Promised the future, delivering the past: Sri Lanka at the crossroads

By Chandrasena Maliyadde

The National People Power’s (NPP) election manifesto, ‘A Thriving Nation – A Beautiful Life’, promised to launch a state-sponsored public awareness campaign on corruption, fraud and bribery with the aim of empowering citizens to resist such practices and to make Sri Lanka a corruption-free country in the future.

Yet, when allegations surfaced that the coal procurement process was riddled with irregularities from start to finish, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake rushed to Parliament to assert that while the coal might be substandard, there was no corruption, fraud or bribery involved in the procurement process. In doing so, he remarked that he had not tasted the coal to determine its quality. Regrettably, none of his highly regarded advisers appears to have guided him to consult the findings of the National Audit Office or relevant International Monetary Fund (IMF) assessments instead of tasting the coal.

The chosen course of action was to appoint a special commission to investigate coal procurements dating back to 2009. The NPP government that promised the future (corruption-free) is now delivering the past (what happened prior to 2024).

Measuring performance and perception

Eighteen months after NPP rose to power, citizens grapple with the familiar question: has the promised future and the transformation delivered or given way to delivering the past? To track the government’s performance, Verité Research launched the Anura Meter in July 2025, which monitored 30 promises and reported that 10 promises were met, 10 were in progress, nine promises had not made progress, and one had failed. The 30 promises represent only a small fraction (2.2%) of a total of 1,325 campaign promises in the NPP manifesto. The methodology used to select 30 promises and the criteria used to determine whether a promise is considered fulfilled, ongoing or broken are not known.

The same think tank conducted a separate survey in February 2026 to gauge the mood of the nation. It reported that the Economic Confidence Index had risen to +36 – its highest level in four years – while the government’s approval rating stood at 65%. The study drew on a nationally representative, multi-stage, randomized sample of adults from different households, aiming to capture the sentiments of a nation emerging from crisis. However, critics argue that the sample size of 1,048 respondents may be insufficient to reflect the diversity, variations and complexity of 16 million adults.

These findings sit uneasily alongside broader global indicators. According to the World Happiness Report 2026, Sri Lanka ranks 134th out of 147 countries, placing it among the least happy nations worldwide. This marks a steady decline from 128th in 2024 to 133rd in 2025, and now 134th in 2026, suggesting a continuing deterioration linked to persistent economic instability, social strain and a declining quality of life.

Results of both the Anura Meter and the survey must be evaluated against the expectations shaped by the NPP during its election campaign. These expectations were clearly articulated by President Dissanayake in his maiden budget of 2025, presented in February that year. He pledged to revitalize the SME sector, strengthen public transport, promote rural development and agricultural renewal, support local entrepreneurship, incentivize research and remove structural barriers to growth and export competitiveness.

 The Anura Meter and the survey do not meaningfully reflect these core expectations. Instead, the index focuses on more cosmetic or peripheral aspects of the manifesto rather than measuring progress on the substantive economic and structural reforms that were central to the campaign promises and the public’s aspirations.

The vision – people at the centre

At the outset of his presidency, President Dissanayake articulated a clear philosophy: economic growth must be inclusive, and citizens must be active participants in the economic process. He emphasized a people-centred economic philosophy and pledged to create an economy where citizens would be participants, not spectators, stressing inclusive growth and equitable distribution of wealth. “Our primary goal is to design an economy where people can be integrated as participants in the economic process,” he said. “Growth for the sake of growth has little value to society unless it is a means to uplifting the lives of all members of society”.

He stressed the importance of economic sovereignty even while acknowledging the stabilizing role of the IMF program. His message was clear: stability alone was not enough – prosperity had to be shared.

A shift in direction

Within a year, the tone of governance appeared to change. President Dissanayake’s early emphasis on shared, inclusive prosperity and on citizens as active participants rather than passive bystanders gave way to a stronger focus on macroeconomic priorities. By the time of the second budget and the Fiscal Strategy Statement 2026, macroeconomic stability, fiscal discipline, adherence to IMF-backed reforms, revenue targets, primary surpluses and credit rating improvements had moved to the forefront, marking a clear departure from the initial vision of participatory growth.

This reorientation reflects the growing influence of key economic institutions, including the Central Bank and Finance Ministry, alongside engagement with international partners. Interactions with these actors increasingly steered policy toward stabilization and fiscal consolidation with less emphasis on grassroots economic participation. Economists and policy think tanks with market-oriented perspectives have pointed to improved revenue performance, stronger growth and upgraded sovereign ratings as evidence of recovery.

As a result, citizens, initially envisaged as active participants in economic transformation, have largely become spectators of a recovery driven by aggregate indicators.

Influence of officials and international partners

In the immediate aftermath of the election, the administration’s approach was shaped primarily by the public mandate and the counsel of close political allies. The president pledged that governance would honour public trust and prioritize the well-being of the people.

However, early engagements with international stakeholders signalled a turning point. At the first meeting with the IMF delegation, the president was accompanied by key members of his planning team, led by Anil Jayanthe Fernando, who played a central role in discussions while officials from the Central Bank and the Finance Ministry remained in peripheral roles. This initial interaction served largely as an orientation for the new administration, highlighting the experience among officials and their grasp of macroeconomic realities, the implications of the country’s bankruptcy and potential recovery pathways and that officials speak less and align more with the IMF.

For officials and the IMF delegation, initial meetings served as an opportunity to observe and assess. It became evident that the political leadership and its advisory team were still consolidating their footing in complex negotiations, particularly in articulating positions within the technical framework of international finance. In subsequent engagements, the balance of influence shifted; officials assumed a more central role while the planning team receded into a secondary position.

This transition reflected a broader evolution in policy direction. The initial emphasis on inclusive, grassroots-driven prosperity gradually gave way to a framework prioritizing macroeconomic stabilization and growth. Over time, what began as a learning process consolidated into a more technocratic policy approach, increasingly aligned with orthodox economic management.

Gap between promise and delivery

Having placed considerable trust in the IMF, the Central Bank and Finance Ministry officials, President Dissanayake asserted that Sri Lanka has met all targets under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) program and achieved a degree of macroeconomic stability.

Stability is evasive, illusive, elusive and fluid – an evolving benchmark rather than a fixed destination within a dynamic economic system. It is difficult to identify any modern economy that can claim enduring stability in a complete sense. Assurances offered by the IMF and the Central Bank are taking President Dissanayake up the garden path away from his promised future. The NPP entered office with a clear commitment to building a people-centred economy grounded in inclusive and shared prosperity. NPP is delivering an economy with fluid evasive stability.

While the IMF and the Central Bank emphasize recovery and stability, assessments by the World Bank point to enduring structural vulnerabilities. These include elevated and potentially rising poverty levels, food insecurity and constrained access to essential goods and services. The strain on public transport has intensified, healthcare capacity remains limited and broader concerns about public safety and governance contribute to growing public dissatisfaction.

The promise of a thriving nation and a beautiful life is being overshadowed by a narrower focus on stability. While the public awaits the promised transformation, President Dissanayake has unveiled a series of national programs reminiscent of a magician producing one rabbit after another from a hat. These include the Prajashakthi national program, the Clean Sri Lanka initiative, the anti-corruption drive with digital tracking, the digitalization of public services, land title regularization under Bimsaviya, Rebuilding Sri Lanka and a national drive against drug abuse.

Waiting for the future

A population weary of crisis yet eager for change continues to hold on to hope, although that hope is increasingly deferred. For many citizens, the promised future remains alive, but its realization appears uncertain.

Whether the government can bridge the gap between promise and delivery and between economic reform and lived reality will depend on its ability to balance fiscal discipline with social equity and to translate macroeconomic gains into tangible improvements in everyday life. The success of the post-crisis agenda ultimately hinges on whether these reforms can meaningfully impact the daily experiences of ordinary people.

Sri Lankans continue to watch and wait, observing whether the future they were promised will finally materialize or whether the past will persist in shaping their present. The trajectory of economic reform and its alignment with lived realities may well determine whether the post-aragalaya era marks genuine transformation or merely a return to familiar patterns.

For now, the question remains open: will the promised future translate into real progress, or will public frustration once again spill onto the streets in dissent against a king proudly paraded in garments no one else can see, tailored by the IMF, the Central Bank, the Ministry of Finance, CIABOC and other institutions while delivering only the past?

-This article was originally featured on groundviews.org