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
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Sunday, December 31, 2017
Yahapalana’s three-year report card
Except restoration of democracy, government’s record is unimpressive
December 30, 2017, 6:31 pm
A well-heeled chum, but neither bright nor trustworthy
Source: Sri Lanka Brief 26 Oct 2016
srilankabrief.org/2016/10/the-yahapalanaya-saga-the-end-of-the-long-beginning-in-sri-lanka/
Source: Sri Lanka Brief 26 Oct 2016
srilankabrief.org/2016/10/the-yahapalanaya-saga-the-end-of-the-long-beginning-in-sri-lanka/
Vengeance shall be mine
Source: 360 News: live360.lk/govt-well-way-towards-dictatorship-mahinda/
Source: 360 News: live360.lk/govt-well-way-towards-dictatorship-mahinda/
Kumar David
It’s
the end of the year, nearly three years from January 8, 2015 and an
opportunity to draw up two balance sheets. Today I will focus on the
acts of commission and omission of the Sirisena-Ranil duumvirate and
next week take a sharp look at Local Government (LG) elections slated
for February. The latter will be a significant pointer, so I will keep
you salivating for a week. Commentators agree that more than local
administration hang on the results, therefore I assure you it’s worth
the wait.
A question frequently put to me is: "What do you now have to say about
this government? Didn’t you canvas for the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa?
Isn’t yahapalanaya a failure?" The question is directed at me because I
am responsible for originating the Single-Issue Common-Candidate concept
taken forward by Rev Sobitha’s Just Society Movement, anti-Mahinda
political parties and democratic and human rights activists. Most people
cottoned on to the Common-Candidate (CC) strategy to facilitate the
defeat of Rajapaksa, but few grasped the parameters of the Single-Issue
(SI) concept. Let me explain this fine and nuanced line and clarify my
mixed reaction to the shortcomings of yahapalanaya.
The CC strategy was pulled off by Sirisena, Ranil and Chandrika in a
brilliant political coup. Hats off! The need to unite all who detested
Mahinda-Gotabaya oppression, repression and slide to autocracy, was an
easy idea to grasp. Millions cottoned on, refused to be intimidated by
state power, resisted billions of rupees, and voted for a common
candidate to drive Rajapaksa out of office. Bravo!
The more finessed point, Single Issue (SI), is that many, like me, who
united to defeat Rajapaksa did so for one clearly articulated reason.
The motive of those of us who voiced the SI concept was to pull Lanka
out of a creeping dictatorship. This was the bottom line, the minimal
agenda; anything more would be a bonus. Let me be clear; the purpose of
SI-CC was to defeat MR-GR, halt the slide to dictatorship and abolish
the all-powerful executive presidency. We harboured no assurance that
much more would be achieved. Yes, there was hope on two related
objectives; a constitution translating electoral victory into statutes,
and second, vigorous action against corruption that had made Rajapaksa
era abuse of power profitable. These were possible bonuses, but the
minimum was to halt an erosion of democracy, dignity and human rights.
No illusions
This is crucial: There was no illusion, there could possibly not have
been any illusion on the Left, that a government led by the ideological
heirs of JR Jayewardene and a woolly headed erstwhile Mahinda Rajapaksa
loyalist without an economic strategy, would fashion an economic
programme to gladden the hearts of leftists, socialists and Marxists.
Those of us who endorsed SI as a minimum do not have any right to be
disappointed if this government pursues a liberal-capitalist economic
strategy. Anybody who expected Ranil to make his beloved uncle turn in
the grave was a dreamer. The tenor of explicitly enunciated economic
strategies of the yahapalana government is true to its form and as
expected. I will explain at the end why, buffeted by the gales of global
realpolitik, the government has been compelled to buck its much-loved
neo-liberal inclinations.
My first response to my interlocuters is: "I am pleased on the
Single-Issue theme. The defeat of the Rajapaksa regime and clan has
achieved what was paramount, restoration of a modest quantum of
democracy. Those pushing the nation to despotism have been routed – no
more state and semi-state extrajudicial murders, no more white vans and
arbitrary arrests, no more intimidation of journalists, no more dread of
the police and military in the heart of every Tamil and Muslim". This
does not mean that the UNP or the Sirisena-SLFP will win future
elections; such dynamics are more convoluted as Mahinda Rajapaksa in
2015 and Churchill in 1945 learnt the hard way.
To repeat: The overriding objective underlying SI-CC has been achieved.
Anything more is a bonus, but before touching on bonuses let me add: The
greater credit for restoring democracy belongs to the January 8
activists; only a lesser part can be credited to political leaders (I
have already paid a handsome compliment to Sirisena, Ranil and Chandrika
for translating the CC proposal into reality). I grant that though not
perfect – where in the world is a government perfect? – yahapalanaya
has, by and large, been supportive of democratic reforms (right to
information, reconciliation, expanded media freedom and so on) but the
government has been held on a short leash by its midwife, the January 8
forces, who can therefore claim a greater share of the credit for these
reforms.
No bonuses
A new constitution, prosecutions to bring the multitude of Rajapaksa era
crooks to book, and measures to stem corruption within the new
administration, these are bonus dividends over and above the
Single-Issue and would have been welcome. On these matters I share the
public’s disappointment. Well, a new democratic constitution to replace
JR’s abomination is, actually, more than a bonus; it flows from the need
to cement the defeat of autocracy. It is a necessity to firm up the
victory.
Indications at this time are that the constitution will fizzle out. The
SLFP is a repository of Sinhala chauvinism and does not have the
sentiment or the gall to support a modern constitution. It has advocated
only Sinhalese interests for 70 years, its politicos are place-seekers
who prospered as lick-spittle stooges of the powerful; think of (Dr)
Mervyn Silva. Not one SLFPer, or for that matter Communist, Samasamajist
or DLFer, opposed the 18th Amendment. What can one expect from such
reptilian life-forms? The UNP too contains creepy-crawlies. Is this
harsh? Maybe, but may I humbly ask you to pause and reflect on whether
this is true. The truth, in turn, is a reflection of the Sri Lankan
voter whose consciousness has not matured to pluralism and modernism.
Now you see my pessimism about two-thirds of these types of MPs
supporting the abolition of the executive presidency, devolution of
administrative power to minorities and many fine proposals contained in
the six sub-committee reports. I hope I am wrong and that two-thirds
will be forthcoming, but I am pessimistic. I have argued in this column
before, and am willing to reiterate today, that if two-thirds can be
found among the Kotte dunderheads, then the referendum can be carried
relatively easily; high 50s and up to 60% support is conceivable even if
Gota, Mahinda and GLib Peris stand on their empty heads.
There is universal disappointment, if not condemnation of the laws
delays and insolence of office. Prosecutions are not filed for ages,
cases are buried
in the courts as deep as the Treasures of Tutankhamun, Ministers blame
the Attorney General’s Department, the police are not allowed to do
their job, and everyone agrees the judicial-legal system is ramshackle.
Surely, part of the blame must rub-off on the government. If the system
is in shambles, doesn’t it have the power and the funds to fix it? Of
course it has, but lacks motivation!
Explicit corruption charges against yahapalanaya big-wigs, Ministers and
MPs are met with the defence that ‘sleaze is not as bad as in the
Rajapaksa days’. Good heavens, what a minimal defence! The Bond Scam has
done damage and established that the Prime Minister is not competent in
the selection of persons of integrity and ability for key positions.
Indrajit Coomaraswamy is an exception, but when else has the PM opted
for excellence and expertise over old school tie, society types and
sycophants? President Sirisena is not in the clear either. A proposal to
buy a Russian Offshore Patrol ship for Rs 30 billion (three times the
fraud alleged in the Bond Scam) is said by Muhammed Fazl (Daily FT, 23
Dec) to be a possible Sirisena scam. The Joint Opposition keeps deadpan
silence on the matter, motivating Fazl to ask; is the scam in cahoots
with the Rajapaksas? Though none of this, nor many lesser bandit stories
about Ministers and MPs have been proved in court, allegations are many
and the ‘ung okoma horu’ refrain has gained currency.
My minimal expectations, a) defeating the Rajapaksa Presidency and
restoring democracy and b) abolishing the executive presidency, have
been fulfilled, completely and partially, respectively. In respect of
other expectations, those who were very hopeful are, understandably,
disappointed, others like this correspondent who were only keeping their
fingers crossed for a bonus pay-out, are not surprised. That’s the
truth of it.
Backsliding on neo-liberalism
Not just Mangala but the government as a whole is schizophrenic on
economic strategy. Ranil, Charitha and Malik chorus hosannas to
free-market capitalism, serenade wild-ass liberalism and croon to the
global and domestic private sector. The last named will, they say, ride
in on a great white stallion to rescue the stranded UNP maiden. Neither
knight nor stallion has so far, been sighted. Global capitalism is in
retreat and multinationals are reluctant to invest except in safe havens
like China. Global FDI peaked at $1.9 trillion in 2007, collapsed to
$1.2 trillion in 2009 and recovered only partially by 2016; FDI inflows
to developing countries shrank by 14% from $752 billion in 2015 to $646
billion in 2016. (UNCTAD data,
http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/wir2017_en.pdf). Lanka has not
bucked the trend and FDI has fluctuated between $900 billion and $700
billion between 2011 to 2016. Global capital is in hibernation while
domestic capital has shallow pockets and is overcome by stupor.
Actions speak louder than words. Every mega economic initiative of
yahapalanaya has been state-to-state. Note the $1.1 billion Hambantota
Harbour and economic zone, intended lease of the Mattala white elephant
to India, continuation of Colombo Port City, proposals for 1200 MW of
coal power in a belated attempt to contain further aggravation of the Rs
220 billion Sampur cancellation blunder, and the much talked of
Economic Zone in the East with Indian participation. Where are the
nourishing FDI inflows of private capital? Mangala can huff and he can
puff and he can blow the House down in Sri Jayewardenepura, but the
directive axis of foreign investment in Sri Lanka will remain state-led.
Let them (Ranil, Mangala and the golden oldies) sleepwalk into it; no
matter, so long as they sleepwalk in the right direction.