A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Thursday, August 10, 2017
How to Move Forward and Not Backwards?
Can a system of good governance (yahapalanya) be built on extreme neo-liberalism? My answer is no, based on both theory and practice of many countries.
(August 9, 2017, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) Criticisms
on this government from most (not all) of those who supported or
spearheaded a political change in January 2015 could not be taken as any
effort to bring back the Rajapaksa rule again. Sri Lanka should move
forward and not backwards.
Political or social changes in many countries are evolutionary, not
revolutionary. Even if there are apparent ‘revolutions,’ those also
should be taken within a long spectrum of evolutionary political/social
development and not as absolute or abrupt discontinuities. Even in
revolutions, there can be major setbacks.
After the French Revolution, the reactionary fall back was popularly
called the ‘Thermidorian Effect.’ A similar setback occurred even after
the Russian Revolution in 1917, a hundred years ago. These setbacks
therefore are more understandable in a parliamentary context.
Understanding January Change
The January 2015 change came about through many contradictions. What can
be most appreciated is the people’s resolve to oust the old regime.
When we take the ‘people’ as the whole lot of men and women, young and
old; they moved decisively at the polling day. Most admirable was the
way the minority communities voted for the opposition candidate,
Maithripala Sirisena, even with some reluctance. Therefore, the people
were determined irrespective of their ethnicity or religion to change
the regime.
Although there was some attachment to the old regime, among the majority
community, because of its role in defeating terrorism, this became
largely changed by August parliamentary elections. They learned through
January experience that change is desirable and achievable. The country
had to move forward. The 19th Amendment
was a decisive progress. If there were no controversial bond scams
during the period, the people’s support for a major parliamentary change
could have been more decisive. The bond fraudsters gave a life line to
the old regime, and still do so.
People’s role in the change was not solely spontaneous. There were
politicians, activists, critical media, intellectuals and civil society
organizations that brought a new alliance and influenced the people.
Civil society organizations were/are not that popular unfortunately in
the country because of some NGOs. This is still a liability to move
forward. There must be some rethinking. However, some organizations were
different, particularly the National Movement for Just Society (NMJS)
led by late Ven. Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero and Puravasi Balaya (People’s
Power) etc. There was an agreement between the presidential candidate
and 52 organizations for good governance, yet to be fulfilled.
Shyamon Jayasinghe has made an important distinction between the
Yahapalana movement and the Yahapalana government (Colombo Telegraph, 26
July 2017). This can always be the case. The political alliance that
could be worked out at the last moment in November 2014 was immature and
mixed with many contradictions. This was far weaker by the time the
country went for the general elections in August 2015. The old parties,
the power brokers and the funders emerged and took over many of the
Yahapalana reins. Even within the Yahapalana movement itself, there were
contradictions and immaturities. There were idealists without much
realism or practical knowledge. A major weakness was/is the lack of a
proper social justice program, based on economic reforms, particularly
after the unfortunate demise of Ven. Sobitha.
‘National Unity’ Government
The major liability was the unreformed nature of the two main parties,
the UNP and the SLFP, that came to form the so-called national unity
government. The JVP was aloof working in its own ivory tower. ‘National
unity’ by name, the government did not have common or necessary
consensus on national reconciliation. There were no much efforts to
rebuild them even from the national reconciliation secretariat.
Understandably this is not an easy task. However, this is the main
reason for the deadlock in bringing a new constitution. In the whole
constitutional reform process, the Prime Minister’s lackadaisical
‘liberalism’ prevailed without leadership, creating opposition within
and outside.
The TNA also was not very helpful. Although the leadership has
considerably moderated their policies and political positions, they made
a major blunder by appointing a maverick leader, C. V. Wigneswaran, to
the Northern Provincial Council. The constituent parties of the alliance
are also disparate, dominated largely by former militants. This was
another reason why building consensus on a new constitution has become
so difficult. After nearly thirty years of terrorism, it must be
understood that extremely radical changes are not possible.
If the radicals or the idealists, on both sides, tried to depend on the
international actors to bring about a ‘defused new constitution,’ it was
morally wrong and the international situation also has changed
dramatically. Therefore, the prospects for a new constitution are now
bleak before the 2020 elections.
The major failure of the national unity government however is in the
economic sphere, whether it is in the south or the north. This is
something even the Yahapalana civil society movement has not realized.
Most important matter for the ordinary people is their day to day
living. When the people brought down the old regime, or the family rule,
they were not expecting their economic conditions to go backwards or
corruption to re-emerge. The bond scam or the Penthouse issue is only
the tip of an iceberg. The emergence of criminality and lawlessness in
the north are also related to the stagnant economic conditions.
The unreformed constituent parties of the national unity government,
mainly the UNP and also the SLFP, are major reasons for recent and
ongoing corruption, reinforced by the electoral system. Although
Maithripala Sirisena has manged to take over the party apparatus of the
SLFP, most of the personnel and the practices are the same. Otherwise,
there was no need for a jumbo Cabinet and several ministries, which make
the governing inefficient and expensive. It has been the practice of
the leaders, the funders and the organizers of these parties to enrich
themselves and their organizations through shady business and other
deals after coming to political power. As the UNP has come to power
after a very long spell, the urge for these corrupt practices could be
even higher. Therefore, they are also reluctant in investigating the
past corruption.
Questionable Neo-Liberalism?
Can a system of good governance (yahapalanya) be built on extreme
neo-liberalism? My answer is no, based on both theory and practice of
many countries. The principles of good governance also should apply to
the private sector. But neo-liberalism does not allow that. However, a
complete opposition to global trends or economics could also bring a
type of a government like Donald Trump! That would be the other extreme.
It would be a colossal disaster in a developing country like Sri Lanka.
The present government and particularly the UNP leaders are following an
extreme form of neo-liberalism without taking any responsibility to
build the national economy and the public sector. It is a myth to
consider the ‘national economy’ outdated. According to them, the only
engine of growth is the private sector. They ask the masses to wait for
the trickledown effect, like waiting for Godot. This is in a context
where neo-liberalism is failing worldwide. The first round of this
failure was the global financial crisis, ten years back. Now, the
political opposition has started, however distorted, with Donald Trump
and Brexit.
In the Prime Minister’s website as the Minister of National Policies and
Economic Affairs, there is an important statement titled ‘Economic
Policy of the Government.’ This is a statement that he has made before
Parliament, but now the date does not appear. Previously, I criticised
the preface to it which said, among other things “Today
our economy need no governance, yet a regulation. Hon. Prime Minister
Ranil Wickremasinghe says that the aspiration for a prosperous country
could be realized merely through more and more liberalization of the
economy.”
Now it is taken out! However, the speech is still there, which might
become the basis of the next Budget and the intended Three Year Economic
Plan. This requires full review later, but for critiquing the extreme
neo-liberal policies of the government or the UNP in this article, the
following excerpts would suffice. The PM was talking about a third stage
of economic reforms after 1977. Here he goes.
“Future
economic potential does not rely on labour alone. What is relevant for
the development process is innovation and productive growth. In addition
to such challenges, we are forced to face welfare and health measures
of an aging population in Sri Lanka.”
Now the first proposition is acceptable, emphasizing the importance of
innovation and productive growth. Then he attacks ‘welfare and health
measures’ as challenges. Then he goes on to say,
“We
cannot sustain the belief that the Government must provide all services
and solutions. Accordingly, we must be able to pay attention to the
spirit of competitiveness and enhancing productivity, while providing a
systematic network that affords a strong sense of social protection.”
No one is asking him or his government to ‘provide all services and
solutions.’ But at least the existing ‘welfare measures and health
services’ must prevail and improved. Otherwise, what is a Government
for? Is it only for the crony capitalist class like Perpetual Treasuries
or Ravi Karunanayake’s? As far as I know, the legitimate and decent
business people are different. Immediately thereafter, the following is
what he says, that the people should be beware of by the next Budget.
“Now
these may not be popular and may offer a bitter pill to swallow. But we
need to take bitter medicine to cure our sick systems and ourselves.”
How to Move Forward?
It is too early to envisage what would be necessary to prevent the old
regime, particularly the Rajapaksa family, coming to power again at the
next elections, and what kind of a political alliance is necessary to
take democracy, social justice and development forward. The JVP could
play a major role with other Left parties, if the JVP does not deviate
from the democratic path. What is clear at this stage is the necessity
to oppose the regressive, lethargic and corrupt policies of the present
government, while appreciating the progresses made particularly in
creating a relatively free and open political environment.
Rajapaksas are not an alternative, particularly considering corruption,
democracy and repression. Take the example of Ravi Karunanayake’s
Penthouse issue. Mahinda Rajapaksa was reluctant even to sign the
no-confidence motion and only now he says that he would vote against RK.
What a leader?
Many civil society organizations who spearheaded the January 2015 change
are organizing a Satyagraha on 15 August to demand the government for
further reforms. Setting up of a Special Court to investigate Corruption
is one admirable demand. However, a major weakness of this civil
society movement, in my opinion, is not taking up the economic
struggle/s of the ordinary masses.
In conclusion, I wish to focus on several broad elements that might be
necessary to take the democratic, economic, human rights and
social-justice struggle forward:
- Critical and independent media (social media included), journalists and intellectuals who would not take a direct governmental or a political party line.
- Vibrant civil society organizations without solely depending on external sources for funding or policy directions.
- Public education in Sinhala and Tamil, while promoting English knowledge even among the ordinary masses to independently understand the world outside.
- Absolute non-violence and peaceful protests and activities, without resorting to major work stoppages inconveniencing the public.
- Taking up the struggle against Corruption and Torture as two major ailments in the present-day Sri Lankan society.
- Taking up not only the struggle for political reforms, a new constitution or political matters, but also the most important day to day economic grievances of the poor and ordinary masses.