brand logo

When history repeats

28 Aug 2022

“No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth.”  – Plato   Sri Lankan politicians are well-known for their double-tongued speech, which varies according to the situation and political requirement. The ‘truth’ in their hands invariably becomes clay, which is thereafter shaped in the manner that best suits their political interests – a pliable tool that is almost always used to achieve political goals and disposed of immediately thereafter. Every political turncoat in the present Parliament, of which there are many, stands testament to it and the current leadership epitomises this characteristic by going against what it said and stood for just months before. Even though the administration appears to be hellbent on continuing its witch-hunt of those who were in the vanguard of ushering the winds of change, the dividends of that change seem to be paying off, with a semblance of economic stability beginning to appear on the horizon. But all that will dissipate in a matter of hours if speculation of a return of the deposed former leader to a position of power becomes real. We can only hope that saner counsel will prevail for the sake of the relative stability that has now been achieved through rational decision-making. All indications are that the Central Bank, now largely devoid of political interference, has managed to get a grip of things for the first time in at least the last couple of years and it is beginning to show. It appears that applying the brakes on the ill-conceived concept of Modern Monetary Theory relied upon by the former leadership of the Central Bank in the nick of time may well have prevented Sri Lanka from becoming another Lebanon. One can only shudder at the thought of what may have been had there been no people’s revolution and the former Governor – aided, abetted, and empowered by the previous political leadership – kept going the way he did in making Sri Lanka the guinea pig of an utopian theory. Therefore, the present administration, while taking credit for the semblance of sanity that appears to be dawning on Central Bank policy-making, must in turn give credit where it’s due: a revolutionary people’s power movement that brought new meaning to the concept of political authority being directly and irreversibly accountable to the people. It is in this milieu that economists are predicting that the sharply spiralling inflation will peak by next month in the 70% range and plateau thereafter, meaning there will be no further significant increases in the foreseeable future, notwithstanding unforeseen events. It will enable people, more notably industry and business sectors, to finally be able to factor in costs and recalibrate budgets and estimates for at least the next six months.  But the downside of this relative ‘progress’ seems to be the emboldening of the administration to usurp its non-existent mandate to consolidate its grip in the Legislature in preparation for what appears to be a long haul, effectively dodging the need to consult the people in accordance with the sentiments expressed through the people’s revolution. It is in this backdrop that the Government appears to be leaving no stone unturned in its quest for an all-party administration, which was expected to be done and dusted by last week, but is yet in the works as a consequence of its slip beginning to show. As noble an idea as it seems, the real intentions of the proposed all-party endeavour appear to be anything but that, given the increasingly autocratic bent displayed by the administration, despite the best efforts of its leader to camouflage the wolf in sheep’s clothing. The President is well-versed in the all-party ploy that is being mooted, having presided over the ill-fated Yahapalanaya project involving the two biggest political parties at the time. It caused more problems than solutions as the days wore on, with the major actors representing the two parties not only pulling in different directions but also undermining and undercutting each other at every given opportunity. With that blot right on top of his resume, the motivation for a similar (mis)adventure seems to be divided this time around, with failure being a desired outcome should the economic revival not go according to plan on the one hand and the creation of a strong political hand should things look up, on the other. Indications are that the President appears to be keen on throwing the dice betting on the latter, with an eye on the creation of an elusive one-party state in the guise of an all-party government. Already an all-powerful President with the 20th Amendment yet in force, an all-party government to boot will be the best possible insurance to retain that seat, given the lack of a mandate as well as parliamentary support of his own. Whether the 225 members of Parliament can foresee what could be is questionable, given their less-than-desirable IQ levels save a few, and inclination for power and position.  The administration is well aware that a revival of the people’s movement despite the wholesale intimidatory tactics is just one misadventure away – and it has in fact been warned to that effect by intelligence agencies. For all intents and purposes, it will be futile to assume that people have given up on their demand for wholesale reform, which the administration is in fact using as cover for formation of an all-party government. The ongoing selective application of the law continues to highlight the fact that the root causes for the mass protests, most notably corruption and mismanagement, have barely been addressed, and expecting things to change through an all-party endeavour secured through incentives rather than moral compulsion will surely lead to people getting a bigger dose of what they rejected. One cannot escape the fact that our governance model is based on a two-party parliamentary model, providing for a government and an opposition. One cannot operate in the absence of the other; to do so would be the ultimate corruption of the Westminster parliamentary system. If an all-party government is formed as envisaged, then Parliament becomes redundant and its role relegated to a non-entity. Since Parliament represents the sovereign, it is only proper that the people are consulted on the matter. For a political fraternity well-versed in the art of preying on the weaknesses of the voting public, consulting them should not pose much of a problem, for the average voter is easy to please, has a history of selling themselves cheap, and, more worryingly, has a short memory. Given the serial failure of every recent administration to deliver on election promises, voters have also proven to be extremely forgiving and gullible to the extent of electing the village thug as the parliamentary representative. Every politician worth his salt is aware of these inherent weaknesses and preys on them every five years or so. Notwithstanding this cycle, whether one likes it or not, it is an established fact that the current President in different avatars over the last two decades has ended up being the country’s economic saviour every time his political nemesis has previously been in power. The first time was in 2001 when the then People’s Alliance Government drove the economy to minus GDP growth for the first time since independence. The Wickremesinghe-led UNP administration over the course of the next three years managed to reverse the trend, only to be unceremoniously thrown out by the then President, paving the way for a fresh poll that ended with Mahinda Rajapaksa becoming president for the first time in 2005. Wickremesinghe narrowly lost that election due to a controversial LTTE-led boycott of the polls in the north and east. Had these areas been allowed to vote, Wickremesinghe would have comfortably knocked off the 180,000 margin that separated him from Rajapaksa.  Then again, with two years to go of the second Rajapaksa presidency, elections were prematurely called in 2014 for no other reason than an anticipated economic crisis. Having secured victory at the January 2015 poll, once again the Wickremesinghe-led UNP administration was able to turn the economy around by 2019 through IMF-led reforms, despite a presidential coup and politically-motivated ethnic clashes in the south, culminating with the deadly Easter attacks, which ultimately proved to be politically fatal as well.  The rest is now contemporary history. But this time around Wickremesinghe has been entrusted with the same mission as in the past two instances in 2001 and 2015, through only a parliamentary majority. Therefore, instead of working to get the people behind him in going forward, which is critically important if he is to stave off a second uprising, he appears to be hellbent on antagonising even his few remaining supporters. If Wickremesinghe’s grouse for taking this provocative path is the burning of his house by a group of unruly elements, they should by all means be identified, arrested, and produced before the law. But generalising the crime and holding all peace-loving protesters responsible for it will not only prove to be counterproductive, but also self-destructive. The loss of a house and the things one holds precious is no doubt a profound experience. It is therefore opportune to reflect on the thousands of ordinary, innocent, peace-loving people who have suffered the same fate for no fault of theirs. The carnage of 1983 followed by 1988/’89, when thousands became homeless and penniless under a government in which he was a powerful minister, must surely prick his conscience. In more recent times, many members of the Muslim community suffered similar loss of property owing to racially-motivated riots in Beruwala, Kandy, and the east under his watch during the Yahapalanaya administration.


More News..