A government on the defensive as political turmoil intensifies

By Our Political Editor

The past week in Sri Lanka’s political landscape has been nothing short of turbulent, with the government finding itself on the back foot amid controversies and strategic missteps.

Deputy Minister Nalin Hewage’s inflammatory remarks against SJB MP Rohini Kaviratne became an unnecessary distraction for the administration, opening critics to attack the government’s moral standing. Even Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya and NPP MP Kaushalya Ariyaratne distanced themselves from Hewage’s comments, signalling internal discomfort within the ruling coalition.

What should have been an isolated incident quickly spiralled into a national debate fueled by digital media outlets that are highly critical of the government. These platforms framed the controversy as evidence of a growing rift between President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s faction and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya’s bloc within the government. The narrative also gained traction in traditional media, with newspapers and television networks using the controversy to paint a picture of moral decay within the ruling administration. Whether or not such divisions genuinely exist, the episode underscored a key weakness of the government and its inability to manage and neutralise damaging narratives before they spiral out of control.

Amid this political turbulence, the government is preparing for the local elections, scheduled for May 2025. Despite internal challenges, the ruling coalition remains the favourite to win, primarily due to the fractured nature of the opposition. However, maintaining dominance at the local level will not be easy.

The November 2024 parliamentary election saw the government secure an overwhelming 61% vote. While the opposition remains divided and embroiled in internal conflicts, replicating that electoral success will be difficult. According to sources close to President Dissanayake, he knows that a significant drop in voter support could begin his administration’s political decline. The upcoming elections, therefore, will serve as a crucial test of whether the public remains committed to the government’s agenda or if dissatisfaction is growing.

The much-hyped talks between the United National Party (UNP) and the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) to form an electoral alliance have failed in the opposition camp. What initially seemed like a promising political realignment quickly degenerated into a media spectacle with no real substance.

The collapse of these negotiations has frustrated many within both parties, especially those who viewed the alliance as a necessary step to mount a credible challenge against the ruling government. However, it became evident that a small but influential group within the UNP and SJB worked behind the scenes to sabotage the talks. These individuals, driven by personal ambitions and long-standing political rivalries, successfully derailed what could have been a game-changing partnership.

For the ruling government, this is a strategic advantage. The continued division within the opposition ensures no unified front capable of challenging President Dissanayake’s administration. However, political observers caution that the government should not become complacent. While the opposition is fractured, public discontent is growing, and if the government fails to address key issues, voter sentiment could shift unexpectedly.

Another significant development was the release of Ven. Galagoda Aththe Gnanasara Thero, the controversial general secretary of the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS). The Colombo High Court granted him bail after he was sentenced to simple imprisonment for insulting the Islamic faith.

Wasting no time, Gnanasara Thero launched a media blitz, addressing a well-attended press conference where he reignited the debate on what he described as “radical Islamisation” in Sri Lanka. His speech, delivered in his characteristic aggressive style, painted a grim picture of national security threats, claiming that brainwashed individuals continue to roam freely.

While he glorified President Dissanayake, calling him the right leader for the country, he also warned that radicals exist even within the government’s inner circle. His remarks sparked a heated debate across political and religious communities, with some viewing his statements as an attempt to stir communal tensions. In contrast, others saw them as a necessary intervention in Sri Lanka’s ongoing security discourse.

Following the press conference, Gnanasara Thero continued his campaign through multiple YouTube interviews, further amplifying his narrative. His re-emergence poses a unique challenge for the government;. At the same time, some within politics may see him as a helpful ally in mobilising nationalist sentiment. In contrast, others worry that his rhetoric could create unnecessary tensions and damage Sri Lanka’s international reputation.

As if these challenges were not enough, the government has also struggled to defend its first full-year budget. Despite controlling a comfortable parliamentary majority, the administration has received relentless attacks from the opposition.

Opposition MPs have accused the government of hypocrisy, claiming that the budget presented by President Dissanayake closely resembles the economic policies of former President Ranil Wickremesinghe. Every time the government has been cornered in parliamentary debates, its response has been weak and repeatedly pointing to the IMF agreement signed during Wickremesinghe’s tenure as a justification for their economic policies. While this may be a factual argument, it is politically ineffective. The opposition has successfully used this to undermine the government’s credibility, suggesting that the ruling coalition is merely continuing Wickremesinghe’s economic model rather than offering a fresh vision for the country.

Even more concerning for the government is its failure to effectively highlight the positive aspects of the budget. Economic experts have pointed out that several key areas in the budget could have been marketed as wins for the administration—whether it be targeted social welfare programs, investment incentives, or reforms aimed at long-term fiscal stability. However, the government’s weak communication strategy has allowed the opposition to dominate the narrative.

With the local elections approaching, the government must reassess its strategy to maintain its electoral dominance. The current trend of being reactive rather than proactive puts the administration on the defensive, allowing the opposition to capitalise on its weaknesses despite being fragmented.

The handling of the Nalin Hewage controversy demonstrated the government’s failure to control narratives before they escalated. The collapse of UNP-SJB alliance talks is a reminder that while the opposition is in disarray, political conditions can shift quickly. The return of Gnanasara Thero raises new questions about the administration’s stance on national security and religious extremism. Meanwhile, the budget debate has exposed significant vulnerabilities in the government’s messaging and public relations strategy.

If President Dissanayake and his team wish to avoid a decline in public support, they must act decisively. Strengthening internal cohesion, improving strategic communication, and delivering tangible economic results must become immediate priorities. Otherwise, the government risks entering the May elections not as an invincible force but as a struggling administration trying to regain lost ground.

The ruling coalition still holds the advantage, but the warning signs are unmistakable. The battle for public trust is far from over, and the months ahead will be crucial in determining whether the government retains its dominance or if it begins a slow political descent.