Scope of Aragalaya and future of SL

With the protest camp cleared, Victor Ivan weighs the repression against the anarchy it forestalled, examines the detentions under the PTA, and judges the morality of the Aragalaya itself.

Dismissing Ranil

Answering the critics of ‘Ranil’s destiny’. Victor Ivan asks who else was available for the presidency, weighs the charges against Wickremesinghe one by one, and returns to the shortage of mature leaders.

Ranil’s destiny

Victor Ivan describes taking his reform plan to Gotabaya Rajapaksa during the uprising, then makes the case for Ranil Wickremesinghe — a man, he argues, whose character the media deliberately destroyed.

True nature of the storm

Gotabaya fled because he was weak, not because the Aragalaya was strong. Victor Ivan restates the constitutional argument he has made throughout and says what the movement should demand next.

Limitations inherent in July uprising

Victor Ivan measures the July uprising against Magna Carta, the American and French revolutions and the Indian independence movement, and locates the limitation that decided its outcome.

What could be the end of the revolution?

Written in the week of 9 July. Victor Ivan admits the uprising disproved his own forecast, sets out what distinguished it from the JVP insurrections, and asks what it can end in.

Overcoming ideological anarchy

Mao on falling into pits. Victor Ivan argues that neither the protesters nor the opposition parties who borrowed their slogan have worked out whether it can actually be done.

Alleviating the burden of the crisis

Eight practical measures for living through the crisis — fuel rationing, public transport, solar conversion for expatriate-owned homes — inside a case for an all-party government.

A way out of the crisis?

An all-party consensus, and quickly. Victor Ivan offers his reform proposals as a specimen of the scale required rather than a text to be adopted, and warns of the stage below the present one.