Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Sri Lankan president threatens to end ruling coalition

By K. Ratnayake -23 January 2018

Sri Lankan media outlets ran headlines last week reporting that President Maithripala Sirisena walked out of the weekly cabinet meeting last Tuesday. According to these reports, Sirisena threatened to discontinue the coalition government because some members of his main partner, the United National Party (UNP), had publicly criticised him.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and several ministers apparently persuaded Sirisena to rejoin the cabinet meeting. It appears a patch-up was made by both sides, well aware of the political consequences of the breakup of the coalition, which could lead to the government’s collapse.

Wickremesinghe, who heads the UNP, warned his members of parliament not to make any criticisms of the president.

However, the president’s outburst was not just a subjective reaction. It expressed the extreme political crisis of the coalition between the UNP and Sirisena’s Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and of the ruling class as whole. The government has been gripped by growing class tensions, deep economic crisis and massive financial scandals.

Sirisena defected from former SLFP-led government to stand against then President Mahinda Rajapakse in the January 2015 presidential election, principally with the support of the UNP, which was then in the opposition. After taking office, Sirisena installed a minority UNP government, appointing Wickremesinghe as prime minister.

While the campaign headed by Sirisena exploited mass opposition to Rajapakse, it was a carefully prepared regime-change operation, orchestrated by Washington. Rajapakse had turned to Beijing for investment and military procurement cutting across US strategic and military moves directed against China.

After general elections in August 2015, a SLFP-UNP “national unity government” was formed to implement harsh economic policies against the working people and stabilise the pro-US administration. A dissident faction of members of parliament from the SLFP and its United People’s Freedom Alliance organised themselves under Rajapakse as the “joint opposition.”

The immediate cause for last week’s eruption was that UNP members publicly attacked Sirisena for undermining their party’s image, using a presidential commission of inquiry report into a bond scam that occurred two months after Sirisena assumed office.

The inquiry reported last week that a finance company, Perpetual Treasuries, owned by the son-in-law of the newly-appointed Central Bank Governor, Arjuna Mahendran, a close confidante of Wickremesinghe, amassed a profit of at least 10 billion rupees ($US65 million) after receiving inside information. Apart from Mahendran and some senior Central Bank officials, former finance minister Ravi Karunanayake was implicated in deals with Perpetual Treasuries.

Sirisena was responsible for finally confirming Mahendran’s appointment. However, in an effort to wash his hands of the scandal, he issued a statement via electronic media last week referring to UNP leaders and senior officials. It was the latest attempt by Sirisena to insist that he is not fully responsible for the government’s actions and is instead leading an “anti-corruption” crusade.

Sirisena’s manoeuvring comes amid the campaign for the February 10 island-wide election for local government bodies. Sirisena’s SLFP is contesting the election separately from the UNP. By distancing himself from the government, Sirisena hopes to derail the mounting opposition among the masses and garner support in the election.

The president has another concern. His rival, Rajapakse, is leading the newly-formed Podu Jana Peramuna (PJP) to contest the election, exploiting the popular discontent with the government.
Rajapakse remains discredited for his regime’s ruthless prosecution of the communal war against the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which was defeated in May 2009, his police-state measures and attacks on living and social conditions.

The ex-president is seeking to boost support by inciting anti-Tamil communalism while shedding crocodile tears about the government’s attacks on living conditions. Declaring that the ruling coalition’s “infighting is affecting economic development,” Rajapakse is sending a message to the capitalist class that he is ready to deliver “strong government.” Sections of the media and big business that profited under his nepotistic rule have rallied to him.

The February 10 local government election will not directly affect the government’s survival. But if Rajapakse’s party wins substantial support, it could result in more defections from Sirisena’s party and further undermine the government.

Every faction of the ruling class, whether backing Sirisena, Wickremesinghe or Rajapakse, is nervous about the rising working class unrest. The latest in a wave of struggles for better pay and working conditions, Ceylon Electricity Board workers held a protest strike and a march in Colombo last Thursday. This followed protests and strikes by postal, railway, ports, petroleum and plantation workers.

Despite the unrest, the cash-strapped government has been compelled to implement more austerity measures dictated by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in order to receive financial assistance. Like other countries such as Greece, Sri Lanka must meet strict economic targets as part of an IMF program that will not end before mid-2019. In particular, the government must cut the fiscal deficit to 3.5 percent of gross domestic product, half the level of 2014.

After a review of Sri Lanka’s economy, an IMF press release issued on January 11 said “the downside risks remain significant given the high level of public debt and need for further fiscal consolidation.” It said “fiscal risks” included “ineffective implementation of the IRA [Inland Revenue Act], further delays in SOE [state owned enterprise] reforms and failure to provide for weather calamities.”

The IMF-required measures to increase taxes, extend privatisations and impose other cuts will set the stage for major struggles by workers, rural poor and youth, already hit by attacks on working, living and social conditions. This volatile situation for the ruling class is developing amid an upsurge of working class struggles internationally.

In this situation, while warning his coalition partner, Sirisena is seeking to strengthen his own hand. Two weeks ago he consulted the Supreme Court about whether he could continue his term for six years, until 2021. He made this request despite the 19th amendment to the constitution, introduced with his support in 2015, that restricted a president’s term to five years, which for him would end in 2020. A five-judge bench unanimously rejected Sirisena’s application last week.

Last Wednesday, Sirisena summoned the attorney-general, Central Bank governor, director-general of the Bribery Commission and other officials to discuss fighting corruption, including by introducing new laws and setting up a police investigation unit to probe present and past cases. None of these institutions is under the president’s purview. Sirisena’s action is akin to those of past executive presidents, including Rajapakse, who used the autocratic presidential powers to run the government and implement anti-democratic measures.

At the same time, Sirisena declared he would initiate a “national movement against corruption with all the politicians who love the motherland, irrespective of their political differences.”

During the past three years Sirisena and his government have already been using police-state methods to suppress struggles by workers, the rural poor and university students. Facing political instability and intensifying class tensions, Sirisena is preparing for dictatorial forms of rule.

Is time running out for Sirisena, Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa?

Wednesday, 24 January 2018

On 8 January 2015, the people of this country exercised their true democratic grit to dispel the rule of President Rajapaksa and his family. The right of the people was exercised in a clear wave of hope to end corruption, inequality and establish justice, which most thought was diminished under the Rajapaksa rule.

The result was unexpected and happened against the series of overwhelming public endorsements received by the Rajapaksa Government in successive elections prior to the people’s presidential verdict. The scenario brings to mind a saying of Niels Bohr, “The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.”

High expectations were set on the coalition Government formed with the advent of Maithripala Sirisena as President and the then minority United National Party. Three years have now passed, but the country still hangs over a wave of corruption, injustice and inequality. Despite many inquiries and court house dramas, the so-called corrupt deals of the previous regime are yet to be justified and proven under a court of law.

The Government is also overshadowed by the bond scam, which has lost billions of rupees for state institutions and the impact to the country is in such high propositions that is yet to be accounted in full. In simple terms “Yahapalanaya” has not yet been established.

One could argue the fact that the wrongdoers in the bond scam were exposed in the wake of good governance and the establishment of the Presidential Commission was a result of such conducive atmosphere. The reality is that such measures were adopted as a result of the surging public uproar that spread throughout the country against such day light robberies.

It has been over 13 years with the country under the rule of President Rajapaksa and thereafter the coalition Government led by President Sirisena and Premier Wickremesinghe. The years of these rulers have witnessed the country making way for prosperity, but with no clear implementation plan to reach its vision.

President Rajapaksa should be credited with the defeating of terrorism and subsequent drive in infrastructure development, despite the questions raised over its economic feasibility. The coalition Government spearheaded the movement to create better international relations, media freedom and establish economic freedom. Despite the positives, one thing common that we observe in all three political celebrities is the hunger and greed for power. The true nature and interest of such desire is unknown to the common voter.

Will the Premier ever become president?

Twenty-three years as the leader of the country’s biggest political force and four-time Prime Minister serves well to fall into the category of qualified personal to hold the office of president. However, the Premier is thus far the most unsuccessful leader of the Grand Old Party which under his leadership has failed to produce a president from the party for the past 23 years and even having to sacrifice the candidature of the party to common candidates at two prior presidential elections. Even Wickremesinghe tried his luck at the presidency only to fall short on each time.

The UNP under his tenure has detached itself from the common masses and even failed to form a Government that is stable and capable of implementing the policies owned to the UNP. On both occasions that the UNP came to power under the leadership of Wickremesinghe, the result was hinged on crossovers of key personal from the SLFP. Taking into consideration the past performance of the premier it seems that he might not be destined to become President despite the ambition that rests within.
Will President Sirisena contest again?

In his inaugural address to the nation as President, Sirisena highlighted that he had no intention of contesting another election. In further speeches that followed his term in office, the President reiterated his stance and made it clear on one occasion that he would consider shortening his term to four years given the possibility.

However, the post of high office seems too attractive to give up easily, even for those who came to power to relive it off its superior powers. Many ministers in the camp of President Sirisena have already pronounced that the President in deed would seek another term, even though no clear indication came from the President.

Though President Sirisena is yet to comment on his desire for re-election, he has also not rejected that possibility. His recent comments on seeking the view of the Supreme Court on his term and the speech made at a recent election rally clamming that his rule will end the day corruption ends in this country, are blurred but indicative that the President has a high propensity to seek re-election.

After taking his Presidential oath, President Sirisena went on to snatch the leadership of both SLFP and UPFA and even went on to the extent of appointing his own henchman to key positions of the party. However, the leadership of President Sirisena has not been convincing or spineless as one would call it, as he is yet to take action against prominent personal of SLFP, such as President Rajapaksa for his active involvement with the competing party, Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna.

President Sirisena seems to be in fear of the popularity of Rajapaksa and the subsequent repercussions of expelling him from the party. The same goes with the rest of the UPFA defectors that have resorted to supporting the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna.
Will President Rajapaksa ever come to power again?

President Rajapaksa will always carry the title of the leader that ended the bloody conflict that cursed this nation for the past three decades or so. However, his rule also was marked by allegations of corruption, malpractices, lavish expenditure on his family, nepotism and uneconomical mega projects. The named reasons were the decisive factors behind the people’s verdict to end his rule. Despite nine long years in power, the greed for power never seems to die within Rajapaksa as seen with the other two.

The main positive with President Rajapaksa is that he is still a popular leader and major crowds flock to embrace his political wisdom. However, time will be the best answer on his future as the 19th Amendment to the Constitution now prevents Rajapaksa from seeking re-election as President. Despite the technicalities preventing the former President from holding top office again, the former Commander in Chief does not seem to be deterred by such impediments in his quest to regain the top office.
Is there an alternative?

The imminent alternative is the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). However, questions can be raised over their administrative competence despite their rhetoric and vibrant orations of their frontrunners including their Leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake.

In the ranks of the UNP, Sajith Premadasa seems to be the next in line for the leadership, at least on paper. Sajith Premadasa made an unsuccessful attempt for the post during the crises years of the UNP which only resulted in him luring Karu Jayasuriya to vie for the leadership position, who eventually went on to suffer a heavy defeat at the hands of Wickremesinghe.

The current structure of the leadership in the Maithri fraction does not indicate a leadership candidate or a prospective individual. In the Rajapaksa camp it is evident that the former president is grooming his elder son Namal to take up the reigns of his new party and even go on to capture the leadership of the SLFP, succeeding President Sirisena.

Despite many calls for former Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa to seek office, it is yet inconclusive of his eligibility to contest for president.
[The writer, CFA, is the Founder/ Director at Elon Venture Catalysts Ltd., a financial and investment banking services firm operating in Sri Lanka. He has a BEng (Hons) in Chemical Engineering degree from the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom and a MBA from the University of Colombo. He is also a Chartered Financial Analyst, Certified Global Business Analyst and Certified Management Accountant (Australia). He can be reached via email on vidushan@elonventure.com or www.elonventure.com.]

I am against corruption - President

President Maithripala Sirisena addressing a United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) rally in Kandy yesterday. Pictures by Sudath Silva

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe addressing the rally in Millaniya yesterday. Picture by Hirantha Gunathilaka

MR regime borrowed more than all other govt’s did - PM

Wednesday, January 24, 2018

President Maithripala Sirisena requested Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to support him to bring culprits of the bond issue to book.

He was addressing a United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) rally in Kandy on Tuesday.

The President said those members of the G L Peiris’ party were saying that the scam has happened from 2015 to 2016, but he knew what those members did then and asked the Premier and his party members not to weaken him in the move to take measures against those who had misappropriated public money.

President Sirisena said the G L Peiris’ party members should not forget that the Supreme Court judges had clearly stated in the report that the fraud had been committed since 2008. He said that a forensic and audit reports had been called for this reason. He said what is needed at the moment was to punish all those involved in the racket.

The President said it was fair to follow lions rather than leading a pack of dogs. He said all who defrauded public money should be penalised.

“That money should have been used to facilitate the poor. Although Mahinda Rajapaksa had requested people to join him as the government and opposition has proved a failure, he himself had failed at three occasions,” the President said.

He said Mahinda Rajapaksa held the Presidential Election two years earlier since he failed to run the economy. “He lost the election and the August election as well,” President Sirisena said.

“The people supported me against the corruption and I won on January 8,” the President said.

President Sirisena said Mahinda Rajapaksa did not vote for the no faith motion against Ravi Karunanayake brought by the Joint Opposition, but he congratulated Ravi when he won it.

MR regime borrowed more than all other govt’s did - PM

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe addressing the rally in Millaniya yesterday. Picture by Hirantha Gunathilaka

Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on Tuesday said the loans obtained by the previous government was higher than what former governments had taken for the last 60 years.

He was addressing a political rally in support of the candidates contesting LG polls for the Millaniya and Bandaragama Pradeshiya Sabhas in Millaniya.

The Prime Minister said the previous government left a huge debt burden on the present government.
He said the UNP was the only political party that could develop villages.

The Prime Minister said a solution would be brought to the Mattala Airport issue this year, and a new entry point to the Southern Express way would be constructed in Millaniya.

He said the government has taken many steps to fast track development. “The industrial zones being constructed in many parts of the country will help improve economy,” he said

Power and Energy Deputy Minister Ajith P Perera, Ministers Gayantha Karunathilake, Daya Gamage, State Minister Sujeewa Senasinghe, Parliamentarians S.M. Marikkar, Nalin Bandara, Hirunika Premachandra Horana SLFP Organiser Hemantha Wickramarachchi, Western Provincial Councillor Nishantha Sri Warnasinghe and Aruna Deepal were present.

Strive for ‘A tomorrow without corruption’

January 24, 2018 by

A leaflet campaign carried out as another step of the people’s forum launched by ‘Inception of Change’ to have a dialogue with the masses regarding the local government election was held opposite Fort Railway Station yesterday (23rd) evening.

Several intellectuals and artists including Prof. Chandana Abeyratne, Dr Nirmal Ranjith Devasiri, Dr Nihal Abeysinghe, Senior Lecturer of the University of Fine Arts Asela Rangadeva participated.

‘Inception of Change’ holds a series of seminars throughout the island and will hold the ‘National Forum’ under the theme “Who should be given power in the village?” at Youth Services Council Auditorium at Maharagama tomorrow (25th) at 3.30 p.m.

ETF Will contributors receive a fair return ?

2018-01-24

While activities concerning the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) came under much scrutiny in recent times, its sister fund the Employees’ Trust Fund (ETF) has seldom been discussed. Even when discussed, many have pointed to a looming merger of the two social security programmes, followed by fears of the funds being open to abuse and misappropriation.

Substantial portions of the ETF investments are invested in gilt-edged government securities; and yet many have opined that its beneficiaries are not receiving the highest available returns. Established under Act No-46 of 1980, the Employees’ Trust Fund Board (ETFB) initially commenced operations under the Labour Ministry. As of June 2017 the ETFB functions under the Ministry of Development Assignments and covers all private sector employees and all public sector employees who are not entitled to the Government pension scheme. With an estimated 79,000 employers contributing 3 per cent of the gross earnings of their employees to the fund on a monthly basis, the ETFB today boasts of a 270 billion fund.

ETF Will contributors receive a fair return.docx by Thavam on Scribd

Unplanned and uncoordinated growth of grey infrastructure

Wednesday, 24 January 2018

The Ministry of Environment, which is under none other than President Maithripala Sirisena, has a laudable vision – that is to create a healthy and pleasant environment sustaining nature for the wellbeing of the people and the economy.

This ministry has a host of institutions and programs including the Forest Department, Central Environment Authority, Coast Conservation and Coastal Resource Management Department, Climate Change Secretariat, Blue-Green Era and Sri Lanka Carbon Fund which have a mandate to preserve and protect the environment and mitigate climate change, and around a dozen of environmental policies are in force to this end (http://www.environmentmin.gov.lk/policies.htm).

In addition, about 10 environment-related UN International Days are observed in the country, including the World Environment Day and World Water Day with newspaper supplements and messages from the powers that be. On top of it, millions of saplings have been planted, although with an extremely low success rate, over the past several years to mark the birthdays of political leaders of the ruling party. The environmental situation in the country is, however, deteriorating day by day, with environmental issues assuming alarming proportions. Burgeoning population, migration from rural to urban areas, unscientific and irrational urbanisation, uncoordinated and ad hoc industrial growth and poor waste management along with poor implementation of environmental policies have, among others, contributed to the above situation.

Against this backdrop, it seems fitting that a ‘blue-green budget’ was recently presented for 2018. Under the circumstances, it is apposite to look at new concepts, strategies and emerging trends in infrastructure development in other countries to promote green cities and green growth, striking a balance between economic development and environment.

Cities and towns as a major source of environmental pollution and ecological footprint

Cities, which occupy only 3% of the Earth’s land surface, accommodate half the human population, use 75% of the resources, and account for 70% of the CO2 emissions, contributing to an enormous carbon footprint (https://www.cepal.org/en/.../37700-are-we-building-competitive-and-liveable-cities). Migration from rural to urban areas and urbanisation occur unabated adding to the ecological footprint, exerting unmanageable pressure on the planet.

Therefore it is a formidable challenge to provide essential services and amenities to a rapidly expanding urban population and maintain habitability and competitiveness of local cities in a globalised environment while minimising the ecological footprint. City infrastructure has a profound effect on environmental health, habitability and competitiveness of cities. Because of the long lifespan and heavy capital outlay involved, it is of utmost importance to correctly and smartly plan, design and build infrastructure, taking into account environmental sustainability, competitiveness and quality of life.

Global trends and developments in urban planning and development

Eco-efficiency is an important parameter used widely in infrastructure development. It is a management philosophy that seeks to develop synergy between economy and environment thereby reducing the use of resources such as land, water, energy and raw materials and generation of waste and pollution. It will thus maximise return on investment and promote green growth and green economy. Stated differently, eco-efficiency aims at maximising environmental sustainability, competitiveness and quality of life. This concept is being vigorously pursued in many cities of Europe, North America and Asia, especially Japan, Singapore and Malaysia, to establish eco-efficient and socially inclusive infrastructure with a view to building clean, green, healthy and smart cities.

People rarely think of forests, wetlands, groves, grasslands, water ways, ponds, coral reefs, and other natural ecosystems as forms of infrastructure. But, they are. Forests, for instance, prevent silt and pollutants from entering streams that provide freshwater to downstream cities and enterprises, and act as a natural water filtration system. Thus they are a form of ‘green infrastructure’ that can serve the same purpose as ‘grey infrastructure’ – the human-engineered solution that often involves concrete, bitumen and steel.

Green infrastructure has been successfully used to improve the habitability and environmental sustainability of many cities in the world. Restoration of mangroves rather than building dikes to protect shorelines from storm damage in Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam, upstream landscape conservation and restoration as an alternative to conventional water treatment technologies in Bogota, Columbia, and conserving and fostering mangroves, dunes and coral reefs in the Andaman Islands instead of building a sea wall are to name, but a few.

Another noteworthy feature of green infrastructure is that it is often far less costly than grey infrastructure. For instance, New York City evaluated two schemes to manage its storm water flow, one a green infrastructure comprising stream buffer restoration, green roofs, bio-swales and landscape elements designed to remove silt and pollution from surface run off, and the other a grey infrastructure comprising tunnels and storm drains. Adopting the former helped to cut cost by more than $1.5 billion, but with comparable outcome.

Another emerging concept regarding infrastructure in urban areas is Blue Green Cities. Here water resources and green space are integrated for improved environmental health, quality of life and sustainability by combining and protecting hydrological and ecological functions and the values of urban landscape. That will enhance the evaporative cooling effect from a matrix of green corridors, street trees, green or living roofs and walls and water bodies. It will also improve hydrological performance through high evaporation, high infiltration and low surface run-off. All of these benefits are of prime importance.
Urban planning and development in Sri Lanka

While many countries in the world are responding to change by building liveable, competitive and sustainable green cities based on eco-efficient and socially inclusive infrastructure, we seem to be clinging on to grey infrastructure. A look at the infrastructure landscape including new constructions in many towns in our country will show that it predominantly constitutes grey infrastructure built of concrete, mortar, bitumen and steel along with impervious paving of gardens, paths and premises devoid of open areas and green spaces. Such infrastructure, in the name of ‘development’ and urbanisation, is progressively eating into the remaining limited green spaces of towns, adding to environmental issues and climate change. The highly contagious fashion and passion to pave indiscriminately roadsides, footpaths, jogging tracks, gardens, premises of offices and business establishments has taken grip of our country.

Recently I painfully observed how a long and wide stretch of green space on the coast of Weligama was replaced with impervious pavers, an environmental disaster. Impervious concrete and asphalt areas are rampant in the infrastructure landscape of our country. For instance, the Kotuwegoda Beach Park is practically the only resort for leisure, relaxation, recreation and social interaction at Matara; however, over 35% of its area is covered by impervious concrete and asphalt particularly for purpose of parking buses as well as heavy vehicles.

A survey by Dr. Chaminda Kumara and his team of the University of Ruhuna revealed that the visitors to the park disliked the concrete and asphalt covered areas as they were inhospitable, particularly during the day and desired more green space in the park. Studies by Dr. Sunanda Kodikara and his team of the same University found that, at noon, the ambient temperature over concrete paved areas was about 3-5°C higher than that over grass cover. Besides, such impervious cover seal off the soil preventing infiltration of rainwater and recharge of groundwater aquifers and increasing run-off to overstretch drains and sewers and thereby contribute to flash floods.

For this reason, prior permission from the relevant authorities is mandatory in some countries for paving land with impermeable material. For instance, in the UK prior permission from the relevant authority is necessary even in private property if the area to be paved exceeds 5 m2. (https://www.paving.org/index.php/planning-permission-for-paving-a-garden/). Why do we not adopt such practices as appropriate to curtail the menacing growth of paved areas which contribute to flash floods, poor recharge of ground water aquifers and rise in ambient temperature?

Sri Lanka being an island nation, the recharge of groundwater aquifers is of prime importance, particularly in coastal areas, to minimise the intrusion of salt water. This matter should receive utmost attention in the light of rising sea level and lowering water table owing to unplanned, ad hoc and uncoordinated infrastructure development including impervious paving, over-extraction of ground water, unsustainable land use practices, etc. As evident from Fig. 1, saltwater intrusion occurs naturally to some degree in most coastal aquifers, owing to the hydraulic connection between groundwater and seawater. Since saline water has a higher mineral content than freshwater, it is denser and has a higher hydraulic head (liquid pressure exerted by a water column). As a result, saltwater can push inland beneath the freshwater. This process has been held in check because of the greater height of fresh water columns than the sea water column. However, with the rise of sea level and the drop of the water table due to the said reasons, the equilibrium will be lost; consequently more sea water will diffuse into fresh water causing contamination of ground water aquifers thereby posing a serious threat to drinking water.

Therefore the subject of intrusion of sea water and its implications has assumed paramount importance, particularly in the island nations. Dr. Gregory De Costa, Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering at Unitech, New Zealand has done extensive research on this subject highlighting the consequences of intrusion of sea water on fresh water supplies in coastal areas where nearly half of the world population lives (http://www.unitec.ac.nz/about-us/rising-sea-levels-gregory-de-costa).
Translating scientific knowledge to design principles in Sri Lanka

There is growing awareness in cities throughout the world that green and blue infrastructure can offer a wide range of ecosystem services to support a healthy urban environment. For example, landscape architects explore possibilities in their design of the urban landscape to use the potential of green and blue elements for regulating air temperature, air quality, water storage and drainage, and noise reduction. Our politicians and officials travel abroad frequently to attend UN sessions and international conferences related to environmental management, urban planning and development and climate change, and to study modern eco-cities. Yet, hardly any concerted and concentrated effort is being made in our country to derive the potential benefits of green and blue infrastructure. Hence there is a crying need for translation of scientific knowledge on the functionality of green and blue infrastructure into design principles and to integrate these principles into the design of multifunctional green and blue infrastructure.

The quotation “Politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians” is attributed to Charles de Gaulle. Likewise, coastal zone management is too serious a matter to be left to a few institutions because about half of the population and half of the GDP of the country come from the coastal areas since economic activities such as manufacturing, trade, tourism, banking, insurance, fisheries, port and shipping are concentrated in this region. Besides, this region is very important from environmental, social and cultural points of view as well.

Therefore a holistic approach is necessary for coastal zone management including infrastructure development in this area because of its far-reaching implications for ground water recharge and sea water intrusion affecting the supply of drinking water among other things. Mega projects already under way and proposed projects will make an unprecedentedly heavy demand on fresh water resources, and the success of the projects is highly contingent upon availability of quality fresh water in adequate quantity. This is a formidable challenge that has received scant attention. There is little time to waste and delay could prove to be disastrous. Therefore all relevant institutions such as the Coast Conservation Department, Central Environment Authority, Urban Development Authority, National Water Supply and Drainage Board, and local government institutions as well as the academia should join forces and work in concert to plan, design and build infrastructure with the right blend of grey, green and blue for environmental sustainability, habitability and quality of life, leaving no room for unplanned and uncoordinated physical growth for protecting and fostering the precious ground water aquifers in the country.

(The writer works at University of Ruhuna. He can be reached at ransen.ru@gmail.com).

Meet the spies injecting Israeli propaganda into your news feed

Sima Vaknin-Gil, now in charge of running Israel’s anti-BDS ministry, was once chief military censor. (Wikipedia)

Asa Winstanley-24 January 2018

When Sima Vaknin-Gil took over as director-general of Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs at the start of 2016, a crucial fact went largely unnoticed.

For years, she had been a high-ranking officer with an Israeli spy agency.

This means that for the last two years a former intelligence officer has been running Israel’s global war against BDS, the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

Her ministerial boss is Gilad Erdan, a key ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

They were last month revealed to have spent huge sums creating anti-BDS propaganda targeting social media and news media.

It should be a big wake up call to all defenders of free speech and human rights when a peaceful civil society campaign is targeted by spy agencies responsible for hacking, torture, kidnapping and murder in Palestine and around the world.

Military intelligence

While hardly a secret, Vaknin-Gil’s background was barely remarked upon in the media coverage following her appointment, which focused on her previous role as Israel’s chief censor.

An extensive search turned up just one article – a December 2015 interview with arms industry magazine Israel Defense – discussing her career in intelligence.

That interview was on the eve of her appointment as the top civil servant in what is effectively Israel’s anti-BDS ministry. It revealed she had spent more than 20 years as a spy in Israeli air force intelligence, rising to the rank of brigadier general – a position she still holds as a reservist.

During that time, the magazine stated, she worked “closely with US officials and the highest ranking officers of Israeli intelligence.”

In 2005, she started her decade-long run as chief military censor, a role that required regular coordination with Israel’s top spies and military leaders, including the head of military intelligence, the chief of Mossad and the chief of the army’s general staff.

“Flood the internet”

“I want to create a community of fighters,” Vaknin-Gil said soon after her appointment to the strategic affairs ministry.

She said she planned to “flood the internet” with Israeli propaganda that would be publicly distanced from the government.

More recently, at a Jerusalem Post conference, she announced in passing that she came “from the intelligence in the IDF,” the Israeli military.

Streamed live on YouTube, the December 2017 panel was a debate on how best to combat BDS.
Vaknin-Gil conceded that BDS activists’ human rights arguments are so compelling at the grassroots in Europe and the US that “over there, unless we will do something, we will lose.”
She credited supporters of Palestinian rights with “acting very, very smartly.”

Palestine solidarity activists “are fighting for the hearts and minds of grassroots,” she said, and asserted, “we just woke up [to BDS] and we have to do it very fast.”

BDS movement co-founder Omar Barghouti told The Electronic Intifada that Israel had failed to win “the battle for hearts and minds at the grassroots level.”

According to Barghouti, Israel is “desperately trying to suppress the enormous growth of the BDS movement for Palestinian rights into the mainstream by passing draconian measures of repression and exporting them through its lobby groups to Western governments.”

Ministry’s deep spy links

Strategic affairs minister Gilad Erdan’s official diary for 2016, obtained by Israeli activists and translated by The Electronic Intifada, confirms his department’s intimate links with the country’s spy agencies.

The diary lists a 17 January meeting with the head of the Shin Bet – Israel’s domestic secret police. The agency has a long history of harassing, kidnapping, torturing and murdering Palestinian activists.
The diary also shows that on 16 February 2016, Erdan had lunch with the head of Mossad, Israel’s overseas agency for spying and assassination.

And on 20 March, Erdan apparently met with the “head of 8200” – a reference to Unit 8200, the Israeli spies responsible for leading cyberwarfare efforts.

According to veterans of Unit 8200, its activities include eavesdropping on the communications of Palestinian civilians living under Israeli occupation for political persecution or to find embarrassing personal or sexual information that could be used to blackmail them into collaborating.

Buying-off the press

Vaknin-Gil’s plan to “flood the internet” mirrors previous covert efforts to spread pro-Israel propaganda.

In 2014, The Electronic Intifada uncovered a plot by tech site Israel21c to plant its puff pieces online and in media using deceptive methods.

Under Vaknin-Gil – an expert in censoring the press – the ministry is instead trying to buy off editors.
Israeli media watchdog The Seventh Eye reported last month that the ministry she runs paid the publisher of Israel’s best-selling daily newspaper $100,000 to publish articles and videos attacking BDS as “anti-Semitic.”

Published in both Hebrew and English by Yediot Ahronot and its website Ynet, the articles did not explicitly disclose that they were paid content.

One English article vaguely stated it was the result of the ministry and the publisher “joining forces,” while two such Hebrew articles stated they were “in collaboration” with the ministry.

Propaganda war

The Seventh Eye explained that this propaganda was “meant to influence readers to support a campaign Israel is waging against its critics.”

As well as Yediot, the ministry also bought faux journalism aiming to enlist support from a global audience, including from the Times of Israel and The Jerusalem Post.

The 2016 Erdan diary aligns with this, listing an 18 July “meeting with the editor of The Jerusalem Postnewspaper, Yaakov Katz.” The entry does not record the subject of the meeting.

The paid articles were part of a wider strategic affairs ministry campaign, which included a $740,000 budget “to promote content on social media and search engines, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram,” The Seventh Eye reported.

'Apartheid state': Israel condemned by South Africa at UN

Over 100 countries shed light on Israeli violations against Palestinians during periodic review

'Israel is the only state in the world that can be called an apartheid state,' says South Africa (Reuters)

Amandla Thomas-Johnson-Wednesday 24 January 2018

GENEVA - A fiery exchange between Iran and Israel broke out at the United Nations in Geneva on Tuesday, while South Africa labelled Israel an “apartheid state” over its treatment of Palestinians.

The exchange came during a major review of Israel’s human rights record by more than 100 country delegates, including the 47-strong United Nations Human Rights Council which spearheaded the session.

Countries were given just over a minute to suggest recommendations, which Israel would later decide whether to accept.

Known as a Universal Periodic Review (UPR), the assessment is held every five years and is seen as a barometer of the state of human rights in a given country.

The rights of Palestinians and the treatment of children were at the top of recommendations put forward by several countries at what was a largely uneventful session held in the Palace of Nations overlooking Lake Geneva in Switzerland.

Emi Palmor, Israeli delegation leader and Director-General of the Ministry of Justice, speaks after the UPR session (MEE/Amandla Thomas-Johnson)

But when it was South Africa’s turn to speak, sparks began to fly.

“Israel is the only state in the world that can be called an apartheid state,” the South African delegate said. “We remain deeply concerned at the denial of the right of self-determination to the Palestinian people, in the absence of which no other human right can be exercised or enjoyed.”

The Israeli delegation fired back: “We came with the intention of having a serious discussion of human rights issues. Unlike what some delegations seem to believe, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not be solved in the Human Rights Council and certainly not during today's UPR.

"We ask that delegates stick to the appropriate language of the UN, and that the discussion is steered in the direction of human rights rather than politicised issues.”

Later in the session, Israel rebuked its regional arch-rival, Iran, after the Iranian delegation referred to it as “the Israeli regime”.

“It is bad enough that the representative of the Islamic republic of Iran with its dismissal of human rights pretends to be in a position to give Israel lessons in human rights,” a member of the Israeli delegation said, before calling on Iran to refer to Israel by its official name.

In a strongly worded statement, Iran, which does not recognise Israel as an official state, also demanded that it end its “continuous atrocities through the enormous destruction of civilian property in Gaza Strip” and the “forced displacement of civilians, arrest and detention of Palestinians”.

The Israeli delegation was not expecting an easy ride. It had failed to turn up to its UPR in 2013, and has had a difficult relationship with the Human Rights Council, which has passed more resolutions condemning it than the rest of the world combined.

For its part, Israel has accused the council of bias, arguing that the UN body is politicised and claiming that other countries are pointing the finger at Israel to create a smokescreen for their own rights abuses.

“Clearly some countries will choose to take advantage of today’s discussion to wage political attacks against Israel,” Israeli ambassador to the UN Aviva Raz Shechter said in her opening remarks.

Country delegations raised the issue of Palestinian rights, and when given the opportunity to speak, Israel did little to address their concerns.

The harshest criticism came from other Middle East countries, with Israel’s allies in the West taking a softer stance.

Jordan expressed deep concern at violations committed against Palestinians and called on Israel to respect the historic status of the Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.

The United States, Israel’s closest ally, praised it for its commitment to “democratic traditions and values” and requested additional resources to improve the conditions of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

France, another close ally, requested that Israel bring its practice of administrative detention - where suspects are held without charge for an indefinite amount of time - in line with international standards.

The State of Palestine delegation also weighed in, demanding an end to the “colonial occupation against Palestinians” and a recognition of a right of return for them.

Rights groups condemn Israel

Rights groups that attended the session, and who had submitted documents as part of the UPR process, also criticised Israel’s approach.

“Israel focused mostly on internal policies and did not raise any issue related to the Occupied Palestinian Territories,” said Ines Osman, legal coordinator at the Geneva-based Alkarama Foundation.

“The specificity of Israel’s review is that its human rights record needs to be assessed not only in Israel but also in the territories it occupies. What was striking is the fact that Israel did not address this issue at all but - and that is positive - most countries did.

“Ultimately, as long as the situation of occupation remains, human rights violations will continue to be perpetrated by Israel and one can wonder how efficient the UPR can be when what lies behind is the pressing need to find a political solution (to the conflict)."

Sarah Pritchett, a spokesperson for Euromed, a Geneva-based human rights monitor, warned against the "politicisation" of the country review process, but said that Israel’s failure to implement recommendations made at previous UPR sessions had led to frustration.

“We’re not seeing anything particularly new coming from the different countries compared with previous reviews. What we are seeing is quite a lot of frustration particular because it’s the third review and a lot of countries are coming back with the same remarks.

“States are taking the political route, going with their state policy towards that country. What we want to see is more focus on human rights but as separate from political issues. People have to take the priority.

“Certainly there have been some accomplishments in areas of rights of disabled and LGBT. But they are on paper improvements; we’re not seeing enough mechanisms in place to make those improvements substantial.”