A NEW NARRATIVE FOR SRI LANKA

Dr. Jehan Perera writes that the past shouldn’t be relived in a painful way

The aftermath of Sri Lanka’s decades long war continues to be felt across the country – especially on 18 and 19 May each year, as these dates highlight the deep divisions that continue to persist.

On 18 May, Tamils mourn their loss of civilians and combatants while on 19 May, the state commemorates the triumph of its armed forces and remembers the civilians who lost their lives. Though both days are marked by sorrow and remembrance, they’re seldom observed together except by small civil society groups.

This duality in memory is a symptom of a deeper malaise because Sri Lanka lacks a shared national narrative that recognises the pain and dignity of all its people. If reconciliation is to be real and lasting, this must change.

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s participation in the 16th National War Heroes Commemoration, though belated and politically fraught, signalled a departure from the war victory oriented rhetoric of previous governments.

He emphasised the tragedy of war and collective suffering it caused and said: “To every parent, their child is precious.” His decision to refer to military personnel as ‘soldiers’ rather than ‘war heroes’ drew criticism from nationalist quarters but it also marked a statesmanlike step towards a more inclusive remembrance.

Such a move is long overdue. Civil wars are not conflicts between countries; they are fought within nations by different groups and communities. There have been attempts in countries such as the US and Spain to glorify one side’s victory. This has only deepened societal rifts; Sri Lanka needs to learn from those mistakes and avoid going down a similar path.

Victories in civil wars, if they’re to be remembered at all, must be seen as tragedies; not as national achievements. They must be moments of reflection rather than celebration. That’s why a new national narrative that doesn’t glorify violence or marginalise the suffering of any group is urgently required. Such a narrative would not only honour the dead more truthfully, it will also lay the foundation for a more united Sri Lanka.

But time is running short for the country. The nationalist opposition is quick to capitalise on any sign of compromise and social media platforms have already begun to echo the divisive language of the past, and accusing the president of betrayal and weakness.

If this tide is not countered, the fragile political space that has emerged for reconciliation could be quickly closed off. The state must not cede ground to those who prefer that the divisions remain entrenched in the minds of Sri Lankans.

That’s why civil society must rise to meet this moment. The task of reframing Sri Lanka’s post-war narrative can’t be left to the government alone. Religious leaders, artistes, educators, activists and local communities must join in shaping a collective memory that promotes healing and understanding.

They must push for substantive reforms rather than only symbolic moves. These should include the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), return of occupied lands, holding of long overdue provincial council elections, and full implementation of the 13th Amendment.

The government must not retreat into cautious incrementalism. Its overwhelming parliamentary mandate, including significant votes from the north and east, offers a unique opportunity for it to act boldly. Though his political party is new to governance, Dissanayake must use this window to advance policies that demonstrate genuine commitment to reconciliation and justice.

So the way forward is clear. Sri Lanka needs a national narrative that acknowledges not only the end but also tells the full story of the war. It should include the causes, its victims and the continuing costs. This could come out of a truth and reconciliation commission that successive governments since 2015 have been talking about but not brought to fruition.

Such a narrative must be grounded in the shared hu­manity of all Sri Lankans and not in ethnic triumphalism or historical grievance. It should seek not to divide but to unify.

The president has taken the first step and the government – with the support of civil society – needs to go further. But if this moment is allowed to pass without action, there’s a clear danger that history could very possibly repeat itself.