The just concluded presidential election in the US could very well have been the tightest ever such contest in the world’s ‘mightiest democracy’ in recent decades. With some reservations it could be said that the democratic system of government triumphed once again in the US and that the ‘popular will’ asserted itself.

It would have been preferable if the President of the US was elected only by the ‘popular vote’ or the majority of votes she or he directly polls countrywide but unfortunately this is not the case. The Electoral College (EC) system gets in the way of this happening effectively and it is gladdening to note that this issue is being addressed by the more reflective sections in the US. It is time for this question to receive the complete attention of the US’ voting public.

Hopefully, the ‘pluses’ and ‘minuses’ of the EC system would be fully examined by the US public in the days ahead. Right now, critics of the system could not be faulted for seeing it as distorting somewhat the ‘popular will’ or the overall preference of the US voting public in its choice of President.

The close contests between the contenders in what are termed the ‘Swing States’ helped highlight some notable limitations in the EC system. It ought to be plain to see that the requirement that the ‘winner takes all’ of the EC votes in these states needs urgent questioning and rectification.

However, the US and the world’s thriving democracies could take heart from the fact that there has been a legitimate transition of power in the US in the most democratic of ways possible at present for the US. Considering this it could be said that the US is continuing as a frontline, vibrant democratic state.

Not to be forgotten too is the fact that the elections to the US House of Representatives and the Senate have also been simultaneously completed on the basis of laid down legal procedures. That is, elections to all tiers of government have been concluded, testifying to the fact that the ‘democratic health’ of the US is unquestionable.

‘Democracies’ come in numerous forms and it is open to question whether a rigorous definition of the term could be given. Even some of the most authoritarian, autocratic and theocratic states prefer to call themselves ‘democracies’. At first glance, these considerations could lead to some bafflement but it could be stated that, generally, it is only those governing systems that lead to the total empowerment of people that could be considered democratic.

Defenders of and apologists for authoritarian and dictatorial regimes could shoot back on hearing the above observations that since their regimes satisfy the material needs of their populations, their states fully qualify for democratic status.

But the defenders of democracy, correctly understood, may beg to defer. The total empowerment of individuals and publics is realized only when the latter enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms, as enshrined in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, for example.

Accordingly, a regime that does not permit its people total Freedom of Speech and Thought, for instance, could in no way be seen as empowering its people. A regime that does not allow its citizenry the latter rights is repressive and undemocratic and is out of step with democratic development. In fact it is the latter process that even facilitates the material empowerment of publics.

Assessed on the basis of the above yardsticks, the US and other Western states, where fundamental freedoms are generally ‘alive and well’ could be considered democratic although absolute or perfect democracies could nowhere be found. Democracy is a process and it needs to be enriched and given greater depth, going forward. The process is long term and one which progressively evolves.

Besides the above considerations, advanced democracies are also characterized by multiple political parties that contest for power within the parameters of democratic principles. States that lack these essential attributes could not be considered democratic.

Going forward, states East and West need to be guided by the above principles because minus the multi-faceted empowerment of people, democratic development would not be possible. Seen from this viewpoint, it would be self-defeating for government leaders of the South in particular to consider opposition parties as inessential.

They need to also consider that there is no question of turning back the hands of time and reverting to strait-jacketed, one-party states of the Soviet era. These formations were thrown out by the relevant peoples themselves as incapable of ‘delivering the goods’ most needed by them.

The recent US presidential election campaign speeches were, for the most part, bereft of any substantive content. As a result, it’s difficult to predict as to the specific directions in which US foreign policy would evolve in the days ahead.

However, while a less pluralistic and ethnically accommodative US could be expected under Trump, a more inward looking foreign policy could very well be on the cards as well. A future Trump administration could see a lesser need to be committed to the Ukraine, for instance, and is likely to pursue more of an isolationist foreign policy which could see a gradual friction build-up between the US and its Western allies. Consequently, the cause of democratic development worldwide could suffer.

However, during one of her closing election addresses Presidential contender Kamala Harris left the world with a nugget of wisdom or two which would need to be treasured by policy planners and governments worldwide. She said, among other things, that one’s opponent should not necessarily be seen as one’s enemy. The latter should be spoken to in a most constructive fashion at the same table and be seen as having something essential to contribute towards nation-building.

The above is a stateswoman like pronouncement. If the international community is desirous of ushering a more peaceful world, Harris’ words would need to be dwelt on and consistently acted on. They come at a time when inhumanity internationally is more the norm rather than the exception.

All the contestants, vying for the title of Miss Universe 2024, are having an awesome time in the city of Mexico. Sri Lanka is represented by Melloney Dassanayaka and she is doing great in the scene over there, according to reports coming my way. Says Melloney: “I’m having an amazing time in Mexico City, and meeting up with these beautiful ladies is incredible.”

She went on to say that she is super grateful for her incredible roommate, Miss Universe Canada! “She’s kind, funny, caring, and a true sweetheart who made this long pageant month, away from family, so much brighter.

“With her talent as a TV host, and her amazing spirit, I couldn’t have asked for a better companion on this journey. “Huge thanks to Miss Universe @missuniverse for connecting me with all these beautiful souls!”

Plenty of smiles for the cameraman

Melloney has also come in for a lot of praise on social media, with many wishing her ‘good luck’, as well as describing her as…

* Sooo beautiful

* Awww she is cute

* So pretty. Good luck

* Wow! She deserves the crown

The beautiful ladies, in the city of Mexico, are now busy rehearsing and getting themselves fine-tuned for the grand finale, scheduled for next Saturday, 16th November.

By the way, the four top beauty pageants in the world, for women, are (1) Miss Universe, (2) Miss World, (3) Miss Earth, and (4) Miss International.

by Chandrasena Maliyadde

I have worked with all the Executive Presidents, except President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in different capacities during my tenure in the public service and even afterwards. The way they managed or rather mis-managed the economy was different from one to the other. The late President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s management style was unique, flawless and foolproof. He monitored and followed up each and every decision he made.

We used to keep notepads and pens beside our land phones. Mobile phones were not freely available at the time. The phone could ring any time after 4.00 am. The President would direct us to attend to a particular matter. By 10.00 am a second call would come from him, inquiring about progress.

With this system of monitoring and follow up he was able to establish 200 garment factories in the rural countryside, implement the first-ever government sponsored poverty alleviation programme, Janasaviya, one million Housing Programme, Gam Udawa Programme and the Rural Road Rehabilitation Programme within a period as short as four years.

The aforesaid anecdote will serve to show the importance of monitoring and follow-up.

During the past six weeks or so, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) has held meetings with all key Ministries and several other organizations and outlined his government’s plans and expectations. He gave directives related to Agriculture, Education, Power and Energy, Rural Development, Public Service, Exports, Tourism, Industry, Business and Enterprises. the President has underscored the urgency of accelerating and swift implementation of development projects. My intention is to examine how much these decisions have been followed up and translated into action. Considering the limitation of space, I decided to select one area to illustrate this i.e. the devastating flood and the havoc it brought a few days back.

On 14 Oct., the President held a meeting with officials to discuss the flood situation and the measures to be taken. The meeting was attended by the Secretaries to the President and Ministries of Finance, Defence and Disaster Management, Director General of Disaster Management Division, Disaster Management Centre National Building Research Organization and Meteorological Department and Senior Assistant Secretary of the National Disaster Relief Service Centre.

The President has emphasized, at this meeting, the need for a specific and sustainable programme to address the recurring flood situation in the country. He noted that frequent flooding requires long-term solutions for effective control.

Since then three weeks have elapsed; Rain has ceased; Flood victims are returning to their homes; No news on the emphasis on specific and sustainable programmes. Maybe it has to be reemphasized when the next disaster strikes. Until then there is no urgency.

Why is a Specific Sustainable Programme important?

Sri Lanka is a blessed island surrounded by Indian Ocean water but, is punished by water – lack of it, as well as abundance of it. “Water is a gift of nature and its management is man’s (of course woman’s as well) responsibility”.

The recent floods, landslides and the inclement weather brought havoc. Occurrence of heavy rainfall, floods and long droughts increased significantly over the recent years. Sri Lanka is being positioned among the top 10 countries at risk of extreme weather events by the Global Climate Risk Index. Floods are common and widespread among the most frequent weather-related disasters in Sri Lanka. Popular and common belief that disasters are natural is misleading.  Change of the weather is natural. But the disaster occurs when the weather changes intersects with human activities.

The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) emphasizes that human actions, such as deforestation, urbanization and inadequate infrastructure, worsen the impacts of events like floods, earthquakes and storms. Building in flood-prone areas and settling communities close to rivers and on mountain slopes increases the vulnerability to floods, transforming into a devastating disaster. Inadequate building norms, marginalisation of people and poor choices on land-use planning make natural disasters worse. Change of weather is a given but the disaster that follows can be avoided.

‘Climate Change’ has come to the top of the Agenda on international platforms. Human Activity is the Cause of Increased Greenhouse Gas Concentrations. Over the last century, burning of fossil fuels, like coal and oil (Sri Lanka is notorious for this), has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). Taken together, these miserable and sometimes deadly effects are what have come to be known as climate change. Human activity is the primary driver.

World Bank 2018, South Asia’s Hotspots: The Impact of Temperature and Precipitation Changes on Living Standards. South Asia Development Matters has estimated that 87 % of Sri Lanka’s population lives in moderate or severe hotspots for disasters. Nearly half of Sri Lanka’s population lacks disaster preparedness, a key vulnerability factor aggravated by accelerating climate risks.

All the above findings point to the fact that disasters are not free from human intervention. Then disaster management arguably requires human intervention, too. We human beings, that include the agencies responsible for disaster handling, need to prepare a specific and sustainable programme to address the recurring disasters and to minimize the damage caused by them.

It was not reported that any of the agencies present at the meeting with the President held on the 14th has commented or qualified the President’s emphasis for a specific sustainable programme. This does not mean that nothing has happened in the past or no institutional and regulatory arrangements are in place. Sri Lanka is abundant in the solutions and technologies and legal and institutional network required addressing disaster management.

The government introduced the Sri Lanka Disaster Management Act in 2005. The Act provides the legal foundation and strategic directions and proposes an institutional structure and coordination mechanism from national to local levels. A National Council for Disaster Management (NCDM), a high-level inter-ministerial body chaired by the President and a Disaster Management Centre (DMC), was established. Subsequently a separate Ministry for Disaster Management was established.

The National Disaster Management Policy 2013, National Disaster Management Plan (NDMC) 2013- 2017, and National Emergency Operation Plan (NEOP) 2017 have been developed in accordance with the SLDM Act. Several other policies and plans, such as National Climate Change Adaptation Policy and the Plan, Water Conservation policy, Local Government Policy, Flood Protection Ordinance, National Land Use Policy, National Physical Plan and Policy and several sector-specific policies also contribute to Disaster Risk Management (DRM) in the country.

Integrated Water Resources Development: The Way Forward for Sri Lanka to tackle the Climate Crisis-UNDP  04 October 2023 suggests “In moving forward, Sri Lanka requires a two-track approach. First is to invest in our infrastructure. As this requires more funding and time, in parallel, integrated water resource management should be promoted, tapping into Sri Lanka’s 4,000-year-old cascade systems.”

The question is how, when and who would prepare the programme envisaged by the President, follow it up and monitor the progress?

There is already a National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP) for 2022-2030 prepared in 2022 running into over 200 pages with 8 Chapters, 17 Annexures and 13 Figures. This plan guides all Ministries, Departments, Statutory bodies, officials of sub-national administrations (provincial Ministries and district divisional and local government); relevant officers and personnel from Governmental and UN Agencies, INGOs Non-Governmental organizations; civil-society organizations, private sector, and professional organizations in Sri Lanka.

NDMP would throw a lot of lights in preparation of the programme envisaged by the President. Only drawback is “The NDMP aims to set the 2030 strategic direction for Disaster Risk Management in the country, in line with the national development vision of the Government, “Vistas of Prosperity and Splendor”.

A senior officer once told me “Chandre, when you prepare a report don’t worry too much about the content. But, make sure you have the picture of the President or the Minister on the front cover”. Following that saner advice one can replace “Vistas of Prosperity and Splendor” with “A Rich Country-A Beautiful Life”.

There are two other plans (perhaps more) already prepared. One is the ‘National Drought Plan for Sri Lanka’ by the Ministry of Environment in September 2020; the other is the National Emergency Operation Plan (NEOP) formulated by the Disaster Management Centre in 2017.

The President has made decisions; issued directives; plans, policies, agencies, legal and administrative arrangements are in place. I believe that someone with command, clout and the will to organize an inter/multi-disciplinary/agency committee a). To peruse all relevant documents, reports and plans already in place; b). To set a time target and c). To assign the responsibilities to identified agencies/personnel. The Committee would meet from time to time and monitor the progress and provide assistance and instructions to resolve issues that arise during the implementation stage and follow up.

Sri Lanka has rich experience in such arrangements. I remember Secretaries such as Mr. Paskaralingam, Dr. Wickarma Weerasooria, who were known as super secretaries, have revived “Secretaries Committee’ to monitor the progress of directives and decisions made and follow up by resolving issues that arose in implementation. Dr. Lloyd Fernando, as the DG National Planning, facilitated and serviced the Committee. Mr. Dharmasiri Peiris a luminary in the public service, as the Secretary Ministry of Agriculture established a Committee consisting of players at both the centre and the Provincial level to ensure the Agriculture value chain is working smoothly. H. M. G. S. Palihakkara, the most illustrious Foreign Affairs Secretary, established an inter-ministerial Committee to follow up the developments in all the Ministries for the benefit of Sri Lankan Missions abroad as well as the respective Ministries.

This kind of hands-on experience and the experiments would be useful in establishing a mechanism for monitoring and follow up of directives and decisions made by the President.

Monitoring and follow-ups provide concrete evidence of outcomes.

(The writer is former Secretary to the Ministry of Plan Implementation. He can be reached on chandra.maliyadde@gmail.com)