By Mohamed Shareef Asees – 

After two years away, I returned to Sri Lanka last month and spent an entire month in the country. I returned with memories of the Sri Lanka I had known well, but I was curious to see how the country had changed during my absence.

During my stay, I had the opportunity to meet academics, members of the armed forces, senior police officers, prison officials, officers from Ministries, deputy minister, former students and people from different walks of life. These conversations, together with what I observed during my travels, allowed me to look at Sri Lanka from several perspectives.

I came away with a strong impression that Sri Lanka is changing.

The changes are not all dramatic or complete. Some are political, some economic and institutional, while others are visible only in everyday life. Taken together, however, they suggest that the country has moved away from the extraordinary uncertainty of the recent crisis and is gradually entering a more stable phase.

Political Stability

The first and perhaps most important change I noticed was political stability. Sri Lanka has experienced considerable political and economic turbulence in recent years. The economic crisis created enormous uncertainty, while public confidence in political institutions was severely affected. Against this background, the political environment I encountered during my visit felt considerably more stable.

The present government has a very strong parliamentary mandate, holding 159 of the 225 seats following the November 2024 parliamentary election. This two-thirds majority gives it an unusual degree of political strength and the ability to pursue its programmer without the parliamentary instability that affected previous administrations.

But political stability should not simply mean the absence of political conflict. Its real value lies in the opportunity it creates for long-term governance. A government with a strong mandate can plan, implement difficult reforms and take responsibility for their consequences.

During my conversations, I sensed that this stability is being noticed, but it has also created greater expectations. The public now expects the government to use its political strength to address the country’s deeper structural problems.

The two-thirds majority is therefore both an opportunity and a responsibility. A strong majority can facilitate reform, but it also creates a greater obligation to respect democratic institutions, listen to criticism and maintain checks and balances. Political strength should ultimately be used to strengthen institutions, not weaken them.

From Economic Crisis to Recovery

The second major change I noticed was economic. Two years ago, the economic crisis remained deeply visible in everyday life. Shortages, uncertainty and financial hardship had affected almost every section of society. During my recent visit, the atmosphere was considerably different.

Sri Lanka appears to be moving from crisis management towards recovery. Economic activity seems more normal, businesses are functioning with greater confidence, and there is a stronger sense that the country is moving forward rather than simply trying to survive.

This recovery deserves recognition. At the same time, economic recovery should not automatically be equated with prosperity. Many families continue to face high living costs, and the benefits of recovery are not necessarily being experienced equally.

The real test is therefore whether macroeconomic recovery can gradually translate into better living standards, employment opportunities and economic security for ordinary Sri Lankans. A country cannot declare victory simply because its economic indicators improve. Recovery becomes meaningful when people begin to feel it in their daily lives.

Tourism Is Returning

One of the most visible signs of recovery was the revival of tourism. During my month in Sri Lanka, I encountered considerable tourist activity, and many businesses connected to tourism appeared to be benefiting from the return of international visitors. This is important because tourism is not simply about hotels and large businesses. It supports drivers, guides, restaurants, guesthouses, traders, artisans and communities throughout the country.

Sri Lanka possesses extraordinary natural, cultural and historical resources. If managed properly, tourism can become one of the country’s most important sources of employment and foreign exchange.

But the objective should not simply be to increase visitor numbers. Sri Lanka should aim for sustainable, higher-value tourism in which visitors stay longer, spend more locally and contribute to communities while the environment and cultural heritage are protected.

The revival of tourism is encouraging, but it should be treated as an opportunity to build a stronger and more sustainable sector rather than simply returning to the model of the past.

Governance and Institutions

Another change I noticed was in my interaction with government officials. During my stay, I met people working in different parts of the public sector. My overall impression was that many officials appeared more approachable, professional and willing to engage than I had experienced previously.

This may seem like a small matter, but it is important. Citizens experience the state not only through national budgets, legislation and political speeches. They experience it through the official behind a government office desk, the police officer they encounter and the institutions they depend upon in their daily lives.

A friendly official alone does not constitute good governance. What matters is whether public institutions become professional, impartial, transparent and accountable.

I also sensed that some forms of petty corruption and informal expectations appeared less visible in certain interactions than I remembered. I would not claim, on the basis of one month, that corruption has been eliminated or has declined throughout the public sector. Sri Lanka’s corruption problem is too complex for such a conclusion.

Nevertheless, a change in administrative culture is worth noticing. If citizens can increasingly approach public officials without relying on political connections, personal relationships or informal payments, that would represent an important change in the relationship between citizen and state.

I also had the impression that some institutions appeared to have greater professional space and independence. In conversations with people working in different sectors, I sensed less hesitation in discussing professional responsibilities and a greater emphasis on institutional roles rather than purely political considerations.

I would not suggest that Sri Lanka’s institutions have suddenly become fully independent. Institutional independence is a long-term process, and political influence remains a concern in any democracy. But gradual changes in institutional culture matter.

The real measure of the current political transformation will therefore not simply be whether the present government is different from previous governments. It will be whether it leaves behind stronger, more professional and more independent institutions.

Changes in Everyday Life

Some of the changes I noticed were much more ordinary, but equally interesting. Sri Lanka appeared cleaner to me. In several places I visited, public spaces seemed better maintained, with greater attention to cleanliness and order. I do not suggest that the country has solved its waste-management and environmental problems. Clearly, it has not.

But a cleaner public environment matters. For a country that depends heavily on tourism and takes pride in its natural beauty, environmental cleanliness should be treated as an economic, social and national priority.

Transport also appeared to have improved in several respects. I found travelling around the country somewhat easier and more organised than I remembered. One particularly noticeable development was the improvement of online cab services.

App-based transport has become more convenient and accessible. Being able to book a vehicle, see an approximate fare and track a journey makes travelling considerably easier, particularly for visitors and people unfamiliar with an area.

Although this may seem like a small development, it reflects a wider change: the growing integration of digital technology into everyday Sri Lankan life.

Not every positive change I observed can or should be attributed to the government. Some are the result of private enterprise, technology, changing consumer behaviour and broader economic recovery. That distinction is important.

I also sensed that drug-related activity was less visible in some communities than I remembered. My conversations with people working in the security and prison sectors gave me an additional perspective on the challenges associated with drugs, crime and rehabilitation.

However, I would be cautious about turning this personal impression into a nationwide conclusion. Drug use and trafficking are complex problems that cannot be measured simply by what a visitor sees. Long-term progress requires prevention, education, rehabilitation, employment opportunities and meaningful alternatives for young people.

Recovery Is Not Transformation

Despite these positive observations, I did not return to Sri Lanka believing that all problems had been solved. In fact, the improvements I observed make the government’s remaining responsibilities even greater.

The present administration came to power with enormous expectations. Its political strength, promises of change and the public’s desire for a new political culture have created expectations that will be difficult to satisfy.

The question is no longer simply whether Sri Lanka is better than it was during the economic crisis. The more important question is whether the country is becoming fundamentally better governed.

There is a difference between stabilising a country and transforming it. Economic recovery can stabilize a country. Tourism can bring foreign exchange. Political stability can create confidence. Better public services can improve everyday life.

But deeper transformation requires institutions that function independently, corruption that is addressed systematically, an economy that creates opportunities, and a political culture in which accountability applies to everyone.

The present government should therefore resist the temptation to regard its electoral mandate itself as evidence of transformation. A two-thirds majority is a means, not an achievement in itself.

The government should continue strengthening independent institutions and ensure that reforms survive beyond the life of the present administration. Anti-corruption policy should become institutional, based on transparent procurement, professional administration, effective oversight and predictable enforcement.

Economic recovery also needs to reach ordinary households more clearly. People ultimately judge the economy through employment, wages, food prices, housing, education and their ability to provide a secure future for their families.

Greater attention should also be given to young people. Sri Lanka’s educated youth need opportunities to build their futures in their own country. A country cannot sustain itself if its most ambitious young people feel that their only option is to leave.

Finally, Sri Lanka must continue strengthening social cohesion, reconciliation and equal citizenship. Economic development and political stability will have limited meaning if sections of society continue to feel excluded or marginalized.

What I Took Away

After spending a month in Sri Lanka, I left with a more positive impression than I expected. I saw a country that appeared politically more stable, economically more confident and increasingly active in tourism. I encountered government officials who seemed more approachable. I sensed changes in public attitudes towards laws and institutions. I saw cleaner public spaces, improvements in transport and greater use of digital services. I also sensed that some institutions were beginning to develop greater professional independence.

None of this means that Sri Lanka’s problems have disappeared. Nor should the present government be given unlimited credit for every positive development. Some changes are the result of government policy; others reflect private enterprise, technological development, social change or the natural process of economic recovery.

But together, they create an impression that Sri Lanka is moving in a different direction. The country now has something extremely valuable: political stability and an opportunity for long-term reform.

The challenge is to use that opportunity wisely

A government should ultimately be judged not by how different it looks from the government that preceded it, but by whether it builds institutions that work better, an economy that provides greater opportunity, a society that is fairer, and a state that citizens can trust.

Sri Lanka has been given another opportunity. The task now is to ensure that political change becomes institutional change, that institutional change becomes better governance, and that better governance ultimately becomes a better life for ordinary Sri Lankans.

That is the Sri Lanka I saw when I returned after two years and that is the Sri Lanka I hope to see when I return again.

*Dr. Mohamed Shareef Asees – PhD in Global Studies; MA in International Relations; BA in Political Science; Researcher and Lecturer in International Relations, Geopolitics, and Peace building based in Berlin, Germany