By Raj Sivanathan –

Bimal Rathnayake’s Repeated Position Raises a Larger Question About Northern Development

The continuing uncertainty surrounding the development of Jaffna International Airport at Palaly and Kankesanthurai (KKS) Port can no longer be viewed simply as an administrative delay. Recent comments by Transport and Highways Minister Bimal Rathnayake, combined with his earlier statements concerning these strategically important Northern gateways, raise a much larger question: what exactly is preventing Sri Lanka from fully developing Palaly and KKS when India is prepared to provide substantial assistance?

At a recent media briefing in Jaffna, Minister Rathnayake responded to questions about delays affecting the two projects by emphasising that, regardless of who provides financial assistance, the Sri Lankan government will determine which projects should proceed, where development should take place and when it should happen.

Legally and constitutionally, there is nothing unusual about saying that the Government of Sri Lanka has the final authority over infrastructure within its territory. But that is not really the issue. The issue is why these two Northern projects continue to face uncertainty despite their strategic importance, existing demand and Indian assistance — and why no convincing timetable has been presented to the Northern public.

This Is Not the First Time

The latest statement becomes more significant when considered alongside earlier criticism directed at Minister Rathnayake.

Tamil Progressive Alliance leader Mano Ganesan previously accused him of obstructing the expansion of Palaly Airport and development of KKS Port. Ganesan went considerably further, alleging that opposition to these projects reflected both anti-Indian and anti-Tamil attitudes.

Those are serious political allegations and should not automatically be presented as established facts. However, Ganesan raised a legitimate question that remains unanswered: if the government believes KKS is economically unviable, where is the independent economic assessment demonstrating this?

Rather than relying on political assertions from either side, the government should publish the feasibility studies, projected cargo volumes, passenger forecasts, capital requirements, operating costs and expected economic returns for both projects. Then the people can judge the evidence themselves.

The Government’s Own Position Appears Contradictory

President Anura Kumara Dissanayake stated in Jaffna in January 2026 that the government planned to address shortcomings at Palaly Airport and that work at KKS Port would begin “very soon.” The President also acknowledged India’s willingness to provide substantial assistance towards the port project.

Yet months later, instead of hearing when construction will commence, Northern residents are again hearing arguments about who has the authority to decide whether development proceeds.

If the President says KKS will proceed very soon, while another senior government figure repeatedly stresses caution and the government’s power to determine whether and when it proceeds, the public is entitled to ask whether there is a difference in emphasis — or policy — within the government itself.

KKS: From Loan to Grant

Kankesanthurai presents perhaps the strongest case for clarification. India initially extended a line of credit for the remaining phases of KKS rehabilitation. When project costs subsequently increased, India moved towards grant assistance for the project.

That distinction matters enormously. A loan adds to Sri Lanka’s repayment obligations; a grant does not impose the same debt burden.

Therefore, arguments based on avoiding another debt-funded white elephant become considerably less persuasive when applied to KKS. If substantial grant assistance is available, what precisely remains unresolved: the MoU, technical design, environmental approval, procurement, national security, commercial viability, or a political decision? The Northern public deserves a straightforward answer.

Palaly Is Not Mattala

Minister Rathnayake has referred to Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport as an example of infrastructure development that resulted in substantial losses. Governments certainly should learn from Mattala, but comparing Palaly with Mattala risks obscuring fundamental differences.

Mattala was constructed as a new international airport based largely on anticipated future demand. Palaly is an established airport with a long history and an existing regional aviation market.

Direct air connectivity between Jaffna and southern India already exists, and the government itself has been undertaking terminal expansion. Palaly is therefore not simply a theoretical proposal waiting for passengers to materialise. The real question is how far the government intends to expand it and what long-term role it sees for Jaffna in Sri Lanka’s aviation network.

KKS Is Not Hambantota Either

KKS is geographically positioned close to southern India and already participates in passenger connectivity through the Nagapattinam–KKS ferry service.

A functioning commercial port could reduce the need for suitable cargo destined for the North to enter through Colombo and then travel hundreds of kilometres by road. That could reduce transport time, fuel consumption, handling costs and pressure on road infrastructure.

This would not benefit Tamils alone. Properly planned, it could benefit the national economy by creating a more efficient regional logistics corridor.

Palaly + KKS = A Northern Economic Gateway

The most important mistake may be considering Palaly and KKS as two unrelated infrastructure projects. They should instead be considered together.

Palaly provides the air gateway. KKS provides the maritime gateway.

Combined with road and rail infrastructure, they could create a Northern economic corridor directly connected with southern India. KKS could support cargo, fisheries, agricultural inputs, machinery, construction materials, cold-chain logistics, warehousing and potentially Northern exports. Palaly could support tourism, business travel, professional services, investment missions and diaspora connectivity.

That creates two reinforcing economic chains: Airport → visitors → tourism → hotels → restaurants → transport → investment → employment; and Port → cargo → warehousing → distribution → agriculture and fisheries → exports → employment.

For decades, economic activity in Sri Lanka has been disproportionately concentrated around Colombo and the Western Province. Developing another regional gateway should therefore be regarded as economic decentralisation — not a threat to national sovereignty.

Why Does Direct Northern Connectivity Create Such Political Sensitivity?

A developed Palaly Airport and KKS commercial port would reduce the Northern Province’s dependence on Colombo for international connectivity. Jaffna could increasingly become a gateway between Sri Lanka and southern India rather than simply the northern endpoint of an economic network centred on Colombo.

Some critics in Jaffna have described resistance to this transformation as racism. That accusation should be treated carefully. It would be irresponsible to declare someone’s personal motivation racist without convincing evidence.

But it is equally wrong to dismiss the underlying concern without examination. If Northern infrastructure is subjected to standards or delays that comparable projects elsewhere do not face, the government has an obligation to explain the difference. The strongest response to accusations of discrimination is transparency.

Northern Development Should Not Be Viewed as a Threat

Sri Lanka has spent decades debating ethnic reconciliation while economic inequality between regions remains substantial. Real reconciliation cannot consist solely of speeches, commemorations and political meetings. Economic opportunity, employment, investment and infrastructure matter.

Allowing Northern Sri Lanka to develop direct international connectivity does not separate the North from Sri Lanka. It integrates the North more strongly into the national economy while allowing the country to exploit its geographical proximity to India.

A cargo vessel arriving at KKS, a passenger flying directly from Chennai to Jaffna, or a diaspora investor landing at Palaly and establishing a business in the Northern Province does not threaten Sri Lankan sovereignty. These activities create economic growth.

Five Questions the Government Should Answer

1. Does the NPP government fully support developing KKS into a functioning commercial cargo port?
If yes, announce the commencement and completion timetable.

2. When will the Indian grant agreement for KKS be finalised?
If negotiations remain incomplete, explain what issues are outstanding.

3. What is the government’s long-term plan for Jaffna International Airport?
The public needs clarity on terminal, runway, passenger, cargo and international-route capacity.

4. If either project is considered economically questionable, where is the independent feasibility study?
Publish the evidence and allow the public to assess it.

5. If India is ready to provide assistance and Sri Lanka says it supports Northern development, what exactly is causing the delay?
This remains the central unanswered question.

From Political Statements to Deadlines

Bimal Rathnayake is correct about one thing: ultimately, the Sri Lankan government must make decisions concerning Sri Lankan infrastructure. But with that authority comes responsibility.

It is no longer enough to say, “The government will decide.” What Northern Sri Lanka now needs are dates: when the KKS agreement will be finalised, when construction will commence, what cargo capacity is planned, what the next stage of Palaly expansion will involve, and what international connectivity the government intends to facilitate.

The debate should therefore move beyond whether Bimal Rathnayake personally holds anti-Tamil or anti-Indian views. Such allegations are politically explosive but difficult to establish objectively. There is a much simpler test: publish the plans, publish the feasibility studies, publish the funding arrangements, publish the deadlines — and then implement them.

If the NPP government genuinely believes in equality, decentralised development and reconciliation, Palaly and KKS provide an opportunity to demonstrate those principles through action.

Northern Sri Lanka has waited long enough. The question is no longer whether India is willing to help. The question is whether Colombo is genuinely willing to allow the North to realise its economic potential.