Ethnic Nationalism or Inclusive Nation Building?

Correct Discourse for Post-conflict Sri Lanka and its Identity

By Siri Gamage

(January 22, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) Recently I read a very interesting article appeared in an Internet newspaper comparing nationalism and liberalism in Sri Lanka. It states that the liberalism is a threat to Sinhala nationalism (Transcurrents - Kathika Study Circle- 20.01.2010). The article itself is a useful one as it includes an analysis of events and facts in recent history of the country, and I must say that it is well written also by a group called Kathika Study Circle. Nonetheless, one has to question the conclusion; Liberalism, defined as the ideology granting individual freedom that is also associated with the free market economy, as operating in the Sri Lankan context going against the tenets of Sinhala nationalism, is an interesting thesis -even though I believe that there needs to be more substantiation of this thesis compared to what the authors have been able to show. It is commendable that sociologists are perusing this kind of hypothesis as such exercises have the potential to trigger new lines of investigation, reflection and discussion.

My contention is that it is far more important and useful to talk about Nation Building in the post conflict era rather than talk about ethnic nationalisms -whether it is majority or minority based- because any nationalism, which is not inclusive of different communities in a country, can generate continued frustrations, alienations and even conflicts once again. What Sri Lanka needs now is a discourse -a powerful discourse- that is oriented towards building an inclusive Sri Lankan nation and identity. A post conflict country like Rwanda has decreed that no one will be identified in ethnic terms. Given the metamorphosis that Rwanda has gone through due to ethnic hatred and violence, it has decided to use national identity as the guiding principle. Recently I met some Phd Students at a European University during a party to celebrate one of them getting his PhD degree after the defence. When I asked one of them whether he is Tutsi or a Hutu, he declined to respond to my question and simply said he is Rwandan. What does this say about national identity and nation building project in a post conflict country?

Using ethnic or communal identity to rally people for a particular project like an internal war has its own rationale and consequences. We have seen the tremendous cost of ethnic nationalisms in the Sri Lankan context over the last few decades. Ethnic nationalisms have their own place in cultural terms and to some extent politically also within an inclusive polity where there are overarching mechanisms to maintain a national ethos, ie. Rule of law, democratic values and space. However, they should never be the basis upon which modern states transact their formal business. Instead common identity based on the notion of 'citizenship' should be used as the basis upon which the interactions between the state and its people are defined, formulated and enacted. Ideally rights of the citizen are based on the fact that they belong in the nation-state, which in turn provides their security.

Even though Sri Lanka gained formal independence in 1948, the building of an inclusive nation was hampered by the lack of political vision on the part of its leaders. One could argue that there used to be a Ceylonese identity during the pe-independence period but it was a subservient one as the country was a colony of the British Empire then. Looking at the post-independence Sri Lanka, there were internal pressures and factors preventing the generation of a true Sri Lankan identity and nation. The triumph of the Sinhala nationalist forces in 1956 and its culmination in the Presidential elections four years ago paved the way for a Sinhala nationalism that prevented the development of an all inclusive Sri Lankan nationalism. When we reflect on the post-war situation, there is a danger that the euphoria leading the current Sinhala nationalist discourses has the potential to continue this 'crude ethnic nationalism' as the discourse and ideology that should govern the business of the multi ethnic state rather than a more broad based Sri Lankan nationalism and identity which are still undeveloped and in embryonic stage other than in official rhetoric.

In this context, one has to question the direction of discourses prevailing in this pre-election period. Are they sufficient to hold different communities together in material and symbolic forms? This is not to say that one should not celebrate one's ethnic heritage. All over the world people maintain and celebrate their ethnic heritages. This applies to English, Irish, Hindu, Sinhala, Tamil or Chinese Diasporas also. However, in the modernising and globalising world, there are powerful forces that make individuals embrace other identities also. Thus one finds hyphenated identities such as Irish-Australian, Sinhala-Australian, Sinhala-Sri Lankan, Tamil-Australian, Tamil-Sri Lankan and so on. In the current context, one is able to carry dual or multiple identities and even citizenship. This ability shows that even the nation states have devised sophisticated procedures to accommodate nationalisms and identities rather than attempting to put people in boxes that are defined in terms of traditional categories only. Sri Lanka has to confront this reality sooner or later. It has to offer its citizens 'a liberating vision' perhaps based on liberalism (individual freedom) and its associated concepts of democracy and human rights rather than trying to show to the population what is best is ethnic nationalisms of different kinds. If people are treated equally and fairly on the basis of citizenship rights there is no need to promote ethnic nationalisms as political ideologies and over use these ideologies in political discourses. Primordial affiliations of peoples are important markers of their identities but in contemporary societies many people have acquired secondary affiliations via education, professions etc. that should be more relevant for progressive futures.

Apart from the ideology governing the state business (formal and informal), the key enterprise before the nation is the nation-building project that has been superseded by other concerns during the post-independence era. An essential element of this project is the creation of space for the citizens to transact business with the state and its agencies in an independent and fair manner without depending on those who are known to someone in offices or giving bribes. A functional state bureaucracy is essential in this regard. Even from the point of view of the ruling politicians this is an essential element because whatever the policies and programs that are approved by them have to be implemented by the bureaucrats in various ministries and departments on the ground while keeping the values of public service intact. The difficulty that the average Sri Lankan have been facing all along is that those who follow the rules and procedures and wait in the line are never able to achieve their objectives. Those who break the rules and waiting lines and get closer to the decision makers -whether it is a district level office or a central government office- get their jobs done. Those who know the system know that even moving a file from one desk to another within the same office takes weeks and months if not years! In this age of information and modern technology, the government bureaucracy has not moved with the times apart from those who are holding high positions in the bureaucracy or the polity. Often money also speaks, hence people who are frustrated due to delays resort to offering bribes. In a post-conflict Sri Lanka, systems of governance have to change in such a way that the citizens are able to transact business without delays and frustration. For this, a new culture of customer service in government departments and agencies at central and district levels need to be established along with adequate facilities and resources.

What we have now is that people in the electorates have to visit the home of the MPs on weekends to get their business transacted. Many who visit these places do not get their objectives satisfied. Here again, 'political allegiance' and 'connectivity' are important considerations. One has to ask why the office of the MPS is located at his/her home instead of a neutral place such as the population centres in each electorate? If there is an office located in towns people are able to visit these offices and talk to the staff and get assistance. In countries like Australia, this is the case. Recently I wanted to make a doctor's appointment. I couldn't get one on the day I wanted. Then I wrote to the MP representing my electorate and he in turn wrote to the Minister of health. I received responses from both as to the steps that the government has been taking to increase the doctors in the area I live. Even though they didn't solve my immediate problem, my concern was addressed from a policy perspective. I could have gone to the hospital's emergency section if my concern was serious anyway. This shows that the system in place is working and the politicians are responsive to the concerns of citizens.

Dysfunctional systems of administration or even its politicisation have contributed to many ills in Sri Lanka. One has to only think of the road traffic rules, rent rules and police stations in the country to convince themselves about the dysfunctional nature of these systems. When systems do not function, people have to depend on those holding power and authority to achieve their day to day needs such as obtaining employment, a certificate of one sort or other sort, and so on. When departments do not do their job, people have to obtain letters from politicians by visiting their homes. Often these letters are only letters! Yet an unnecessary dependency on politicians is created by these disfunctionalities. Once I visited the home of former President Hon. Wijethunge at Pillimatalawa where I saw at least 400 people seated to consult him. He sat with his private secretary to type letters to dictate what to write after studying the individual case very carefully. He was a very good member of parliament and a kind and approachable one. He did not show the trappings of office to his electors. Instead a humble 'public servant' attitude embraced his persona and attitude to his electors. However, he was the exception to the rule.

For building an inclusive nation, the leadership has to conceptualise a modern country (some would say even a post modern country). Countries such as Malaysia and Thailand and even India and China have embraced such goals for their nations. Apart from economic inclusivity, institutions and procedures should be built to inculcate this new sense of belonging to a nation that everyone can feel comfortable. In doing so the cardinal values and principles of the nation and its people ought to reflect in the behaviour of government bureaucrats, e.g. sense of fair play. The currently applicable 'might is right' attitude has to be replaced by a new sense of 'fair play' and humane principles in all transactions. I was told in a European country that any citizen could meet government ministers easily to discuss any matter of concern to them. The gap between those who make decisions and those who are subjected to such decisions is very narrow in some of the European countries, especially those in Scandinavia. They seem to have a very strong concept of citizenship and a humanistic orientation to whatever they do in relation to citizenry. Instead of the politicians being respected by the citizens, politicians respect the citizens. Politicians are seen as public servants as they are being paid by taxpayers' money. There is no attempt to elevate the leader of the country to Kingly status either. Many of those countries have Kings and Queens who inherit their roles by heritage and tradition. People in fact respect them. This is the case even in Thailand. Recently I visited Bangkok on my way from Europe. Everywhere one could see the pictures of their King and his family including the elderly mother. Even near the Grand temple, this was the case. However, I could not see the picture of any Politician!

It is common knowledge even among most politicians in the country on all sides that the world is moving in different directions with the constant changes in economies, technologies, trade and migration opportunities, new spaces being opened up for younger generations in regional and world theatres. Many of their kith and kin also have accessed these opportunities and are enjoying the good life across countries. The opportunities for people, skilled and educated people, are many. Sri Lanka is part of these global and regional networks of commerce, business, industry, international education, and culture. The country has to move with these new networks and opportunities. For example, the education sector in the country has a crucial role to play in moving towards this new era. An all inclusive Sri Lankan nation and identity building project is essential for this new path. It cannot be built unless the leaders of the country's state, industry, professions, education, religions etc are not putting their minds and efforts as a collective. The new leader in the country has to take this on board and devise strategies that will allow the dawn of a new Lanka that can not only compete in the world stage but also 'connect' on its own merit. As a country Sri Lanka is well placed to access the manifold opportunities being offered but it has to attempt to stand on its own feet rather than depending on foreign aid and loans. For developing this kind of nation building project requires a set of individuals 'with a vision' at the helm who are able to execute a 'change agenda' developed by careful study and deliberation. Discourses of ethnic nationalism should not govern this kind of nation building project. It should be governed by well-articulated notion of Sri Lankan nationalism, citizenship and identity.