Will Maithree be forced to Commit
Political Harakiri?
Power and tradition destroy good people. In Sri Lankan
standard, Maithreepala Sirisena (MS) is a good politician. Resigning from the
post of the general secretary of the SLFP and announcing that he will stand
against President Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR) at the forthcoming presidential
election would appear as a very courageous decision. Nonetheless, the events as
unfolded may also give the impression that MS had become a secondary actor
moved by other powerful political forces. In the political arena we have seen
in the last ten years two parallel conflicts. Dynastic politics is not uncommon
in this part of the world. Since independence we have witnessed many a
political conflict between leading dynasties, Senanayaka- Bandaranaike,
Bandaranaike-Wijewardena after the decline of Senanayakas in the late 1960s.
Since 2005, we saw an emergence of a rural small dynasty that was ‘no-body’ and
did not go beyond its power of influence from remote Giruwa Pattu as a leading
political dynasty in Sri Lanka. Rajapaksa dynasty has been able to defeat
effectively both Bandaranaike and Wijewardena dynasties in the arena of Sri
Lankan politics and to rise as a formidable opponent to the existing political
dynasties. The second conflict is blurred and not clear. This conflict is
between traditional bourgeois and the novae rich that emerged in the neoliberal
phase of Sri Lankan capitalism. The conflict between these two contenders has
focused on the issues such as who gets the bigger share? whose economic
interests dominate in decision-making? Traditional bourgeoisie no doubt
supported political parties during elections but did not actively play a role
in political conflicts. For them, of course with exceptions, economics and
politics are separate specialties. Since 1977, we have seen a rise of new
economic grouping that I call in the absence of a better phrase
economico-political bourgeois class. They were equally active in both spheres.
A phenomenon that Prof. Wendy Brown recognized some time ago as a new
development in world politics. As she argues this new group not only help
existing parties, but they themselves involve in political parties. In the Sri
Lankan political scene, these two conflicts, namely, (1) conflict between
political dynasties, (2) conflict between two bourgeois groups, were visible
especially in the last ten years. However, these conflicts have surfaced not in
explicit form but as conflicts between various binaries such as civilized/
uncivilized; orderly/ disorderly; clean/ dirty; urbane/ baiyas.
The system of executive presidency that was crafted by late
President J R Jayawardena in order to maintain the power of Wijewardena dynasty
for ever has failed to achieve its objectives partly because of the
‘unanticipated’ events. Exceptional situation invariably requires
unconventional aberrations! The brief rule by a commoner, President R
Premadasa, was the outcome. Power shifted, Bandaranaikes came to power once
again for 11 years. Once again, two leading dynasties had shown they could not
handle the Tamil uprising by the LTTE. A new leader with strong
Sinhala-Buddhist support was required. A rural dynasty was brought in, and
Rajapaksa government’s success in defeating the LTTE contributed to consolidate
its power while addressing to the new needs of the emerging economico-political
bourgeois class. President Rajapaksa was able not only to consolidate his power
but also to consolidate his and his extended family as a new ruling dynasty at
the center eclipsing both Bandaranaikas and Wijewardenas. After so many
defeats, two dynasties have realized new Rajapaksa dynasty cannot be confronted
by adopting conventional political mechanisms. A new room for a new aberrations
so the two dynasties together brought in a ‘common’ common candidate from
Polonnaruwa. In this sense this is a very Machiavellian move and all the credit
should go to President Chandrika Bandaranaike.
Maithree’s Political Future
If the summation is the only law in mathematics, there is a
reasonable chance that MS wins the presidential race on January 8, 2015. The
issue that I am trying to raise is what would be the political future of MS. How
does this exercise affect the country, especially its multitude? There are many
‘black elephants’, (if I use the term recently coined by someone combining
black in ‘black sawn’ and elephant in ‘elephant in the room’). How would
Maithree regime address these ‘black elephants’? Since Maithree would most
likely to be a stop-gap person, may be it is not pertinent to expect from him to
address all these issues. But he is ambiguous even on the issues people around
him want to address. He stated at the outset that he would abolish the
executive presidency in 100 days, but he changed this position at Horagolla
Bandaranaike Samadhi a couple of days ago by saying that he will reduce the
power of the executive president. What would be written finally in his election
manifesto is yet to be seen. In case, he abolishes the executive presidency in
hundred days and if he signs MoU with the UNP that Mr Ranil Wickramasinghe will
be appointed as the Prime Minister, Maithree would be just a rubber stamp after
100 days. After winning the presidential election, if he forms a cabinet
consisting the prominent UNPers and SLFPers, this so-called national government
would not be qualitatively different from the present government headed by MR
except the absence of Rajapaksa family members. Hence, my submission is that
the way in which Maithreepala Sirisena emerged as the presidential candidate
will not allow to make a big turning point in Sri Lankan recent political
history notwithstanding the brief respite it would generate after the
presidential election. Let us ask the following questions? Will his regime
abolish the executive presidential system or scrape its some executive powers?
Will his regime ensure full implementation of the 13th Amendment to
the Constitution? Will he open up the files kept by MR and take actions against
all the corrupt elements in the UPFA government? Will he allow UN Commission to
come and continue the enquiry on war crimes? Will he implement LLRC
recommendations? These are in fact BIG questions even we leave out the question
about the neoliberal economic policies that have been adopted since 1977.
Correct Decision but Incorrect Path
I believe that Maithree-Rajitha took a correct decision by
quitting the Rajapaksa government that has been increasingly moving towards
authoritarianism. Sri Lanka needs a strong social movement to counter three
main trends in its recent history, namely, towards authoritarianism, towards
economic policy framework that is biased towards the interests of the upper
classes and layers of the society, and towards majoritarianism. Both Maithree
who came from rural peasant background and Rajitha who continuously stands for
the rights of the marginalized and oppressed layers of the Sri Lankan society
have the potential of leading such a movement for democracy, equality, social
justice. Of course one important dimension that has to be added to this list is
ensuring ecological balance. However, the two have entered oppositional
politics not from this perspective but from the short term perspective of presidential
election becoming secondary actors in two bigger, but parallel, conflicts
mentioned above. If they took a different path in or after taking the decision
to quit MR government, Maithree would have become a real organic leader of a
Sri Lankan first ever peasant party raising all the issues faced by the
downtrodden rural masses. Such a part together with the urban lower classes and
marginalized nations, ethnic groups and social groups would have been the real
force that can address the issues outlined above.
The writer is the co-coordinator of the Marx School.
Comments
Post a Comment