It’s been almost a week since the elections for the
Sabaragamuwa, North Central and Eastern Provincial Councils were held. The
votes were counted and the elected have been separated from the losers but the
Chief Ministers have not been named yet.
In the North Central Province there is a tussle between
incumbent strongman and aspirant strongman.
Sabaragamuwa is quiet. The noise
is coming from the East. There’s no
clear winner and therefore many are claiming bragging rights.
The ruling party (UPFA) won the largest number of seats and
therefore can say ‘we won’. The
opposition, as a whole, can say, ‘the UPFA doesn’t have a clear majority, so it
has lost; consequently, we won!’ The TNA
says, tagging along so to speak, ‘we got the biggest slice out of the
opposition (which won by the way) and therefore we are the winners’. The SLMC says ‘we are the king makers’. Wimal Weerawansa’s PNF, which was snubbed at
the nominations by the SLFP-led UPFA, still managed a single seat (equal to the
JVP) and can say ‘we won too’. The UNP
and JVP can say (in consolation) ‘the UPFA lost’. They are not in a position to dictate in the
post-election machinations.
Someone must cobble together a majority, either by aligning
with one or more parties or by persuading a few people to join ranks. The latter seems to be the easier path. It might not be the best, though.
The difficult thing is to work with ‘sworn enemy’. The SLMC, during its campaign used the
communal card in raw and distasteful ways, especially considering that its
leader is a Cabinet Minister in this Government. The principled thing would have been to first
resign. Now, after bad-mouthing, when
the king-maker claim is tossed out, it implies a willingness to hold hands with
the ‘baddies’. The TNA was no better,
but it didn’t have the ‘cabinet-handicap’.
On the other hand, a party that was so slavish to Prabhakaran cannot
really point fingers at anyone. The UPFA may have some higher moral credit
here, but then again there was the usual abuse of state machinery in the
campaign. As the incumbent at the
center, the UPFA can call the shots, hence the talk about ‘purchasing’ support
or getting a few to defect.
It’s all about maneuvering and bargaining, brinkmanship and
arm-twisting, promise of goodies and preying on vulnerabilities. But let’s face it neither the parties nor the
elected can be called decent, respectable, democratic, principled entities. Take any party and you can find fault and 101
reasons not to work together. There are
also 101 arguments for working together.
The TNA was the LTTE’s pawn. So what? They were victims of circumstances just as
must as they were happily complicit in that sordid political story. The SLMC is made of politicians, just like
the UPFA is. They ‘invest’ by campaigning and they want to recover
investment. Just like anyone in any
other party. No one is cool. The UPFA has the inside track, as mentioned
above. For all the bragging, in the end,
the UPFA’s decision will stand.
In these circumstances, the SLMC will have to play
second-fiddle. The TNA cannot afford to do so.
But the TNA cannot play communal politics and ever hope to do anything
for the Tamil people in the East.
Indeed, the election result (the three-way split) puts paid to all
arguments for a North-East merger and rips apart the ‘Exclusive Traditional
Homeland’ thesis. Demography counts and
the count is now out there for everyone to see.
The UPFA can do without the TNA. This, interestingly, is the very reason that
the UPFA can and must brush aside the TNA’s long history of scuttling
discussions, dodging issues and playing the communal card as ‘what any
political party in reduced circumstances and slipping fortunes would do’.
The UPFA can call the TNA bluff. The UPFA can do what the TNA will not be able
to deal with. The UPFA can tell the TNA
something like the following:
‘Look, we know your history.
We know who is above you and who is below you. We know about strings and
string-pullers, puppets and puppeteers.
We know your strengths and weaknesses.
And we know you know us too. Very
well. So here’s the offer. You run the East. You pick your Chief Minister. We don’t want anything in return. We promise only one thing. Come budget-passing time, we will make sure
that you don’t lose the vote. Take
it. Do your best. Good luck!’
If the Government considers a puppet-TNA a headache, the
above would be the palliative. The TNA
cannot refuse and also claim that the ‘Sinhala’ Government is not interested in
‘power-sharing’. And if the TNA accepts,
it would amount to a decision to work within the existing framework. That would be historic.
As for the SLMC, it might teach its leadership something
about not being able to have it both ways.
The SLMC’s headaches should not worry the Government. They will go away, by and by. The TNA, not the SLMC, is the party to work
with. That’s the challenge.