Showing posts with label TNA Manifesto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TNA Manifesto. Show all posts

10 September 2013

C.V. Wigneswaran chit-chats with a ghost



[IN A PARALLEL UNIVERSE CALLED ‘HUMILITY’…]

Illustration by Asanga Indunil
Canagasabapathy Viswalingam Wigneswaran, retired-judge of the Supreme Court, burdened by the unfamiliar rigors of politicking, took a break.  He told his entourage of supporters to take a break as well and stepped into a nondescript eatery on a dusty street in a less populated area of Vadukoddai.  Still relatively new to this part of the country, not many recognized him.  He was able to sip his plain tea in peace. 

A man, probably in his mid-fifties, who had been sitting at the next table suddenly got up, walked over to the would-be Chief Minister and politely requested to sit with him.  Wigneswaran looked at the bald-headed, stocky gentleman clad in a veshti with his upper garment decked with a salvai with mild irritation, but the smile on the man’s face disarmed him.  He grudgingly consented.

‘Thambi,’ the stranger said but before he could continue, the Septuagenarian retorted, ‘Thambi?’
He was not questioning relationship claim but perceptions of seniority.

‘Yes, Thambi,’ the man insisted. 

This brought on a stare, naturally.  Then the man said, ‘Amirthalingam.  I am Appapillai Amirthalingam.’

‘But you are dead,’ the ex-judge pronounced.

‘Strictly speaking I was killed, but you’ve resurrected me with your manifesto, wouldn’t you say?’
Devout Hindu that he claims he is, Wigneswaran was not ready to challenge ghost-claims, but in the manner of an impartial judge chose to listen.

‘As you know Thambi, I’ve been dead, killed-dead that is, for almost a quarter of a century.  That’s not as dead-long as Chelva Aiyah or Ponnambalam Aiyah, but more dead-long than Prabhakaran Thambi, but it’s dead-long enough.’

‘Wait, you still call him “Thambi”?’ Wigneswaran interjected.

‘In dead-land there’s little to gain by harboring ill-feeling, although Thambi studiously avoids me.’

‘Ok, go on!’ the candidate’s curiosity was aroused.

‘You are old enough to know that we really don’t know what kind of tragedies we precipitate with the most innocent and well-meaning of actions.  In 1977 we saw an election result.  Of course we identified with the cause, the Eelam wish and all that, but that parliamentary seat was as important a dream.  We didn’t know that it would take us to the Indo-Lanka Accord and when that came, we didn’t know that Thambi would renege.  I didn’t foresee Thambi turning into what he did turn into, Surya Devan and all that, and I never imagined he would send me to dead-land. ‘

‘Hmmm….’

‘Hmmm….anyway, the dead years are good for assessment and over the dead-years I’ve managed to skirt around that sad rock called Regret that keeps materializing before me wherever I go.  I wasn’t to know that I would lose the road map or rather have the road map grabbed from me. I wasn’t to know that Thambi would lose the plot.’

‘Come, come….hmmm,’ he couldn’t bring himself to calling this younger looking man-ghost 
“Annai”, but after a few pulled himself together quickly and said, ‘It’s not your fault or Thambi’s fault, and anyway you seem to be treating those Sinhala chauvinists with soft gloves!’ 

‘Oh no!  I have no illusions about Sinhala chauvinists.  But Thambi, we can only go so far with the blame game and that of passing the ball.  There were things we did which built the wrong kinds of walls.  It was not a great wall that carved for us a separate state along lines that we conveniently and arbitrarily drew.  No, it was a great wall between us and a place called “Better”.  Ironically, we regressed so much that today whatever “better” we can talk of is thanks to what we called the Sinhala Government and because that Sinhala Government got rid of Thambi and his goons.’

‘Shhhhh!’ the candidate shushed the former leader of the TULF.

‘This is the problem. We’ve been shushing too much. We shushed when Thambi started killing innocent people. We shushed when he started abducting little Tamil children.  I am sure even you must have shushed when Thambi got me killed.  There was shushing when hundreds of thousands of our people were held hostage. I can go on and on, I am dead and time is all that I have.’

‘Stop.  This is not about all that. This is about an election.  None of us seriously believe we can deliver what we promise. We can blame it on the racist Sinhalese who are not interested in addressing our legitimate grievances and delivering legitimate aspirations.’

‘I know, I know, but Thambi, politics does not begin when elections are called and do not end when results are announced.  Our words go to other mouths, who will add words to those that we utter.’

‘It worked for you!’

‘I don’t want to wish you anything less than the Chief Minister post, don’t get me wrong, but you know, our words don’t follow us to our graves and it is not just we who have to pay for our crimes of omission and commission.’

‘You are batting for the Sinhalese now!’

There was silence.

‘Dead-land is full of people who got their visas long before they ought to have.  It’s a crowded place, this county for the unnecessarily-killed where I am resident now.  Blame it on me.  There’s limited oxygen there.  We really don’t need to have our numbers swelled.’

It was time to pronounce judgment.  Wigneswaran closed his eyes. Reflected. There was silence.  When he opened his eyes, he was alone.  His cup was empty, and there was a half-full cup of plain tea on the other side of the table. 
    

09 September 2013

The TNA’s ‘hardline’ manifesto


There is a time-tested formula to obtain the optimum in any engagement.  It was proposed first by the All-Knowing and All-Seeing, the Buddha Siddhartha Gauthama.  The doctrine is contained in two ideas: compassion and wisdom.  Applicable to all, this formula offers the best instruments to dissect and respond to the manifesto recently put out by the Tamil National Alliance (TNA).

Promising sun, moon, stars and everything underneath is part and parcel of manifestos.  If, as Lee Kwan Yew once said, democracy in Sri Lanka is but the periodic auctioning of non-existent resources, the TNA cannot be faulted for promising the undeliverable. 

The TNA manifesto pledges a commitment to a separate state in no uncertain terms.  The deliverability aside, there are several reasons why such a manifesto makes sense, politically that is, for the TNA.  There is no Tamil country in this world.  As such, the promise has appeal, albeit to the less-critical and baser instincts of the Tamil community.  It need not be a place, even if obtained, that someone in Colombo or Toronto, for example, would ever inhabit, but it is certainly an idea that is warm enough to warrant support. 

Then there is also the issue of belonging.  The distance between the powerful and the powerless is such that few can actually relate with heart and soul to rulers.  A Sinhalese being President does not make all Sinhalese feel safer.  A woman president doesn’t automatically emancipate women from patriarchal fetters.  Given decades of deliberate mis-education by communalist leaders, a war where primarily Sinhala soldiers fought an outfit made of Tamils and failure to address real, felt grievances (never mind the inflations of the same), that sense of un-belonging can be expected to be more acute in a Tamil.  The TNA manifesto, therefore, is something that the Tamil voter could salute, never mind the fact that it echoes the Vadukoddai Resolution and the anger, violence, misery, death, destruction and dismemberment it precipitated.  Manifesto-scribblers are tasked to script documents that rake in the votes. They don’t have to deal with the fall out.  Responsibility is not their referent framework. 

The TNA Manifesto is different from those of other parties only in the fact that it pledges to deliver different ‘undeliverables’.  It plays on different aspirations.  The key words remain the same: ‘undeliverable’ and ‘aspiration’.  There’s nothing undemocratic about it.  Hardliners, after all, can operate within a democracy and do their ‘hardlining’ democratically.  And of course, this is ‘vintage’ Tamil communalist politics.  Nothing new here.  

The manifesto, therefore, should be looked at with compassion, as we have done above.  That’s part of the ‘wise way’, we offer, of treating the TNA and its hardline politics.  Wisdom, however, has other dimensions.

The TNA’s hardline precludes the possibility of any reasonable, say, ‘softliner’, considering that party as a credible partner in post-conflict reconciliation. Indeed, this manifesto can be branded as ‘RECONCILIATION OBSTACLE’ because it proposes a schema that will result in perpetual antagonism between communities.

Hardliners and ‘hardlines’ are not contained by legislation and especially not by that horrendous 
affront to democracy, democratic process and communal harmony, the 13th Amendment.  On the other hand, it remains a legitimate cling-on for separatists, Indophiles, regime-haters and other spoilers in the absence of a comprehensive, gloves-off, lets-be-real, lets-not-beat-around-the-bush, exercise to enumerate ALL grievances of ALL communities that include credible measurement of the same, leading of course to practical mechanisms capable of alleviating grievances to the satisfaction of all. 

All this calls for a fresh sheet of paper.  The first line on the paper could be ‘The Second Republican Constitution’.  Whether we like it or not, that document and all the errors scribbled into it that make for the legal accumulation of privileges by the rulers and the cover-up of all things illegal, while systematically robbing citizen of participatory agency in decision-making, remains ‘starting point’, this side of revolution or invasion. 

It is a relatively simple exercise (and one that has been done by many critics) to identify all its flaws and all its anti-citizen clauses, i.e. those lines which favor ruler and detract from the ruled.  In the rush to assert identity, consequent fixation with one’s community and simultaneous suspicion of the relevant ‘other’ to the point of fear, sense of threat and resolution to fight (back), the broader category of ‘citizen’ has been forgotten.  In power politics this is to be expected; ‘citizen’ is somehow less sexy than ‘Tamil’, ‘Buddhist’, ‘Catholic’ or any such identity.  Hardliners will not think ‘citizen’, and this adds to the burden of ‘softliners’. 

Whatever the TNA’s ‘hard line’ produces, the softer and ultimately more enduring line of national reconciliation is that which focuses on ‘citizen’, engages relentlessly with the constitution and consistently privileges reason over emotion.  Everything else is but testosterone rush and the comparison of libido.    

[You can reach Malinda Seneviratne at msenevira@gmail.com]