Connect with us

Opinion

Suicidal government, divided opposition, distorted Aragalaya

Published

on

BY DR. DAYAN JAYATILLEKA

If pressure is manifestly building up in a boiler and the safety valves stay shut, then an explosion is inevitable. The ruling party or should I say ruling party+1, the plus being Prime Minister Wickremesinghe are keeping the safety valves shut. A Cabinet reshuffle with a sprinkling of SLFP and SJB defectors does nothing to outrun the coming explosion.The ruling party had the chance of a confidence-building measure aimed at a consensual dynamic in Parliament. It could have made the gesture of voting for Rohini Wijeratne Kaviratne as Deputy Speaker. It did not. By rejecting that option, it enhanced the rhetoric of confrontation in Parliament.

RANIL RAJAPAKSA?

The ruling party may well continue on this path, on an issue that is far more crucial, and that is the 21st Amendment. That amendment is the very last chance to show that anything positive and accommodating of the Aragalaya demands, can come from this Parliament. It is perfectly alright for the SLPP to enter negotiations with all other parties over the text of the draft resolution but those negotiations must have a tight deadline, because a clock is ticking outside. The SLPP must not be or be seen as the deal-breaker. It must agree to whatever all the others agree to.

The new Prime Minister, who is also the very old Prime Minister, not only in age but also because it is his sixth go round in the post, is compounding the problem. In the first place, it was a wrong choice. If Gota didn’t want to appoint the Opposition Leader because the latter had attached too stiff a price tag, the next best choice when facing a YOUTH REVOLT, would have been his own party colleague Dullas Alahapperuma, who shares in part the same ideological formation as the young rebels or rather the parties that back them.Not only was Ranil the wrong choice, Ranil has or Gota-Ranil have yet to do the right thing. What is that right thing?

The deep and deepening Sri Lankan economic crisis requires the very best brains we can muster, just as a complex surgery would require the finest surgeons handling it. What and where is our A-team which is handling the economic crisis and also negotiating with the world system? Dr Nandalal Weerasinghe is definitely a huge plus, but where are Dr Nishan de Mel, Dr Dushni Weerakoon, Dr Deshal de Mel and of course Prof Howard Nicholas (who has worked with the Vietnamese government)? These stellar talents have to be on the frontlines of the economic war, not in some backroom advisory group.

OPPOSITION OBSTACLES

Now to the Opposition. I think that Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa should have responded faster to President Gotabaya’s last speech, which provided an opening. The speech was in the evening, the reply, even the same reply should have gone in early next morning. Timing is essential in politics. The response should also have been somewhat more nuanced than it was. The stress should have been on the President’s remarks on the 19th Amendment. That should have been nailed down. The exit issue should have been flagged but worded more diplomatically; not quite so ‘in your face’. The approach should have been what the Cold Warriors used to call Soviet ‘salami tactics’, i.e., a slice-by-slice incremental approach to taking power and displacing the existing governmental leader.

Today, the most glaring lapse of the Opposition is its divided character. The main Opposition is too heavily tilted towards one side of the Opposition spectrum, i.e., the TNA, and too far away from the centrist group with the larger numbers; the SLFP-led 11-party bloc of roughly 40 MPs. The main Opposition party should be more even-handed and equidistant in the opposition space if it is to get the arithmetic right. if not it will have to inhabit a liberal enclave, with the JVP-NPP growing on the ground, outside Parliament, and posing a serious electoral challenge.In the face of galloping quasi-anarchic radicalization, no Opposition formation can make it alone. It is only—I repeat, only—a progressive centrist re-groupment; a new Center-Left, that can rebalance the democratic system and save it. That means the SJB plus the SLFP; Sajith Premadasa plus Maithripala Sirisena. Nothing else would be sufficiently broad-based.

The chance is coming up with the 21st Amendment. The SLFP is not for outright abolition of the Executive Presidency. The SJB has recently converted to abolition. Either the latter can remain politically fundamentalist and lose the vote, or it can arrive at an agreement with the SLFP and secure a solid vote for abolition of the 20th Amendment and its replacement by a version of the 19th. In my personal view as a political scientist and ex-diplomat (rather than a lawyer, accountant or banker), the most responsible and correct view on the Executive Presidency is held by the SLFP, the 11-party bloc it leads, the 43 Group of Patali Champika Ranawaka, and Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka the chairman of the SJB.

ARAGALAYA ADVENTURISM

Finally, for the Aragalaya. Before the Aragalaya and even before Mirihana or the candlelight vigils on the sidewalks, there was the peasant unrest. The peasantry got it right, when it said “never since 1948 has there been a leader like Gotabaya who devastated us like this”. Some said it had happened earlier under the British, others demurred, saying not even under the British.The candle-light vigils, the Mirihana demonstration and the Aragalaya all got it right: Gota Go Home, because he was the one responsible for the catastrophe and he was the very worst we had ever experienced. His was a freak presidency.

The Gota Go Home/Gota Gotta Go slogan corresponded perfectly to Mao Zedong’s definition of the correct line or what he called ‘the mass line’; ‘from the masses, to the masses”; the cognitive cycle from the perceptual knowledge of the masses to the conceptual knowledge of the revolutionary intellectuals and reinserted in its refined version, into the mass consciousness.This was working fine, as manifested in the spectacular demonstrations in the Sri Lankan Diaspora.Where are those now? What has happened is the struggle has shifted, been diverted, cluttered, adulterated, confused.

How can anyone square ‘Gota Go Home’ with ‘down with all 225’, ‘shift power out of the Diyawanna Parliament’, ‘overthrow the system,’ etc., which, if at all, should come ONLY AFTER the ouster of Gota? Fidel Castro and Che Guevara said none of this while fighting to oust Batista. The Iranian mass movement that ousted the Shah never raised these divisive issues during the successful struggle; they only came up later. The Filipino movement which ranged from the Catholic church, and the Liberal to the Maoist CPP-NPA-NDF, never raised these slogans within the mass struggle to get rid of Marcos.How on earth can one say, as the peasants rightly do, that no one has ever been as bad for agriculture and food security as Gotabaya, and also say that this has been going on for 74 years?

How can one logically say that the 20th Amendment created an autocracy and then say that things have been lousy for 74 years? How can one rightly assert that the economy has never been worse and then say that the years in which Ceylon/Sri Lanka was a model of welfare, as well as those decades in which we had a high growth rate—including an average of 5% during wartime—all belong to 74 years of doom and gloom?

How can a rational mind accept that the truth that Gotabaya’s 20th Amendment makes for an autocracy, and then jump from that to the conclusion that one should abolish the entire Executive Presidency rather than surgically remove the 20th Amendment—and in the case of the FSP-IUSF, abolish Parliament as well?

How can one justly accuse Gotabaya of having usurped all power through the 20th Amendment, thereby creating a powerless Parliament and Prime Minister, and then go on to lynch Parliamentarians for not changing the situation? How can one justly target an autocratic President and his oligarchic clan as concentrating power and wealth in their hands, and also attack the Parliament and parliamentarians?

These divisive slogans were imported into the original struggle firstly and mainly by the JVP-NPP and later, with more Tabasco by the FSP-IUSF, or should I say, IUSF-FSP.Then there is the question of violence and the character of that violence. The idea that it is somehow justifiable to lynch supporters of the government or even its opponents like Kumara Welgama, because Mahinda Rajapaksa’s thugs attacked demonstrators on Galle Face Green is bullshit.Liberal Party leader Benigno (“Ninoy”) Aquino was assassinated, shot in the back of the head, as he was getting off the plane in Manila, having flown in from the USA to lead the anti-Marcos struggle. Where was the rioting and lynching of Marcos supporters in the subsequent struggle? The massive, inclusionary demonstrations led by widow Cory Aquino (who later became President) and powered by the university student movement, especially of the University of Manila, was determined, militant, massive but non-violent. If there had been even the slightest lethal violence would the military have been neutralized and Defence Minister Juan Ponce Enrile broken ranks, thereby ending the rule of Marcos, forcing him to fly into exile?

Don’t excuse the lethal mob violence by reference to harsh economic conditions or the privileges of MPs. There has been considerably militant, even violent street agitation, in recent years in Latin America, against the terrible economic hardships created by the neoliberal model and its crisis. There was shooting, even lethal shooting, by the State. Examples range from Chile to the town of Medellin in Colombia. Chile has elected a leftwing president while a left populist is front-runner in Colombia’s election. Where was the mob violence against parliamentarians and the lynching to death of any of them throughout Latin America?

The stuffing of slogans and the justification of violence has blurred, even distorted the profile of the Aragalaya and caused cognitive dissonance among its impressively broad support movement and mobilization in the diaspora.



Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

What is wrong with Sri Lanka?

Published

on

By Dr Laksiri Fernando

It is not the country per se, but the politicians and the people who are wrong. While politicians should take 70 percent responsibility, the people also should take 30 percent. It is true that these wrongs on the part of the politicians or the people are not limited to Sri Lanka. Even in a country like Australia where I now live, there are intermittent corruption, crime, gender abuse, killing, and misguided politics. However, the difference is extremely vast. Sri Lanka’s wrongs are perhaps 50 times higher than a country like Australia.

One may pinpoint this to the economic difference or development. There is some truth in it. However, the whole truth is not that. It is rooted in the political culture and social culture in general. That is one reason why Sri Lanka was not being able to develop after independence like Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, etc. India also has come to the forefront of development today. Sri Lanka became caught up in a vicious cycle where political culture prevented development, while underdevelopment influenced the political culture.

What is this political culture? It is mainly renovated feudalism with family at the core of politics that dominates the political culture. It is also the same in social culture, families dominating business, religion, entertainment, and the media. Only female members are set apart. It is in a way natural for members of a family to follow their fathers, brothers, or other close members. Or it can happen the other way around, fathers or uncles helping and promoting their siblings.

Even in America or the UK, this could be seen. The Kennedy family promoted members into politics. However, in Sri Lanka this is overwhelming, some families completely dominating politics and social arena. While the Rajapaksas are the most prominent example with abhorrent practices, the Bandaranaikes, the Senanayakes and the Jayewardenes (Ranil Wickremesinghe with links) were also playing the same game. In Australia, I have not come across this process. When John Howard was the Prime Minister, his brother Bob Howard continued to serve as an academic at the University of Sydney whom I used to meet often.

In 1995, I decided to come back to Sri Lanka to serve the country. I applied and got the appointment as the Director of the Sri Lanka Foundation Institute (SLFI) through a competitive interview. It was a great institute with many capabilities and the people working there were quite flexible and committed. However, when it came to filling vacancies and expanding the staff for new tasks, I came across political influences and pressures.

I managed to overcome them luckily as the SLFI came under the purview of Chandrika Kumaratunga as the President and as she did not make any interference at least in my case. However, I resigned and came back to Australia within six months as the situation was unbearable. People who tried to influence me were either top ministers or bureaucrats.

Again, when I finally came back in 1997, I first joined the University of Colombo before undertaking any other appointments. By that time, I had fairly learned how to overcome political influence. The university system was fairly reasonable (not completely) and on that basis it was possible for me to follow my impartial principles. However, there was at least one instance where a former friend of mine tried to blame me publicly, claiming that I myself asked for favours! It was heartrending.

Sri Lanka’s public service is large and widespread. There are around 1.5 million people working in its various institutions, departments, and branches. Although there is the Public Service Commission which is supposed to be independent, even in its appointments political and other influences are paramount. The most discriminated people in this service are Tamils, Muslims, and Women. Although there are over 15 percent of Tamils in the population, their presence in the public service is less than 10 percent. Apart from discrimination on the reason of ethnicity and gender, there are discriminations on the basis of caste, religion and region. The dissolution of Provincial Councils since October 2019 has enlarged these discriminations overwhelmingly.

It is mistakenly claimed that the ‘large state sector’ is the primary defect of Sri Lanka’s economy. It is not the size of the sector that has mattered but its inefficiency, incapacity, unproductivity, and sometimes duplication. In Australia, out of the total workforce, 20 percent are in the state sector. But it is sufficiently productive and provides necessary services even to private enterprises. In Sri Lanka, if we count 12 million as the workforce (adult population 14 million), the state sector comprises only around 12 percent.

The state sector undoubtedly should be restructured, and the workforces should be retrained or even dismissed. There is no point in keeping people like Sirimanna Mahattaya in the public service if we take an example from the teledrama, Kolam Kuttama (Funny Couple)! Even privatising certain (loss-making) state enterprises is in order. However, there are certain sectors and services that the state should hold on to. Education and Health are the most priory sectors among others, depending on national dialogues. It could allow the private sector to participate, but the state should not give up its primary responsibilities.

There can be other strategic sectors where the private sector could be allowed like the ports, airports, airlines, electricity, gas, oil, and even water, but the state should not give up its responsibilities completely. Public-Private partnership can be a model in certain areas in this respect.

The stagnation of the education sector has been a primary problem area in Sri Lanka now for a long time. This applies both to school education and university education alike. In the case of university education there have been some curricula and teaching methodology changes but those are not up to modern and current needs.

We still get a huge number of Arts students while the country’s need is in the direction of Science, Technology, Medicine, Nursing and Business Management. Those who come from the Arts streams in schools, if it is not possible to change in the short run, should be able to move to scientific areas, if capable. In Australia, there is no prohibition of changing the stream if the students show high capability in whatever area that they qualify in. School education should be totally reformed with emphasis on scientific and international knowledge.

The discarding of English education (since 1956), in my opinion, has been the major mistake that the country has committed in degrading the educational system, the economy, and the country’s international profile. In recent times young generations are trying to overcome these barriers through private education, tuition, and social media. However, this is mostly limited to the well to do. English should not be considered as a superior or imperial language, but a practical and international language.

While this short article, with word limits, confine to only few areas of ‘wrongs’ that Sri Lanka is committing, a possible conclusion is to call for an overall change in the political and economic system in the country. Those political leaders and parties responsible for the country’s present political and economic crisis should be completely ousted.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Plan to transform country into an export economy

Published

on

Dear Mr. President,

A Presidential Media Division statement, titled “Country set for rapid transformation into an export economy” quoted remarks made by you at the inauguration ceremony of a historic temple in Kegalle.

As a caring citizen I said, “three cheers”, happily thinking that at last, the country was on the correct governance path focusing on the creation of new strategic leadership options and policy changes to encourage present and new investors to produce tradable goods and engage in external services. I was delighted that the statement began with a reference that Sri Lanka can no longer continue to rely on borrowings (presumably external?) to address the imbalance between imports and exports, which if pursued will inevitably lead to another economic crisis within a decade.

As I read the rest of the statement, I noted that your plan for achieving such a transformation by holding discussions with the World Bank, ADB and the IMF to initiate a programme and passing two new laws in April. The only other reference even as a vague statement was in relation to implementing an agricultural modernisation programme, where you anticipated results only after 6-7 years. Are you planning in addition to leverage the National Trade Facilitation Committee (NTFC) and its Secretariat as a part of your implementation strategy[ii] ?

I am sure that many highly competent Sri Lankan trade economists (including those who have guided you in the past), will be able to advise you on more important winning strategic policy/implementation and change management options.

They would surely stress the relative importance of developing strategic networking options with supply chains in the region, assisting capable SME’s to upgrade quality/productivity, and enhancing public infrastructure productivity; along with the need to remove para tariffs, enhance ease of doing business, and one stop facilitation center benchmarking services in South Indian states. These can bring big gains, well before dreaming as your short-term goal, leveraging Free Trade Agreements with India, China, Thailand, Singapore, Vietnam and attempting a high jump by  joining RCEP.

Chandra Jayaratne

Continue Reading

Opinion

Solar and wind power projects

Published

on

There has been a delay in finalising the unit cost for the proposed 500 Mw wind power project initiated by India’s Adani Group. This is surprising and disturbing as there was a news item that the Cabinet had approved the payment of US dollar cents 14.6 per unit, nearly Rs. 50 in our local currency, without the knowledge of the Ministry for Power and Energy or the Ceylon Electricity Board. If so, what is the reason for the delay in going ahead with the construction of the Wind Power Project at Mannar? The snag may be that other private suppliers too are demanding the same payment as agreed with Adani Group.

As I handled this subject at the Ministry of Power and Energy, I still take interest therein, in my retirement. In my earlier letters to the press, I pointed out the negative aspects of wind and solar projects, mainly, Sri Lanka being an island with a limited land area of 65,610 sq. km, where land is required for agriculture as is seen by the desperate attempt of the government offering uncultivated land both state-owned and private to grow more food.

It is said that four to five acres of land is required to produce 1 Mw of electricity. If so, consider the land requirements for major solar parks. In addition, no plant life is possible under these solar panels, which has multiple effects on the atmosphere. The scenic beauty of this country, which attracts tourists will be lost and thereby foreign exchange which we desperately need. This goes for floating solar projects on hydro reservoirs and lakes which the government has already approved contracts to the private sector. In wind farms, there is the danger to birds and flying insects. It is also reported that due to the noise people cannot settle down in adjacent areas.

It is not my intention to discourage the projects to produce power from renewable sources of energy. I intend to make the authorities concerned seek alternative sites, along the sea coast, avoiding beaches frequented by tourists, rooftop solar panels in all buildings. Do not forget we are actively pursuing the connection of our grid to India and when this project materialises, the energy requirement of this country will be eased to a great extent.

It is strange the Ministers in charge of land and agriculture and also tourism have not objected to setting up solar parks and wind farms on land.

G. A. D. Sirimal

Via e-mail

Continue Reading

Trending