A high-level American Congressional delegation is currently visiting Sri Lanka to reinforce ties between Washington and Colombo, with a special focus on security cooperation and regional stability in the Indo-Pacific.

The delegation, led by Congresswoman Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, arrived in the country on 27 July and is scheduled to remain until 30 July, holding a series of high-level meetings in Colombo with senior government, military and political figures.

Houlahan, a veteran of the US Air Force, serves on the House Armed Services Committee as Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, and is also a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Her visit forms part of a broader American effort to deepen the bilateral relationship with Sri Lanka, with officials indicating that the trip is aimed at addressing shared concerns including transnational crime, economic development and commercial ties between the two countries.

During the visit, the delegation is due to meet several senior Sri Lankan figures, including Deputy Minister of Defence Major General (Retd.) Aruna Jayasekara, Deputy Speaker of Parliament Dr. Rizvie Salih and Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa.

These discussions are expected to cover a wide range of bilateral issues, with particular emphasis placed on regional security cooperation and efforts to promote stability across the Indo-Pacific.

S&P Global Ratings has affirmed Sri Lanka’s long- and short-term sovereign credit ratings at ‘CCC+/C’, while maintaining a stable outlook, citing continued economic recovery, strong revenue growth and improvements in fiscal management.

The ratings agency said Sri Lanka’s economy has remained resilient despite multiple external challenges, with increased government revenue helping to support fiscal consolidation and reduce debt servicing pressures.

However, S&P warned that the country’s external position could come under pressure this year due to a higher import bill and possible impacts from the Middle East conflict on tourism earnings and worker remittances.

The stable outlook reflects S&P’s expectation that Sri Lanka’s economic growth and fiscal recovery will continue over the next six to 12 months, although external risks remain significant.

“Sri Lanka’s creditworthiness remains vulnerable and dependent on favourable financial and economic conditions, but the government does not face an immediate risk of a debt or payment crisis,” the agency said.

S&P noted that Sri Lanka’s economic recovery has been stronger than expected, with real GDP growing 4.8% in the fourth quarter of 2025 and 5.1% in the first quarter of 2026.

The agency expects economic growth to slow to 3.8% in 2026 due to higher energy costs and external pressures before recovering to 4.2% in 2027 as global energy conditions improve.

S&P highlighted that government revenue increased significantly, supported by tax reforms and economic recovery. Revenue rose by 34% in 2025 to 16.7% of GDP, while the fiscal deficit narrowed to 2.3% of GDP.

Revenue growth continued in the first five months of 2026, increasing by 30% compared to the same period last year, the agency said.

However, S&P cautioned that Sri Lanka’s external position has weakened due to rising imports, currency pressures and uncertainty over tourism and remittance inflows.

The ratings agency said the Middle East conflict could affect Sri Lanka through higher energy prices, reduced tourism earnings and slower remittance growth, as the region accounts for a significant share of foreign worker remittances.

It also warned that a stronger El Niño event in 2026 and 2027 could pose risks to agriculture, electricity generation and overall economic activity.

S&P said Sri Lanka’s continued commitment to reforms under the International Monetary Fund (IMF) programme, including improving government revenue, cost recovery in utilities and strengthening public financial management, would remain important for further economic improvement.

The agency said it could upgrade Sri Lanka’s ratings if stronger economic growth leads to further improvements in fiscal and external positions. However, the ratings could be downgraded if renewed funding pressures or a significant deterioration in economic conditions emerge.

Tamil National Heroes Day 25 & 27 07-2026

Welikada Prison Massacred 43 rd Remembrance Day

எமது போராளிகளின் அர்ப்பணிப்பை அர்த்தம் உள்ள அரசியல் தீர்வை நோக்கி நகர்த்துவோம்

43rd Anniversary of Black July 83, TELO Leaders and Fifty three Tamil prisoners were murdered in the maximum security Welikade prison, In the July 83 anti-Tamil program Sinhala thugs, ruling UNP party cadres, sections of Sri Lankan troopers, and Sri Lanka Police killed more than 3000 Tamils and destroyed property worth billions of rupees.

Rights activists in Sri Lanka organized a rally seeking justice for the families of some 2,000 Tamil people killed in the Black July massacre 43 years ago, saying without reconciliation, the country cannot achieve lasting peace.

Some 200 people participated in a street campaign in Colombo on July 23, the eve of the ethnic pogrom’s 43rd anniversary, raising slogans and distributing leaflets to raise awareness on the issue.

They also collected signatures on a petition they plan to submit to the government to deliver full truth about the incident and ensure accountability for the crimes, allegedly carried out by majority Sinhalese mobs.

Lahiru Weerasekara, a leader of the Movement for Equal Rights, which organized the public program, said no one has been held accountable for the planned violence that selectively killed the Tamils.

“No justice has been served, and no compensation has been given to the victims to date,” he said, adding that those accused of involvement in the massacre continue to be active in national politics.

Politicians and party activists of the then-ruling United National Party were accused of organizing or encouraging attacks in certain areas. However, these allegations were never comprehensively investigated or prosecuted, activists say.

The United National Party was later split, and the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB or United People’s Power) was formed, which is currently the main opposition party.

Both parties “must be held accountable for their links to the massacre,” he said.

The week-long massacre that started on July 24, 1983, targeting the Tamil community also destroyed 23,000 homes and businesses, and displaced 150,000 civilians.

Some estimates put the death toll at 3,000, but the government’s official estimate puts it at only 400 people.

The program has links with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), formed in 1976, to demand a separate homeland for the ethnic Tamils in the northern areas, where they are concentrated.

The anti-Tamil massacre began a day after the LTTE ambushed an army patrol near northern Jaffna city, killing 13 Sri Lankan soldiers. That ambush is considered the beginning of a 22-year-long armed struggle that was crushed in 2009.

The civil war killed more than 100,000 people, displaced 800,000, and set development back by decades in the Indian Ocean nation of 22 million people.
Velauthan Sinthiya, whose father’s business in Colombo was burned during Black July, said the family managed to save itself by escaping with whatever clothes they had on.

The family moved to Tamil-dominated Vavuniya town and her father died of a heart attack that year, still grieving the destruction of his property and unable to support his children’s education, she told UCA News on July 24.

The collective wounds of the community remain unhealed even after 43 years, she said.

Father Marimuttu Sathivel, an Anglican priest and rights activist, demanded justice for those murdered and forcibly disappeared during the week-long violence.

Thusara Sadun, 49, a rights activist from Moratuwa, said Sri Lanka needs political devolution, demilitarization, accountability, and credible mechanisms to address victims’ grievances stemming from ethnic violence.

Sinhalese form some 74 percent of Sri Lanka’s 23 million people, with 15.1 percent Tamils and Sri Lankan Moors, mostly Muslims, forming some 10 percent.

William J. Grimm M. M.
Publisher

Business establishments, factories and movie theatres run by Tamils were torched, sometimes while the occupants were in them (Courtesy The Guardian UK)

The hate instilled in the minds of Tamil youth by the week-long anti Tamil pogrom provided thousands of recruits for the Tamil armed groups

Exactly 43 years ago, on July 23 1983, a single violent incident in Jaffna shifted the course of Sri Lankan history by a wide angle. It accelerated an armed conflict in the north of the country that was then marked by random, isolated incidents into a full-blown war which became one of the longest armed conflicts in the world.

It also triggered a fresh armed conflict in the south which within two years claimed over 60,000 lives, mainly innocent people. The brutality of the armed forces and vigilante groups created by the same forces during that conflict could be assessed by comparing its death toll with that of the former which ran into just over a hundred thousand within three decades.

Both bloodbaths could have been averted had those power-hungry politicians in power then acted prudently and farsightedly. In fact, it was the government that created the southern conflict – one between the armed forces assisted by vigilante groups, and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) which had by then renounced violence after their failed insurrection in 1971 to enter into democratic politics.

Thirteen soldiers were killed in Jaffna on July 23, 1983 in a land mine blast followed by gunfire by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the most ruthless among half a dozen Tamil armed groups then active in the Northern and Eastern Provinces who were fighting to carve out a separate state for Tamils, within the territory of Sri Lanka.

The southern populace – who were till then used only to news of isolated attacks by Tamil groups that killed one or two police officers or soldiers — was shell-shocked with the number of soldiers killed, though they became accustomed in the years which followed to hearing news of the demise of Presidents, ministers and commanders of the armed forces, apart from thousands of soldiers. The LTTE killed over 1200 army personnel within two days in 1996 while overrunning the Mullaitivu army camp and between 1500 security forces personnel were killed when the Tamil Tigers overran the Elephant Pass military complex in 2000.

However, with the bodies of the 13 soldiers being brought to Colombo for their funeral on July 24, 1983 hundreds of thousands of people thronged the Capital with emotions spilling over. Something happened somewhere initially which triggered a huge backlash against the Tamils in the city.

Thousands of houses and vehicles occupied by Tamils and business establishments, factories and movie theatres run by Tamils were torched, sometimes while the occupants were in them. The news flew across the country where similar riots against Tamils broke out, except in the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

The complicity of the ruling United National Party (UNP) was apparent by the inaction on the part of the security forces personnel deployed in the streets. Not a single shot was heard to have been fired or tear gas was used to quell the mobs. 53 Tamil detainees in the Welikada prison were killed in two separate days allegedly by the outsiders and fellow detainees, without any reported resistance from the prison guards or the security forces personnel.

Indian Foreign Minister Narasimha Rao was in Colombo and Kandy to see the carnage which was ongoing for a week. President J.R. Jayewardene who was unheard of for the first four days of arson attacks, killings and looting addressed the nation on July 27 but only to criticise the Tamil leaders for their demand for separate Tamil state and not to warn the rioters. Next day, attacks and looting intensified. Not a single hooligan was prosecuted.

Narasimha Rao presented in Indian parliament a report on his observations in Sri Lanka, especially on the pathetic situation of people of Indian origin which was highly damaging to Sri Lanka. Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who was already not happy with President Jayewardene’s pro-Western policies, used this report as well as the large influx of Tamil refugees who crossed the Palk Strait to escape death and destruction for India’s geo-political ends.

She armed, trained and funded about four Tamil armed groups including the LTTE and forced the Sri Lankan government to accept a power devolution scheme which was brought to the island by senior officials of Indian External Affairs Ministry like G. Parthasarathy and Romesh Bandari. It culminated in the ‘Indo-Sri Lanka Peace Accord’ imposed on Sri Lanka by India in 1987, introducing provincial council system.

The hate instilled in the minds of Tamil youth by the week-long anti Tamil pogrom provided thousands of recruits for the Tamil armed groups while the widespread sympathy for Sri Lankan Tamils around the world helped Tamil leaders, such as Appapillai Amirthalingam, who was then the Opposition Leader, cultivate diplomatic backing for the Tamil separatist struggle. The rest is history.

On the other hand, the Jayewardene government used the riots in 1983 to proscribe the JVP and two other leftist parties falsely accusing them of backing the riots. In fact, the JVP, which was then growing rapidly, was the real target. It was widely believed that President Jayewardene wanted to eliminate the JVP from the political arena due to the legal challenge of its leader, Rohana Wijeweera against the results of the referendum that was held in December 22, 1982, to extend the term of the Parliament that was elected in 1977, till August 1989.

The ban on other two parties was lifted soon when it was seen a mockery of justice while the JVP remained proscribed on various flimsy grounds. The JVP took various legal as well as political actions through its trade unions and other friendly entities and persons to get the proscription imposed on it done away with. After being pushed to the wall after three years, during which time its cadres and leaders were increasingly arrested and killed, the party sought protection through a desperate decision to arm itself and face a military that was battle hardened, well- experienced and armed with sophisticated modern weaponry.

However, the JVP was forced to confront what had become inevitable. Its entire politburo, except for one member, Somawansa Amarasinghe, was eliminated. Rohana Wijeweera was killed while in custody of the army. Thousands of JVP members were killed or disappeared or escaped to other countries while thousands more were incarcerated. Politics of other parties and personal animosities of various people played their role, wiping out thousands more, mostly innocent youth, from the surface of the earth. The number of total fatalities is said to be over 60,000. Yet, people still call it the ‘JVP Bheeshanya,’ thanks to the power of pro-establishment media over the year.

The announcement has fuelled widespread debate over whether the new platform marks the emergence of a new political force or simply an issue-based coalition within the Opposition. On 13 July, six minority parties announced the formation of a common platform comprising Ceylon Workers’ Congress (CWC) General Secretary Jeevan Thondaman, Ilankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi (ITAK) M.A. Sumanthiran, Tamil Progressive Alliance (TPA) Leader Mano Ganesan, Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) Leader Rauff Hakeem, All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) Leader Rishad Bathiudeen, and Democratic Tamil National Alliance (DTNA) Leader Selvam Adaikkalanathan. The move has intensified speculation over the alliance’s political significance, its ability to bridge the differing priorities of Tamil-speaking communities, and its implications for the future of the Opposition.

In an interview with Ceylon Today, CWC’s Jeevan Thondaman addressed questions over the alliance’s objectives, its relationship with the Opposition, how it intends to bridge the differing priorities of the Northern, Eastern, Hill Country Tamil and Muslim communities, and whether the platform can move beyond identity politics to deliver meaningful outcomes for Tamil-speaking people across Sri Lanka.

Excerpts of the interview follow:

The Alliance was not prompted by one particular event or election

What prompted the formation of this six-party alliance at this particular moment?

A: This alliance was formed because we believe Sri Lanka is at an important stage. While the country has made progress since the economic crisis, many long-standing political and governance issues affecting Tamil-speaking communities remain unresolved.

This was not prompted by one particular event or election. It is the result of continued discussions and a shared belief that cooperation will always achieve more than fragmentation. When we speak together on issues that affect our communities, our voice becomes stronger and more constructive.

Is this primarily a pressure group within the Opposition, or the beginning of a new political front?

A: It is neither. This is a platform for cooperation among parties representing Tamil-speaking communities. Each party continues to retain its own identity, leadership and political independence. We have simply agreed to coordinate on matters where we share common concerns. Our immediate focus is effective cooperation and better representation, not creating another political party or political front.

What gap do you believe this alliance fills that existing Opposition structures have failed to address?

A: The parties represented on this platform have different constituencies and political histories, but we also face several common issues that require a coordinated approach. We have agreed to work together on three immediate priorities, introducing a new Constitution, the early conduct of Provincial Council Elections and addressing land-related issues affecting Tamil-speaking communities. Speaking together on these matters gives greater weight to the concerns of the people we represent.

Could this eventually evolve into a formal political alliance with a common candidate at future national elections?

A: It is far too early to discuss electoral arrangements. Today, our focus is on working together in Parliament and on issues affecting the communities we represent. Political decisions relating to future elections can be considered when the time comes. Our success should be measured by what we deliver for the people rather than speculation about future candidates.

The common thread is not that we agree on everything

The six parties have different political histories and priorities. What is the common thread that binds you together?

A: We share several core principles. We believe in democracy, equal citizenship, social justice, constitutional governance, peaceful political engagement and protecting the rights of the people we represent. Our political histories may differ, but our commitment to these principles is what brings us together. The common thread is not that we agree on everything. It is that we agree on the key issues that require immediate attention. We are united in calling for a new Constitution, the early conduct of Provincial Council Elections and meaningful solutions to longstanding land issues affecting Tamil-speaking communities. These are concerns shared across the North, East, Hill Country and Muslim communities.

We have also agreed that each constituent party will nominate two representatives to analyse, review and submit a comprehensive report setting out their objectives and priorities. That process will help us identify areas of consensus and, in due course, develop a common roadmap for the platform.

Beyond that, every party retains its own identity and political position, but on the issues where we agree, we believe our collective voice is stronger than individual efforts.

How will this alliance function when its members have disagreed on major national issues in the past?

A: Differences are normal in any democracy. What matters is that we now have a mechanism to consult one another before taking positions on issues affecting our shared interests. We do not expect everyone to agree on everything, but we do expect mature discussion and mutual respect.

What mechanisms have you established to resolve disagreements and prevent internal conflicts?

A: The alliance will function through regular consultation and consensus. There will be continuous discussions among party leaders and representatives before major decisions are made. Open communication and mutual respect will be the foundation of this partnership.

Are there issues on which the alliance has deliberately agreed to disagree?

A: Yes. Every party retains its own identity and political position. Where issues fall outside our common agenda, parties remain free to express their own views. This platform is based on cooperation, not uniformity.

Beyond minority issues, what common positions have you reached on the economy, education, governance and constitutional reform?

A: At this stage, our common agenda is focused on the priorities we announced publicly, namely a new Constitution, early Provincial Council Elections and resolving land-related issues. As discussions continue, we hope to expand cooperation into other national issues such as economic development, education and governance where there is common ground.

Will the alliance publish a common policy document or roadmap?

A: We have already outlined our immediate priorities publicly. As this platform develops, we will certainly consider publishing a broader framework that reflects the areas where all constituent parties have reached consensus.

We reject extremist politics

Sri Lanka has long struggled with politics based on ethnicity. How will this alliance avoid reinforcing ethnic divisions?

A: Our intention is exactly the opposite. Recognising the concerns of different communities does not divide the country. Ignoring those concerns often creates greater division. This alliance is committed to constitutional democracy, equality, reconciliation and inclusive development. We reject extremist politics. Our objective is to strengthen dialogue between communities while ensuring every citizen feels equally represented.

Many Sri Lankans are looking beyond identity politics towards economic recovery and good governance. Why should voters see this alliance as a step towards national unity rather than another ethnic based grouping?

A: Economic recovery and national unity cannot exist without inclusion. This platform is built around constitutional democracy, equal citizenship and ensuring that every community has confidence in the institutions of the country. We believe a united Sri Lanka is built by ensuring every citizen feels respected and included in the country’s progress.

Can a platform built around Tamil-speaking communities eventually evolve into a genuinely national political movement?

A: Every national movement begins by addressing the real concerns of people. If we demonstrate responsible leadership and practical solutions, there is no reason why our ideas cannot appeal more broadly. Our values are based on equality, democracy and shared national progress, which benefit every Sri Lankan.

The CWC joins this platform as an equal partner

How will you build a meaningful common agenda without one group’s concerns overshadowing another’s?

A: Every community has its own history and priorities. This platform respects those differences while recognising that many challenges are shared. Every constituent party has an equal voice, and every community’s concerns will receive equal attention. Cooperation works best when it is based on mutual respect.

Plantation leaders have long complained that Hill Country Tamil concerns, including representation in areas such as Vavuniya, have often been ignored by Northern Tamil political leadership. What guarantees do you have that this alliance will be different?

A: The strongest guarantee is equal partnership. The CWC joins this platform as an equal partner and will continue to speak directly on behalf of the Hill Country Tamil community. Our priorities will be represented by us and not through anyone else.

Why should Hill Country Tamils trust that their issues will receive equal attention within this platform?

A: Because our participation ensures that those issues remain at the centre of the discussion. Housing, land ownership, education, employment, estate infrastructure and political representation will continue to be priorities. We joined this platform because we believe it strengthens our ability to advocate for our people.

Is the current government attending to the plantation sector as expected?

A: There have been some positive initiatives, and we will always acknowledge progress where it happens. However, many long-standing issues remain unresolved. Land ownership, infrastructure, education, healthcare and sustainable livelihoods still require much greater attention. We will continue to engage constructively while holding the government accountable where necessary.

Were the Dimbula and Watawala cyclone-affected people given their welfare by the Government?

A: Relief assistance was provided, and we appreciate the efforts of officials who worked during a very difficult period. However, many families still require long-term support, including permanent housing, livelihood assistance and proper rehabilitation. We will continue to raise these issues until affected families receive the support they deserve.

Did the Government want the CWC to support any of their initiatives for the plantation sector?

A: Governments often engage political parties on matters affecting national development. Our position has always been consistent. If a proposal benefits the plantation community, we are prepared to support it regardless of who presents it. Our decisions are based on the interests of our people, not politics.

What specifically can this alliance achieve for the Hill Country Tamil community that previous political platforms could not?

A: It gives Hill Country Tamil issues a stronger collective voice alongside those of the Northern, Eastern and Muslim communities. Whether it is constitutional reform, land rights or strengthening democratic institutions such as the Provincial Councils, our concerns will now be advanced through a united platform while ensuring that the unique needs of the Hill Country continue to be articulated by us.

This, however, is not an electoral alliance

Critics argue that only selected Hill Country Tamil leaders have been included while others were left out. Why was this approach taken?

This is not a closed platform. Every alliance has to begin somewhere. We remain open to engaging with others who share the same objectives and want to work constructively for the benefit of our communities.

Was there an attempt to include all Hill Country Tamil political parties? If not, why?

The TPA has also joined this platform, and together the CWC and TPA are the two parliamentary parties that primarily represent the interests of the Hill Country Tamil community. This is not a closed platform. Discussions have already begun, and we welcome others who share our objectives to join and strengthen this collective effort.

Does this alliance genuinely represent all Tamil-speaking communities, or only the political parties that have joined it?

No alliance can claim to represent every individual. We represent the parties that have voluntarily come together while remaining committed to engaging civil society, religious leaders, youth organisations, women’s groups and professionals. Our aim is to broaden participation over time.

Has the Ceylon Workers’ Congress obtained the support of its members and grassroots before joining this initiative?

A formal political alliance would require approval through the CWC National Council. This, however, is not an electoral alliance. It is a parliamentary platform that was discussed over a long period with the party’s senior leadership to enable us to speak with a common voice on issues that affect our people while each party retains its own identity.

If, in the future, this were to evolve into an electoral alliance, we would follow the CWC’s formal decision-making process through the National Council.

Does this alliance have the confidence and support of Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa?

This platform is independent of any single political party. At the same time, the CWC continues to function as part of the Parliamentary Opposition. This initiative is intended to strengthen cooperation on issues affecting Tamil-speaking communities and should not be viewed as being directed against anyone.

Will you continue to function within the SJB-led Opposition in Parliament, or independently?

The CWC remains part of the Parliamentary Opposition. Our role in Parliament remains unchanged. This platform simply allows parties representing Tamil-speaking communities to coordinate more effectively on issues of common concern.

NPP Minister Ramalingam Chandrasekar has said that no alliance can shake the current Government, and we believe it’s over this new alliance. What is your response?

A: We did not come together to shake any government. We came together to ensure that commitments already made to the people, including a new Constitution and Provincial Council Elections, are implemented. If the Government fulfils those promises, we will acknowledge it. If it delays them, we have a responsibility to raise those concerns democratically.

Critics argue that Tamil and Muslim parties have not always supported each other’s key political demands in the past. What assurances can you give voters that this partnership is based on genuine long-term cooperation rather than short-term political calculations?

A: History has had its differences, but it has also shown that cooperation is possible when there is trust and mutual respect. This partnership is based on the understanding that many of the challenges facing our communities require collective solutions. Ultimately, people will judge us not by our words but by our actions. Our commitment is to work together responsibly, deliver practical results and contribute to a more inclusive and united Sri Lanka.