On September 21, Sri Lanka marked a transformative moment in its political history by electing Anura Kumara Dissanayake as president. Dissanayake, the leader of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, secured 55% of the vote, signaling not just a victory for his Marxist-leaning party but also a crucial win for democracy in a country long troubled by authoritarian leaders, corruption and economic crises.

As Bangladesh confronts its own political challenges, Sri Lanka’s recent electoral shift offers lessons that could guide it toward a more inclusive and robust democracy.

Sri Lanka’s 2024 election was a clear rejection of entrenched political elites. Dissanayake’s victory marks the first time in decades that a leader without connections to the country’s political dynasties has risen to power. His opponents, Ranil Wickremesinghe and Sajith Premadasa, both came from families with deep roots in Sri Lanka’s political system. But the voters – especially the youth – opted for a candidate who promised real change, accountability and an end to the corruption that had plagued previous administrations.

The parallels to Bangladesh are striking. For years, its political landscape has been dominated by the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, fostering an environment of patronage, nepotism, and stagnation. Much like Sri Lankans, Bangladeshis are growing weary of the political status quo. With elections to potentially be held in the next year or two, Bangladesh has an opportunity to follow Sri Lanka’s example by supporting leaders focused on governance and public welfare over divisive, partisan politics of the past. A departure from the entrenched rivalries could inject fresh life into the country’s political system.

In 2022, Sri Lanka’s economic crisis pushed the nation to the brink of collapse, with skyrocketing inflation and severe shortages of essentials like food and fuel. This economic meltdown sparked widespread protests, ultimately leading to the ouster of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and paving the way for Dissanayake’s election. His campaign was built on addressing the deep economic grievances of the people and offering sustainable solutions to systemic issues.

Bangladesh, despite periods of impressive economic growth, faces its own challenges, including inflation, rising inequality, and corruption in key sectors. The lesson from Sri Lanka is clear: economic mismanagement can rapidly lead to political unrest, but it can also create opportunities for transformative leaders to emerge. Bangladesh’s leaders must prioritise meaningful economic reforms that tackle inequality and benefit the broader population, rather than relying on short-term political tactics.

Mobilising youth

A key driver of Sri Lanka’s political transformation was the mobilisation of its youth. Young voters were instrumental in Dissanayake’s victory, rallying behind his message of change and accountability. Faced with corruption and economic stagnation, many young Sri Lankans saw him as a beacon of hope.

Bangladesh, with its large, politically active youth population, is in a similar position. Many young Bangladeshis feel alienated from the political process and frustrated by a lack of opportunities and representation. Though some student leaders have been included in the interim government, the political establishment must engage more meaningfully with the youth. By addressing their concerns – ranging from unemployment to corruption – Bangladesh could tap into the potential of its younger generation, driving a wave of political renewal similar to Sri Lanka’s.

Sri Lanka’s political protests, known as the Aragalaya or the Struggle, were notable not only for their size but for their largely peaceful nature. Despite the economic crisis, law enforcement officials largely refrained from heavy-handed responses and the military did not intervene. These protests eventually led to President Rajapaksa’s resignation and a peaceful transfer of power – a rarity in the region.

In contrast, Bangladesh has a more violent history when it comes to political protests, often marked by clashes between government forces and the opposition. Law enforcement authorities have been criticised for using excessive force, and the politicisation of the judiciary has further eroded public trust in democratic institutions. Sri Lanka’s experience shows that peaceful protests, coupled with respect for democratic norms, can lead to meaningful change. Bangladesh must foster a culture of peaceful protest and ensure that its institutions remain neutral, even in times of political crisis.

One of Dissanayake’s major challenges as president will be managing Sri Lanka’s complex ethnic and religious divisions, particularly between the Sinhalese majority and Tamil minority. His ability to form an inclusive government that represents all Sri Lankans will be crucial for lasting peace and democratic stability.

His Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, traditionally known for its Sinhala-Buddhist nationalist politics, has undergone a significant transformation under his leadership and its because of its participation with 20 other parties in the National People’s Power alliance. Originally a Marxist movement with majoritarian tendencies, the JVP has shifted its focus from ethnic nationalism to a broader, more inclusive platform centered on socio-economic issues.

It now positions itself as a progressive force advocating against economic inequality, corruption, and the sale of national assets. The party’s current stance recognises the geopolitical reality of India as a key regional player, a departure from its earlier anti-India rhetoric. This transformation reflects a move toward pragmatic politics in the context of Sri Lanka’s evolving political and economic landscape.

The election in Sri Lanka highlighted a deep electoral divide, with Southern Sinhala-Buddhists supporting Dissanayake, while the Northern and Eastern Tamil and Muslim populations, along with Upcountry Tamils, largely rejected the JVP. This rejection is rooted in the JVP’s stance on maintaining Sri Lanka’s unitary state and viewing the ethnic conflict as terrorism rather than a struggle for rights.

The JVP’s historical opposition to the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord in 1987 and support for military action against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam further alienated Sri Lanka’s Tamil and Muslim communities. To gain their trust, the JVP must move beyond its left ideology and address the grievances of these populations.

Bangladesh, too, faces challenges regarding inclusivity, especially concerning its religious and ethnic minorities. Periodic outbreaks of communal violence and discrimination have marred its political landscape. For Bangladesh to progress, it must build an inclusive political culture where diversity is embraced. Ensuring that all communities feel represented and protected is key to fostering a resilient and vibrant democracy.

Both Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are important geopolitical players in South Asia, navigating relationships with powerful neighbors like India and China. By learning from each other’s experiences, both nations can strike a balance that serves their national interests while fostering regional stability. Sri Lanka could take notes from Bangladesh’s successful management of economic ties with China while maintaining security cooperation with India, and Bangladesh could learn from Sri Lanka’s peaceful political transitions to avoid destabilising its alliances.

As Bangladesh faces its own crossroads, Sri Lanka’s journey offers a roadmap for harnessing democratic renewal and securing a brighter future for all.

Ashok Swain is a professor of peace and conflict research at Uppsala University, Sweden.