COLOMBO, Sri Lanka — Transport Minister Bimal Rathnayake said Wednesday that Sri Lanka would not pursue development projects that failed to benefit ordinary people, remarks likely to renew scrutiny of the government’s approach to two Indian-backed gateways in the Tamil-majority north: Jaffna International Airport at Palaly and Kankesanthurai Port.
“Economic development projects must be connected to the everyday lives of the people,” Mr. Rathnayake said. “We will not pursue development projects that do not benefit the people.”
He made the remarks at a ceremony in Colombo where Japan handed over seven low-floor buses for Sri Lanka’s public transport system.
Mr. Rathnayake did not mention Palaly or Kankesanthurai on Wednesday. But his comments closely echoed an argument he made in Jaffna last week when questioned about why development of the airport and port had not advanced despite Indian financial assistance.
“As a government, we are concerned about development,” he said then. “But it is the government that will decide what development should be undertaken and where.”
Mr. Rathnayake cited Mattala Rajapaksa International Airport as a warning against poorly planned infrastructure that leaves the state carrying losses.
“Our government will not undertake development that results in such losses,” he said. “Regardless of who provides the funding for development, the final decision will be taken by the government.”
The comparison has drawn criticism in the north.
Unlike Mattala, which was built from scratch for about $248 million around passenger projections that never materialized, Palaly and Kankesanthurai are longstanding gateways with established links to southern India.
Palaly dates to the Second World War and already handles scheduled flights between Jaffna and Chennai. Kankesanthurai has operated as a commercial port since 1950, lies about 56 nautical miles from India and already supports a passenger connection with Nagapattinam.
Their development could allow more passengers and goods to reach northern Sri Lanka directly from India instead of passing through Colombo, reducing travel time and transportation costs and potentially weakening the north’s economic dependence on the capital.
The financing of Kankesanthurai also complicates concerns about the financial burden on Sri Lanka. India initially offered a $45.27 million line of credit, but after costs increased, New Delhi agreed in 2024 to convert the project into a grant of roughly $65 million.
Mr. Rathnayake said last week that Indian assistance for Palaly would not cover the entire proposed development and that Sri Lanka would have to find or borrow the balance.
Critics have accused Mr. Rathnayake, who is also the governing National People’s Power’s chief coordinator for the Northern Province, of obstructing the two projects. A Jaffna-based economist previously told Jaffna Monitor that developing them would give the north direct economic links with India instead of requiring commerce to pass through Colombo.
Mr. Rathnayake has rejected development driven simply by the availability of foreign financing, arguing that the government must determine whether projects make economic sense.
But he has not publicly presented an economic assessment showing that Palaly or Kankesanthurai would impose losses comparable to Mattala, nor has the government announced a timetable for their full development.
Wednesday’s remarks sharpen that unanswered question: if development must demonstrably benefit ordinary people, on what basis do two existing gateways connecting northern Sri Lanka with a major market just across the Palk Strait fail that test?
