{"id":93860,"date":"2019-10-13T16:19:40","date_gmt":"2019-10-13T23:19:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/?p=93860"},"modified":"2019-10-13T16:19:40","modified_gmt":"2019-10-13T23:19:40","slug":"revisiting-january-2015","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/2019\/10\/13\/revisiting-january-2015\/","title":{"rendered":"Revisiting January 2015"},"content":{"rendered":"

by Rohana R. Wasala<\/em><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n

The following article of mine was published in The\nIsland<\/em> newspaper and in Lankaweb<\/em> respectively on January 14 and\n15, 2015. I thought the present circumstances warrant a reprint of the\nsame.  If you see any unimportant inconsistencies here in relation to the\ncurrent ground reality in the political landscape, please remember that this\nwas published just five days after the incumbent president was sworn in,\nfollowed by the launching of the Yahapalanaya. The transfer of power that \ntook place then was very smoothly achieved because the Rajapaksa government\nallowed the electoral process to take its legitimate course without any\nhindrance; they did not want to do anything that could have undermined the\npeople’s right to vote. Neither did they postpone elections out of fear of\nlosing them; instead, the government advanced the presidential election by two\nyears (Please see paragraph 3 below.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Limits of realpolitik and the cost of maithri <\/em>misdirected<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I hail the final result of the free and fair election so efficiently\nconducted under the outgoing administration as confirmation of the fact that\ndemocracy remains still safe and untouched in this country. The coming together\nof many diverse, formerly well-nigh irreconcilable factions, but which were\neventually  bound by a common aim (that of dislodging Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa\nfrom power, come what may) demonstrates the great potential that such pan-Sri\nLankan unity  has for causing even more positive change in the country\nwithout resorting to violence. The change of government, however brought about,\ncould offer unprecedented opportunities for resolving the longstanding national\nissue. The fact that the UPFA has promised unconditional support for the\ngovernment to implement its 100-day programme, which could give the people a\nforetaste of what to expect under a more permanent regime set up after this\nchange, is an encouraging sign for future developments of a positive nature.\nThings are generally looking up for the new government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having said this, however, I must admit that I was among those\nSri Lankans who did not actually envisage a regime change engineered through a\ncoup of sorts at this juncture in view of the more important local and global\nramifications of the problem. In circumstances that need no elaboration, what\nactually happened was that the election that the former president held two\nyears ahead of the end of his second term for his own strategic reasons was\nturned into an uncalled for caesarean section by vested interests. A change of\ngovernment effected without outside interference would have been better for the\nhealth and longevity of the new government and also for the well-being of the\ncountry. If the agenda of the  movers and shakers behind this operation\nagrees with the democratic wish of the non-communalist majority (which includes\nall ethnic communities) of the population it will definitely be the happiest\nnational occasion for all Sri Lankans since the defeat of terrorism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The smooth manner in which the transfer of power took place,\neven in the abnormal circumstances it had to be performed,  reflects the\nfact that after all Sri Lankan leaders are well schooled in leading the\nunhampered democratic process that is necessary for the exercise of the\npeople\u2019s right to change governments through the power of the ballot, and that\nthey don\u2019t need outsiders to preach to them or pressure them in this regard. Mr\nMahinda Rajapaksa, Mr Maithripala Sirisena and Mr Ranil Wickremasinghe played\ntheir complementary roles in a highly commendable manner. In the generally\nhopeful environment that has emerged, my personal belief is that the government\nchange, while being a clear victory for Rajapaksa haters, has paradoxically the\npotential of being, in the long term, a blessing in disguise for Mr Mahinda\nRajapaksa and his supporters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the short term effect is otherwise: it looks like a\ntragic fall for Mr Rajapaksa. In a classical Greek tragedy such as Oedipus Rex\n(King Oedipus) the protagonist (main character) is a noble person, a hero. The\ndrama is built around the fall of this character from fortune to adversity due\nto some negative factor in his situation such as a flaw in his reasoning,\nhubris or overweening pride in his own abilities, and an inherent condition in\nthe society, which prevents him from reaching some noble goal that he aspires\nto realize.  Mr Rajapaksa\u2019s tragic flaw  was his voluntary or\ninvoluntary vulnerability to charges of rampant corruption and nepotism or\nfamily bandyism (something from which, unfortunately, his successor is not immune).\nOf course, no politician in power is completely safe from charges of\ncorruption, but that doesn\u2019t mean that every politician is corrupt. The voters\nknew this from the beginning, but expected him, at the earliest instance\navailable, to put an end to his vulnerability to such charges by doing\nsomething proactive about it. After patiently turning a blind eye to it for as\nlong as they possibly could for the sake of the country, many strong Mahinda\nsupporters thought enough is enough and helped his ouster even at some temporary\n risk to the country. The opposition ranks arrayed against him, swollen by\ndefectors from his own governing alliance, almost exclusively focused on these\ncharges and his alleged susceptibility (as rumoured) to an authoritarian style\nof interaction with his colleagues in the government; they played down his\nsuccessful performance in more important areas such as national security and\nthe equitable development of all parts of the country including particularly\nthe northern and the eastern provinces which had faced the brunt of the civil\nwar, which aspect of his presence was actually the basis of his popularity.\nThis relentless insistence by his critics on  (probably strategically\nexaggerated) charges of corruption, nepotism and authoritarianism, etc.,\n had its desired effect especially among social media savvy young people\n(say those between 18 and 35) who seemed to adopt a clearly more no-nonsense\nattitude towards those corruption allegations than an older generation of\nvoters who were ready to temporarily overlook these in support of the\nwar-winning leader now embarked on a massive development drive. The majority of\nthe older supporters of Mr Rajapaksa trusted him to focus on the need to\neliminate the grounds for such accusations to be made against him when more\npressing matters would be sufficiently settled. But there is no doubt in my\nmind that they wholeheartedly approve of the hardnosed attitude of the younger\ngenerations of voters towards power seeking politicians (such as what is the\nnorm in Australian parliamentary politics, where the unalterable implicit\nwarning to all politicians is \u2018deliver or depart\u2019: Former federal prime\nminister Mrs Julia Gillard had to go because of the carbon tax problem, and now\n the writing is said to be on the wall for her successor Mr Tony Abbott on\nsimilar grounds). That trend should be encouraged by all means for the good of\nthe country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is unfortunate that the former president got no chance, or\ndidn\u2019t try to find one, to respond to opposition charges of corruption, and\nthat apparently he didn\u2019t think it necessary to have restricted his preference\nfor co-opting family members into the task of nation building to his three\nbrothers;  and despite his alleged authoritarian way of dealing with his\nsubordinate colleagues, he strangely failed to contain the  abominable\nbehavior of certain unsavory characters around him.  It is said that he\nwas too kindhearted to hurt the feelings of his friends, and he forgave them\ntoo often. In the process, he effectively betrayed the trust reposed in him by\nthe people of the country. So it was a case of misdirected maithri (in Buddhism\n\u2018loving kindness\u2019 also literally \u2018friendliness\u2019).As a non-partisan journalist,\nwith absolutely no selfish motives to achieve, but only well intentioned towards\nboth Mr Rajapaksa and the country, I wrote two articles entitled Old fossils\nout, new blood in\u201d and What\u2019s wrong with corruption\u201d in both of  which I\ncalled a spade a spade while making some brief comments on, respectively, the\ninadvisability of nepotism, and the necessity of registering a plausible\nresponse to charges of corruption. My purpose was to seriously suggest that\nsomething convincing be done to create no conducive environment for such\nallegations to arise. This was quite  early in Mr Rajapaksa\u2019s second term.\nThese articles, published in The Island respectively on September 11, 2010 and\nJuly 29, 2011, are still available in the internet. (Of course, here I am\nwriting as an average citizen of the country.  Much wiser and far more\nknowledgeable people than me have made similar suggestions.) Perhaps, Mr\nRajapaksa neglected to refute charges of corruption because they were totally\nfalse and also because they were too numerous to counter individually. He was\nheard saying that he had more urgent work to do than  waste time on\nbaseless allegations, which in fact would have been accepted by the people as a\nlegitimate response had he cared to meet at least a few typical charges\nin  some more reliable, well publicized manner, with facts and figures set\nout for all to see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No successful politician can avoid realpolitik at times. Moral\nidealism has sometimes to be sacrificed for dealing with practical realities.\nBut there are limits to realpolitik. His decision to hold elections two years\nbefore they were due was a crass miscalculation. He could have instead used the\nremaining two years of his term to fix the various corruption allegations, and\nsettle issues relating to governance, economic management and reconciliation.\nIf that happened he would have easily won a third term in due course, and saved\nthe country from impending, possibly chaotic, conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mr Rajapaksa successfully projected his Sinhalese Buddhist image\nfor obvious reasons. But the majority of Sinhalese Buddhist voters are not too\ndumb to take politicians at face value. This is an age in which more and more\neducated young people become skeptical about such superstitions as astrology,\nwhich is a good thing. He betrayed an exaggerated, quite unbuddhistic\n reliance on the predictions of astrologers, auspicious times, occult\nprotection, etc (Buddha rejected astrology as a practice fit for beasts or\nthiraschina vidya), which also partly contributed to his defeat, by betraying\nhis unwarranted panicky behavior towards the D Day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Psephologists have made a neat comparison between the two camps\nin respect of the general voting patterns: a majority of each minority\ncommunity and a minority of the majority community have voted for Mr Sirisena,\nwhile the reverse has happened in the case of Mr Rajapaksa. But the important\nthing is that both candidates got votes from all the communities. If anyone\nsuggested that Mr Sirisena won only because of minority votes, that would be a\nserious mistake. Mr Rajapaksa\u2019s losing margin was a mere 449,072 votes, whereas\nthe valid vote cast was over 12,000,000 and his share was 5,768,090 (47.48% to\nMr Sirisena\u2019s 51.28%).  The voter turnout was a very healthy 81.52%, which\nreflects a very high level of public awareness of and active participation in\nthe democratic process. So the rulers are obliged to capitalize on this\nopportunity to resolve outstanding issues through democratic consensus. The\ncohesion of the entire electorate on these lines can increase the chances for\nthe formation of a government at the centre that is more amenable to the\ndemands of the minorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This centripetal tendency will serve to preserve the unitary\nstatus of the country, averting separatism. The task of achieving the right\nbalance between the minority and majority interests that will enable the birth\nof a new country where the different communities can live in harmony as one\nnation without minorities clamouring for separation will call for political\nskills of the highest order. Whether Mr Sirisena is equal to the task will soon\nbe tested. Mr Rajapaksa\u2019s less hurried plan of achieving reconciliation by\nwinning the hearts and minds of the minorities through comprehensive\ndevelopment has virtually been aborted. The sad reality is that he squandered\nthe chances he had to address these issues in a more robust manner than he\nactually did. Probably a bit of hubris was a contributory factor, too. But he\nis still in a position to influence events, because he hasn\u2019t still\nsignificantly lost his stature and popularity among the masses who are mindful\nof the many plus points of his leadership. As many people who still admire him\nsay, it was the system that was defeated, not Mr Rajapaksa himself.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Rohana R. Wasala The following article of mine was published in The Island newspaper and in Lankaweb respectively on January 14 and 15, 2015. I thought the present circumstances warrant a reprint of the same.  If you see any unimportant inconsistencies here in relation to the current ground reality in the political landscape, please remember that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":true,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[91],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-93860","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-rohana-r-wasala"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93860","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=93860"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93860\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93860"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93860"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lankaweb.com\/news\/items\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93860"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}