Tariffs ruling is major blow to Trump’s second-term agenda

Donald Trump had been warning for months that a Supreme Court decision like this would be catastrophic.

If the court curtailed his ability to impose these tariffs, he had said, it would be an “economic and national security disaster”.

A six-justice majority of the Supreme Court, in ruling against the president on Friday, didn’t care much about his concerns.

Congress, not the president, has the power to impose tariffs, the justices ruled. And nothing in the law that the president based his tariffs on, the Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, delegated such sweeping powers to Trump.

The court’s decision represents a rare check on this president’s broad use of executive authority.

A majority of the justices over the past year have shown a willingness to allow Trump to press ahead with his agenda, particularly on immigration and reshaping the federal government, even as legal challenges work their way through the court system.

This case, which was fast-tracked through the court system as an emergency, slams the door on one such expansive use of presidential authority.

With several other major cases involving controversial uses of executive power, such as efforts to end birthright citizenship and to dismiss a Federal Reserve governor based on alleged improprieties, this may not be Trump’s only setback in the coming months.

At the very least, this decision weakens Trump’s hand when trying to force other nations to make concessions to the US and tarnishes his veneer of invincibility.

Weakness begets weakness, and America’s trading partners may be emboldened to take a tougher line with the US now that the president’s tariff powers have been curtailed.

It also opens up the possibility that the Trump administration may have to give back much of the tariff revenue it collected over the past year.

While the justices left this thorny issue to be decided by a lower court, Brett Kavanaugh in his dissent warned that the process is likely to be a “mess”.

The Trump administration had plenty of time to prepare for Friday’s decision.

Supreme Court precedent, and the attitude of many of the justices when the case was argued in court last November, indicated that an adverse outcome for the president was quite possible.

Jamieson Greer, Trump’s top trade adviser, said last month that the White House has “a lot of different options” on how to proceed if the tariffs were struck down.

“The reality,” he said, “is the president is going to have tariffs as part of his trade policy going forward.”

The other options that could be at Trump’s disposal are more limited, however.

They require government agencies to produce detailed reports to justify imposing tariffs, and they have limits on their scope and duration.

Gone are the days when the president could threaten, or enact, triple-digit tariffs with the wave of a pen or the click of a Truth Social post.

A Rotterdam container ship prepares to dock at Port Miami [BBC]

New tariffs will require a longer lead-in time before they are imposed.

That could limit the kind of economic disruption that took place when the president announced his expansive “Liberation Day” tariffs last year, and would give other nations more time to prepare their responses.

If Trump wants to restore his free hand to impose new tariffs, he could always ask Congress for the kind of explicit authorisation that the Supreme Court has said is necessary. But with narrow Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and midterm elections looming, the success of such a move seems unlikely.

In fact, some of Trump’s conservative allies in Congress may be breathing somewhat easier with this decision.

The president’s tariffs – and the costs they have imposed on consumers – have been unpopular among many Americans. Republican candidates in battleground states and congressional districts would have been open to Democratic attacks for supporting Trump’s policies.

That area of vulnerability has been reduced for now.

Friday’s decision will set up an awkward moment on Tuesday, when Trump delivers his annual State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress. Traditionally, many of the Supreme Court justices sit in the front row of the chamber.

The president, after spending months issuing dire warnings against the court, could stand eye-to-eye with the justices who eroded one of the key pillars of Trump’s second-term agenda.

[BBC]

from The Island https://ift.tt/M3vQhuK

What BNP should keep in mind as it assumes power

BNP rightly deserves our congratulations for winning a decisive victory in the 13th parliamentary election. This outcome reflects an unequivocal mandate that is both politically and historically significant. Coming as it does at a critical point in Bangladesh’s democratic journey, this moment marks more than a change of government; it signals a renewed public resolve to restore democratic norms, accountability, and institutional integrity.

The election came after years of severe distrust in the electoral process, questions over legitimacy, and institutional strain, so the poll’s successful conduct has reinforced trust in the process as well as the principle that governments derive authority from the consent of the governed. For quite some time now, Bangladesh has faced deep polarisation, intolerance, and threats to its democratic foundations. Regressive and anti-democratic tendencies—whether institutional, ideological, or political—risked steering the country away from its foundational goals. BNP’s decisive victory can therefore be interpreted as a call to reverse this trajectory, and a public desire for accountable, forward-looking governance rooted in liberal democratic principles.

However, the road ahead is going to be bumpy, to put it mildly. A broad mandate alone cannot resolve deep-rooted structural problems. The BNP government will likely continue to face economic challenges and institutional constraints for the foreseeable future. This will test its capacity and sincerity not only to govern but also to transform the culture of governance in the country.

Economic reform imperatives

A key challenge will be stabilising the economy, which continues to face mounting pressures: growth has decelerated, inflation has eroded people’s purchasing power, foreign exchange reserves remain low, and public finances are tight. External debt has increased significantly in recent years, while the tax-to-GDP ratio has fallen to historically low levels. State-owned enterprises and the banking sector face persistent structural weaknesses, and confidence among both domestic and international investors remains fragile.

The new government should begin by restoring macroeconomic discipline. Containing inflation will need close coordination across ministries and agencies. Monetary policy must remain cautious and credible, free from political interference, while fiscal policy should prioritise stability rather than expand populist spending.

Tax reform is also unavoidable. The National Board of Revenue requires comprehensive modernisation, digitalisation, and total compliance. Broadening the tax base, especially by bringing all high-income groups and segments of the informal economy into the formal system, is crucial. Over time, reliance on indirect taxes such as value-added tax and import duties should be reduced, paving the way for a more progressive direct tax regime.

Banking sector reform is equally crucial. Proper asset quality reviews and regulatory oversight are necessary to rebuild confidence in the sector. Political patronage within the financial institutions must end. Without a resilient financial system, private investment cannot recover. As regards growth, the government should focus on diversifying exports beyond ready-made garments and deepening integration into regional value chains. Attracting foreign direct investment will depend on regulatory predictability and improvements in logistics and energy reliability. Ambitious growth targets must be matched by realistic implementation capacity.

Political Challenges

Distrust among political actors, partly fuelled by fears of retribution and violence, is a reality that may persist. BNP will face pressure from its supporters to act quickly in addressing perceived injustices, but good governance demands restraint. If the new government resorts to or tolerates exclusion or retaliation, it will risk perpetuating the very cycle it has condemned.

Managing internal party discipline will also be crucial, as a large parliamentary majority can sometimes lead to complacency or factional rivalry. Strong leadership will be required to maintain unity while allowing constructive internal debate. BNP must also rebuild trust with minority communities and vulnerable groups. Elections often heighten anxieties among minorities, so a credible commitment to equal citizenship is crucial. BNP’s political maturity will also be judged by how it treats or engages with its opponents. In this regard, Chairman Tarique Rahman’s visits to the residences of top opposition leaders on Sunday marked a positive gesture, one that many hope will withstand the inevitable pressures or conflicts over governance in the coming days.

Strengthening democratic institutions

A central promise of this election was to restore democracy, which must now translate into concrete institutional reforms. Judicial independence needs constant safeguarding. Which means that appointment, promotion, and case management processes should be insulated from political influence. Parliamentary oversight committees must also function effectively, and the opposition’s voice in parliament must be protected.

Electoral institutions also need reform, particularly along the lines of the July Charter. Continued credibility of the Election Commission will depend on transparency, professional management, and impartiality. Meanwhile, the civil service must be depoliticised. Appointments based on loyalty rather than merit have long undermined governance in the country. So the new administration must work on curtailing the influence of political networks to ensure a professional, impartial civil service. Media reform and digital rights also deserve careful attention. We must remember that democratic consolidation is built through institutional habits, and these habits must be established early.

Beyond winner-takes-all

Bangladesh’s politics has long been characterised by a winner-takes-all mentality. Electoral victories have often resulted in monopolisation of power, marginalising opposition voices and weakening checks and balances. If BNP is serious about democratic renewal, it must consciously break with this tradition. Inclusive policy consultations will be a good starting point. Major economic and constitutional reforms should be based on cross-party dialogue and consensus. Appointments to constitutional bodies should be transparent and consultative, and parliamentary debates should be done with the letter and spirit of the July Charter in mind.

Meeting public expectations

The scale of public expectations now is naturally immense. Citizens want economic relief, employment opportunities, necessary institutional reforms, and improved governance. Managing these expectations will be quite difficult. Many reforms will not yield immediate results, and some may impose short-term costs. So, it is imperative to ensure transparent communication about the associated timelines, trade-offs, and fiscal constraints.

Anti-corruption efforts must be credible and monitored at all times. Measures are needed to strengthen oversight institutions, improve transparency in public procurement, and expand digital service delivery to reduce opportunities for rent-seeking. Governance reform should be systematic, not selective or politically driven. Tangible improvements are urgently needed in public service delivery, particularly in health, education, social protection, and local government.

Finally, a word of caution: BNP’s decisive victory presents both opportunities and risks. It can enable bold reforms but it also carries the danger of overreach. The key deciding factor here is political judgment. The question is, can our leaders deliver based on the mandate voters have given them? (The Daily Star)

Dr Fahmida Khatun is an economist and executive director at the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD). Views expressed in the article are the author’s own.

Views expressed in this article are the author’s own.

by Fahmida Khatun

from The Island https://ift.tt/fuC4GXN

Zadran, Nabi star as Afghanistan bow out with a big win

Having reached the semifinals of the previous edition, Afghanistan will have harboured loftier ambitions, and a group stage exit from the 2026 T20 World Cup will undoubtedly sting. There is some consolation, however: Jonathan Trott ends his tenure as Afghanistan coach with two wins on the bounce, an 82-run demolition of Canada at the M.A. Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai rounding out a campaign that will ultimately be defined by the ‘what ifs’ of that afternoon in Ahmedabad against South Africa.

Against Canada, though, Afghanistan were ruthlessly professional. The man who set the tone was Ibrahim Zadran, who stroked an unbeaten 95 to simultaneously hold the highest individual score by an Afghan batter across all three ICC white-ball tournaments viz. the ODI World Cup, the Champions Trophy, and now the T20 World Cup. His blazing 56-ball knock powered Afghanistan to 200/4 – their highest total in T20 World Cup history – a score that always seemed beyond Canada’s reach before it was rubber-stamped by Mohammad Nabi’s 4 for 7 in what might just be the veteran 41-year-old’s last game in this competition.

Canada asked their opposition to take first strike and themselves took until the final over of the PowerPlay to strike. Rahmanullah Gurbaz was dropped at the wicket by Shreyas Movva off Dilon Heyliger’s bowling in the second over. Gurbaz punished the reprieve, racing to 30 off 20 balls before Jaskaran Singh had him slashing to deep point in the sixth over. Three balls later, Gulbadin Naib was trapped in front and Jaskaran had the on-field not-out decision overturned on review, and Afghanistan were suddenly 49 for 2.

Zadran held firm. He found an ideal foil in Sediqullah Atal, and the pair put on 95 runs for the third wicket, a partnership that steadily, then emphatically, wrested control. Atal was busy and inventive, playing his shots freely on both sides of the wicket, before being caught at long-on off Jaskaran for 44 (32). By then, Afghanistan were 144 for 3 with five overs remaining and Zadran fully into his stride. Azmatullah Omarzai contributed a breezy 13 off 7 before holing out to long-on, but it mattered little as Afghanistan plundered 69 off the final five overs, crossing 200 off the last ball with Zadran stranded agonisingly five runs short of a deserved century. In all, he found the ropes seven times and cleared it five times.

The chase never threatened to be competitive. Mujeeb Ur Rahman struck in the second over, rocking Dilpreet Bajwa’s leg stump for 13 after the Canadian captain had launched two early sixes, and the game was effectively settled when Azmatullah Omarzai had the veteran Navneet Dhaliwal caught at backward point for a duck in the fourth over. Dhaliwal, 37 years old and playing his final international innings, had received a guard of honour alongside Ravinderpal Singh before the match. A warm embrace from Rashid Khan at the boundary as he walked off was a fitting send-off for Canada’s leading T20I run-scorer.

Yuvraj Samra, who had dazzled with a century against New Zealand at this very ground two nights ago, managed only 17 before Nabi got one to turn sharply and find a leading edge to point. Nabi produced a vintage spell that included Kirton skying to long-on, Harsh Thaker top-edging a sweep to short fine leg after a dogged 30, and Heyliger perishing in the deep.

Nabi could have had a fifth, too, but Gurbaz shelled a catch even with no other fielder challenging for it, as had been the case when Gurbaz and Abdullah Ahmadzai nearly ran into each other for Heyliger’s catch. Rashid Khan took care of Movva and Bin Zafar, the latter bowled through the gate attempting an airy mow. Canada finished at 118 for 8 in a just reflection of the chasm between the two sides.

Brief scores:
Afghanistan 200/4 in 20 overs (Rahmanulah Gurbaz 30, Ibrahim Zadran 95*,  Sediqullah Atal 44, Azmatullah Omarzai 13;  Dillon Heyliger 1-41,Jaskaran Singh 3-52) beat Canada 118/8 in 20 overs (Yuraj Sharma 17, Dilpreet Bajwa 13, Harsh Thaker 30, Nicholas Kirton 10, Saad Bin Zafar 28; Mujeeb Ur Rahman 1-23, Azmatullah Omarzai 1-18, Mohammad Nabi 4-07, Rashid Khan 2-19) by 82 runs.

[Cricbuzz]

from The Island https://ift.tt/GwD1u5n

Gateway to host 24th International Schools’ Athletics Championship

Gateway College, a pioneer in international school education in Sri Lanka, is set to host the prestigious International Schools’ Athletics Championship (ISAC 2026) at the Mahinda Rajapaksa International Stadium Diyagama over the weekend.

First held in 2001, ISAC has evolved into the flagship sporting event on the international schools’ calendar, showcasing the athletic excellence of students from 22 leading international schools across the country.

Founded by the late R. I. T. Alles, ISAC has played a pivotal role in advancing competitive sport among international schools, leaving behind an enduring legacy that has contributed significantly to the development of athletics in Sri Lanka.

The championship is expected to attract approximately 1,554 athletes and 300 technical officials, representing the participating schools. With an anticipated audience exceeding 15,000 students, parents and alumni, ISAC 2026 promises to be a vibrant celebration of athleticism, sportsmanship and camaraderie.

Commenting on the event’s national significance Ramantha Alles, Director of Gateway Group, stated, “ISAC has become an important platform for nurturing talented athletes and showcasing junior athletes of international repute. The standard of athletics among international schools has steadily progressed, with several athletes advancing to national and international levels, contributing to high-quality competition.”

Expressing his appreciation for their generous support, Dr. Harsha Alles, Chairman of the Gateway Group, stated, “It is heartening to see Pearson Edexcel as the Principal Sponsor, actively contributing to the holistic development of pupils, Home Lands as the Platinum Sponsor, extending its support to schools and Education and AVI as the Sportswear Partner, playing a valuable role in promoting sportswear and strengthening school sport.”

The event is further supported by Sense Rehabilitation and Sports Hospital as the Official Healthcare Partner, The Papare.com as the Official Broadcasting Partner, Yeti as the Official Hydration Partner and Dinemore Go as the Official Medal Sponsor.

ISAC 2026 will be conducted in accordance with TISSL rules and regulations and the International Athletics Federation Competition Rules. All athletes will compete using a common identity card issued by TISSL, the association representing member international schools.

Participating TISSL member schools for ISAC 2026 include: Asian International School, Belvoir College International, The British School in Colombo, Burhani Serendib School, Colombo International School, Colombo. Colombo International School, Kandy, Elizabeth Moir School, Gateway College, Colombo, Gateway College, Kandy, Horizon College International, Ilma International Girls School, Leeds International School, Panadura, Lyceum International School, Nugegoda, Lyceum International School, Panadura, Lyceum International School, Ratnapura, Lyceum International School, Wattala, OKI International School, Royal Institute, Stafford International School, St. Nicholas International School, Wycherley International School, Colombo, Wycherley International School, Gampaha.

from The Island https://ift.tt/7ERiKJ0

Afghanistan eye morale-boosting win to end campaign

Following up on their highs of 2024 was always going to be difficult for Afghanistan. Paired with South Africa and New Zealand, Afghanistan always knew that they had to win at least one of those games to stay in the reckoning for a place in the Super Eights. Unfortunately, they were up against it right from the start as those two were also their initial opponents in the tournament.

Losing both those matches hurt their chances big time and they had to rely on an upset from Canada to keep them in contention. While Canada briefly threatened, that pressure with their lack of experience was never going to sustain against New Zealand who sealed their spot, leaving this final clash of Group D inconsequential.

The inability of the Afghanistan spin attack to pose more questions to the opposition batting lineup was something that stood out in the two defeats, especially given that Afghanistan have only played day games so far. Mujeeb Ur Rahman had a good outing against New Zealand and Rashid Khan was excellent against South Africa. But Noor Ahmad has had a poor tournament and Mohammad Nabi has been relegated to a very restricted role with both bat and ball – throwing doubts over his future in the national side given his age. At certain moments, Afghanistan looked like they might fall short against UAE as well before Azmatullah Omarzai bailed them out.

On Thursday (February 19), they will be up against a team that finally fared well with the bat against New Zealand, although that was largely thanks to a one-man show from Yuvraj Samra. Canada will have their task cut out yet again against a side that will be desperate to finish their campaign on a high note.

Canada’s bowling attack will once again be under the scanner after they put up an erratic display against New Zealand, squandering the early advantage. While there are question marks over Nabi’s future, Canada’s Navneet Dhaliwal has already confirmed that this would be his final fixture in international cricket.

The pitches have been pretty good to bat on at Chepauk this time. While teams generally prefer to chase in evening games, it’s worth remembering that dew didn’t have an effect in the USA-Netherlands fixture last week.

Ziaur Rahman Sharifi was handed an opportunity in the last game but failed to impress. Afghanistan could contemplate giving Abdullah Ahmadzai a game in this dead rubber.

With nothing to play for, Canada might opt to give some fringe players a go, especially in the bowling department.

Afghanistan Probable XI – Rahmanullah Gurbaz (wk), Ibrahim Zadran, Gulbadin Naib, Sediqullah Atal, Darwish Rasooli, Azmatullah Omarzai, Mohammad Nabi, Rashid Khan (c), Mujeeb Ur Rahman, Noor Ahmad, Abdullah Ahmadzai

Canada Probable XI –Yuvraj Samra, Dilpreet Bajwa (c), Navneet Dhaliwal, Harsh Thaker, Nicholas Kirton, Shreyas Movva (wk), Saad Bin Zafar, Shivam Sharma, Dilon Heyliger, Jaskaran Singh, Ansh Patel

[Cricbuzz]

from The Island https://ift.tt/UtRYwX9

Nepal end 12-year wait as Airee sinks Scotland

Nepal ended a 12-year wait for a third T20 World Cup win, concluding their 2026 campaign with a riotously received victory over Scotland in Mumbai. Sompal Kami, the only man still around from their maiden appearance at the 2014 World T20, provided the inspiration with the ball before Dipendra Singh Airee skewered a valiant Scotland performance with an unbeaten 50 off 23 to seal a high-octane chase.

Not for nothing are Nepal known as the “Cardiac Kids”, and this game – on which nothing was riding other than national pride and bragging rights – swung heart-stoppingly from side to side throughout. Scotland made the early running with an opening stand of 80,  Michael Jones in regal touch, but stumbled through the second half of the innings as Kami’s double-wicket intervention sparked a slow-motion collapse.

In reply, Nepal’s openers provided similar platform before they slipped from 74 for 0 to 98 for 3 on the back of  Michael Leask’s three-for, to the dismay of another heavily Nepal-supporting crowd at the Wankhede. At the end of the 14th over, they needed 71 from 36 balls.

Enter Airee, the dynamic allrounder and one of the totems of Nepal’s recent successes. He struck four fours and three sixes alongside plenty of hard running – he only faced two dot balls – as the unbeaten fourth-wicket partnership with Gulsan Jha finally broke Scotland’s resolve. Jha finished unbeaten on 24 from 17 and hit the winning runs, as Nepal gained a measure of absolution for near-misses against Bangladesh, South Africa and England over the last two World Cups.

Despite a stuttering finish with the bat, Scotland’s defence started well, conceding just one boundary – a muscled six over midwicket from Kushal Bhurtel – in the first 23 balls. Brad Currie put down a tough caught-and-bowled chance off Bhurtel and Brad Wheal thought he had the opener edging behind, only for a review to confirm that the ball had flicked the leg bail (which didn’t move) on its way through.

Aasif Sheikh then hoisted Wheal for the second six of the innings, and that was the trigger for Bhurtel to pile into Mark Watt, as Scotland’s most-experienced spinner endured another off night. With Watt trying to fire the ball into the pads, Bhurtel took him for 4-6-6 – swept, slog-swept and pounded over long-on – to the shorter boundary. A top-edged sweep from Aasif also had enough to clear the man at deep backward square leg, as 23 runs came off the over. Nepal rode the momentum to finish the powerplay on top, 56 without loss.

Oliver Davidson helped rein in the scoring with two overs that cost just nine, but it was the introduction of Leask, the 35-year-old veteran of five T20 World Cups, that brought Scotland back into the contest. His first ball broke the opening stand, as Bhurtel scuffed a top edge to midwicket where Tom Bruce took a good running catch.

Michael Leask made the crucial breakthroughs [Cricinfo]

Leask’s vein-popping roar of celebration was on show again in his second over, as Aasif skied to point, and he then bagged Nepal’s captain, Rohit Paudel, off another top-edged sweep to send doubt rippling through the support in the stands. Leask had figures of 3 for 10 from three overs and seemed to be single-handedly turning the game again. Nepal were 100 for 3, with the asking rate up to almost 12 an over.

Jha hit the first boundary of the partnership, clubbing Davidson’s final ball over long-on, then Airee took down the previously indomitable Leask. The first two balls of the 16th over were clobbered for six – making it three in a row overall – and Airee then found the gap at wide long-on to make it 20 from the over and reignite the passionate Nepali following. Currie was drilled through cover and slashed to third and then, after Wheal had conceded three runs from the first four balls of the 18th – making the requirement 25 off 14 – Airee went six and four to swing the pendulum once again. When Jha launched the next ball, from Currie, for six over extra cover, it was nine from 11 and the crowd officially had licence to go bananas. So they did.

Having inserted Scotland on a patchy, used surface, Paudel would have been hoping for his spinners to finally have an impact. But there was little assistance in the opening exchanges, and while George Munsey was the first to find the boundary, it was Jones who set the tempo at the top for Scotland.

A driven four was followed by six launched over long-off in the third over, with Nandan Yadav then picked off for back-to-back fours. Two more off-side boundaries followed in Kami’s second over and when Munsey muscled Airee down the ground Scotland had raised their 50 from just 32 balls.

They were 52 without loss at the end of the powerplay and the openers pressed on, despite Munsey’s struggle for timing. Sandeep Lamichhane’s difficult tournament continued when Jones cracked his first ball for six, but Paudel finally got the job done himself, tempting Munsey into a toe-ended swipe down to long-off for a much-needed breakthrough.

Sompal Kami meditates in celebration after dismissing Tom Bruce [Cricinfo]

Jones was involved in another sprightly fifty stand alongside Brandon McMullen, who smashed his fifth ball, from Lamichhane, for six as Scotland looked to press home their good start. After 15 overs, they were 131 for 1 with two established batters at the crease. By the end of the 16th, the score was 134 for 3, with both Jones and McMullen back in the hutch.

Kami was the spark Nepal so desperately needed. First he deceived Jones with a perfectly executed knuckleball that dipped and deceived the batter in flight to peg back leg stump; two balls later he had removed McMullen with an outrageous reaction grab in his follow through, another slower ball inducing a leading edge that he plucked one-handed above his head. A third wicket came in his final over, Bruce flummoxed by a back-of-the-hander. Kami’s Buddha pose in celebration made him the calm amidst the storm of Nepal’s fightback.

With Nandan also finishing well to claim 2 for 34, it meant Scotland had lost 6 for 30 in the space of 27 balls. Watt defiantly smacked the last delivery for six but they couldn’t compete with Nepal’s surge.

Brief scores:
Nepal 171 for 3 in 19.2 overs  (Dipendra Singh Airee 50*, Kushal Bhurtel 43, Aasif Sheikh 33, Rohit Paudel 16, Ghulsan Jar 24*; Michael  Leask 3-30) beat Scotland 170 for 7 in 20 overs (George Munsey 27, Michael Jones 71,Bramdon McMullen 25, Richie Berrington 10, Mark Watt 10*; Sompal  Kami 3-25, Nandan Yadav 2-34, Rohit Paudel 1-12. Kushal Nhurtel 1-37) by seven wickets

[Cricinfo]

from The Island https://ift.tt/sSOEe3C

Unpacking public responses to educational reforms

As the debate on educational reforms rages, I find it useful to pay as much attention to the reactions they have excited as we do to the content of the reforms. Such reactions are a reflection of how education is understood in our society, and this understanding – along with the priorities it gives rise to – must necessarily be taken into account in education policy, including and especially reform. My aim in this piece, however, is to couple this public engagement with critical reflection on the historical-structural realities that structure our possibilities in the global market, and briefly discuss the role of academics in this endeavour.

Two broad reactions

The reactions to the proposed reforms can be broadly categorised into ‘pro’ and ‘anti’. I will discuss the latter first. Most of the backlash against the reforms seems to be directed at the issue of a gay dating site, accidentally being linked to the Grade 6 English module. While the importance of rigour cannot be overstated in such a process, the sheer volume of the energies concentrated on this is also indicative of how hopelessly homophobic our society is, especially its educators, including those in trade unions. These dispositions are a crucial part of the reason why educational reforms are needed in the first place. If only there was a fraction of the interest in ‘keeping up with the rest of the world’ in terms of IT, skills, and so on, in this area as well!

Then there is the opposition mounted by teachers’ trade unions and others about the process of the reforms not being very democratic, which I (and many others in higher education, as evidenced by a recent statement, available at https://ift.tt/Rd8fOpL ) fully agree with. But I earnestly hope the conversation is not usurped by those wanting to promote heteronormativity, further entrenching bigotry only education itself can save us from. With this important qualification, I, too, believe the government should open up the reform process to the public, rather than just ‘informing’ them of it.

It is unclear both as to why the process had to be behind closed doors, as well as why the government seems to be in a hurry to push the reforms through. Considering other recent developments, like the continued extension of emergency rule, tabling of the Protection of the State from Terrorism Act (PSTA), and proposing a new Authority for the protection of the Central Highlands (as is famously known, Authorities directly come under the Executive, and, therefore, further strengthen the Presidency; a reasonable question would be as to why the existing apparatus cannot be strengthened for this purpose), this appears especially suspect.

Further, according to the Secretary to the MOE Nalaka Kaluwewa: “The full framework for the [education] reforms was already in place [when the Dissanayake government took office]” (https://ift.tt/qioWQyj, citing The Morning, July 29). Given the ideological inclinations of the former Wickremesinghe government and the IMF negotiations taking place at the time, the continuation of education reforms, initiated in such a context with very little modification, leaves little doubt as to their intent: to facilitate the churning out of cheap labour for the global market (with very little cushioning from external shocks and reproducing global inequalities), while raising enough revenue in the process to service debt.

This process privileges STEM subjects, which are “considered to contribute to higher levels of ‘employability’ among their graduates … With their emphasis on transferable skills and demonstrable competency levels, STEM subjects provide tools that are well suited for the abstraction of labour required by capitalism, particularly at the global level where comparability across a wide array of labour markets matters more than ever before” (my own previous piece in this column on 29 October 2024). Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) subjects are deprioritised as a result. However, the wisdom of an education policy that is solely focused on responding to the global market has been questioned in this column and elsewhere, both because the global market has no reason to prioritise our needs as well as because such an orientation comes at the cost of a strategy for improving the conditions within Sri Lanka, in all sectors. This is why we need a more emancipatory vision for education geared towards building a fairer society domestically where the fruits of prosperity are enjoyed by all.

The second broad reaction to the reforms is to earnestly embrace them. The reasons behind this need to be taken seriously, although it echoes the mantra of the global market. According to one parent participating in a protest against the halting of the reform process: “The world is moving forward with new inventions and technology, but here in Sri Lanka, our children are still burdened with outdated methods. Opposition politicians send their children to international schools or abroad, while ours depend on free education. Stopping these reforms is the lowest act I’ve seen as a mother” (https://ift.tt/XW1jPFZ). While it is worth mentioning that it is not only the opposition, nor in fact only politicians, who send their children to international schools and abroad, the point holds. Updating the curriculum to reflect the changing needs of a society will invariably strengthen the case for free education. However, as mentioned before, if not combined with a vision for harnessing education’s emancipatory potential for the country, such a move would simply translate into one of integrating Sri Lanka to the world market to produce cheap labour for the colonial and neocolonial masters.

According to another parent in a similar protest: “Our children were excited about lighter schoolbags and a better future. Now they are left in despair” (https://ift.tt/XW1jPFZ). Again, a valid concern, but one that seems to be completely buying into the rhetoric of the government. As many pieces in this column have already shown, even though the structure of assessments will shift from exam-heavy to more interim forms of assessment (which is very welcome), the number of modules/subjects will actually increase, pushing a greater, not lesser, workload on students.

A file photo of a satyagraha against education reforms

What kind of education?

The ‘pro’ reactions outlined above stem from valid concerns, and, therefore, need to be taken seriously. Relatedly, we have to keep in mind that opening the process up to public engagement will not necessarily result in some of the outcomes, those particularly in the HSS academic community, would like to see, such as increasing the HSS component in the syllabus, changing weightages assigned to such subjects, reintroducing them to the basket of mandatory subjects, etc., because of the increasing traction of STEM subjects as a surer way to lock in a good future income.

Academics do have a role to play here, though: 1) actively engage with various groups of people to understand their rationales behind supporting or opposing the reforms; 2) reflect on how such preferences are constituted, and what they in turn contribute towards constituting (including the global and local patterns of accumulation and structures of oppression they perpetuate); 3) bring these reflections back into further conversations, enabling a mutually conditioning exchange; 4) collectively work out a plan for reforming education based on the above, preferably in an arrangement that directly informs policy. A reform process informed by such a dialectical exchange, and a system of education based on the results of these reflections, will have greater substantive value while also responding to the changing times.

Two important prerequisites for this kind of endeavour to succeed are that first, academics participate, irrespective of whether they publicly endorsed this government or not, and second, that the government responds with humility and accountability, without denial and shifting the blame on to individuals. While we cannot help the second, we can start with the first.

Conclusion

For a government that came into power riding the wave of ‘system change’, it is perhaps more important than for any other government that these reforms are done for the right reasons, not to mention following the right methods (of consultation and deliberation). For instance, developing soft skills or incorporating vocational education to the curriculum could be done either in a way that reproduces Sri Lanka’s marginality in the global economic order (which is ‘system preservation’), or lays the groundwork to develop a workforce first and foremost for the country, limited as this approach may be. An inextricable concern is what is denoted by ‘the country’ here: a few affluent groups, a majority ethno-religious category, or everyone living here? How we define ‘the country’ will centrally influence how education policy (among others) will be formulated, just as much as the quality of education influences how we – students, teachers, parents, policymakers, bureaucrats, ‘experts’ – think about such categories. That is precisely why more thought should go to education policymaking than perhaps any other sector.

(Hasini Lecamwasam is attached to the Department of Political Science, University of Peradeniya).

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies.

from The Island https://ift.tt/uzMnCBg