Politics around the world and more so in Sri Lanka has seen the ideals of representing a constituency replaced with the face of populism. The cult-like figures of politicians have been built up through aggressive marketing and initiatives which have seen short-term benefits reach the public. Very often, the policies and plans which would not see immediate results are shelved in favour of those who provide immediate monetary results but contribute little to the long-term development of the country. Since the introduction of the executive presidency, Sri Lankans have often chosen to vote for the individual and his or her personality, ahead of the policies they stand for. At the 2010 presidential election which came less than a year after the conclusion of the war, the country was provided with two populist figures – Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was the President at the time the war ended, and Sarath Fonseka, the Army Commander credited with ending the conflict. The election proved to be little more than a popularity contest with both candidates presenting manifestos that appealed to the immediate desires of the voting public. Following his victory, Rajapaksa continued to govern the country solely based on the perception of his personal popularity amongst his supporters. The Opposition in 2015 When the 2015 presidential election was announced back in November 2014, it was done on the back of a strong performance by the United National Party (UNP) at the Uva Provincial Council elections. Rajapaksa’s popularity was starting to be questioned, resulting in him calling for an election a year earlier than it was originally scheduled for. With mounting pressure from civil society groups, opposition from political parties, and an overall growing displeasure towards him and his family, Rajapaksa seemed keen on getting ahead of his declining popularity. The main Opposition parties led by the UNP recognised that this was their best opportunity to win back power and enact meaningful change. The weeks and months leading up to the announcement of the election saw many backroom meetings between the Opposition parties and members of the Rajapaksa Government. Recognising that a common front was required in order to succeed at the election, the Opposition was building an electoral platform driven by issues rather than the personality of the candidate. It is a public secret that Maithripala Sirisena was in fact not the Opposition’s first choice as their candidate, but was rather the only candidate that was capable of uniting all the different factions. Choosing a unifying figure over a political strongman highlighted the Opposition’s approach towards reigniting the voters’ demands for meaningful policies ahead of political rhetoric. The Mahinda Rajapaksa Government was built around the aura of Rajapaksa; the successes of his Government were attributed to himself personally, while the failures were covered up. Despite maintaining a jumbo cabinet numbering 52 cabinet ministers, this was entered into the Guinness World Records and the Rajapaksa Government was seen as a “one-man regime”. When the then Opposition announced the common candidacy of Maithripala Sirisena, it took some political pundits by surprise. Sirisena, despite being the General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), was a relatively unknown political figure on the national stage. Having been in representative politics since the 1980s, Sirisena had not been able to build an image outside of his constituency in Polonnaruwa. In fact, despite holding the post of General Secretary of the SLFP, he was forced to operate in the shadow of the Rajapaksa family. His defection to the Opposition ranks certainly caused a great deal of euphoria amongst their supporters, with much of the public re-energised for the upcoming elections. It was not so much his arrival as the Opposition candidate that rejuvenated their supporters, but the promise that his unveiling would be the foundation for a broad, issue-based alliance. With the benefit of hindsight, it is now clear that the success of the Sirisena candidacy in 2015 was not so much due to his own political prowess, but rather due to the policies and ideals that accompanied his campaign. Support from a wide range of political parties, including the minority parties and civil society, meant that the required cross-section of voters was adequately convinced to vote for him. Strategy for forthcoming election? The UNP-led Opposition was able to build an electoral platform that appealed to all sections of society. It is certainly not an easy task when the fractious nature of society is taken into account. However, the unifying nature of a common candidate demonstrated its weight in gold with an against-the-odds victory at the election. In contrast, the populist figure of Mahinda Rajapaksa was forced to rely on his existing support base, unable to woo first-time voters and the undecideds. While in power, it was the populist nature of Rajapaksa which ensured that he was able to govern with an iron fist, continually portraying his decisions as those which were going along the popular trend of thought. However, when finally challenged by a united Opposition front which was able to appeal to a wider section of society, the follies of the Rajapaksa’s populist politics was highlighted. It was the populism adopted by Rajapaksa during his 10-year reign that prevented him from appealing to a more diverse vote bank. The problem with populist politics is that you are unable to be popular amongst all sections of society – a lesson highlighted by the defeat of Rajapaksa in 2015. Despite commanding a sizeable support base amongst the Sinhala-Buddhist voters, he was unable to gain a foothold within the minorities or the moderates in the country. Once again, it seems as though the Rajapaksa camp adopted a similar strategy. The nomination of Gotabaya Rajapaksa – endorsed by Mahinda Rajapaksa – as their candidate suggests they will rely on a populist approach. Gotabaya’s arrival on the scene will certainly fortify their position among the Sinhala-Buddhist voters. However, the hard line approach to the minorities and moderates adopted during his tenure as the Secretary to the Ministry of Defence will certainly alienate him from them. The UNP, on the other hand, is still debating over the best strategy to approach the upcoming election. While ensuring that the UNP’s support base is encouraged to come out and vote in the party’s favour is paramount, the party will also need to ensure that the support of the minorities is secured. Faced with the populist tactics of the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), the UNP will need to decide whether they try to defeat the Rajapaksa threat by employing similar tactics or revert back to the successful strategy of 2015. Whichever decision is taken, history has shown that populism does not always trump substance.