In a forceful and candid speech delivered at a public function, Sri Lanka’s Agriculture Minister K.D. Lalkantha challenged the widely held belief that governing is harder than being in opposition, declaring instead that the burden of leadership is far lighter than the long years of struggle his party endured in opposition. Lalkantha’s remarks, directed at both political rivals and a wider national audience, reflect a tense political climate in which accusations and counter-accusations have become central to public discourse.
The Minister’s statement was prompted by comments from acclaimed filmmaker Asoka Handagama, who suggested that the responsibilities of governance are inherently more demanding than opposition politics. Lalkantha dismissed this viewpoint outright, arguing that his party’s prolonged opposition since 1965 was “extremely difficult,” marked by internal betrayals and the killing of colleagues. For him, the present era of governing, despite its challenges, represents a healthier and more stable political reality than the period in which his party was forced to fight for survival in an environment of violence and intimidation.
Lalkantha did not shy away from controversy in his response. He openly admitted that while he sometimes chooses to remain silent in the face of criticism, he is prepared to retaliate when the timing is right. His warning was unambiguous: he will not tolerate political attacks without response, and he will strike back at the appropriate moment. “If you are coming to do politics, leave them aside,” he said, dismissing concerns about decorum or public image. “We will attack no matter what you are wearing,” he added, explicitly rejecting any notion that personal status or appearance—be it a black coat, national dress, or judicial robe—should grant immunity from political confrontation.
The Minister’s rhetoric grew sharper when he invoked Leninist doctrine, asserting that the legality of an attack is irrelevant when confronting an enemy. Such a statement will likely deepen concerns among critics who view the government’s posture as increasingly intolerant of dissent. Lalkantha’s choice of language underscores a broader shift in Sri Lanka’s political discourse, where ideological firmness is increasingly expressed through confrontational and uncompromising terms.
Yet the Minister did not present his stance as a reckless or impulsive approach. He offered a strategic analogy, comparing political tactics to artillery and catapults, suggesting that power is not deployed all at once but reserved for when it can be most effective. “We do not use artillery to shoot with catapults,” he said, implying that the government will act strategically rather than impulsively. The analogy also hints at a deeper message: the Minister believes the state has not yet fully mobilized its power and is still in a stage of consolidating influence.
Lalkantha also used the platform to reflect on the government’s progress since taking power, arguing that the change in leadership has not yet produced a fundamental transformation in governance. He emphasized that while the government has changed, the system remains largely the same and requires further reform. “There has not been a revolution in Sri Lanka yet,” he declared, suggesting that key laws and structures must still be amended to achieve meaningful change.
