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 1, 2019
The Presidential Election 2019 In Retrospect
As the dust settles on one of the stormy Presidential elections in Sri
Lanka which was marked by an unprecedented amount of promises by both
the main candidates, it is opportune to seriously evaluate certain
aspects of the race in retrospect. There are both positive and negative
points of which we the Sri Lankan citizenry need to take serious note
of.
A non-violent, free and fair Election
First of all, it is one of the violence-free elections ever, in recent
times in our country. Similarly, the relatively non-violent aftermath of
the election is also significant. Some, especially the leaders of the
outgoing government have attributed this development to the 19th
Amendment which they introduced immediately after their taking office in
2015.
It could also be due to the overwhelming majority with which Gotabaya
Rajapaksa won, so much so, all those who were very eloquent and
violently rhetorical in opposing him during the pre-election period have
been dumbfounded with his stunning victory. One may dare to associate
this non-violent aftermath also as an indication of the political
maturity our citizens are slowly but surely growing into.
The non-usage of decorations for political rallies such as flags and
banners made out of non-decaying plastics and polythene is yet another
sign not only of our emerging political maturity but also of the growing
environmental consciousness of the citizenry. One also needs to mention
that as usual, the number of citizens using their franchise was very
high this time, too, exceeding 80%. Compared to the Western democracies
(who wish to portray their version of democracy as the ideal for the
whole world), this is very high because not even in the USA, the UK and
in the EU countries such as Italy do they have such a high voter
turn-out at any election. All these surely are very positive signs which
indicate that we are still a vibrant democracy.
The two-party political system
Interestingly, as the election day was approaching, some of the
self-appointed urban political pundits were speculating eloquently about
the emergence of a third force as "people are fed up with the two-party
political system" that has taken us, the Sri Lankan citizens, for
granted ever since our Independence. The noble aim to promote such a
third force was to change the unhealthy political culture that has
prevailed especially during the past few decades, thanks to the
principle-less two main political parties that had governed the country.
While there was a lot of truth in what they were saying, they
conveniently forgot that in almost all those so-called "thriving
democracies", too, there exists a two-party political system. The
Democrats and Republicans in the USA, Labour and Convservatives in the
UK, the BJP and the Congress in India are just a few illustrations of
this vital phenomenon.
Interestingly, most of those who enthusiastically mooted this view for a
"third force" were mostly from the urban areas of Sri Lanka, and most
of them belonged to those who earnestly voted for the outgoing President
Maithripala Sirisena and the so-called "yahapalana" government, calling
the previous Rajapaksa government ‘corrupt’. The day-light robbing of
the Central Bank through the Bond Scam (in which most in the
‘yahapalana’ government cronies were alleged to be involved) and the
Easter Sunday Bombing (due to the destruction of the fine security
network that was already in place from the time of the annihilation of
the LTTE militarily) did make the former supporters of the "yahapalana"
open their own eyes and ears wide.
Worse still, the indifferent if not lackadaisical attitude of the same
"yahapalana" government to have a fair and impartial inquiry into these
two significant but tragic issues during their tenure in office, made
most of those who voted for them badly disillusioned. Till the
candidates handed over their respective nominations to contest the
Presidential elections, the common slogan of this group of people (most
of whom were from the upper middle class urban elite) was that they will
not vote for any of the candidates of the two main political blocks in
our country, some even going to the extent of stating that they would
refrain from voting at all, out of sheer frustration with the Sri Lankan
political culture.
However, as the elections were approaching, they gradually changed their
stance and were pinning all their hopes and certainties on one
Nagananda Kodituwakku as the right person to lead a third force, but
with his failing to file nomination papers, they had to swiftly and
uncritically switch their allegiance overnight to some other candidate;
that candidate happened to be the retired Army Commander, Mahesh
Senanayake. None of them knew for sure how he would be in the political
arena, but the need to pin their hopes on someone as a "third party" at
any cost, apparently justified their decision to back Senanayake.
A careful analysis of the just-concluded Presidential election results
would substantiate the present writer’s claim that almost all the crowd
that rallied around this so-called "third political force" hailed from
urban Sri Lanka, as Mahesh Senanayake received the bulk of his meagre
0.37% of the total vote only in urban electorates. However, it is more
than obvious that such a percentage of the total vote is pathetically
negligible in the background of all-island voting map, and falls far
short of being a "third force".
Even JVP’s Anura Kumara Dissanayake who ranked third in the overall
voting, could muster only 3.16% of the total vote. In other words, this
election has clearly shown once again that the two-party system still
prevails solidly in our island nation and will be so for many decades to
come as long as the key deciding factor in Sri Lankan elections remains
the vast majority of rural voters whose perspectives of reality and
basic needs are very different from those of our urban folks who are
obsessed with promoting a "third force".
Urban/Rural and North/South Divide
As a matter of fact, one of the main facts which is often conveniently
overlooked by Sri Lankan election analysts is the neat and clear-cut
division between the urban and rural voters of the country. Although
still it is the urban elite who call the shots in the running of the
affairs of our nation, so to say, especially in the decision-making, it
is the vast rural folks that would always decide who should rule the
country, as had been evident in almost all the recent elections,
including the just-finished Presidential election.
Even at the 2015 Presidential elections, the then out-going President
Mahinda Rajapaksa won convincingly in the rural areas of Sri Lanka,
especially in the South. If not for the North-Eastern minority Tamil and
Muslim vote, Maithripala Sirisena, too would have lost that crucial
election. To brand those rural voters simplistically, if not naively, as
"Sinhala Buddhists", as our city-based political analysts and their NGO
allies are accustomed to, is not only unfair but unrealistic as this
group includes also Sinhala Catholics and many others who live among the
Sinhala Buddhists!
The entire Catholic coastal belt (except for Negombo and Wattala
electorates) voting overwhelmingly for Gotabaya this time, further
substantiates this point. However, one also needs to admit that this
election more than any other has indicated a clear-cut division between
the North-Eastern Tamil and Muslim minorities and the vast majority of
the Southern Sinhalese. This division was intensified this time by those
political leaders and parties who claim to represent those ethnic and
religious minorities (such as the TNA and the SLMC) when they appealed
openly to their respective voters to unite and defeat Gotabaya citing
their perceived fears that the latter would be working against the
minorities, if elected.
In Sri Lankan polity, unfortunately, the minorities seem to be held
captive by their so-called "political representatives", often preventing
them from freely choosing their own candidates at elections – it has
been customary of late for these so-called "representatives" of the
minorities to indicate those candidates/political parties for whom they
ought to vote which is a clear violation of the individual freedom of
the minority voters. Their open call this time to support Sajith
boomeranged as the majority in the South in response united in an
unprecedented way to vote for Gotabaya, proving once again that a Sri
Lankan President could be elected even without the support of the
minorities.
Significantly, Gotabaya received the highest percentage of votes in the
southern-most Matara district while Sajith received his highest
percentage in the northern-most Jaffna district. Moreover, if not for
the North-Eastern vote, Sajith Premadasa would have been routed
completely at this election. He managed to win only the six provinces of
that geographical area while Gotabaya swept all the remaining
provinces.
The role played by the so-called minority parties such as the TNA and
the SLMC which are exclusively based on race and religion should be
taken into account seriously in the aftermath of this Presidential
election. Is it a particular minority group that freely voted or is it
the will of a handful of so-called "minority representatives" who made
their followers to vote the way they voted? The role played by
exclusively racist and religious political parties has been crucial in
forming governments in Sri Lanka in recent times, but this time around
they could not use their political clout, as the South overwhelmingly
voted for Gotabaya Rajapaksa.
It has become so common to brand the Rajapaksas as "racist" (as we heard
again so often during the recent election campaigning, from their
opponents’ platforms as well as from SMS messages via electronic media)
but interestingly no one calls the minority political parties that are
exclusively based on race and religion, by such derogatory terms. It is
high time to pay our serious attention to this issue, if we are really
interested in national integration and harmony.
In recent times, we have been hearing the need to ban hate-speech in our
country as a first step towards religious and racial harmony and this
is surely praiseworthy, but one also needs to do something about those
political parties that are based exclusively on race and religion in our
country because they too are notorious divisive factors that threaten
social and political harmony of the island.
Using either religion or race, these exclusively racial or religious
political parties had been leading their respective followers towards
further isolation from the mainstream affairs. Only the leaders of those
parties (most of whom are comfortably placed in Colombo) have been
enjoying ministerial posts and all the perks they entail, under
successive governments. Also, they have been notorious of being in
office no matter what political group came into office, but
conspicuously they had done very little (if at all) for the voters they
claim to represent, as is so evident in the North and the East of Sri
Lanka.
Accusations of corruption and the enforced fear psychosis
During the recent election campaign, accusations of corruption were
hurled at both the main parties but a question the ordinary voter asked
was: "if the Rajapaksas were so corrupt, what did the ‘yahapalana’
government do to bring them to justice, during their more than four and a
half years in office?" Moreover, the glossing over of the day-light
robbing of the Central Bank thanks to the Bond Scam allegedly under the
patronage of quite a number of "yahapalana" big shots and the reluctance
to appoint an impartial commission to probe into the Easter Bombings
apparently did not go unnoticed as Sri Lankans used their franchise this
time.
Ever since the Presidential elections were called, the untiring efforts
of the opponents of Gotabaya Rajapaksa to block him from contesting also
boomeranged against them. First, they went to courts about his
so-called "dual-citizenship", then, they filed court cases against him
in the USA, then, they tried to malign him saying that he was a terrible
dictator, but the ordinary voter seems to have flatly refused to buy
such crap. Even the references to the so-called "white-van" episodes (a
phenomenon which in fact began in the late 1980’s under the Premadasa
regime during the JVP insurrection) against Gotabaya during the election
campaign, thus the efforts to create a fear-psychosis, seem to have
gone unheeded, by the ordinary voter.
Elections Promises
Equally important to note is the fact that the Sri Lankan voter is no
longer to be taken for cheap rides with unrealistic election promises
which were in abundance at this election. When one candidate promised to
give free fertilizer to paddy farmers, the other promised to give such
concessions to all the farmers in Sri Lanka. Both the candidates made
promises but some of them were really bizarre and even dared to reach
levels that are normally repugnant, in our Sri Lankan culture. For
example, the promises to provide sanitary pads for women and free
passports for all those senior citizens who were to go on pilgrimages,
brought the history of Sri Lankan election promises to a new height (or
was it a new abyss/depth?!).
Even the notorious promises of bringing rice from the moon by Mrs.
Sirima Bandaranaike and granting eight kilos of cereals ("eta ata") by
J.R.Jayawardena in the 1970’s, were pushed to an insignificant horizon
by such bizarre promises this time around. Yet, the general Sri Lankan
voter refused to be hoodwinked by such promises, which is another
indication of the growing political maturity of the ordinary Sri Lankan
voter.
Easter Bombing and its Effect on the Elections
Last but not least, one shocking election result deserves a special
comment here, namely, the result of the Negombo electorate. All
reasonable persons expected the voters there to teach the "yahapalana"
government a bitter lesson at this election as it did not make any
reasonable and impartial effort to probe into what really happened last
Easter Sunday and to bring the culprits to justice. Yet, to the surprise
of many, Negombo gave a comfortable sailing through to Sajith
Premadasa, while the vast majority of the rest of the North-Western
coastal belt which is dominated by Catholics did not vote for him though
traditionally this area is considered a bastion of the UNP. The only
other electorate which Sajith managed to gain in this area was Wattala
which he won by a very narrow margin.
This generated so many questions all over the island. For example, here
in Kandy where I live, the three-wheeler drivers whom I know, the fellow
passengers with whom I travel by public transport, and many other
acquaintances of mine (most of whom are predominantly Buddhist) were
asking me in the aftermath of the elections various embarrassing
questions that could be encapsulated as: "Father, what happened to the
Catholics of Negombo? We, voted against the ‘yahapalana’ government this
time mainly to show our solidarity with our fellow brethren in Negombo,
but they seem to have voted the other way!"
One person in her unbelief and frustration even dared to say
passionately: "We need to send another Zaharan to blast another bomb in
that area again so that at least then they would open their eyes and
ears!". Inexplicable as it is, the way the Negombo voters used their
franchise is explained away by some analysts by pointing out other
would-have-been crucial factors that were at work there, such as the
rivalry between two SLPP organizers in the area, the drug menace which
is allegedly blamed on one of them, the vast number of Muslims in the
Negombo electorate,…etc.
Of course, the Katana electorate wherein is situated the Katuwapitiya
St.Sebastian’s Church (one of the main venues of the Easter bomb
blasts), voted against the "yahapalana" government convincingly. Yet the
fact that the neighbouring Negombo electorate could not follow-suit at
least to show their solidarity with their fellow citizens will remain an
unanswered question. In this regard, it is also important here to note
how the prophetic voices of the Catholic Church (especially that of His
Eminence Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith who was a lone voice in the wilderness
calling for a just and impartial inquiry) were silenced by certain
media cronies of the "yahapalana" rulers and their NGO henchmen by
unjustly accusing them of using the Church pulpit for politics.
The end result was that during the election campaigning proper, very few
significant non-political Catholic religious voices were heard calling
for an impartial and fair inquiry into what really happened. It is in
this sense that some were expressing the view of the need for Catholics
to form their own political party to make their voice heard too, just as
the Muslims have the SLMC. Even the official statement issued by the
Catholic Bishops Conference of Sri Lanka on the eve of the recent
Presidential elections shied away from explicitly calling for an
impartial and fair inquiry with regard to the Easter attacks. Thus,
there was no one to raise a voice for a just and fair inquiry into the
Easter bombings. Consequently, the Easter tragedy turned out to be an
insignificant item for the election campaign. As such, one cannot forget
these important factors too, when one considers the strange way in
which the predominantly Catholic Negombo electorate voted this time.
Rev. Fr. Vimal Tirimanna, CSsR Kandy