Skip to main content

Navigating Conflict: Sri Lanka's Economic Survival and Lessons for Pakistan


I like Sri Lanka as a country: small, isolated island with limited resources and a long history of internal instability, yet its people remain among the most civilised and socially grounded in South Asia. Despite decades of conflict, Sri Lanka has managed to achieve better human development indicators than most countries in the region. That contrast alone makes it worth paying attention to.

The Sri Lankan civil war, which lasted from 1983 to 2009, grew out of ethnic exclusion rather than inevitability. Policies that sidelined the Tamil minority, especially language and political marginalisation, slowly turned grievances into armed rebellion. The state responded primarily through force, and while it eventually defeated the LTTE, the cost was enormous. What stands out to me, however, is that even during this prolonged conflict, Sri Lanka kept much of its economy functioning. The fighting stayed largely confined to specific regions, allowing industries like tea, garments, tourism, and port services to survive. Remittances from overseas workers also helped cushion economic shocks.

When I look at Pakistan, the comparison is uncomfortable. Pakistan is far larger, richer in resources, and strategically more important than Sri Lanka, yet it struggles to deliver comparable social outcomes. Like Sri Lanka, Pakistan has regions affected by conflict, but unlike Sri Lanka, Pakistan often allows instability to define the entire national narrative. We talk endlessly about security, but far less about governance, education, and inclusion.

The most important lesson for Pakistan is not economic resilience, but political responsibility. Sri Lanka’s war shows what happens when legitimate grievances are ignored for too long. If Pakistan continues to treat regions like Balochistan and parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa as security problems rather than political failures, the consequences will be long-term. Economic survival can be managed. Social cohesion cannot be enforced. Sri Lanka paid a heavy price to learn this. Pakistan does not have to.

What Sri Lanka ultimately shows me is that conflict does not automatically doom a country, but denial does. A state can survive years of violence, economic pressure, and instability if it continues to invest in its people and keeps political grievances within a framework of dialogue and reform. Pakistan still has that choice. We have greater resources, a larger population, and far more strategic depth than Sri Lanka ever did. Yet without serious attention to inclusion, governance, and human development, these advantages mean little. Military victories, economic stopgaps, and security narratives can buy time, but they cannot build trust. Sri Lanka emerged intact because it eventually combined force with reform. Pakistan’s future depends on whether it learns that lesson early, rather than paying for it the hard way.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Unforgettable Lt. Colonel Frank Slade: A Complex Character Study

I think Scent of a Woman is a special film because it leaves something behind after it ends. It isn’t just remembered for a performance or a few iconic scenes, but for the way its central character stays with you. Frank Slade, played by Al Pacino, feels less like a fictional construct and more like a person you might have crossed paths with—difficult, intense, and impossible to ignore. What draws me in is that Slade does not fit the usual idea of a hero. He is angry, cynical, and often deliberately unpleasant. Yet beneath that rough exterior lies a strong moral core. He values honesty, dignity, and truth, even when he appears self-destructive. His strength does not come from authority or discipline, but from an uncompromising sense of right and wrong. Psychologically, Frank Slade fits closely with what can be described as a trauma-driven, depressive personality with rigid moral defenses . His blindness is not just a physical condition; it appears to have intensified an already fragile...

Whispers of Division: '71's Silent Grief

In '71, history etched in pain, A tale of discord, a loss to explain. From Jinnah's dream, a unified might, To fractures deep, in the darkest night. East and West, two wings once soared, United in faith, in dreams adored. Yet politics brewed an unsettling storm, Tearing apart what had been the norm. Bengal's ethos, its vibrant call, Clashed with power, leading to the fall. Cries for freedom echoed loud and clear, Amidst the chaos, hope turned to fear. Amidst the bayonets, a nation's cry, A struggle for rights reached the sky. Dhaka's streets bore witness, stained red, As a nation's unity hung by a thread. Through the pages of history's tome, The agony of '71 finds its home. More than a tale of a land torn apart, It's a reminder etched in every heart. Simple and sorrowful, this tale's refrain, Of a nation's loss, a unity's pain. In '71, history's sorrowful trace, A testament to unity's fragile grace.

The Enigma of Gregory Rasputin: Saint, Sinner, or Master Manipulator?

Grigori Rasputin, Painting by Sergey Levin When it comes to Russian history, Gregory Rasputin is still one of the most mysterious characters. It is quite remarkable how Rasputin went from being a farmer to a mystic after being born in the Siberian village of Pokrovskoye in 1869. Rasputin went on a religious pilgrimage that he said strengthened his bond with God; despite his lack of schooling, he became famous for his spiritual abilities. He became a member of the Russian royal family's inner circle after he gained the belief that he could cure the sick and predict the future. After the Romanov family met Rasputin in 1905 in the hopes that he could cure their son Alexei of hemophilia, a hereditary condition that caused excessive and potentially fatal bleeding, the two became inseparably linked. The only thing that could calm Alexei during his crisis, according to Tsarina Alexandra, who was anxious to rescue her son, were Rasputin's prayers and presence. In his lauded biog...