Re-organisation of the UNP
Posted on May 8th, 2010
By Charles.S.Perera
Therer is a proposal to reorganise the UNP. The UNP as the oldest political party deserves a reorganisation as it has not so far contributed to Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s social or economic growth.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Only contribution it made in its inception was the bringing in of all communities together to work for the independence of Sri Lanka from its colonial rule that had lasted for nearly three hundred years.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ But the Independence alone was not sufficient to establish the sense of freedom – being a Nation a part entire.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It had to await theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ launch of a new political party the SLFP by SWRD Bandaranayake for the emancipation of the country from the bonds of colonialism.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Therefore from the very inception the UNP was unable to make a substantial ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ contribution to the people to make them understand what it is to be an Independent Nation.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ From time to time the political environment of the country had changed between the UNP and the SLFP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The more progressive parties like the LSSP and the CP could not contribute much to the progress of the country on their own without being a complementary to the SLFP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP being a pro western and anti Communist party ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ did not have that fortune of being connected to the ideas of progressƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ of the left and were always saddled with parties that could not give new ideas to take the country on a different path to progress and development.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP how ever had a short spate ofƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ having a left wing politician within its fold Mr. Philip Gunawardhana, for a short while but his contribution of leftist ideas to the UNP was nil.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ What ever social and economic progress Sri Lanka made was under the SLFP and their leftwing partners.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Each time a SLFP Government was defeated and the UNP came back to power, UNP only stepped backwards from progress until the next SLFP government came into power toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ put the country back on the rails of social and economic development.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP therefore remained a party of certain interested power blocks, without being a political party of the people.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP was aƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ party of the capitalists, the business community and in a country where the small capital that it had was mainly in the hands of a few who had no progressive ideas UNP failed to contribute to the development of the country in a big way.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ At its inception UNP underƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ D.S.Senanayake had carried out a few progressive development projects,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ such as ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the Yoda Ela ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ irrigation scheme, Norton Bridge and Laxapana, the settlement of Sinhala villagers in the North , and the Free Education.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ These were the contributions that go to the ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ credit of the UNP of that period.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Subsequently the Mahaveli Scheme and development of Villages through Gam Udawa, the clearingƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and renovating religious areas such as Anuradhapura, Mihintale, Kataragama and Kandy go as well ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to the credit of UNP under Jayawardhane and ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Premadasa.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ On the whole UNP did little for the economic development of the country until latterly under Ranil Wickramasinghe there was a slightƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ economic growth, but that period also showed lot of misconceived economic ideas put into practice which were not positive to the later growth of Sri Lankan economy.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ On the whole the UNP a conservative political Party which catered to the business community and the well to do local landedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ gentry did not find its proper place inƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Sri Lanka and was not on the whole a Party that contributed to Sri LankaƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s social, culturalƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ or economic growth.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The writer has no political interests, and was never in the Diplomatic Service of Sri Lanka nor does he know any minsters of the present Government or those of the Governments before.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ He does notƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ know the present President of Sri Lanka nor any previous Presidents, therefore his only interest is in seeing the development of his motherland of which he is a simple citizen. ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Therefore, he writes neither to receive accolade from one political partyƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ or negate the importance of another.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It is just an attempt to evaluate the situation and give his opinionƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ on how the UNP could perhaps be reorganised to be a political ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ party of the people.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It is only now that the political scene in Sri Lanka has seriously changed. It is this political change that has made the members of the UNP think of the necessity to reorganise the UNP. It is time that some one comes forward to speak of the necessity to change the make up of the oldest political party the UNPƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ before it disappears into the past memory of the people.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If it were to continue as it is,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ it would soon beƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ phantom of its own past.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP has contributed nothing in the way of progress and development to the country in the recent past, and very little before.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP if it had adopted a different attitude towards the ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ other main political party the SLFP, it may perhaps have evolved differently and perhaps won the respect of the people, ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and a certain popularity along side ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the SLFP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ But instead, the UNP adopted an aggressive diametrically opposite attitude thus appealing more to the aggressive, pompous and rudeƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ elements of the society. The UNP leadership on political platforms did not inspire the ordinary people; the ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ simple, gentle , and the peace loving.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ When the UNP leadership knew thatƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ its opponents were more respected and loved, it should have gone along with the people to accept them as good people, but show in a more gentle ways that the politics they have adoptedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ were not the best.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Then the people would have listened and perhaps changed their views.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ But the rhetoric of ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Tissa Attanayake, Lakshman Kiriella, Ravi Karunanayake,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and Ranil Wickrmasinghe were annoyingƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ could not attract the peopleƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ to their side.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP thus distancedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ itself from the ordinary people.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP had committed too many mistakes the 1983 riots were the results of a mistakes of UNP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ TheƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ CFA was another mistake of UNP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP had accumulatedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ such errors and did not accept them asƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ its mistakes.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The executive Presidency was the child ofƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP. It was used by JR in a negative way. Taking away the civic rights of Mrs. Bandatranaike was another ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ mistake.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ JRƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢s UNP depended too much on America, and when India intervened when the UNP was winning against the terrorists, he expected American intervention which was not forth coming and UNP had noƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ alternative but to give in to Rajiv Gandhi and sign the 13th Amendment to the Constitution.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The UNP of Ranil WickramasingheƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ had not learnt any lessons from the mistakes UNP had accumulated in the past.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The result was that the people relied more and more ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ in Mr.Mahinda Rajapakse.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Executive Presidency in the hands of an honest politician, loyal to the service to the people was a boon at the time the country wasƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ infested with the cancer of terrorism. That honestƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ politician loyal to the people was Mahinda Rajapakse, to whom executive Presidency ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ paid dividends.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Though some criticise him for a ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-recordƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ cabinet, it showedƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Mahinda RajapakseƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ¢-¾‚¢sƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ cunning statesmanshipƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ and showed his ability toƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ use the worst of a situation to the best of his advantage.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ If the UNP played its cards well at the time it would have come off the winner.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ There would not have been an ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-exodusƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ of UNP seniors to the fold of President Mahinda Rajapakse, if Ranil Wickramasinghe had agreed to work in cooperation with the PresidentƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Mahinda Rajapakse, at theƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ time the country was in danger of being divided by the ruthless terrorists. And the people would have appreciated it andƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ accepted the UNP for an alternative government when the time was ripe.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ That in fact was the fall of the UNP, having failed to make use of a situation to its advantage, itƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ was left like a man caught in the flood waters without even a weed to hang on to.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ The fact that the leader of the UNP Ranil Wickramasinghe has still not learnt his lesson is evident fromƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ the fact that he has not been able to be honest to himself, by handing over his resignation from the leadership of the UNP.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ That is the best he could have done ,for which the people would have been grateful to him and even pardoned him for his errors.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Those who want to reorganise UNP should take into consideration all this, and make radical changes in its policies.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP is known as a pro-western conservative party.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ It had been able to dupe certain section of the people at grass root level, not by adopting people friendly political policies, but by giving certain advantages to its followers , over the rival groups of people.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ UNP should also take into consideration that we are a developing country, and in being in that position we should adopt neutral political policies, withoutƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ being ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-proƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ”š‚ any one sector,ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ or ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…-anti ƒÆ’‚¢ƒ¢-¡‚¬ƒ…- another sector.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ We should be able to take advantage from both East and West.ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ Russia and China had been our greatest strength at a time of need, and that fact should be kept in mind by those who want to reorganise UNP.
ƒÆ’-¡ƒ”š‚ A viable opposition is healthy for democracy, and we wish all the best for those who will reform and reorganise the UNP.
May 11th, 2010 at 2:50 am
As they say, you learn something new every day. On reading your article, for instance, I learned that colonial rule over the island “lasted for nearly three hundred years”. And all this while I thought the period from the arrival of the Portuguese until the British left, amounted to nearly 450 years! Maybe, I need to re-visit my old history text books. I also gathered that the country had to await the founding of the SLFP by Mr Bandaranaike “for the emancipation of the country from the bonds of colonialism” – I had believed the island got its independence three years before that. And I was in for another surprise. I note you saying that “whatever social and economic progress Sri Lanka made was under the SLFP and their left wing partners” and “the UNP has contributed nothing in the way of progress and development to the country in the recent past, and very little before”. Isn’t that a bit harsh? And all this despite your own acknowledgement elsewhere that UNP governments had in fact completed some significant development projects including the Gal Oya and Mahaveli schemes.
I am afraid you are also being less than fair when you say the “UNP leadership on political platforms did not inspire the ordinary people; the simple, gentle and the peace loving”. This is most certainly not true of the Party in years past. The likes of DS and Dudley Senanayake, MD Banda, A Ratnayake and UB Wanninayake appealed very much to the “simple, gentle and peace loving”. And the large numbers who consistently voted for the Party attest to the Party’s country-wide popularity over the years.
The UNP had the misfortune to lose President Premadasa and two potential strong leaders in Lalith Athulathmudali and Gamini Dissanayake, to the assassin’s gun. And it is true, the Party has fallen on bad times and the current leadership seems wanting. The UNP has made mistakes. So has the SLFP. It is in the nature of things that this will happen. But, please, let’s be fair and not criticise unreasonably.
You say that “it is only now that the political scene in Sri Lanka has seriously changed”. This implies things were largely static all these years. That is difficult to accept. The military defeat of the Tigers last year was without doubt a seminal event in the island’s history. And almost everyone is rightly excited about that. But we should not get too carried away into thinking that serious change only occurred then. The political scene is forever evolving. Indeed, I can well remember Mr SWRD Bandaranaike saying, almost ad nauseum, when he became Prime Minister, how the country was then going through a period of transition!
In 1956 the UNP was routed at the polls with only 8 members being elected to parliament. And yet it was back in government in 1965. And in 1977 it again came back after seven years in opposition. The party can bounce back in similar fashion and no doubt it will.
Sri Lanka needs a strong Opposition, and it is in the national interest that the UNP is able to become again a credible alternative government. I join you in “wishing all the best for those who will reform and reorganise the UNP”.