and an academic (sanga-weda-guru) expecting blessings from the highest level in the country. Unfortunately, the struggle ended up with farmers and labourers (govi-kamkaru) facing the problem. Indications are that the country would have to bear the outcome of arsenophobia for many months, if not years to come with inadequate food at exorbitant prices. No country in the world has stopped use of synthetic fertilizer in food production. European Union countries maintain extremely high levels of food safety in the world. They have decided to reach 25% organic food production by 2030 very cautiously. Canada produce food only during the warm six months of the year. They export 68% of the produce. In the Canadian Agriculture policy food production for export is a high priority. They apply scientifically controlled methods in use of agrochemicals. It is said that Canada was the major supplier of red dhal to Sri Lanka in certain years.
Leaders need to listen to scientific facts generated through careful experimenting and scholarly thinking. Mature scientists do not rush foolishly to take risks; politicians only see short term benefits. The prosperity of a country lies in well discussed decisions arrived through scientific knowledge, and not based on ad hoc findings of half-baked pseudoscientists. The l strength of India lies on the initiative to apply science in its policies immediately after independence by the Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. The writer had the opportunity on two occasions to participate the Annual Indian Science Congress. On both occasions, the Prime Minister of India and four Cabinet Ministers participated at the congress and spent two days listening to the scientists. Unfortunately, interactions in Sri Lanka are nowhere near it. Sri Lanka gives the opportunity to the pseudoscientists to mislead law makers at individual levels.
Obviously, the Sri Lankan food production system affected by the absence of required fertilizer inputs is not in a position to deliver the staple and complementary food for the nation. It is already late to put things back in the track before everything gets beyond control. Let the country believe in science and its true scientists at least now and act sensibly.
Former soldiers becoming Buddhist monks is not unheard of in the history of Sri Lanka. We have examples from the time of King Dutthagamani whose army fought successfully with invading foreign forces and some of them finally ending as Buddhist monks. But with the departure of the most venerable Buddhangala Ananda Maha Thera, formerly, Major General Ananda Weerasekera, we are witnessing the end of a legend who combined his army discipline with that of the Buddhist monastic order and lived an exemplary life of virtue, concentration and wisdom (sila, Samadhi, panna).Born in 1943, as the eldest in a family of six and having completed his school education at Nalanda Vidyalaya, Colombo, Ananda Weerasekera joined the army in 1964 as a junior officer and completed his distinguished career as a Major General, winning such honours as the Uttama Sewa medal and the Purna Bhumi medal doing his way. One of the highlights of his army service was to have been appointed the Commissioner of Rehabilitation of the participants of the 71 insurrection. This was both a new experience in the recent political history of the country and a new experiment involving the harder path of reforming instead of punishing those who took arms against the state. Ananda Weerasekera accepted this challenge and completed his mission successfully. There were two predominant concerns in his life, they are: his country and his religion. The army career culminating as Major General is testimony of his love and service to the country. He served as the commanding officer of the North Central Province at a point when the country was suffering very badly due to separatist terrorism. He dedicated the most active phase of his life to safeguard sovreignity and integrity of the country and the nation. Born into a good Buddhist family of Mendis and Sumana Weerasekera and receiving his school education at Nalanda College, one of the leading Buddhist schools of the country, Ananda Weerasekera dedicated his life not merely for the protection and safeguard of the precious religious tradition of the country but also, perhaps, even more importantly, for learning and practice of this sublime teaching, which finally made him to choose the monastic practice as his way of life. He obtained a special permission from the University of Kelaniya to follow Masters of Buddhist Studies at Postgraduate institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies (PGIPBS) and completed this course fulfilling his keen interest to acquire systematic knowledge in Buddhism which he inherited as his religion by birth. This knowledge, no doubt, enabled him to engage in Buddhist activities with a sense of confidence. One such activity deserved to be recorded here is his service to the higher studies in Buddhism as a member of the Board of Management of PGIPBS. In 2004, as the then director of the institutes I invited him to join the highest administrative body of the institute, and he served a complete three year term (2004-2007) contributing to the wellbeing of the institute with his substantial knowledge and administrative experience. He was an ardent supporter of the Damrivi Foundation, a Buddhist social organisation for social, economic and spiritual development, of which his younger brother Rear Admiral Dr. Sarath Weerasekera, the Hon. Minister of Public Security of the country at present, among others, has been a founding member. After a successful service to the security and wellbeing of the nation, Major General Ananda Weerasekera entered the monkhood fulfilling a long-cherished desire for a life of more serious practice and service and guidance from the Dhamma to those who needed it. He entered the monkhood in 2007 at Buddhangala Forest Hermitage as a student of the Nayaka thera of the monastery and was conferred Full Admission – Upasampada – in the following year, thus becoming a full member of the Sangha. Although his admission to the Sangha was described in the press (Sunday Observer, May 13, 2007 by Premasara Epasinghe) as “a very strange transition”, it was only very natural for Ven. Ananda who had cherished ideas of renunciation particularly after the demise of his beloved wife and mother of his children. The choice of the forest hermitage far away from the hustle and bustle of city life as his residence was in accordance with his inclination to live a life dedicated to practice in meditation, teaching and dissemination of the Dhamma.Venerable Ananda had, from his early days, a great skill in oratory which he used very effectively as a forceful communicator. Although he had all the skills to be a popular preacher of the Dhamma, Ven. Ananda accepted invitations to go out very selectively. He was happier to teach and guide those who visited the Buddhangala monastery without disturbing his own peace and seclusion. I remember once he gave a memorable speech to the Buddhist Studies students of the University of Colombo when I visited him with them at Buddhangala in one of the annual educational field trips. The Venerable was an equally forceful and clear communicator in writing. Among practically dozens of writings on the Dhamma, one attracted much attention and admiration of the readers was his translation into Sinhala of the life story of the Thai Buddhist nun ‘Silamata Chai’ who was believed to have attained the Arahanthood.The life of the late Venerable Ananda, both as a lay person and a member of the Sangha, was substantial, fruitful and memorable. This note coming from a junior friend, who had the privilege and honour of teaching him academic Buddhist studies, is necessarily incomplete, but only a humble tribute to him on behalf of all those who came into contact with him in particular in Buddhist-related activities. May the late Venerable Buddhangala Ananda Thera attain the supreme bliss of Nibbana!
The late Bishop Desmond Tutu, whose life was closely intertwined with the engrossing political fortunes of South Africa over the past few decades, had his strong reservations over the integrity of the ‘cream’ of the country’s post-apartheid political class. Inasmuch as he was trenchant in his criticisms of apartheid and its white supremacist practitioners, he warned grimly those incoming native South African rulers against ‘mispresenting’ the country’s best interests.
If the charges currently being leveled against former South African President Jacob Zuma are anything to go by, then Tutu’s reservations could be considered as having a substantial basis to them. Zuma not only amassed personal wealth on a profligate scale at the expense of the state but went on to figure in a couple of high-profile corruption cases that are continuing to be heard before the country’s superior courts. Recently, Zuma was jailed for failing to attend court in connection with one of these corruption law suits.
Another African political strongman to enter the record books for eye brow-raising corruption is Zimbabwe’s former President Robert Mugabe. He is probed for corrupt links with British American Tobacco (BAT). Recent reports said that BAT was aware of discussions to facilitate a large payment for Mugabe ‘for the purpose of continuing its alleged corporate espionage activities in Zimbabwe.’
Needless to say, the above cases constitute only the proverbial tip of the ice burg. The charge of amassing personal wealth by questionable means could be made at quite a few members of the political class well outside the African continent as well. If the recent Pandora Papers revelations, for example, are anything to go by such parasitical public figures are numerous in India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, for instance. However, none should be surprised if all regions of the South are preyed upon by such self-aggrandizers with impunity.
The mind-numbing amassing of personal wealth by post-colonial indigenous rulers should not come as a surprise when it is realized that such ruling strata are an integral part of the transnational capitalist class (TNC) whose interests are at great variance with those of peoples worldwide. These local rulers are in league with international capitalist interests whose sole motive is the earning of profits at the expense of native populations.
For example, foreign investment and other forms of international business transactions are prominent among the mechanisms through which international capitalist interests are served with the willing collaboration of local political elites, who, of course, gain in the process, through shared profits, commissions, kickbacks and the like. Fortunately, for progressives everywhere, there is ample work by contemporary political science scholarship that sheds light on these vampirical processes through which the peoples of the South in particular are relentlessly pauperized. One such relatively recent book that merits mentioning is, ‘Politics of Globalization’, edited by Samir Dasgupta and Jan Nederveen Pieterse, a publication of SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd. (www.sagepub.in). This volume could be considered a veritable update on the state of the South, particularly in the areas of economics and society.
What the foregoing disclosures indicate in the main is the need for intense and continuing watchfulness on the part of Southern peoples and civic organizations, lest the promise of people-centric self-governance goes unfulfilled at the hands of their ruling elites. That is, accountable governance is the insistent need and local systems need to be in place to secure this imperative. Thus, Bishop Tutu was right in cautioning local elites against betraying the best interests of the South African public.
The lack of role models among local elites of the South needs to be factored in when assessing the multi-level degeneration that is gripping the hemisphere. It could be said that South Africa had the potential of developing as a model polity in the immediate post-apartheid years. It had positive trend-setters, such as Bishop Tutu and Nelson Mandela, to light up the path into the future. However, as could be seen, subsequent principal figures in politics and society have largely failed to measure up to the standards established by the likes of Tutu and Mandela.
What Tutu and Mandela conceptualized was a ‘Rainbow Nation’ or a South Africa that embodied ‘Unity in Diversity’. And they were prepared to pay whatever price was required to achieve this end. Mandela’s decades-long imprisonment proved the point. He remained true to the cause of national liberation and social equity and did not stray from this target, whatever the odds. The spirit of self-aggrandizement, seen in the likes of Jacob Zuma, was totally alien to him.
In these times when ‘reconciliation’ has become a much bandied around word in the South, it is important to recollect what this term meant for Tutu and Mandela. For the latter, reconciliation was inseparable from forgiveness. That is, unless antagonists to a conflict were willing to forgive each other in a spirit of brotherhood, reconciliation could not be achieved.
It is important to focus on the point that forgiveness is possible only among equals. It was on the basis of such principles that apartheid was ended in South Africa and the foundation for a democratic, multi-racial South Africa was laid.
Accordingly, we are left with no choice but to draw the discouraging conclusion from the self-aggrandizing tendencies of some post-Mandela political leaders that vital founding values of post-apartheid South Africa have been gravely eroded. Progressives the world over are likely to hope that South Africa would rejuvenate itself on the basis of the Tutu-Mandela legacy, with its focus on people-centric development and national healing based on forgiveness.
The experience of post-colonial states of the South is that power centralization, self-aggrandizement among rulers and repression go hand-in-hand. Democratization involves the elimination of these iniquities. With regard to political repression, Nelson Mandela states the following in his epochal autobiography, ‘Long Walk to Freedom’: ‘A man who takes another man’s freedom is a prisoner of hatred, he is locked behind the bars of prejudice and narrow-mindedness.’
Insights such as the above are a measure of the yawning democratic deficits in the majority of contemporary Southern states. Once again, one is reminded of the fact national rejuvenation and progress are impossible without statesmen.
Now, another Maj. Gen. barred from entering US
Mahanama’s book reveals Ranil backed Thilanga undermining Amarasuriya
Better if ministers resign before criticising collective Cabinet decisions -President
Agro sector mess: Govt. cannot absolve itself of responsibility by sacking Secy. – Opposition
Sri Lanka has no choice but to Restructure External Debt: A Pathfinder Perspective
EC Chief says not informed of LG polls postponement
JVP: “Gotabaya-made” food shortage imminent
Copyright © 2020 Upali Newspapers (Pvt) Ltd. Solution by LankaCom Privacy Policy