7 December 2019 12:00 am Views - 2685
2018 LG polls brought to power individuals wholly unsuited
Calls for a ‘Sajith Sulanga’ will not work
Exigencies of p’mentary politics should not be divorced from imperatives of a meritocracy
Gota’s victory, clear-cut though it is, remains fragile
At present, there are two routes he can take. They are both contradictory and coterminous. He can, firstly, concentrate on the parliamentary elections. In 2015, the government took care of that with a budget bonanza: basically, Ravi Karunanayake’s Robin Hood budget. We now know that such a bonanza was not going to be sustainable in the long-term, even if and even though it contributed to UNP’s win at the August polls. On the other hand, Gotabaya can also concentrate on establishing a meritocracy outside Parliament. We know that the last regime failed to do this, barring the appointment of Indrajit Coomaraswamy (“The only good appointment this government has made” as Razeen Sally aptly described), because in doing away with ‘Rajapaksist’ nepotism, the Yahapalana regime brought in the UNP’s own brand of nepotism, as Ranil Wickremesinghe’s and Karunanayake’s own appointments showed. The rot with all that took just weeks to settle and the stench stayed on.
Personally, I believe both these options are, and ought to be seen as, compatible. In other words, the exigencies of parliamentary politics should not be divorced from the imperatives of a meritocracy. Right now, the initiatives for these two are being taken by two rather different camps, both of which are “with” the incumbent: the party apparatus (SLFP plus SLPP) on the one hand and the Viyath Maga and Eliya set on the other. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka’s distinction between the former’s left populism and the latter’s hardcore authoritarian nationalism may or may not be a crass simplification, but it helps shed light on an interesting phenomenon: how a presidential figure propped to power through the ballot box is implementing a programme which envisions far-reaching and wide-ranging reforms outside the ambit of Parliament. Neither Viyath Maga nor Eliya was elected on a popular mandate, yet the truth stands that Gotabaya’s mandate was authored, partly if not considerably, by them.
The 2018 local government elections brought to power individuals wholly unsuited, we can say, to the very idea of popular representation. I need not point out names because they are there for all to see: alleged drug dealers, thugs and shady criminals. By then only the possibility of a Gotabaya candidacy lingered on, and by year end, with the constitutional fracas (to call it a coup would be to understate it) that came and went, people were treated to a sight they’d never even dreamt of seeing: elected representatives throwing chairs, books and chilli powder at their adversaries. Disgust, even among those sympathetic to the SLPP, was acute, and for a long time the SLPP had to fight a big battle to win over disaffected sections of the Sinhala Buddhist suburban middle-class, who had become as alienated from the SLPP as the pro-UNP crowd. The Easter attacks did helped the party to win them over. But that alone was never enough; there needed to be an alternative to the populist surge which had brought to power, at the local government level at least, dubious representatives the likes of whom even supporters of the SLPP have now vowed to get rid of next year.
That alternative, which proved to be pivotal in pushing Dayan Jayatilleka (arguably the most prominent intellectual who came out in support of a Rajapaksa restoration) further away from Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was Viyath Maga plus Eliya. One of the most interesting paradoxes at the heart of Dr. Dayan’s critique of Gotabaya is his preference for a Mahinda comeback over a Gotabaya coup. It is interesting on two counts. Firstly, the comeback strategy worked for a while in 2015, but by 2018 influential sections of the bourgeoisie and petty bourgeoisie had grown tired of waiting for Mahinda; Gotabaya, on the other hand, was new and untested and moreover aligned with their (fragmented) economic aspirations. It was only fitting, then, that among its coterie of nationalists, academics, and activists, Viyath Maga should also have its share of Sinhala Buddhist businessmen; in a context where economic downturns forced them to look elsewhere for a saviour and solution, they had turned to an efficient administrator who happened to be a member of their (majority) community.
Secondly and as paradoxically, Dr. Dayan’s preferred outcome, which was either a Mahinda presidency or a Mahinda premiership under Maithripala Sirisena (the latter of which we very nearly got last year), could only lead to the enrichment of cronies who, while elected, had got in solely if not mainly by virtue of their alliance with the Pohottuwa. The truth of the matter is that no one would have voted for these people if they had not allied themselves with the SLPP; voters would have even cast their first preference for (Dr) Mervyn Silva had he vowed to revive a ‘Mahinda Yugayak’ in Kelaniya. The consequence of the populist upsurge was seen in Parliament, and that disillusioned even Pohottuwa supporters and bolstered the campaign to drive an administration widely considered to be illegal out. So this, Dr. Dayan’s preferred political outcome, was precisely one which many voters, young and old, rural and urban, pro-UNP and anti-UNP, had rejected: wildly populist antics and promises, made and epitomised on the campaign trail by the anti-Rajapaksa candidate, Sajith Premadasa.
Interestingly enough, incidentally, calls for a Sajith Sulanga will not work. Sajith Premadasa has neither the charisma nor the blend of experience and newness that Mahinda and Gotabaya embodies now. The task that Premadasa has before him for the next three months is thus in many ways more difficult than that which confronted Mahinda upon his defeat years ago. In the latter case, the tussle over the leadership of the party to which the defeated candidate belonged had been resolved, in favour of the winning candidate, by the time the defeated candidate’s loyalists had laid down a comeback strategy through a new political movement centring on him. In Sajith’s case, the situation is more complex and tricky: the demand is for him, yet even if Ranil Wickremesinghe concedes territory to him, the agreement between the two of them will be drafted to ensure a place for the five-time prime minister in such a way as to alienate the most pro-UNP grassroots supporter. A Sajith Sulanga, therefore, will not work, not only because the populist wave has died down but also because for there to be a Sajith Sulangathere has to be a rejection of the policies of stalwarts opposing it from the party, and so far no one, not even Sajith, has stepped forward to criticise Ranil and those who tarnished the UNP’s presidential bid with their anti-Buddhist rhetoric.
The way I see it and the way things are going, the VYE movement can turn out progressive or retrogressive depending on how its organisers handle it and how the President balances it with and against the needs and demands of Parliament. It is important that its organisers do not let VYE go down the path of petty politicking and chauvinism, not least because for a meritocratic movement this is precisely the path that must be avoided if it is to sustain the middle-class backlash that propelled Gotabaya to power. Let’s not forget, after all, that VYE houses not only Sinhala Buddhist activists, but also the likes of Muttiah Muralitharan, who by no stretch of the imagination can be considered as divisive. On the other hand, the President has to keep those elected representatives on his side happy. If it is hard to imagine the two coexisting, it is because elected representatives tend to prioritise self-enrichment, against the aims of a professional front formed outside the legislature.
In that sense, the President is the great unifying figure, as he always has been. Will he be able to keep up the momentum? Will he be able to weed out those considered as undesirables by supporters of the regime and the opposition? Or will he let contradictions between Parliament and VYE rise to inexorable heights, letting VYE veer off course and inadvertently helping the UNP usurp the middle-class and petty bourgeois base on which the President was elected to power weeks ago? As of now, only time can tell.