-By LeN Economic Correspondent
(Lanka-e-News -30.Nov.2025, 11.30 PM) Sri Lanka is now four days into what officials describe as one of the most catastrophic floods in living memory. Entire districts remain submerged, infrastructure has collapsed, and the death toll—still rising—already numbers in the hundreds. More than a hundred thousand people have been displaced, many of them with nothing but the clothes they escaped in. Village after village has been swallowed by landslides, cutting off families, schools, and hospitals from the outside world.
The scale of devastation now extends far beyond the remit of ordinary emergency response. Bridges have been washed away. Power stations and water treatment facilities remain offline. Factories in key export zones are under water. Thousands of schoolchildren have been forced to abandon their classrooms. The economic consequences will be profound and prolonged, particularly for a country already wrestling with a fragile post-crisis recovery.
In this context, there is a growing chorus—from economists, diplomats, and disaster specialists—urging the Sri Lankan government to take a decisive step: call an International Donor Conference. It is not merely advisable; it is essential.
History offers ample precedent. Bangladesh, Indonesia, Mozambique, Pakistan and several African nations have all convened donor conferences in the aftermath of major cyclones, earthquakes, and floods. These events mobilised billions in grants, soft loans, technical expertise, and emergency logistics support—resources far beyond the scope of any single government.
Sri Lanka, too, has benefited from similar global solidarity in the past, most notably following the 2004 tsunami. Today’s floods, though different in nature, demand a response of equal urgency and international magnitude.
The early signals from friendly nations are promising. Several countries have begun releasing emergency funds, dispatching disaster teams, and offering logistical support. The Sri Lankan diaspora—with its characteristic generosity—has mobilised within hours, responding to the government’s transparent appeal to donate directly to the Treasury’s disaster response fund. But goodwill alone is not enough. What is required now is coordination, structure, and diplomatic urgency.
A central question, however, looms over Sri Lanka’s ability to rebuild: debt.
Even before the floods, the country was navigating one of the most complex sovereign debt restructurings in the world. The ongoing IMF programme—while stabilising in theory—comes with strict spending limits and fiscal targets. In a moment of national emergency, these constraints risk suffocating the government’s capacity to rebuild critical infrastructure and resettle communities.
For this reason, Sri Lanka must not only seek international aid but also demand temporary relief from debt obligations, including:
Partial debt forgiveness for bilateral and multilateral loans
A moratorium on repayments during the reconstruction phase
A suspension or easing of IMF conditions to create fiscal space
Such measures are neither unprecedented nor unreasonable. The IMF has previously granted disaster-related waivers and flexibility to countries ranging from Haiti to Sierra Leone. For Sri Lanka, where rebuilding roads, schools, bridges, sanitation systems, and power lines will require billions, such a window of opportunity could determine the success—or failure—of recovery efforts.
To its credit, the current NPP government has responded with a level of transparency rarely seen in previous crises. Relief fund accounts have been publicly disclosed, emergency procurement procedures have been tightened, and appeals to the public and diaspora have been direct and clear. International partners have acknowledged the efficiency of the coordination between military, civilian, and local authorities.
But even the cleanest domestic governance cannot substitute for the raw scale of resources required. Sri Lanka simply cannot rebuild alone.
What Sri Lanka now faces is not a temporary weather event but a national reconstruction challenge. The damage spans:
Transport infrastructure
Power and energy grids
Manufacturing hubs
Agricultural zones
Schools and universities
Rural and estate villages increasingly threatened by landslides
Each of these requires long-term investment. An International Donor Conference would enable Sri Lanka to present a coordinated reconstruction plan, backed by transparent spending frameworks and prioritised needs assessments. It would also allow global partners—from governments to multilateral lenders to humanitarian organisations—to align their support.
In moments of national devastation, sovereignty is not weakened by asking for help; it is strengthened by mobilising every resource available to protect the population.
The floods have tested Sri Lanka’s resilience, but they have also created a rare moment of alignment: government, diaspora, foreign partners, and local communities all recognise the gravity of the crisis. What is needed now is diplomatic boldness.
Calling an International Donor Conference—and demanding debt relief alongside it—is not just an option. It is a necessity if Sri Lanka hopes to rebuild its towns, restore its villages, and protect its future.
The waters will eventually recede. The question is whether Sri Lanka will emerge from them weaker, or with a new foundation built on global solidarity, responsible leadership, and economic breathing space.
--By LeN Economic Correspondent
---------------------------
by (2025-11-30 18:12:53)
Read 26628 Times
Leave a Reply
0 discussion on this news