A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, October 2, 2017
The global and the local
-kwk-4.jpg)
by Sanjana Hattotuwa-September 30, 2017, 7:22 pm

My work outside of Sri Lanka is influenced deeply by what I do in the
country, and reciprocally, what I do beyond our borders informs how I
respond to challenges within it. Over the past three weeks, the
intensity of travel and work prevented me from submitting a column. In
part, it was because of how far away I was the country. To a larger
degree though, it was because I was involved in shaping projects that
responded to the same kind of socio-political dynamics we endure, and
fight against, in Sri Lanka.
In Macedonia, Albania, Bosnia in Herzegovina, Kosovo and Serbia, a
region to which I’ve travelled twice this year, the socio-political
dynamics are uncannily similar to Sri Lanka. The transitional justice
agenda, post-genocide and post-war, is at varying stages. In some
countries, memorialisation – both as a political construct and resulting
urban architectural features - forgets the manner in which atrocities
were committed by troops and state sponsored militia, and instead
focuses on the loss of life as a consequence of enemy offensives and
actions. In other countries, there is no memorialisation – a conscious
decision to forget, and move on.
The economic disparity, coupled with enduring effects of war – youth
under-employment, unemployment, urban poverty – results in society that
is on edge, unable to move forward, unwilling to face the past,
splintering from within. On the other hand, every country in this region
sees a high use of smartphones and the relatively cheap availability of
broadband. So, while unemployment is sky rocketing, youth reload data
(with money taken or borrowed from parents and grandparents) to engage
with each other, and what they understand as politics, mediated through
thumb and palm, in parks, alleyways, sofas, souks, beds, buses and other
places. You can see the disconnect from public and family life, and the
immersion in an alternative reality governed by the algorithms of a
news feed, the narcissism of likes, and the on-demand anonymity of
online engagement.
Youth here feel connected, but almost exclusively inhabit, online and
over social media, bubbles – peers, friends, colleagues and others who
are echo chambers, reinforcing group-think, focussing on gossip and
entertainment, and through these vectors, mainstream politics. This is
fertile terrain for the subversion and corruption of impressionable
minds by everyone from populist politicians, right-wing Christian
clergy, conspiracy theorists and mullahs who are in fact thinly veiled
militants. Unsurprisingly then, one finds rumour, misinformation,
disinformation (essentially, propaganda and gossip to varying degrees
wrapped as serious news and content) colouring the worldview, engagement
and emotions of a young demographic.
As a counterpoint, a conference organised by the Junior Chamber
International in Kuching, Malaysia offered a chance to interact with
several hundred participants– all working in private industry - from
over 100 countries, and under the age of 40. Speaking at and
facilitating two workshops, several leitmotifs emerged. Those with
economic means are worried about the unresponsive nature of mainstream
politics in their respective countries. Counter-intuitively, this
critique goes deeper than the nature of government. It wasn’t just the
participants from countries with a known democratic deficit who
complained that, as they saw it, mainstream politics didn’t reflect to
any meaningful degree or sustained manner, their hopes and aspirations.
Young professionals from the West – from mature democracies - also
complained that government was increasingly alienating them.
This manifested itself through a very low interest in franchise
("nothing really changes") to anger ("we bring in the money, they waste
it with corruption and bureaucracy"). Participants from around the world
found in common that the language they spoke – of innovation, an
interest in changing the status quo, new ways of working, new kinds of
jobs and value creation, an interest in migrant and mobile working,
travel, a low interest in savings when young, but a healthy interest in
financial independence – where opportunities and challenges governments,
and business as usual, simply didn’t embrace.
In Myanmar, I was working with several civil society organisations from
across the country when the violence that has now gripped global
headlines first broke out. Snippets, competing narratives and the first
images of the violence in the Rakhine came by way of WhatsApp messages
and Facebook Messenger, followed by email. This was several days before
serious mainstream media coverage of the issue in the country. It took
much longer for the world to react to what was going on. This
information ecosystem is ripe for disinformation and rumour, which when
engineered and disseminated broadly, serves to do two things primarily –
get people to react to information that is clearly intended to incite
hatred and violence against another religion or community, or devalue
the veracity of information over these channels in general.
The first is what most choose to focus on. The second is more
pernicious, because very often, those who suffer the brunt of violence
only have the phones they carry around with them to document the
violence. When this valuable footage that bears witness to atrocities on
the ground is also mistrusted, it serves to undermine the urgency of a
political and whole of government response to quell the violence, and
empathy. Similar tactics were employed in Sri Lanka three years ago,
when interestingly, old images of Rohingya from the Rakhine were
distributed over instant messaging platforms and Twitter purporting to
be from Aluthgama, taken during the anti-Muslim riots.
Most recently in San Francisco, I led some conversations around
opportunities and challenges around the use of technology in
humanitarian aid, and more generally, in the strengthening of human
rights. Leitmotifs that emerged were interesting. The existing world
order – including international humanitarian law which governs war –
currently has no clue, capacity or competency to deal with threats that
are the result of targeted offensives launched against critical
infrastructure and vulnerable populations over the Internet. These are
not embryonic or emergent. The field of offensive cyber-operations, and
reciprocally, cyber-defence, is already mature even though governing
norms, legal frameworks and definitions simply haven’t kept up with the
heady pace of technological change.
It’s now possible for a just a few dollars to slow down or crash a
friend’s PC whilst playing a tournament online; or for a very different
order of strategic advantage, disrupt or seriously harm an entire
country’s banking, medical services or power grid. In Sri Lanka, the
very same authorities who can’t even secure the President’s website from
successful hacking attempts of a teenager are those that promise us
benefits of an electronic national identity card system, where biometric
and personal data, to a very invasive degree, will be stored online. It
is a ticking time-bomb that, entirely independent of the known
malevolence of our government, can hold entire swathes of the population
hostage and render them, almost instantaneously, destitute, through
identity theft of an order we haven’t seen, aren’t prepared for and
simply won’t know what to do when it happens.
All this suggest a couple of things, globally evident and locally
relevant. The aspirations of the young need to be reflected in
government. Government itself needs to be younger, more responsive and
more innovative. Propaganda is pervasive, and it is often more effective
than verified news at shaping the public narrative and official
responses. Vital witness testimony, despite the promise of the internet
to give everyone a voice, remains hidden, especially from mainstream
media. Extremism online is a problem, and use the same platforms to
spread fear, violence and harm as hundreds of millions use to document
and discuss their cappuccino’s perfect froth. This makes technology
companies in Silicon Valley – often more powerful than individual
governments - important intermediaries in every country their products
and services are present in, when combating propaganda, disinformation
and the rapid spread of hate. The primary vectors of news and
information for youth is now social media, over a smartphone. Refugees
and IDPs need and go in search of information and Internet access as
much as water and food. Existing international covenants around the
rules of war need to be revised to embrace cyber-terrorism.
Sri Lanka is no stranger to any of these challenges. Whereas warts and
all, conversations across multiple continents and countries on these
issues is anchored to strategic engagement, reform and planning,
government officials, politicians and policymakers in Sri Lanka remain
set in their ways, largely unwilling and seemingly unable to change. We
all stand to lose.
