Readers please note it is essential that all letters to
the Editor carry the full name and address of the writer, even if it has to
appear under a pseudonym. This applies to all email letters as well.
Together we can build a better future
I write this with a lot of sadness, relief and hope from what has happened in
the past few months. As a Tamil, (and proud to be one) I deeply feel that
together we can build the burnt bridges and pave a path to peace, happiness,
equality and prosperity for us and for the future generations to come. We cannot
forget what happened for the past three decades, however, we need to put aside
our emotions, despair and remember those lives which were lost in bloody war in
the name of ‘equality’.
We (Tamils) have to now reconcile and win the trust of the nation. For decades
we have been secretive, unpredictable and uncompromising. Sure enough, we were
discriminated in the past, deprived of our equal rights and treated unfairly.
Now we have to give the nation a chance to prove that it is not the case. We
have to let go of the past and not react to our feelings in an irrational and
We talk about the 1953 era, of the riots and how the Tamils were discriminated
and treated badly. In 1953 the whole world was a different place and had a
different attitude. In America blacks could not go into a restaurant or a
supermarket or attend a white school or the aborigines in Australia did not have
any rights. Now America has a black president and the Aborigines have equal
rights; we Tamils now have to give it a chance for change to happen in our
motherland. We are hanging on to views and ideologies which formed 30 years ago
are not appropriate anymore. I think that in the past 20 years we have created a
doubt in the minds of the Sinhalese and the nation making them wonder whether
every other Tamil is a Tamil Tiger or not.
Prior to 1988 before I left to Australia, I remember after a rugby game at
London Place and a few (in my context) drinks at the club, going home in the
early hours of the morning, my only fear was whether I will be stopped and
breathalysed and charged for driving under liquor. In the later years in my many
trips to Sri Lanka the fear was whether I would be subject to harassment because
of my Tamil name. Why do you think it is so? Is it not because of the war, the
suicide bombings? All of this distrust of Tamils started after the war began.
So, did we not create this for ourselves? This is not only happening to the
Tamils. In fact, if you send money to the US or visit the US bearing an Arabic
name you are scrutinised vigorously, which began after “9/11”. The Arabic world
calls it ‘discrimination’.
In 1983 the news of the death of 13 soldiers sparked an organised riot, and over
2,000 Tamils lost their lives and over 100,000 Tamils were displaced. The nation
soon realised that it should not have let it happen and the wider community
shared the same sentiment. In 1996, in a raid on a military camp in Mullaitivu
by the Tigers, 1,500 soldiers were killed, yet there was no repeat of 1983, or
for that matter since 1983 several thousands soldiers have lost their lives and
we did not see a repeat of 1983.
We talk about ‘genocide’ which is a very powerful and compelling word. No doubt
that many women and children have lost their lives, but one has to remember in
every war, innocent people lose their lives. There is blame on both the armed
forces and the Tigers. Let’s not be the judge of that, let the appropriate
organisations investigate and report the findings. The Tamil diaspora and number
of organisations are having protest marches and their websites are relentlessly
publishing calls for the International Community to intervene about the
mistreatment and harassment of the civilians. However much as we are angry and
anxious, we must have patience and let the government, UN and the other aid
organisation to embark on the huge task ahead of them to relocate, resettle and
reconcile the civilian casualties. We have been having protest marches for
decades around the world. Has one head of state or a member of a parliament
taken a flight and gone to Sri Lanka and discussed the problem with the
authorities? I do not think so. The IC will mention our plea in their speeches,
or talk about it when the next election comes around.
Does the IC know the differences between Jayasinghe and Jayasingham? It is up to
us reconcile and rebuild friendships. What has happened in the past has
happened; we cannot turn back the clock. The truth of what happened in the
battle zones will only surface, if the victims have no fear in revealing the
truth. From this point, onwards it is up to us to make sure that this is
possible. We should regain the trust and the sympathy of the greater community.
We Tamils started this war, this was never an option. For 30 years we have
fought a bloody war with no results. Are we going to continue this for another
30 years? No. We, have lost too much, the nation has lost too much. It is time
to take a step back and think sensibly putting aside our emotions and pride.
The Tamil diaspora and community leaders, spokespersons and organisations are
calling for the Tamil community to “re-group and realise our leaders dream,”
after three decades of war is it not the time now to wake up from that dream?
They say now that the Tigers are defeated that we will be systematically
eradicated as there is no one to protect us.
We should stop speculating of what the future holds for the Tamils in Sri Lanka
and need to get these myths out of our heads and win the trust of the nation. We
should responsibly publish and circulate articles and news items, or even
refrain from doing so until the displaced civilians are settled. Now, we need to
concentrate and work closely with those who are in Sri Lanka to help the
In the past few days, there have been reports that, during the celebrations
following the government’s victory over the Tigers, many Tamil businesses were
forced to give money towards the celebrations and this news is from ‘reliable
sources.’ This may be true; may not be true, however when we hear such news we
need to think rationally and responsibly before we spread it around. Sometimes,
in times of sadness, desperation and anxiety the truth is often exaggerated and
taken out of context. We all remember, back in Sri Lanka at a big match we
generally have a ‘hat collection’ to pay for our celebrations. This has been a
culture. Every Christmas, New Year, Vesak or during Vel Festival, the garbage
collectors, the posties, etc go house-to-house collecting money for
celebrations. It is not an unusual thing to happen. The people who have not
experienced this should not be alarmed and portray such incidents as
‘discrimination and harassment.’
I ask those who read this to support me in achieving a united and equal Sri
Lanka for all who were born there. One day I wish to return to the country of my
birth and live as an equal citizen in peace and harmony. How can you help?
Tamils should reach out to the Sinhalese and speak about the grievance you have
and ask them to help you achieve security and equality. My Sinhalese friends
should reach out to Tamils and unconditionally trust them and help them achieve
security and equality. We Tamils have to realise that this is the only nation
that Sinhalese is spoken and we should respect that to win their trust and
respect in return.
What the Buddha said about eating meat
Since the very beginning of Buddhism over 2500 years ago, Buddhist monks and
nuns have depended on alms food. They were, and still are, prohibited from
growing their own food, storing their own provisions or cooking their own meals.
Instead, every morning they would make their day’s meal out of whatever was
freely given to them by lay supporters. Whether it was rich food or coarse food,
delicious or awful tasting, it was to be accepted with gratitude and eaten
regarding it as medicine. The Buddha laid down several rules forbidding monks
from asking for the food that they liked. As a result, they would receive just
the sort of meals that ordinary people ate - and that was often meat.
Once, a rich and influential general by the name of Siha (meaning ’Lion’) went
to visit the Buddha. Siha had been a famous lay supporter of the Jain monks but
he was so impressed and inspired by the Teachings he heard from the Buddha that
he took refuge in the Triple Gem (i.e. he became a Buddhist). General Siha then
invited the Buddha, together with the large number of monks accompanying Him, to
a meal at his house in the city the following morning. In preparation for the
meal, Siha told one of his servants to buy some meat from the market for the
feast. When the Jain monks heard of their erstwhile patron’s conversion to
Buddhism and the meal that he was preparing for the Buddha and the monks, they
were somewhat peeved:
• “Now at the time many Niganthas (Jain monks), waving their arms, were moaning
from carriage road to carriage road, from cross road to cross road in the city:
’Today a fat beast, killed by Siha the general, is made into a meal for the
recluse Gautama (the Buddha), the recluse Gautama makes use of this meat knowing
that it was killed on purpose for him, that the deed was done for his sake’...”
Siha was making the ethical distinction between buying meat already prepared for
sale and ordering a certain animal to be killed, a distinction which is not
obvious to many westerners but which recurs throughout the Buddha’s own
teachings. Then, to clarify the position on meat eating to the monks, the Buddha
• “Monks, I allow you fish and meat that are quite pure in three respects: If
they are not seen, heard or suspected to have been killed on purpose for a monk.
But, you should not knowingly make use of meat killed on purpose for you.” 
There are many places in the Buddhist scriptures which tell of the Buddha and
his monks being offered meat and eating it. One of the most interesting of these
passages occurs in the introductory story to a totally unrelated rule (Nissaggiya
Pacittiya 5) and the observation that the meat is purely incidental to the main
theme of the story emphasises the authenticity of the passage:
Uppalavanna (meaning ‘she of the lotus-like complexion’) was one of the two
chief female disciples of the Buddha. She was ordained as a nun while still a
young woman and soon became fully enlightened. As well as being an arahant
(enlightened) she also possessed various psychic powers to the extent that the
Buddha declared her to be foremost among all the women in this field.
Once, while Uppalavanna was meditating alone in the afternoon in the
‘Blind-Men’s Grove’, a secluded forest outside of the city of Savatthi, some
thieves passed by. The thieves had just stolen a cow, butchered it and were
escaping with the meat. Seeing the composed and serene nun, the chief of the
thieves quickly put some of the meat in a leaf-bag and left it for her.
Uppalavanna picked up the meat and resolved to give it to the Buddha. Early next
morning, having had the meat prepared, she rose into the air and flew to where
the Buddha was staying in the Bamboo Grove outside of Rajagaha, over 200 km as
the crow (or nun?) flies! Though there is no specific mention of the Buddha
actually consuming this meat, obviously a nun of such high attainments would
certainly have known what the Buddha ate.
However, there are some meats which are specifically prohibited for monks to
eat: Human meat, for obvious reasons; meat from elephants and horses as these
were then considered royal animals; dog meat - as this was considered by
ordinary people to be disgusting; and meat from snakes, lions, tigers, panthers,
bears and hyenas - because one who had just eaten the flesh of such dangerous
jungle animals was thought to give forth such a smell as to draw forth revenge
from the same species!
Towards the end of the Buddha’s life, his cousin Devadatta attempted to usurp
the leadership of the Order of Monks. In order to win support from other monks,
Devadatta tried to be stricter than the Buddha and show Him up as indulgent.
Devadatta proposed to the Buddha that all the monks should henceforth be
vegetarians. The Buddha refused and repeated once again the regulation that he
had established years before, that monks and nuns may eat fish or meat as long
as it is not from an animal whose meat is specifically forbidden, and as long as
they had no reason to believe that the animal was slaughtered specifically for
The Vinaya then is quite clear on this matter. Monks and nuns may eat meat. Even
the Buddha ate meat. Unfortunately, meat eating is often seen by westerners as
an indulgence on the part of the monks. Nothing could be further from the truth
- I was a strict vegetarian for three years before I became a monk. In my first
years as a monk in North-East Thailand, when I bravely faced many a meal of
sticky rice and boiled frog (the whole body bones and all), or rubbery snails,
red-ant curry or fried grasshoppers - I would have given anything to be a
vegetarian again! On my first Christmas in N.E. Thailand, an American came to
visit the monastery a week or so before the 25th. It seemed too good to be true,
he had a turkey farm and yes, he quickly understood how we lived and promised us
a turkey for Christmas. He said that he would choose a nice fat one especially
for us... and my heart sank. We cannot accept meat knowing it was killed
especially for monks. We refused his offer. So I had to settle for part of the
villager’s meal - frogs again.
Monks may not exercise choice when it comes to food and that is much harder than
being a vegetarian. Nonetheless, we may encourage vegetarianism and if our lay
supporters brought only vegetarian food and no meat, well... monks may not
complain either! May you take the hint and be kind to animals.
Address grievances of minorities to unite Sri
In his interview with the BBC, the United Nations representative Mark Cutts
hassaid, “nothing less than a new city had been created at Menik Farm.” He went
on to say “bulldozers were working constantly to clear the jungle, phone lines,
schools, banks and even cash machines have been built. Tents are being replaced
with permanent structures.” He states that officials have told him, that, 20% of
the people will be returned within a year. UN has said even those who have been
through the screening process have not as yet been released from the camps.
Meanwhile, Amnesty International accuses the government of not seriously
investigating the human rights abuses which, it alleges, were committed in the
Now that the conflict is over, Sri Lanka is facing a polarisation from the West
going by some of the comments made in the media. The Sri Lankan Government
having to compete with different interests and competing claims - it is easy to
lose one’s moral compass, in the cacophony of voices that questions its genuine
desire to help the civilians and re-settle them as quickly as possible. Its
efforts are further compounded by those in the diaspora who have their own
agenda with its mythical notion of Elam who would not wish to see a united and
prosperous Sri Lanka. We Sri Lankans of every hue and colour agree, that the
underlying grievances of the minorities have to be addressed which is the most
pressing need. After all, talk is cheap; we need to act and challenge our
leaders by asking them where they put their time, energy, and resources. These
are the true tests, regardless of what we tell ourselves. If we are not willing
to pay the price and make some sacrifices to realise the concerns of the
minorities by addressing their grievances and fulfill the dream of a united Sri
Lanka where all our citizens can live with equality, justice, and peace, then we
should ask ourselves whether we truly believe in them all.
If we say finding a solution to the ethnic issue is a priority because we value
the legacy we leave the next generation, then address it. We must we should not
saddle that generation with an insurmountable problem. Part of us knows better.
We hang on to our values even if they are worn and tarnished; even as a nation
and in our own lives, we have betrayed them more often we care to remember. What
else is there to guide us? They are values that make us who we are as people and
as a nation-we recognise they are subjected to challenges, prodded and
criticised and have proven to be durable and constant across faiths, races,
cultures and generations. We can make claims on their behalf, so long as we
understand that our values must be tested against fact and experience, so long
as we recall that they demand deeds and not just words. To do otherwise would be
to relinquish our best selves. We Sri Lankans have an innate audacity to believe
we can put the mistakes of the past behind us, and joined together as one people
to build a better future.
Spread of Dengue in Kandy
It is sad to hear that dengue is fast spreading in Kandy due to neglect of
keeping clean the entire place of the city.
As a resident of Kandy, I just passed along the drains constructed on the upper
and lower roads of Peradeniya, Kandy. I found most of the drains have stagnant
dirty water. It seems that municipal cleaners have not cleaned these drains for
weeks. Then, won’t the mosquitoes breed on such stagnant dirty water? Who are to
The municipal authorities should open their eyes to see these dirty drains.
A Kandy citizen
Lakshman Kadirgamar’s lesson
A close college friend of mine sent me the following email on the late Lakshman
Kadirgamar. Having read it, I couldn’t help but think of a story I read in a
newspaper recently referring to the late minister’s statue still being stored in
a crate! What an ungrateful and petty minded set of politicians we have been
saddled with! Surely, are the high authorities in the government not powerful
enough to order due recognition to a man who was admired both locally and
universally? Or are these authorities also dragging their feet for reasons known
only to them? It’s indeed a shame as whatever reasons the Government has, cannot
overshadow the man’s contribution to his beloved country and people.
This is indeed true.
People appreciate only the icing on the cake not where it was baked first.
In 2005, almost 50 years after he left Oxford, Lakshman Kadirgamar’s portrait
was unveiled at the Oxford Union. This was indeed a great honour bestowed by the
Oxford Union on only 15 others in its 183 year history.
Mr. Kadirgamar had this to say about that event;
“.... I would like to, if I may, to assume that I could share the honour with
the people of my country, Sri Lanka.
I had my schooling there,
My first University was there,
I went to Law College there,
And by the time I came to Oxford as a Postgraduate student, well, I was
relatively a matured person.
Oxford was the icing on the cake... but the cake was baked at home...
R. de Silva
An ‘Indigenous Model’ of University
By Panduka Karunanayake University of Colombo
The university system in our country is undergoing privatisation relentlessly.
Arresting this process is inconceivable, because it is taking place almost
totally outside the jurisdiction of the state and is driven by an insatiable
demand. In fact, even monitoring it is virtually impossible.
At the same time, some segments – mainly supported by or connected to the JVP –
are attempting to whip up resistance to it with little hope of success (short of
what might be achieved by direct physical sabotage). A somewhat larger segment
of society, with remnants of Left-wing leanings from a bygone era, might still
repulse privatisation, but this is becoming increasingly irrelevant as old,
distant ideologies are gradually displaced by the new pragmatism of market
The question is no longer whether or not we ought to embrace privatisation – but
how best we should embrace it. It is no longer whether or not we should accept
privatisation today – but how to shape it today so that we could have tomorrow
the private sector we want to live with.
In this article I hope to outline what I believe is an appropriate macro-level
response to this situation. What I mean by privatisation of the university
system is the enlargement of the portion of the private sector within it – a
change in its ‘sectoral balance.’ It does not refer to, nor attempts to justify,
other possible manifestations of privatisation, such as the sale of state
institutions to the private sector or the incorporation of private ‘machinery’
into state institutions. Furthermore, although the point is obvious, I would
like to take care to point out that a private institution may not necessarily be
The Japanese example
From a country’s viewpoint, the development of a private university sector is a
cause for celebration, not worry. It would give the country a flexible,
responsive segment that could seek out, take risks and grow in areas commanding
local and international demand. From the masses’ viewpoint too, it can
facilitate percolation of a meaningful education – one unlike what we have in
the state sector today – to the lower strata of society, allowing their upward
social mobility, without burdening state coffers and the public with unrealistic
That, for instance, was what happened in Japan in the 1960s. At that time Japan
was just becoming industrialised (an achievement that did not require
universities). She was realising that she had to invest in the knowledge
industries in order to remain competitive against other emerging countries. But
her state universities (which served only the elite in society, like our own
university did until the 1950s) were unable to meet the increasing demand for
graduates that a knowledge-based economy was creating.
She responded to this situation by encouraging the expansion of her private
sector, consisting of private universities and colleges. The state universities
regulated and supervised them while also focusing more strongly on their own
research tasks, while the private sector predominantly took up the task of
Interestingly, therefore, privatisation in Japan brought university education
from the elite to the masses (this is called ‘massification’) and contributed
positively to the economy. We all know what results she has achieved with this
A local tale
In fact, broadening access to education and undertaking massification through
privatisation is not unknown to us. We used this strategy ourselves, in the
late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries.
At that time, an English medium education was essential to secure a sought-after
employment. This was almost the sole conserve of elitist, fee-levying schools
set up by Christian missionaries, such as S. Thomas’, Trinity and St John’s
(Jaffna). In response, indigenous Buddhist and Hindu private organisations set
up schools like Ananda, Mahinda, Dharmaraja and Hindu College.
Furthermore, at post-secondary level too most of the options were available in
English medium institutions like the medical, technical and law colleges of
Ceylon and the universities in London and Madras. The indigenous organisations
responded by setting up the Vidyodaya and Vidyalankara pirivenas which, although
not English medium institutions, broadened the choice available to the masses.
These events broadened access to education which was hitherto available only to
the elite – through the setting up of indigenous, private educational
The indigenous model
Several key characteristics stand out in the Japanese example. It was an
endeavour of her indigenous entrepreneurs from local industries, organisations
and families (much like our own example). It was initially regulated and
supervised by state universities, and as a result received crucial guidance from
the start. The government and the elite supported it, which would have brought
its costs down significantly. All this in turn meant that it was affordable to
at least her middle classes, which was why it was able to meet the demand
successfully. Being indigenous in origin, I am sure that it would have used
methodologies and focussed on areas that were appropriate in the local context.
Let me call this ‘the indigenous model’ of privatisation.
Resistance and loopholes
In Sri Lanka, the state universities’ stiff resistance to privatisation over the
years, mainly at the behest of the JVP, resulted in the inhibition of a local
private sector on the indigenous model. But privatisation cannot be blocked
forever when the demand is strong. Eventually, it is bound to sprout through
loopholes in existing obstacles. And that was indeed what happened.
Initially this took the form of the elite flying off to foreign countries, along
with foreign exchange, to obtain overseas degrees. But in our globalising world
and given the huge local demand, it was only natural that foreign universities
would eventually set up local agents here, using loopholes such as BOI projects
to circumvent governmental and state universities’ resistance.
The satellite model
But this sector is not in the indigenous model. It is based on overseas
universities, with courses that are designed for their contexts (the students
may study here, abroad or both). It charges international fees, which are
invariably higher. (It may offer cheap courses, but this is a reflection of a
wider variety of courses, not corresponding courses at cheaper rates.) All this
leads to the loss of huge amounts of foreign exchange from the country. It is
thus affordable to a smaller, higher socio-economic stratum in society, while
courses in greater demand might only be affordable to the elite.
Furthermore, the kind of government-state-private coordination that was possible
in Japan and which guided the private sector there to work towards national
economic goals is not possible in this model. In addition, since state
supervision or regulation is not possible, we have no way of knowing which
courses are value-for-money or even which establishments are swindlers.
Let me call this ‘the satellite model’ of privatisation.
We should not blame the local entrepreneurs who set up the satellite model. If
the environment was conducive – as it was in Japan – they would have gladly set
up an indigenous model instead. The fault lay with the state universities
themselves, for their selfish and short-sighted anti-privatisation attitude in
An excellent illustration comes from the private medical college issue. In 1981
a local organisation set up a not-for-profit private medical college here in the
indigenous model: the North Colombo Medical College (NCMC). But the government
caved in to JVP-led opposition and nationalised it less than a decade later.
Today, thousands (along with millions in foreign exchange) are flying off
overseas to study medicine. The two currently planned colleges (at Malabe and
Nawala) are themselves satellites of foreign universities.
By setting up the NCMC our entrepreneurs proved that they are capable of forming
even a private medical college in the indigenous model. And having been robbed
of that chance, they have also proven they can do it in the satellite model too.
It is not they that chose the model – it is the society.
The satellite model is unsuited for us for two reasons. Firstly, it is bad
economics, at both individual and national levels. At individual level an
indigenous model would have been cheaper, while the satellite model charges fees
that only the elite could afford.
Once again the NCMC example illustrates this point. At the NCMC the fees were on
average about Rs 25,000 per year (but paid as a lump sum up-front), while
nowadays an overseas medical degree fee alone will cost from Rs 400,000 per year
to over Rs 1 million per year (as even in the case of the Malabe college).
At national level an indigenous model will not burden our foreign exchange
reserves and might even contribute to it by attracting foreign students, while
the burden that the satellite model has become is all too evident.
The NCMC alone earned our country about US$ 400,000 per year from foreign
students’ fees. On the other hand, today our elite pay to foreign universities
more than what our government allocates to state universities. In 2008 we paid
over US$ 170 million (over Rs 18 billion) to foreign universities. This is apart
from what was paid to local colleges that remit foreign exchange to overseas
universities, a figure that I could not even find. In comparison, the total
allocation to state universities in 2007 (the latest year for which this figure
is available) was Rs 14 billion. I am sure that the per capita cost difference
between foreign and state universities would be very significant, but we cannot
calculate this without knowing how many Sri Lankans are studying overseas – and
I wonder if anyone even knows this figure.
Regulation and supervision
The second reason why the satellite model is unsuited is that it does not lend
itself to state regulation and supervision, something that was crucial to
State academics already have close relationships with private institutions. The
institutions need the academics as visiting teachers, while the academics need
the extra income. A new role for them in the supervisory and regulatory
machinery (with an additional income for their consultative services) will not
be difficult for either party to get used to.
The existence of several successful public-private partnerships involving
universities shows that state academics are now well-versed in the etiquette of
working with the private sector.
It would be to everyone’s advantage if the government encouraged and guided the
setting up of a private sector on the indigenous model. It would then be
affordable, and its quality would be the responsibility of the state. The
foreign exchange that is now leaving our country to the coffers of foreign
universities will remain, and the moneys that students pay will go to strengthen
our own institutions. The government will have the apparatus to monitor the
private sector, and this will help planning of both the education sector and the
economy. The private sector could be guided towards national economic goals
through incentives, communications etc.
The only downside that I see is that the private sector will lose some of its
flexibility – a vital attribute in a changing world. The legislation must take
this into account and incorporate effective safeguards.
On the other hand, continuing to turn a blind eye to what is happening will
serve no one on the long term. While there is much opposition to privatisation
from JVP-led student groups in state universities, there can be no grounds for
opposition to state involvement in regulatory and supervisory capacities in a
sector that is invariably expanding anyway.
An informal, undefined relationship already exists between state universities
and existing private institutions – we are, after all, a very small country. But
in spite of this relationship, the direction that privatisation is taking is
wrong from the country’s viewpoint: the satellite model. What the government
must do is gently guide the private sector towards the indigenous model and
formalise and define this relationship into statutory roles.
There must be ample flexibility and reflective practice built into the new
arrangement, so that changing trends lead to appropriate responses. Otherwise,
one of the private sector’s most important advantages – flexibility – will be
We must proactively and judiciously mould our university system into an
integrated, efficient amalgam of state and private components – by promoting an
indigenous private sector. Or else, we will eventually not have a university
system of any consequence that can be called our own.
(The writer wishes to acknowledge Asian Universities: Historical Perspectives
and Contemporary Challenges co-edited by Philip G. Altbach and Toru Umakoshi
(Johns Hopkins University Press: 2004) for valuable information and concepts. He
is a graduate of the North Colombo Medical College, and currently teaches
medicine at the University of Colombo.)
A moment of unique significance
This is an all-important period, in the history of Sri Lanka. A moment of unique
significance that we like to share with the global family - celebrating the
defeat of ruthless terrorism that had taken away the freedom of our people and
terrorised the region, spreading and exporting terrorist ideas and concepts to
all corners of the earth. Freedom has been reclaimed for people of Sri Lanka.
These great moments, must be enshrined in history. Our future generations must
learn and understand the sacrifices of this generation that will give them
freedom of a better future. Most importantly, we have to teach the future
generations to never make this mistake again.
As an artist Bandula Samarasekera initiates Sri Lanka’s digital Internet museum
- a digitally drawn gallery of Sri Lanka’s history - of people who carved the
future of the nation, of events, of monuments that we all treasure. Bandula’s
first digital drawing is of President Mahinda Rajapaksa - the leader responsible
for giving Sri Lanka a future of freedom and a future of success. At this moment
Bandula has completed a digital portrait of another true son of Sri Lanka - the
man who led the forces on the ground and claimed victory against the world’s
most ruthless terrorist outfit. Bandula shows his appreciation of General Sarath
Fonseka with a digital portrait that will adorn the digital museum of Sri Lankan
heroes and freedom fighters. Bandula goes on to express his ambition “the
internet and digital media is all so powerful today and this must be exploited
to showcase the peoples’ contribution to our country - so that people all over
the world with links to Sri Lanka will learn about our heroes, their
contribution and the value they brought to all our lives”. He added that the
current leadership is important to the world because “they taught the world that
even the most ruthless wrong thinking people can be brought to their knees”.
Bandula worked on a portrait of General Sarath Fonseka and completed it in a
week. This digital canvas will enshrine Sarath Fonseka in the gallery of the
famous sons of Sri Lanka in digital media. Bandula’s ambition is to enshrine the
history of Sri Lanka in this digital museum. A long and colourful history with
over a 180 monarchs, Bandula has a formidable task. The long history and rich
culture gives artists an ideal canvas to expose their talent for the country.
He’d like to invite like-minded persons to support and encourage the concept of
The Sri Lankan Digital Museum. Bandula also plans to have a digital canvas
exhibition to encourage newcomers to take to this medium.
Those who believe in this digital museum for Sri Lanka could contact Bandula
at firstname.lastname@example.org or visitwww.bcomart.com and support him in his efforts to
put Sri Lanka’s history in drawings on the Internet canvas.