Independence Without Completion: Remembering Sanmugam Arumugam’s Unfinished Vision
Each year on independence day, Sri Lanka celebrates political freedom and national sovereignty. Yet independence also invites a deeper question: what kind of independence did the country achieve if transformative development visions were left unfinished? The story of Sanmugam Arumugam, a pioneering irrigation engineer, offers a revealing lens through which to examine this question.
In the years following independence, Sri Lanka invested heavily in large scale irrigation and settlement schemes, most notably the Gal Oya project. Gal Oya symbolised the promise of development – harnessing water, expanding agriculture and reshaping the rural economy. It became a flagship of the post-colonial developmental imagination.
At the same time, another visionary project existed at the margins of national attention: Arumugam’s river for Jaffna plan.
The Jaffna peninsula, unlike much of the island, has no perennial rivers. It relied, and still relies, on fragile groundwater systems and erratic rainfall despite having one of the highest proportions of agricultural workers in the country. Arumugam recognised this structural vulnerability early on. His proposal sought to capture monsoon floodwaters from the mainland and convert saline lagoons such as Elephant Pass and Vadamarachchi into interconnected freshwater bodies. Had it been completed, the plan would have systematically addressed Jaffna’s chronic water scarcity, stabilised agriculture and protected groundwater from salinisation.
The failure of the Arumugam plan was not a failure of engineering. Key components were built and the technical logic of the system was sound. What failed was priority and continuity. National development planning concentrated resources, political will and institutional capacity on projects like Gal Oya while the Jaffna water scheme remained partially implemented and eventually neglected.
This raises an uncomfortable but necessary independence day reflection. Political freedom did not automatically translate into balanced or inclusive development. Some regions and visions were integrated into the national imagination of progress; others were left incomplete.
The consequences were long term. Agriculture in Jaffna remained constrained by water insecurity. Rural livelihoods were fragile and opportunities for productive employment especially for young people were limited. While infrastructure alone cannot explain later unrest, the absence of sustained development created conditions in which frustration and marginalisation could grow.
Seen from today’s perspective, Arumugam appears not merely as a historical figure but as a forward looking thinker. His approach aligns closely with contemporary principles of sustainable water management: capturing excess rainfall, reducing salinity intrusion, recharging groundwater and designing region-specific solutions rather than imposing uniform models. At a time when climate change is intensifying water stress across Sri Lanka, his ideas feel strikingly modern.
Remembering Arumugam on independence day is therefore not an exercise in nostalgia. It is a reminder that independence is incomplete when visionary development plans remain unfinished and when technical knowledge rooted in local realities is sidelined. True independence must be measured not only by sovereignty but by the ability to recognise, support and complete projects that secure long term wellbeing for all regions of the country.
As Sri Lanka confronts today’s water crises, revisiting Arumugam’s vision may yet offer lessons for a more sustainable and inclusive future.
