Sri Lanka is facing a different kind of war. This is not so much a physical war fought with soldiers and guns, nor the all-too-familiar civil war that once tore through Sri Lanka’s heart. Instead, it is a war of political discourse, one driven by anger, jealousy, and hatred—emotions carefully stoked by a faction of ideologues who have been sidelined, stripped of the power and influence they believe are rightfully theirs. Their disillusionment with the current political establishment has evolved into something far more dangerous: a festering resentment that drives their every move.
For these individuals, the real enemy is not a foreign invader but the entrenched political elites and ruling class. They see these elites as having stolen and decimated the country’s wealth, leaving them and the public with only scraps of what they feel is owed. These ideologues feed off this sentiment, painting themselves as the true defenders of the nation’s disenfranchised, even if their intentions are often demonstrated to be far from altruistic.
What makes this war of political discourse particularly insidious is that it exploits legitimate grievances—economic inequality, corruption, and political dysfunction—but amplifies them to serve the ambitions of a few. (Ironically, a replacement and not abolition of the set of “elites” supposedly running the country.) The resulting anger is not directed toward solving these problems, but toward deepening the divisions within society. In this sense, it is a war that seeks not to build but to destroy—destroy trust, destroy unity, and ultimately, destroy any hope of meaningful progress.
Sri Lanka’s political history has been marked by the flames of divisive class-based rhetoric for decades. However, the situation has now been exacerbated, particularly with the victory of the National People’s Power (NPP) in the 2024 Presidential Election. This was a victory that reflected the genuine disenchantment of the ordinary citizen with the existing system. It was a turn of events that many found surprising—an unlikely political uprising fueled by both reformists and opportunistic ideologues, now united under the banner of the NPP.
For the average voter, the promises of the traditional political class had long since worn thin. The political class had proven unable or unwilling to address the profound economic and social challenges facing the country. The NPP capitalized on this frustration, positioning itself as the party of the people, the true agent of change, and the last chance the country has for a better future. But while the NPP includes genuine reformers—people who sincerely want to effect meaningful, structural change in the country—it has also brought some ideologues into power and emboldened the demagogues and the extremists in the fringes.
What happens next? Consolidation. The NPP, and the demagogues feeding off their power, find themselves in a precarious position. Despite their victory in the presidential race, they fell short of securing a majority, receiving less than 50% of the vote. With a parliamentary election fast approaching, the easiest and most convenient strategy for these ideologues to safeguard their political future is simple: double down on the narrative that resonates with the ordinary man the most ; the class war and the kleptocratic elites who hold them down.
But now that these populist ideologues have lost arguably the most powerful weapon in their arsenal—the ability to criticize the incumbent government—they are forced to adapt. No longer can they point fingers at the establishment, because now they are the establishment. In the face of their own governance challenges, their strategy has shifted to the next best thing: targeting the past. And they’ve found the perfect target—the longest-serving president in the country’s history and Sri Lanka’s first female head of state, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga (CBK).
A New Target
By going after someone like President Kumaratunga, who not only belongs to one of the most well-known and wealthiest political families in Sri Lanka but who was also in power for longer than anyone, the ideologues are tapping into one of the most potent sources of resentment in the country—disdain for the entrenched political elite. For decades, the Bandaranaike family has been a towering presence in Sri Lankan politics, its name synonymous with power and privilege.
This is a calculated move to reinvigorate their base’s underlying feelings of anger toward the ruling class. By portraying CBK as the embodiment of the establishment they despise, the ideologues hope to remind their supporters of the very reasons they rose to power. It’s not just about critiquing the policies of past governments, but about tapping into the deep-seated class resentment that has long simmered beneath Sri Lankan political life.
Driven by a deep sense of insecurity over their own legitimacy, the ideologues in the fringes of the NPP movement are not content to merely criticize policy. They are drumming up false narratives in an attempt to deepen the divide. One such narrative that they have promoted is a distorted version of history, namely that the 1956 election of S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike (President Kumaratunga’s father) and the subsequent passage of the Sinhala Only Act somehow made it impossible for ordinary people to learn English. This narrative is not only historically inaccurate ; it ignores the broader socio-political context of the time, but it is also a deliberate attempt to stoke anger and foster division. The truth is that while the Sinhala Only Act did shift the official language, it was never passed to block access to education in English, and the first Bandaranaike Administration has a much more complex legacy than the ideologues’ simplistic vilification suggests.
These ideologues have stooped to outright misogynistic defamation and conspiracy theories about Kumaratunga, particularly by spreading rumors about supposed affairs with staff members. (unfortunately, the seemingly go-to-strategy of opponent strategists facing any female politician in Sri Lanka) Such attacks are not only unfounded but are also deeply ironic, given the NPP’s own positioning as a progressive force. The same party that has proudly espoused the appointment of Dr. Harini Amarasuriya as the Prime Minister as a groundbreaking step for women in politics—a genuinely progressive move—is seeing its supporters now turning to sexist and defamatory rhetoric against one of Sri Lanka’s most prominent female leaders.
The Legacy of the Fourth
In stark contrast to the ideologues’ attacks, President Kumaratunga’s legacy is marked by several key policy successes, particularly in the realms of poverty alleviation, development, and education reform, not to mention the successes she and her Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lakshman Kadriagamar achieved in the international arena in restoring Sri Lanka’s image by getting the global community to recognize the LTTE as a terrorist organization.
As president, she implemented a series of pro-poor policies designed to uplift the living standards of ordinary Sri Lankans. One of her administration’s most notable achievements was the launch of the Samurdhi program in 1995, which, despite being mismanaged in later years, was a groundbreaking initiative aimed at combating poverty. The program provided direct financial support to the country’s most vulnerable populations, reaching millions and making a tangible difference during some of the most challenging years of Sri Lanka’s post-war economy.
Her administration also made significant strides in education development. President Kumaratunga’s government increased access to education, especially for rural populations, and worked to improve the quality of education in public schools. Recognizing the importance of English in the global economy, her policies supported English language education, ensuring that young Sri Lankans had the skills to compete internationally—another fact conveniently ignored by the ideologues spreading false narratives about her family’s supposed role in limiting access to English education.
Perhaps most significantly, President Kumaratunga restored a sense of normalcy to a country reeling from the chaos that happened during the previous administration. When she took office, Sri Lanka was still deeply affected by the lingering effects of the civil war and the reeling sense of despair and instability from the 1989 JVP Insurrection. President Kumaratunga’s leadership during this period allowed many ordinary Sri Lankans to regain a sense of security and hope after years of uncertainty. While her tenure was certainly not without its challenges and setbacks, her legacy is one of resilience and reform—an effort to lead the country forward during some of the most difficult times it had seen up to that point, including the fierce fighting of the brutal Eelam War III.
While the ideologues’ attempts to rewrite history and tarnish the legacy of leaders like President Kumaratunga may seem troubling, they are also a reflection of their own vulnerabilities. History has shown that such attempts to manipulate public discourse often unravel when strongly confronted with the truth. The good policies enacted by past administrations—whether in poverty alleviation, education, or restoring national stability—remain deeply embedded in the nation’s progress, and no amount of revisionist spin can erase that. As the country moves forward, there is cause for cautious optimism that the truth, grounded in facts and experience, will ultimately prevail over the insecure efforts to distort the past for political gain.