ot even a month to go for the presidential election, the two main candidates -- incumbent president Mahinda Rajapksa and common opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena are yet to come up with their election manifestos.  Apart from the typical political waiting game --waiting for the other party to come up with their manifesto first so you could either match it or better it -- a paradigm shift that has taken place in the country’s social and political spheres since the end of the civil conflict in 2009 appears to be weighing on the minds of both the campaigners.

Pre-2009, the centre stage of any election manifesto -- whether it be a presidential or a general elections -- was taken by the war -- the ways in which the government which comes into power would try to tackle the separatist terrorists.  Though people have come out of that conflict-oriented mentality, it seems that the main political parties have failed to do so. President Rajapaksa’s 2015 election campaign still harps on past glories. Recently his campaign managers launched a massive advertising campaign in all the daily newspapers in the country by taking the front pages reminding the people of the war victory, implying their obligation to show gratitude. On the other hand common opposition candidate Maithripala Sirisena so far hasn’t come up with a concrete programme to counter Mahinda Rajapaksa’s past glories.

To fill this vacuum, probably for the first time in the history, a privately held think-tank, Pathfinder Foundation, has put forward a comprehensive policy document, which can be used as a guidebook for both candidates in designing their manifestos. Pathfinder Foundation’s policy document clearly shows the deep understanding the compilers had about the paradigm shift that has taken place in the Sri Lanka socio-political structure in the post-war era. It talks about an “aspirational society” which demands more than typical election promises. They demand rule of law, good governance, freedom of speech, a corruption-free society, democratic reforms, etc.

Despite this “aspirational society” that yearns for a lot more than a bag full of goodies, President Rajapaksa’s and Mr. Sirisena’s election campaigns appear to be singing the same old song. President Rajapaksa’s campaign hardly talks about policy and structural reforms. The main weapon of the campaign seems to be fear mongering. People are being told about the possibility of re-emergence of the LTTE and the halting of infrastructure development that are currently being carried out.

On the other hand Sirisena’s election campaign seems to be all over the place. They talk about sweeping constitutional changes and policy reforms without a proper policy document and a clear-cut mechanism on how to carry out such policy reforms. At the same time they promise a bag full of goodies to the people. They promise salary hikes to government servants, subsidies, tax cuts, etc. Probably these populist aspects were included into the Sirisena campaign to lure the voters in the villages, where Rajapksa is believed to have the upper hand. But many believe that it has done more harm to the Sirisena campaign than any good as it gives away the complicated political ideologies within the common opposition, which are not in unison. It also undermines the intelligence and the political maturity of the supporters of the common candidate, may it be the urban middle class or the people in the villages.

Therefore we believe that both candidates have failed in clearly grasping the needs of the “aspirational society”-- if we may call it -- that has emerged since the end of the war. And hence, a question arises about the relevance of the outcome of this election in connection with the country’s socio-economic-political future, though many tend to think the January 8 election is decisive.