Gota’s no-frills first year, whines and whiners

 

It was obvious not a year that made for pomp and pageantry, even if that was the desire. All issues have been either framed or impacted by Covid19. In any case, he’s not, for example, a Mahinda Rajapaksa. Covid19 of course was so sobering that the contrast was lost.

No-frills is good but presidents are not elected to be less or more showy than their predecessors. It’s about manifestos, mandates and delivery. Delivery ran into the Covid19 wall, but this doesn’t mean that it should not be assessed.

Since the country, like the world, has been Covid19-driven, the response needs to be evaluated. One would think.

The Opposition says ‘fail’ and that’s laughable. The worthies in the Opposition ruled the country for 5 years. They brought in a constitutional amendment violating all established procedures and even giving the Supreme Court the proverbial finger. They created kangaroo courts to hound political opponents: hundreds of cases, not a single conviction at the end of five years. If special procedures and institutions were required to circumvent flaws in the judicial system then the architects should have addressed systemic flaws. Failed (even as the ‘kangaroo courts’ functioned) to do so. Failed.

Easter Sunday attacks. Need we say more? A clueless duo at the top of the roost who set new standards for incompetence on all counts. Need we say more? Failed. That was a period when the notion of ‘failed state’ would have been an eminently appropriate descriptive. As predictable, once their pals took over governance reins, they dropped that nomenclature, brushing off the dust for re-use only when they realized that their pals were about to be ousted. And now they have to maintain the lie.

They’ve made some short videos, probably to convince funders that they are still relevant. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu has talked of militarization, authoritarianism and majoritarianism. He’s mentioned presidential task forces and the appointment of former military chiefs to key positions (in these and in other institutions). He believes some human rights organizations are practicing self-censorship (maybe they have nothing to say/market these days). He whines that their activities are being scrutinized and are being asked about how they spend their money. Well, should they remain unaccountable? We do know that these NGO lords and ladies insisted that their organizations be left out of RTI purview. For a reason. Obviously.

Saravanamuttu also says that the 20th Amendment took us back to the situation in 1978. He has not uttered one word about all the flaws of the 19th, the tinkering associated with it and the confusion regarding executive power which in part facilitated the Easter Sunday attacks. What the 20th did they must bother these people most is removing the Constitutional Council, in which their brethren were members and therefore had a say in appointments to the so-called independent institutions. The CC facilitated the appointment of regime-loyalists to top posts, even violating basic principles of meritocracy in appointments to the Supreme Court. President Rajapaksa, in contrast, without the ‘plus’ of ‘civil society’ involvement, recommended the six senior most judges for promotion to the SC. The president hasn’t insisted that meritocracy should override all else in all spheres. He should.

Bhavani Fonseka talks about the period when parliament was dissolved and elections had been postponed. She’s upset that during this period the President called the shots. Well, it’s not as if at that time some NGO consortium could have been asked to run the country, surely? The Supreme Court was petitions, remember? The SC didn’t find anything wrong.

Ruki Fernando, just like her, has talked of human rights activists being intimidated. Vague claims. No substantiation except for mentioning a lawyer who is under detention. Neither dare mention the reason for detention: suspicion over involvement in Easter Sunday attacks. If a terrorist is a lawyer, journalist or wears  some ‘ok’ garb, identity is drawn from dress and not the body it covers. That’s par for the course for these people. Hijaz Hisbullah has not been found guilty. The jury is out. However, one cannot blame a government for refusing to take chances. We saw what THAT policy did just 19 months ago. In the name of celebrating diversity (intent being to deliberately confuse 'majority' with 'majoritarianism' and ridicule, harass and put down Sinhala Buddhists) and championing freedoms, the yahapalana years saw the entire security apparatus being effectively dismantled.

They’ve developed a sudden love for vulnerable groups and this is a good thing. They are talking about fishermen, people in low income categories, garment workers etc. They are saying that Covid19 has made them more vulnerable. Yes, this is correct. It is however not a reflection of any pohottuwa-policy regime. They won’t say that though.

Then we have Jayadeva Uyangoda, who (unlike Saravanamuttu) says the 20th has given the president more powers than those vested in the office in 1978. No elaboration on this has been offered. The president has more power than those given by the 18th Amendment he says. Well, the 20th didn’t remove the term-limit imposed by the 19th. The passage of the 20th followed proper procedure. SC was petitioned. The Attorney General informed court that certain clauses would be amended at the committee stage (the 19th saw wholesale changes when even the British tradition, which yahapalanists love to refer to, allow only minor changes by the House of Lords), the SC objected to just one article and said it would require both a special majority in parliament (two-thirds) and a referendum. It was duly dropped.

Burial of Muslims who have died on account of Covid19 has been mentioned. There’s an issue here. Again, the government has erred on the side of caution. And that’s a good thing. As has been the case since February this year, decisions have been informed by health authorities and epidemiologists. State institutions and personnel have been tasked accordingly. They’ve worked 24/7. Politicians bragged about the efforts of containment, but not at any point were people told to drop their guard. They were told to follow protection protocols even after curfew was fully lifted.

The second wave was not unanticipated. We still don’t know enough about the behavior of the virus. However, there was a plan and it was executed. Quarantine centers were transformed into intermediate hospitals for asymptomatic patients (tested positive) and symptomatic parties were moved to hospitals. First contacts were asked to self-quarantine. Limited resources have been and are being used efficiently.

There have been complaints about privacy and about people being forcibly taken to quarantine centers. Privacy or death, that’s the issue. Angela Merkel said as much and Germany, as private a country as there is, went along. Those living in bubbles can complain. And it’s not as though anyone can be ‘private’ in the year 2021; certainly not most of the whiners who’ve willingly given enough ‘private data’ when they use credit cards, apple phones, use PickMe or Uber, order food, do their keyboard-‘warrioring’ on social media etc.

Were people herded into quarantine centers? They were certainly not allowed to say ‘no’. The relevant authorities moved and moved fast. Had they not, then containment would have been a problem hundreds of times worse. Again, it’s good that an NGO consortium wasn’t mandated to handle the situation.

So. Gota after a year. No frills. Has he turned Sri Lanka into a country that has reached its full potential? No. Close to it? No. On the road to it? No. There’s a lot to be done. Right now, there’s a need to control the Covid19 situation without compromising the economy. There’s a need to protect the most vulnerable sections of the population. There’s a need to move from aid-dependency to domestic production. There’s a need for development banks to be set up. There’s a need to set up a cooperative bank (which the People’s Bank was supposed to be!). There’s a need for a new constitution which resolves once and for all the big question of what kind of governance structure suits us best: presidential or parliament-driven.

There’s a lot being done without fanfare. Perhaps there’s a big communications-gap. No-frills is nice. No communication is not. Are the people happy? I don’t think so. The Covid-19 situation and all the restrictions have not made for roaring laughter. Does it mean they want the yahapalana failures back in the saddle. Highly unlikely.  

It’s too early to say ‘pass’ or ‘fail’ but that day will come. Right now it is absolutely laughable to say ‘fail,’ and hilarious when rank failures make this claim.

malindasenevi@gmail.com

Read more

Ostriches cannot fight terrorists

Immediately after the LTTE was militarily defeated, the peace-brigade that had for years fought tooth and nail for ‘parity of status’ (i.e. for the LTTE vis-a-vis the Government of Sri Lanka) and insisted, inter alia, that the LTTE was the sole representatives of the Tamils, said ‘the government can now dismantle all military camps in the North and East.’

At first glance, this seemed to be a logical suggestion. After all, there was no military threat now. On the other hand, that logic could be applied to all military camps, which ought to be dismantled. One could go further and argue that the entire military establishment should be done away with. Silly. 

Silliness, however, seems to go hand in hand with such people. If, as they have argued, the LTTE was a product of a history (a tale told selectively and with appropriate twists to justify a narrative that is poor on substantiation, by the way), then what is done or not done in the here and now can have consequences. 

In a terrorist-infested world order, dominated by powers that are not adverse to unleashing terrorism, national security is not a suspendible subject. If there were doubts on this, the Easter Sunday attacks would have laid them to rest.  

And yet, we have seen the Colombo Twitterati (Kolumbians, if you will) and of course those who think they’ll get membership in that exclusive and snooty club by parroting their prejudices repeatedly skirting the issue of terrorism. 

We had Phil Miller of the website ‘Morning Star’ (which is ‘for peace and socialism’ no less!) pointing the finger at Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, following the now tired tokenism of flagging the terrorist. Here’s what he says: ‘There are certainly some Muslims in Sri Lanka who may exhibit extremist tendencies.’ Some? May? Talk about downplaying the most terrible single-day execution of terrorist attacks! 

Let’s forgive Phil. He obviously doesn’t know much. The New York Times and the BBC ought to know better than to conjure the now tired ‘billa’ of Sinhala Buddhist extremism, but then again going by the political persuasions of those who provides information at this end, one need not be surprised.  

There are others less forgivable. Prof Jayadeva Uyangoda, in an interview with the Sunday Observer offers two proposals. The first is to defend democracy and human rights. He explains, ‘Slightly similar to the 9/11 attacks on American and global democracy, the Easter Sunday tragedy could be used by certain sections in Sri Lanka to curtail democracy and bring in an authoritarian form of governance.’ He is correct. 

Here’s the second: ‘Restoration of the institutional balance between the President, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet is vital for Sri Lanka to resolve the political crisis which paved the way for the Easter Sunday tragedy.’ Well, some form of clarity is of course useful, and to that extent this is a sensible suggestion.

Is that it, though? It seems that’s it as far as Uyangoda is concerned. In terms of dealing with the threat, all he has to say is ‘[t]he so-called radicalization of Islam has a unique feature, has associated itself with a global armed insurgency, or a global war,’ and ‘what is necessary now is a global conversation about all religions’ secular role.’  So-called? He’s not sure? Well, a conversation is important and that is taking place in various forms, but Uyan talking to Jehan and sharing insights thus obtained with Victor Ivan and Victor briefing Sumanthiran so that Civil Society can take a cue is hardly a conversation and certainly not something that those who plot attacks such as the one on Easter Sunday will lose sleep over. 

Victor Ivan, writing a guest column for the Daily FT titled ‘Sri Lanka: our of the frying pan into the fire,’ talks about the history of Muslims in Sri Lanka, the political conundrum of a president and premier at loggerheads, throws in the bogey of Sinhala Buddhists (as the villains of the piece, obviously) and glosses over the terrorists and the ideas, ideals, identities and faith they profess and affirmed. All he has to say is that it has ‘caused shock and shame among the Muslim community.’ That’s in all of 2,698 words! At least Jehan Perera, in his initial responses to the attacks (published in international media) was not so verbose in the usual vilification of Sinhala Buddhists. Jehan, though, demonstrated once again that he was all at sea when it comes to identifying threats. Still, one would have expected him to advocate a negotiated settlement with the perpetrators. He did not. Is it because churches were attacked, one wonders!

Sumanthiran, TNA Member of Parliament, speaking at an event organized by people who could be described as Wannabe Kolombians, offers that the Easter Sunday attack is a result of Sri Lanka’s failure to address minority grievances. Yeah right! Is he saying that removing the tokenist privileging of Buddhism from and scripting Eelamist devolution into the constitution would have stopped the terrorists who claim to be doing the work of Allah (and not necessarily delivering the aspirations of all Muslims)? 

‘Civil Society’ had to issue a statement (see ‘We cannot afford a second breach’ in The Island,  May 1, 2019). They were ‘appalled by the carnage.  They are, like Uyan, upset about the President and Prime Minister not being united. Naturally, for most of the signatories were gung-ho about the yahapalana lie. They don’t want another ‘carnage’ but apart from a cursory and dismayed allusion to the need for emergency regulations, they’ve focused primarily on possible vigilante violence.  

We don’t need vigilante violence. That would be a tragedy and would play into the hands of the terrorists. Agreed. But is that what everything boils down to?  

Many such people were and are horrified about elephants being used in peraheras. They were quite vocal about elephants being kept in Buddhist temples. They’ve not been upset about swords being found in mosques. They are not questioning the Minister of Muslim Affairs explaining swords as garden tools. They don’t see the truth. They don’t see the threat.  

They are ostriches. And they want the rest of us to play ostrich too. Such an eventuality would be the closest thing to heaven as far as the ISIS, the NTJ and other Jihadists can experience. 

They were like this with the LTTE too.  Indeed, the LTTE may have been defeated much earlier and much carnage avoided had these people not diverted attention from the matter at hand (defeating the LTTE). Red herrings is what they are all about (when they are not being ostriches, that is). It’s not too hard to figure out that the terrorists will have to be defeated, with or without the ostriches. 

Read more