PRESS STATEMENT: SLWJ | FMETU | FMM | SLTMA

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) We, 5 media organizations of Sri Lanka consider the steps taken by Criminal Investigation Department of Sri Lanka police to seal the Lanka newspaper office and arrest/detain its editor Chandana Sirimalwatta as a fatal blow to media freedom and democracy in Sri Lanka. We demand that government stop immediately the repressive acts launched against media with critical and opposing content. It is clear that sole reason behind the repression of the Lanka newspaper and its editor Chandana Sirimalwatta is the role played by the newspaper during recently concluded presidential election.

The promises made during the presidential campaign to defend press freedom and speed up the investigations on assassination of journalists have evaporated within days. Instead the repression against journalists and media that does obey government orders and express dissenting voices has now culminated in acts unleashed against Lanka newspaper.

Existence of a vibrant political opposition and unfettered space for media to carry their ideas and opinions to the people is a necessary component of a healthy democracy. Hampering the role played by the Lanka news paper is violation of the people's right to think, hold and express their opinions.

In our opinion this is not a isolated act but another grave incident of post presidential election media suppression. The signal sent by suppressing Lanka newspaper is that critical media and journalists should shut up.

It is a common knowledge that in a society that values democracy media should not be suppressed. If this trend of suppression of dissent and oppositional views is not halted we are afraid that Sri Lanka may slip in to a dictatorial political system. That is why we urge again national as well as international democratic forces to do their utmost to protect media freedom and democratic values in Sri Lanka.

We would like to remind that during the last few year's dozens of journalists and media workers were killed, large number of them faced various threats and intimidations, number of media institutions were set on fire in Sri Lanka. Because of these anti media actions Sri Lanka was named as the third dangerous country for journalists in the world. Not only our people's right to information was curtailed but also our name of motherland was degraded internationally.

We, 5 media organizations' earnest request to the government is to remove all suppressive measures imposed on the Lanka newspaper and to release its editor Chandana Sirimalwatta immediately.

A response to DBS Jeyaraj’s ‘The magic behind the Mahinda Rajapaksha victory’
...............................................................................
By Citizen Somapala

(January 31, Colombo,Sri Lanka Guardian) There have been some attempts to explain what is beginning to be called ‘Mahinda’s victory.’ However, these explanations make the situation out to be more complex than it actually is, since the issue at hand is in fact, quite simple to understand. The architect of the 1978 Constitution under JR Jayawardene, stated that the only powers that this Constitution does not give the president is the power to make a man a woman. The historical experience from the time that the Constitution was used proves that he was telling the truth. If you can raise one man in a society above all others by placing him above the law, then he can do anything. This is the technique of the 1978 Constitution; it can make two-and-two into five or two-and-two into three. When you are above the law, you can make whatever you want to make without much difficulty.

Those who say that the victory cannot be explained by way of fraud contend that the majority received is so big that it cannot possibly be fraudulent; the fraud is seen to be so big that it just cannot be true. This is exactly what the 1978 Constitution was intended for: to do things that were so disproportionate that people will not believe it is true. For example, in order to suppress the so-called JVP Rebellion of 1986, 1988 – 1991, about 30,000 people were made to disappear. This is a statement that most people do not want to believe. It is too much, and therefore, it must not be true. But commissions for forced disappearances were appointed, the parents of disappeared people came before these commissions and when put together, the figures come to 30,000 or more, and that is only of those who cared to come before the commissions. Since it appears ludicrous to kill so many people in order to suppress such a limited rebellion, this figure had made no impression on the Sri Lankan public and has not been taken seriously by the so-called international community at all.

The president today has completely taken over the powers of all public institutions to the extent that they cannot function in a professional capacity any longer. Every citizen who goes to get anything done experiences this all the time. The fate of the 17th Amendment is well known; that the president didn’t want the 17th Amendment to operate and therefore stopped it is the simplest explanation as to why the 17th Amendment was abandoned. However, this simple conclusion has not found any expression through an official statement or mark of recognition by the public in any significant way. People continue on as if public institutions are not necessary, or with the assumption that ‘well, one day, the president may appoint the institutions under the 17th Amendment.’ The dysfunctionality of these institutions is far too enormous to be taken for calculation and therefore, the facts are ignored.

Take the case of separation of powers. JR Jayawardene’s trick was to end the operation of this principle altogether. The impact of this on the Parliament as well as on the judiciary was enormous; they are unable to carry out the functions that such institutions are expected to carry out in a democracy. However, to come to that conclusion is far too difficult, so we keep on believing that separation of powers exists, that our Parliament is like any other Parliament in a democracy, and that our judiciary has the independence it requires to be effective. Since the facts are too shocking and the dysfunctionalism of these institutions too big, the attitude is ‘let us not bother with this, and let us keep believing that everything happens as it is expected to happen.’ The evil impact of dysfunctionalism is too big for our imaginations to deal with.

This is exactly the phantom limb complex. An amputee who has lost an arm or leg will find it too difficult to believe that the limb is gone. In his imagination, he still wants to believe that those lost body parts are still present and will go so far as to believe that there is pain in that same arm. Psychiatrists will have to find various make-believe methods to treat the pain in an arm that does not exist. It is the same with elections or any other matter of principle within the constitutional order in Sri Lanka: we cannot cope with the idea that a free and fair election is no longer a possibility in Sri Lanka. We cannot deal with the idea that massive financial fraud has now become a normal part of dealings in Sri Lanka. We still want to believe that the auditor general controls everything, and that everything happens as it should. Of course, there may be some minor errors, but these should not and do not add up to massive frauds. We can make believe that there are effective remedies that can be obtained through courts, though we know that the executive presidential system has undermined the independence of the judiciary to the extent that in all vital matters of a constitutional nature, the courts do not have the power to act as they should in a democracy.

Thus we need to believe that an electoral fraud of that magnitude could not have happened; we need to believe that we have had a reasonably good election and therefore, that we have a legitimate government. The 1978 Constitution was designed to create that kind of constitutional order, and that is the explanation that simply explains Mahinda’s victory.

Sealing of a newspaper

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The premises at Delkanda, Nugegoda, of the Lanka newspaper published by the JVP was sealed off by a group of officers from the CID yesterday. The editor, Chandana Sirimalwatha, who has been arrested previously and is still in detention, was brought to the premises and the sealing off took place in his presence. All the employees were told to take any of their personal belongings and then forced to leave the premises. The JVP was one of the political parties of the joint opposition which participated in the last presidential elections as a coalition. Their common candidate was Gen. (Ret.) Sarath Fonseka, who the joint opposition claims has won the election, and has been deprived of the victory by fraudulence.

This newspaper is published in the Sinhala language and is known for its bias towards the poor and the marginalized groups in Sri Lanka. With the weakening of the one time powerful labour parties of Sri Lanka (the Lanka Samasamaja Party and the Sri Lanka Communist Party), the JVP emerged as the most popular leftist party in Sri Lanka, representing the workers and poorer sections of society. Twice in its history the JVP has been subjected to extreme forms of repression and literally tens of thousands of young people, mainly from the marginalized groups of Sri Lanka, have been killed in these repressions. The closure of the newspaper and the threat to the leader of the JVP, Somawansa Amarasinghe, by the Secretary of Defense a few days back may be a sign of another turn of repression against this political group.

The government is now preparing for the parliamentary elections, which are due in April this year. The closure of the newspaper is seen by the opposition as an attempt to weaken the JVP in the coming elections. The government’s declared aim is to acquire the votes of persons who have voted for the opposition during the presidential election for the government in the parliamentary elections. The closure of the Sinhala newspaper will contribute to the deprivation of information, especially to the marginalized groups, during the elections.

Disappearences

Pregeeth Ekanaliyagoda, who was abducted on the 24th of January, remains missing. For details, see the diary note yesterday. The causing of disappearances has been a marked feature of repression in Sri Lanka in recent decades. Previous elections in Sri Lanka have been accompanied by waves of disappearances, particularly at times when the ruling political group faces difficulties in the elections. The highest rates of disappearances in recent years was between 1988 and 1991 when the then ruling regime of President Premadasa was in serious crisis. The highest rates of disappearances were around the days of the elections. Disappearances are used to intimidate the political parties as well as the voters of the opposition. According to the Commissions on Forced Disappearances, a large number of disappearances during 1988 – 1991 were members of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, which was the main opposition party at the time. A feature of such disappearances was the exhibition of dead bodies in the roads and the rivers as a method of causing widespread fear. This method was called the Human Broiler Project.

In causing disappearances, intelligence services, the military, the military police and paramilitary groups have been used. Despite enormous numbers of disappearances on record from the south, north and east, the Sri Lankan government has consistently refused to become a signatory to the United Nations Convention against Forced Disappearances and to have disappearances declared as an offence. Despite the presence of significant evidence of causing disappearances against many security officers and politicians, subsequent governments have refused to prosecute the offenders.

A recent study (soon to be published) conducted by two independent experts into 880 cases of habeas corpus which have come before courts in Sri Lanka clearly demonstrates that the writ of habeas corpus has become a very ineffective legal remedy due to many defects of its implementation. Most cases have been dismissed by courts on very flimsy grounds. Thus, even in cases of disappearances, such as in the case of Pregeeth Ekanaliyagoda, there is hardly any legal remedy available for persons who face such problems.

Provocative use of media against opposition

The media continued to be used provocatively against dissent and against the joint opposition. Television channels and Government radio continued to air interviews with senior government officers who spoke about a plot hatched by the joint opposition candidate, Gen. (Ret.) Sarath Fonseka, to assassinate the president and his family. The denials by the General, who stated that it’s only stupid people who would make conspiracies to assassinate a president from a hotel near the president’s house, was not mentioned in the interviews aired by the Government channels.

The government propaganda on this matter is seen as an attempt to manipulate public opinion to create an impression of an attempt by the opposition to generate violence, with the view to justify government repression of the opposition. A raid was conducted into the office used by the opposition for the presidential election, and it was publicized as an attempt to find explosives kept on the premises. The opposition spokesman revealed that the raid was conducted without a warrant. About 200 officers participated in this raid. When asked about the legal basis for the raid without a warrant, the officer in charge of the raid stated to lawyers of the opposition that it was conducted under prevention of terrorism laws. The abuse of the prevention of terrorism laws to conduct raids relating to elections was clearly abuse of legal process. At the end of the raid, when questioned by the opposition, the raiders stated that they found nothing illegal kept in the premises. The sole purpose of the raid was to create a public impression against the opposition and its election candidate as being engaged in violence as a ploy to justify arrest and other acts of repression by the government itself.

The activities of repression have created an atmosphere of fear and terror and many persons who have participated in the political process during the election campaign fear that they will be targeted for arrest and other forms of repression at any time.

Possible repetition of the Naxalite Conspiracy of 1982

A report from the Sunday Times ( 31/01/2010)on the imminent arrest of Sarath Fonseka:

Alleged plot to kill President and overthrow government

The arrest of retired General Sarath Fonseka any time now became imminent yesterday as a team of Criminal Investigations Department (CID) detectives probed an alleged attempt to overthrow the Government and assassinate President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The Department of Immigration and Emigration has been instructed not to allow Gen. Fonseka, his son-in-law Danuna Tillekeratne and a few others including retired Army officers to leave Sri Lanka. Instructions have gone out to officials at the Bandaranaike International Airport where security has been beefed up with more Air Force personnel.(Read More)

A similar plot, popularly known as the Naxalite Conspiracy, was hatched by President JR Jayawardene in 1982 after the presidential election, alleging that Vijaya Kumaranatunge, a strong supporter of the opposition presidential candidate, as engaged in a conspiracy to assassinate president Jayawardene if the opposition won the presidential election. On this basis, Vijaya Kumaranatunge was arrested and kept in detention. It is known as a totally fabricated attempt to silence Vijaya Kumaranatunge during the referendum because of his support for the opposition.

"The President and the state apparatus need to move on and get back into the development mode without hounding its so-called enemies."
...............................................................................

By FS

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Another election has come and gone and it’s now back to serious business in Sri Lanka.When workers stream into their offices in Colombo and other urban areas tomorrow it would be work as usual, bar the shouting of what would have been. President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s sweeping and unbelievable victory at last week’s poll sets the tone for the parliamentary polls which should be held anytime before April.

Given the margin of victory, the parliamentary poll result is a foregone conclusion with the ruling party expected to steamroll its way sans opposition. The unfortunate outcome of the poll was that the majority-Sinhalese and the minority Tamils and, to some extent, the Muslims have been further alienated. How the President will try to heal the rift, which is extremely important, is anybody’s guess. Another sour development was the unnecessary ‘crisis’ at the Cinnamon Lakeside when dozens of soldiers surrounded the hotel where main opposition candidate Gen. Sarath Fonseka was staying with his advisors and security men.

Whatever the reasons, it was a poor decision and showed the whole world including the international investing community that intimidation and other forms of repression still continues in Sri Lanka.
In Sri Lanka’s recent political history, no losing candidate has been harassed to such an extent even before the final count is announced. And, with the drama taking place at a five-star hotel frequented by the business community and would-be investors – what kind of message are we portraying to the outside world? The President and his ministers should have been magnanimous in victory and extended a hand of friendship to their foes.

Instead ministers came out with ridiculous statements – in the absence of not stating the truth – that the soldiers were there to protect the candidate or that they were trying to grab a few ‘deserters’.
Television images showed a hostile situation so much like the Taj Hotel Mumbai hostage drama a year ago.

A day later, the ‘truth’ emerges: a government spokesperson tells reporters that Gen. Fonseka is the subject of an investigation over a coup attempt and alleged assasination to kill the President and that he would be arrested once the investigation is over. Be that as it may, how anyone could get close to the President (while on the road) when all roads close or people on the streets are ‘shooed’ away (in addition to those walking down lanes being asked to turn the other side and not face the presidential route), beats one’s imagination.

The President and the state apparatus need to move on and get back into the development mode without hounding its so-called enemies. Whatever one’s belief and anger, Gen. Fonseka is also a decorated soldier and deserves shared credit for the end of the conflict which is how, society, business and the international community looks at it.

That won’t change and the quicker the government moves away from revenge-seeking to the role of governing, the better it is for the country and the little over half the people in the country who voted for the President. There is no doubt they are not seeking revenge – unless of course the government has ‘conclusive evidence’ that a plot was hatched. The law must take its course but the law must not be coerced to suit one side.

Amidst the drama of an election and post-polls uncertainty, there were some nice things happening. Last week’s launch of the double decker bus for city tours for local and foreign tourists (see previous page) is an excellent initiative in which Sri Lanka falls in line with many countries including India where any local or foreign tourist can take a bus ride in the city and visit historic and other sites of interest.

This has been a long-time weak link in our tourism and often most tourists had nothing to do in Colombo. It’s a good development even for local families and students keen on learning about the capital. There is always a silver lining! Let’s now hope the country will move forward after letting go of the past!

"Above all, ultimately, the ordinary people must decide the systems by which they are to be governed regardless of whichever party is in power. If the integrity of Tuesday's electoral process is in doubt, these must be cleared through sustained and strong public concern and action."
................................................................................

By Kishali Pinto Jayawardene

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Quite apart from the frenzied allegations and counter allegations that have now come to dominate much of public talk on Sri Lanka's Presidential Elections this Tuesday, one profoundly pathetic image dominates my mind, putting into doubt the very basis on which I will decide whether or not to exercise my vote in future elections in this country.

This is the image of Sri Lanka's Elections Commissioner when, in an edited news telecast, he 'declared' the results on late Wednesday afternoon quite some time after the official time of the announcement of the results had been specified. This was both the classically poignant face and demeanor of a broken public servant. Most particularly his observation that "I was informed by certain people that all I had to do was to protect the ballot boxes. But now it has come to a point where I cannot do even this.'

The plight of the Elections Commissioner

The reference that all that the Commissioner was supposed to do was to protect the ballot boxes related to an attack made on the Commissioner during recent months by one of the chief propaganda hounds of the government, castigating the Commissioner for trying to work in accordance with the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. The Commissioner's highly charged and deeply emotional vow never to return to his post was in natural consequence of the serious irregularities with the electoral process that he raised, including not only the total disregard of his directions by the state media but also the chasing/abusing of his officers from their posts during the polls.

Is this what we should celebrate?

This was only one aspect of Sri Lanka's day of shame. The surrounding of the hotel where General Fonseka was staying at a time when votes were being counted on differing excuses as well as the denial of access to internet sites (even soberly positioned ones such as the Sri Lanka Guardian and InfoLanka news room let alone other more controversial and politically aligned sites) are further issues. A journalist continues to be abducted, another journalist has been arrested and the local media is under threat to an extent not even seen during the time of the war. Is this what we should celebrate?

The nature of the challenge

It could, of course, all have been so different. This column had always acknowledged the fact that despite severe dissatisfaction with government corruption and the high cost of living, the President still remained hugely popular on a personal level in the country's rural belt. That said, General Sarath Fonseka was rightly credited with having posed a serious challenge to the incumbent. This was despite his extremely unwise aligning with individuals lacking credibility and commitment towards constitutional governance as well as hasty pronouncements made to the media. With far more political sense, President Rajapaksa refrained from personal attacks on his challenger while leaving his unprepossessing henchmen to do the job.

However, whatever may have been the motivations for the challenger to have entered the political fray (undoubtedly personal as they may have been), it took tremendous courage to grasp the nettle as it were and confront a supremely authoritarian regime, acknowledging the inevitable consequences that may follow in the event of a possible defeat as is indeed seen to be the case. For this, due credit must be given.

Unrealistic assessments and unseemly beating of breasts

It is being sought now to say that the support for the General was a mirage existent only in the minds of the city elite. Assessments by some foreign as well as local analysts comparing the UNF's percentage of the victory in 2005 to the electoral showing by General Fonseka this week maintain that if the UNP had stood alone against the incumbent only, there may have been a different result. However, what these assessments conveniently miss is that by late 2009, the leader of the UNP had been resoundingly and effectively demonized by the war propaganda machine of the Rajapaksa administration as 'unpatriotic' and as a traitor. In the absence of any strong counter in the post-war environment, severe internal divisions in the party and an absence of effective leadership, there was a world of difference between the UNP leader in 2005 and what he had been reduced to in 2009.

There is little doubt therefore that if the opposition leader had challenged the incumbent, (standing alone as it were), what would have resulted would have been twenty percent of the votes as against eighty percent for the incumbent. As was widely expected earlier, this kind of electoral victory would have made the obtaining of a two thirds majority at the parliamentary elections a given. The fact that such an overwhelming mandate had been prevented by a veritable infant in the murky arena of Sri Lankan politics should be of immediate note and not this unseemly beating of breasts.

It was precisely because of the context and the contest that Sri Lankans went to vote in such overwhelming numbers. The fact that the challenger (even on the official results) was able to garner even forty percent of the votes against a once virtually unchallengeable incumbent is cause for congratulations and may have indeed been seen as such if not for the overly hyped campaign of his backers which lacked any solid work done at the grass roots level.

The fact that some serious discussions took place during the past months on the country's democratic processes as a result of this challenge cannot be gainsaid. Indeed, it was on this basis that President Mahinda Rajapaksa was compelled to answer on his record of governance, including his lack of commitment to the 17th Amendment to the Constitution.

Manifold challenges before us

The challenge is now manifold. The opposition (particularly the United National Party) faces an immediate and imperative challenge to publicly disclose the nature and extent of the election irregularities that are now being alleged. If the perception is that publicly disclosing the nature and extent of the alleged subversion of the vote may lead to voters being discouraged from even exercising their vote in the future, it has to be clearly said that this discouragement is already evident. Staying silent would only make it worse.

The President faces a much bigger burden. Will he preside over a country in which, (much as was the case in Pakistan), citizens remain in doubt regarding the basic validity of the vote that they have cast, resulting only in Pyrrhic victories? Assuredly this will not change until an independent Elections Commission is in place. Never again should we be treated to a sight so terribly demoralising as the Elections Commissioner's face, seen on national television this Wednesday afternoon.

Above all, ultimately, the ordinary people must decide the systems by which they are to be governed regardless of whichever party is in power. If the integrity of Tuesday's electoral process is in doubt, these must be cleared through sustained and strong public concern and action.

Whether we engage in this or not will indicate whether Sri Lanka is destined to go Burma's way.

The journalist thought that would make a good picture back home. He aimed his camera to take a shot. The commando aimed his gun and shouted "stop taking pictures or I will shoot you."
…………………………………………...

Raid from the roof

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) CID detectives turned up at the Rajakeeya Mawatha election office of retired General Sarath Fonseka on Friday evening accompanied by commandos of the Police Special Task Force (STF).

When they tried to enter the campaign office, they found the door locked from inside. One of the CID officers noted that ceiling fans were working and asked help from a commando. He climbed the roof, entered the office and had it open.

The detectives searched the office. An STF officer says he found a motorcycle without number plates. Six retired Army officers and nine retired soldiers were arrested. They seized CDs, CPUs of computers and documents too.

Pleas by a lawyer present at the scene were of no help.

The sorry fate of a hero

The one time war hero, former Army Commander and retired Chief of Defence Staff, General Sarath Fonseka, now has only four policemen for his security. They are from the Ministerial Security Division (MSD). This is in addition to four soldiers, the entitlement to all retired Commanders.

All other Army security provided to him has been withdrawn together with bullet proof vehicles. Incensed by the move, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) has assigned 20 of its active cadres to provide security for Gen. Fonseka. They take turns guarding his rented residence off Queen's Road. There is also a group of retired soldiers.

That is the fate of a man once so powerful. There was very little he could not do, both within the military and outside it.

The oath call

The lady staffer dealing with matters legal at the Presidential Secretariat received an unusual call last Tuesday, the day of the Presidential poll.

The caller, a staffer in the Attorney General's Department, had wanted to know whether retired General Sarath Fonseka could take his oaths, after he won, on Wednesday. The lady politely told the caller "why don't you wait. The polls are not yet over."
Journalist on firing line
`

An Indian journalist now in Sri Lanka to cover Tuesday's polls was in for a rude shock. He was walking towards Gen. (retd.) Fonseka's rented residence off Queen's Road when he saw an STF commando. The commando was in fatigues and wore a balaclava to cover his face. Only his eyes could be seen.

The journalist thought that would make a good picture back home. He aimed his camera to take a shot. The commando aimed his gun and shouted "stop taking pictures or I will shoot you."

At the Queen's Road residence, when a news conference began, retired Gen. Fonseka faced a barrage of questions. The Opposition's 'common candidate' said he was under siege. One of the foreign journalists remarked, "I have not seen any guards." An angry Gen. Fonseka replied, "you may have been dozing off when you came here."

Karin kicked out

Swiss Public Radio journalist Karin Wagner was one of more than 100 foreign journalists who came to Sri Lanka to cover Tuesday's Presidential Election. On Thursday, she asked a question from a senior Cabinet Minister at a news conference. She wanted to know where Presidential advisor Basil Rajapaksa was.

"He is tired and asleep now," responded the Minister. The next question was her undoing. "Didn't he collude with the Commissioner of Elections to manipulate the results?" she asked. The Minister was furious and hit back at her. The next thing to happen was the cancellation of her visa. Immigration chief P.B. Abeyakoon, said she was put on an outbound flight from Colombo on Friday night.

MR for MR

Traditionally, the Catholic Church while speaking out for justice, equality and free and fair election, does not get involved in party politics. In line with this tradition, the Catholic Bishops' Conference of Sri Lanka issued a statement before the poll, calling for a free and fair election, democracy, transparency and measures to curb corruption - a statement which some observers interpreted as being more in favour of Gen. Fonseka's policy.

But during the campaign, Colombo’s new Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith on his own made several statements directly or indirectly supporting the President.

Soon after the election results were officially announced, the Archbishop came on State TV to warmly congratulate the President and call on all people, including opposition parties, to forget their party politics or policies and support the President.

He did this even before any of the four leading Mahanayake Theras made any statements.

Mangala offers the other cheek.

Among the rumours doing the rounds just the day after the polls is one about SLFP (M) leader Mangala Samarweera being slapped by the defeated Opposition Presidential candidate Gen. Fonseka.

When reporters met Mr.Samara-weera, they were keen to find out the truth. "General Fonseka will need a very long hand to have slapped me because I was in Matara on the day that he is supposed to have slapped me," an amused Mr. Samaraweera said.

He also told some media photographers that if they wanted they were free to scrutinise his face to see if either side had any tell-tale finger marks caused by the alleged slap he had got.

Strangers at the top

Eyebrows were raised when a politico, a toughie once in the Opposition, turned up at a top level security conference dealing with election-related matters. He sat through the meeting telling the top brass a few things to follow up.

Two DIGs in trouble

Some top cops suspected of playing politics during Tuesday's Presidential election are in for trouble.

They are to be moved out of positions they now hold to lesser important ones. This includes at least two DIGs, according to Police sources.

Threat to TV station

At a top level discussion on Friday night, it was decided to shut down a leading television network that supported Gen. (retd.) Fonseka.

The Telecommunication Regulatory Commission was directed to inform the network that its licence had been cancelled.

However, there were second thoughts on the matter. It was decided not to go ahead with the move. Insiders say that the letter withdrawing the licence had been issued in the meanwhile. Will they now recall the TRC order, remains the question.

-Couretsy: The Sunday Times

By Gamini Weerakoon

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) It’s been hard to avoid the “we told you so” comments ever since the election results started coming over the TV Wednesday morning. We were reading about democracy at dawn when our phone kept ringing and some of the cheer squad leaders of the incumbent regime were on the line.

“Where are you now? Under the bed?” asked a considerate but delighted colleague. We confessed that we had switched off the TV and were reading about democracy. He thought we were planning sabotage, or even worse things, and wanted to know what we were reading. We quoted from the matter before us, Winston Churchill: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with an average voter.”

“That would have been said about him losing the elections after the last World War,” the proven prophet of January 26 said and hung up.

Masses as asses and pundits

Indeed: the masses are asses when they vote into power a government that we do not like and they are the repositories of profound wisdom when their choice of government coincides with ours.

The next day, in conversation with another prophet of the times, we were told: “Didn’t you hear? Follow the leader.” We said that the Leader that we have been writing to for some time was quite good enough and asked what his leader was going to do?

Abolish the executive presidency which everyone around has vowed to do at some time or other?

“Of course not; we are going to amend it. We need it to tame those like your leader,” he contended.

But wouldn’t old JRJ, wherever he may be, be chuckling that his constitution is still very much useful to incumbent presidents? Chandrika vowed to abolish it and refrained during her two terms. Now that the present incumbent has been given a second chance will he really do it?

“Fonseka and his supporters are in an international conspiracy against the Rajapaksa government and they would not succumb to such temptations,” he shot back

A century-strong cabinet to continue?

Would the new presidency do away with the more than 100-strong cabinet of ministers?
“Aha!” the cheer squad leader exclaimed. “You want to collapse the government even before parliament is dissolved, with the hope that the ministers would cross over to the UNP?”

“But will you pledge that if you win the parliamentary elections — which you are cock-sure of winning — the new government won’t have a century strong cabinet?” I asked.

My colleague got philosophical. “You know very well that privileges once given cannot be taken back, It applies to coolies, peons, doctors, administrative service officials — one and all.”

“So, ministers, peons, coolies and administrative officers are in the same category?”

“Why not? They are all human beings?”

“Going on the same principle shouldn’t coolies, peons, doctors, nurses and the like be all given bullet proof cars, paid chauffeurs, and body guards?”

International conspiracy

“All this is sour grapes because Fonseka couldn’t win the elections,” he claimed. “It is also a part of an international conspiracy to resuscitate the LTTE abroad and make them finance an insurgency here once again.”

“But aren’t the Americans cracking down on LTTE bank accounts and haven’t they sentenced LTTE arms dealers to long term imprisonment?”

“That is eye wash. They want to charge our war heroes with war crimes.” “Wasn’t Fonseka also questioned about war crimes?”

“That is a part of the international conspiracy,” he argued.

“Does it mean that when Fonseka led his troops in the teeth of opposition led by Barack Obama, Gordon Brown and others he was a part of this international conspiracy?”
“Didn’t Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Gordon Brown and Robert Blake all help Mahinda win the elections by opposing his military offensive?

“Didn’t they make Mahinda appear like a Sinhala David standing up to Goliath? “Were shortages of rice in the Pettah wholesale market, the rise of prices in carrots, brinjals and gotukola all a part of an international conspiracy with the active backing of Fonseka and Ranil Wickremesinghe?”

“Don’t be stupid,” says our Rajapaksa cheerleader. “The price of food was not an issue at the elections.”

It makes us go back to that Churchillian wisdom: The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with an average voter.

By Milinda Moragoda

I must study politics and war so that my sons may study mathematics and commerce… in order to give their children the right to study painting, poetry and music… -John Adams (2nd President of the United States)

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The reelection of President Rajapaksa with a historic mandate accounting for nearly 58% of the total votes cast presents a unique moment for Sri Lanka to capture the many opportunities for economic development which we have missed since Independence. This overwhelming victory should serve as a wake-up call for our political establishment across all party lines to stop squabbling on parochial and personality-based issues and to unite and work together on matters of national importance. The electorate has clearly demonstrated that they desire stability and continuity.

During the past four years, President Rajapaksa has been laying the foundation for a growth-based development agenda through an ambitious island-wide infrastructure development programme. The President has said that, during his second term, he intends to pursue national reconciliation, nation-building and economic development with the same single-minded determination that he prosecuted the war and delivered peace during his first term in office. It is very clear that uniting a nation that is deeply divided on race, class, caste, religious and party lines remains one of the major obstacles to progress. One hopes that all political parties will have the maturity and statesmanship to put an end to the culture of manipulation and brinkmanship. However, in this article I will focus primarily on the issues connected with economic development and build on my previous article, published in March 2009.

With the successful conclusion of the war, the recently concluded Presidential election and with the upcoming General Elections, an opportunity presents itself to review Sri Lanka’s overall development strategy. The end of the war has given "hope" to all communities in the country. However, a great deal needs to be done to convert this "hope" into "optimism"; and more importantly, to achieve greater prosperity for our people.

It is timely, therefore, for us to have a national discussion about the "vision" that should drive our development strategy and the policies and programmes that would bring lasting benefits for all our people. This should of course take place in the overall framework of the "Mahinda Chintanaya – Way Forward."……

This discussion should be open-minded and pragmatic, not narrow-minded and grounded on false and unrealistic ideology. Unthinking and chauvinistic populism should give way to rational analysis focused on identifying what works in practice. Short-term political expedience should give way to a long-term perspective based on a rigorous assessment of Sri Lanka’s dynamic comparative advantage in the global economy. For years, partisan politics have driven economic policy-making. The current historical conjuncture presents the country with a unique opportunity to move away from "business as usual" that has given us two youth insurrections in the South and a separatist war in the North. The time is ripe to build a consensus around a long-term strategy for developing the country.

The need of the hour is a national discussion conducted without rancour, which focuses on policy and practice rather than personalities. President Rajapaksa’s pledge at the launch of his Manifesto to end the "politics of promises" and to begin an era of politics based on policies, is a step in the right direction.

The intention of this article is to initiate this discussion. I will begin by presenting my thoughts on a "vision" for achieving sustained development of the country. I will then propose to set out some policies that, in my view, are necessary to achieve this "vision". This article is intended to stimulate debate, which I hope will eventually yield a national consensus.

The "vision" for Sri Lanka’s development must be based on:

* Accelerating the growth trajectory of the economy.

* Maintaining macro-economic stability based on a predictable and transparent policy framework.

* Implementing structural reforms that improve the competitiveness of the economy, including micro-economic measures.

* Ensuring that growth is inclusive by maximising its employment intensity.

* Striving for both regional and urban/rural balance.

* Developing a targeted social safety-net that affords protection to the poor and vulnerable, as well as those who are affected by the adjustment costs of reforms.

* Achieving sustainability by reducing the carbon intensity of the economy.

* Fostering international relations that support the country’s commercial/trading interests.

A sustained reduction in poverty and increased prosperity cannot be achieved without "growing the cake". Moving the economy to a higher growth trajectory requires a significant increase in the overall productivity of the economy. This involves enhancing both the quantity and quality of investment. Increasing productivity through strengthening investment performance is at the core of sustained development.

Investment as a percentage of GDP averaged 25% over the last decade. This resulted in growth averaging 5% during the same period. Our objective must be to achieve 8-10% growth per annum. This is well within our grasp, particularly as for the first time in three decades the whole country is in a position to contribute to accelerated growth. Investment will have to rise to the 30-32% range to achieve this. For this to happen, savings must be increased and the efficiency of capital allocation and utilisation enhanced. National savings averaged 21% of GDP during the last decade and external flows 4% of GDP. Total savings needs to rise to the 26% range to achieve 8-10% growth. Addressing this saving/investment gap will be crucial to achieve the growth objectives.

This cannot be achieved without addressing the structural budget deficit. The government’s fiscal performance is a source of instability in the economy. The current account deficit in the budget has averaged 2.8% over the last ten years. This deficit must be converted into a surplus which contributes to public investment (capital expenditure).

During these past ten years domestic savings averaged 16% of GDP, and national savings were higher at 23.8%. This is attributable to the impressive levels of remittances from Sri Lankans working abroad.

The overall policy framework should incentivise the increase of all forms of savings to bridge the savings-investment gap identified above. The savings performance in the economy cannot be improved without achieving macro-economic stability. The policy framework must be stable, predictable and transparent. It must create the conditions for low inflation and balance of payments viability.

We need to get away from the stop –go policies that have characterised our post independence economic history. We need to create an economy that is efficient enough not to overheat (rising inflation and balance of payments pressure) when we achieve 5-6% of growth.

As I indicated in my previous article, we cannot achieve macro-economic stability without fiscal consolidation. High budget deficits exert pressure on key prices, such as the exchange and interest rates which are important determinants of savings and investment decisions. Unsustainable budget deficits result in higher interest rates, which increase the cost of funds in the economy. This leads to lower growth, employment and incomes. In addition, large deficits would exert pressure on the exchange rate by increasing the inflation differential between Sri Lanka and its major competitors and trading partners. An uncompetitive exchange rate encourages imports by making them relatively cheaper and this discourages savings and investment by reducing the competitiveness of the domestic economy.

I would also like to reiterate that inflation fuelled by an unsustainable budget deficit is an implicit regressive tax on the poor, who do not have the compensating benefits of appreciating asset values. A rigorous public expenditure review, based on clear national priorities drawn from the elements of the "vision" set out above, would be central for meaningful fiscal consolidation. Improving tax administration and the efficiency and buoyancy of the tax system is also important. President Rajapaksa has established a Tax Reform Commission, which I expect will present us with concrete recommendations to achieve this.

Stable macroeconomic policies must be supported by structural reforms which improve the efficiency, and therefore the competitiveness, of the economy. There are two large pools of low productivity in the economy: the public service and paddy production. These sectors absorb considerable resources yet yield low returns. Policies need to be developed, which not only shift resources to other more productive sectors but also use the resources that remain more efficiently. The challenge is to achieve these objectives while minimising adjustment costs in terms of lost livelihoods and incomes. There is a debate to be had on the pace and sequencing of reforms in these sectors. There is, however, a strong case for arguing that "the pain in the short-run will ultimately yield gains in terms of more employment and incomes in the longer-term". We need a national debate on the difficult issues surrounding the reform of these politically sensitive sectors. This debate should take place in the knowledge that much will be foregone in terms of future prosperity if we continue to adopt soft options as we have done in the past.

There are a number of other structural issues that need to be addressed. The financial system is the lifeblood of any economy. The recent crisis has demonstrated the importance of sound institutions operating in a well regulated sector. We need to ensure that the Sri Lankan financial system is fit for purpose in the coming decades of the 21st century. The recent actions taken by the Central Bank to reduce spreads are positive for business. However, we need to adopt a holistic approach to reducing the cost of intermediation in the economy. This has to be supported by measures that seek to make credit available to profitable businesses in all sectors.

In recent years, considerable progress has been made in developing infrastructure, particularly power generation and roads. There is a great deal more to be achieved to reduce the transaction costs in the economy, not least the uncompetitive prices of utilities in the economy. There must also be a pragmatic debate on how best Sri Lanka can take advantage of public-private partnerships to accelerate infrastructure development. Organisations such as the CPC and CEB also need to be reformed.

The global economy places a high premium on competitiveness. A skilled labour force with high levels of productivity is an important element of the competitiveness strategy for any country. Our education system, vocational training and overall skills development should be aligned to labour market dynamics. These in turn must be linked to Sri Lanka’s dynamic comparative advantage in a highly competitive global economy. The focus of policy in this area must be on raising the opportunities available to people in all parts of the country. The controversial area of labour market reforms is another subject that requires a pragmatic debate and effective action. We need to ensure that we have the right balance between the interest of labour and investors.

Sri Lanka possesses the most attractive investment climate in the South Asia region. However, there is much to be done if we are to be more competitive in the overall Asian region and the global economy more generally. Transaction costs must be reduced and "doing business" should be facilitated by reducing red tape and bureaucracy. A significant amount has been done in this respect but we now need to move to the next generation of reforms. These need to be formulated in collaboration with the private sector. However, the private sector, for its part, needs to move beyond narrow self-interest and contribute to constructive thinking on improving the overall business environment.

Employment generation is the best transmission mechanism for sharing the fruits of growth. Interest rates and exchange rate policies as well as the tax system must be geared to support inclusive growth. Priority must also be attached to providing the labour force with the opportunity to acquire marketable skills.

Much has already been done to address regional disparities. This has been a priority for President Rajapaksa. However, more needs to be done. We need to explore how best to develop growth poles in various parts of the country. Rural/urban imbalances are less pronounced in Sri Lanka than in many other developing countries. However, the performance of the rural sector is heavily influenced by the low productivity of the paddy sector. Large scale resources are allocated to this sector through public expenditure on irrigation, the fertiliser subsidy, extension services and the guaranteed price scheme. Paddy and rice are an integral part of our culture and heritage and as such this cannot be viewed through an economic lens alone. However, we have to find ways to modernize and be competitive, perhaps drawing upon the experiences of other rice-centric cultures such as Japan, Thailand, etc. Another debate to be had and consensus to be developed is related to the structure of the agricultural sector in the country. Crop diversification and the balance between small-holder and commercial agriculture are issues that need careful and balanced consideration. We also need to explore what measures can be taken to promote agro-industry. Historically, the country’s performance in this area has been disappointing. Priority needs to be attached to realising the potential of this sector.

As a humane society, we must provide social protection to the poor and vulnerable. However, such support should be carefully targeted, monitored and kept to the absolute essentials so that resources are not diverted from productive activity. We need a conversation among ourselves on whether there is an "entitlement culture" that is constraining Sri Lanka’s development. Do we need to move from an entitlement to a more entrepreneurial culture, which will create the conditions necessary to bring about a rapid transformation of the life prospects of our people.

Well designed compensation schemes to mitigate adjustment costs are an important element of any ambitious reform programme. Any such scheme must also support retraining for workers displaced by implementation of the structural reforms necessary to place the country on a higher trajectory of growth, employment and incomes.

Despite the disappointing outcome at the Copenhagen Summit, it is inevitable that all countries will eventually have to reduce the carbon intensity of their economies. A concerted plan is needed to promote energy efficiency and the development of renewable energy sources. Any future vision for Sri Lanka must also take account of the need to adapt to climate change.

I argued in my previous article that Sri Lanka cannot afford isolationist and inward looking policies. Our international relations need to be conducted in a manner that enables us to take advantage of all commercial opportunities. Our policies should be such that we have good relations with both the East and the West. The global economic centre of gravity is shifting to the East. We need to be alive to the opportunities arising from this qualitative change in the landscape. At the same time, it would be unwise not to nurture the relations that we have developed over the years with the West and multilateral organisations, such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

I began by highlighting the need to address the savings/investment gap. Foreign savings (aid, foreign direct investment and portfolio capital) have an important role in supplementing national savings as a means of increasing investment in the country. Historically, foreign savings have played a major role in the development of various regions. Colonialism and the slave trade were important sources of foreign savings that supported transformation in the West. Japan also benefited from its imperial reach. In later years, South Korea and Taiwan benefitted from preferential access to US capital for geopolitical reasons. In addition, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand benefitted from the export of Japanese capital, following the Plaza and Louvre Accords, which resulted in a sharp strengthening in the value of the Yen.

Our access to foreign savings should be structured on the basis of dignity and mutual respect. While we must welcome both investors and donors as partners, the ultimate decision-making power will rest with us.

Arguably the most critical determinant of the country’s future prospects is going to be our ability to capitalise on India’s emergence as a global power – both economic and geopolitical. The four southern states of India (Andra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala ad Tamil Nadu) are all experiencing rapid growth. The Indian economy was growing at 8% before the global economic crisis. There is confidence that such levels of growth will be restored in the coming years. If the country is recording an overall growth rate of 8%, the four southern states must be enjoying double digit expansion as the overall performance of the Indian economy is being dragged down by lagging states with large populations, such as Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (though performance in the latter has improved recently). Our efforts need to be focused on how to tap into the rapid progress and rising disposable incomes in India, particularly in the four southern states which are in close proximity to Sri Lanka. We need to have a rational conversation on how best to take forward the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement with India.

Sri Lanka is faced with a unique opportunity for transformative change. We need to grasp this opportunity with both hands. We must not be held back by petty-mindedness and a lack of ambition. We must set aside our insecurities and look forward to the future with boldness. There are risks that need to be managed but we should be confident that we can do this and secure a much more prosperous future for all the people of Sri Lanka.

(The Writer, Leader of the Sri Lanka National Congress and Minister of Justice and Law Reform)

By Dayan Jayatilaka

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The (geographic) periphery proved to be (politically) peripheral, while the road to power lay through the paddy fields and the provinces of the Sinhala heartland. Mahinda Rajapakse gave the lie to the notion that the minorities, especially the Tamil minority, held the key to the outcome of the election. Given the demographics on the ground, namely that the Sinhalese constitute an overwhelming majority, Rajapakse proved that even in peacetime, winning an overwhelming majority of that overwhelming majority was a viable path to victory, leaving the Tamil voters relatively peripheral to the outcome just as the Tamil majority areas are peripheral to the island.

The Sinhala peasantry which provided the manpower to sustain the war against the Tigers and finally prevail over them, provided the votes needed for a political victory for the incumbent over the Fonseka option chosen (ironically) by the unreconstructed Tamil nationalists. The foot soldiers who loyally followed Gen Fonseka as Army chief, voted with their families for Mahinda. It is not that they deserted Fonseka but that Fonseka was perceived as deserting the camp of Sinhala nationalism. Rajapakse romanced and won the hearts of the heartland.

The question remains as to how the Opposition’s strategists, Western diplomatic opinion and the overwhelming majority of media pundits got it so very wrong. Not only were they on the wrong side of History and totally oblivious to the sentiments of the vast majority of their fellow/Sri Lankan citizens, their demonstrated powers of analysis require them to get to the back of the class and work it out.

A cursory acquaintance with modern history would have told them that no military chief has bested a strong national political leadership in a political struggle in the aftermath of a historic, victorious war or revolution. A Fonseka bid could have had a chance only in the context of a military defeat, an economic depression or an incumbent with a wimp factor. Furthermore, an Obama-model campaign can work only with an Obama-model candidacy, not grafted onto a John McCain or Ariel Sharon one. A Terminator-type candidate had no chance against a serial smiler with proven machismo and warm if rascally, piratical charm.

The statistical starting point of the opposition strategists and most commentators, not to mention those who sent an array of ‘polls’ by email, was the Presidential election of 2005. We were informed that "the facts were undeniable" when the only thing that was undeniable was the hollowness of pure empiricism as an analytical methodology and perspective.

It was truly imbecilic to take 2005 as the base line, when (i) the then President Chandrika Kumaratunga had thrown her not inconsiderable weight behind former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe at that election and (ii) the intervening period was taken up with a full-on war and victory, making the difference between 2005 and 2010 one between distinct historical periods, "pre-war" and "postwar", or "the Prabhakaran period" and the "post-Prabhakaran period" with their qualitatively different dynamics and altered states of collective consciousness; of national moods.

The election was held in a period that was post-war, post-Prabhakaran but not post-nationalist or post-patriotic. The reckoning that Fonseka’s military record could neutralize that sufficiently, even to the extent of bearing the burden of an alliance with the TNA, the Tiger fellow travelers, (and Ranil, the Tiger appeaser) proved disastrous. Above all, the Opposition, its western backers/handlers, its Diaspora Tamil allies and local pundits grossly underestimated the patriotism/nationalism and anti-interventionism/anti-imperialism of the Sinhala masses, as well as their democratic aversion to the risk of Bonapartist tyranny.

In Gramscian terms, the vital "national popular" and "national democratic" dimensions were ignored by the opposition’s strategists and ideologues, except in the most superficial sense of fielding a war hero as candidate. Those factors, the depth and extent of which were underestimated, were (re)activated not only by the perceived threat to the main political leader who had restored national pride, but by the presence of the pro-Tiger TNA and Ranil Wickremesinghe’s unrepentantly pro-appeasement UNP at General Fonseka’s side, the reactivation of the "war crimes" propaganda in the West, and certain gratuitous remarks by some Western diplomatic representatives.

The model for Rajapakse’s defeat was supposed to be that of Churchill in 1945, but not only was ‘born again’ politician Fonseka no Clement Attlee, Labour leader Attlee did not contest in alliance with Nazi supporter Oswald Mosely and appeaser Neville Chamberlain! Though unaware of its Biblical provenance, "tell me who your friends are and I will tell you who you are" seems to have been the criteria of the Sinhala Buddhist voter.

Is the newly and handsomely re-elected incumbent then secure from challenges? The first challenge is the avoidance of hubristic adventurism. President Jayewardene won a 5/6ths majority at the parliamentary election of 1977 and promptly disenfranchised his main opponent Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike. He won the Presidential election of 1982 comfortably, but blundered by postponing a parliamentary election and substituting a referendum instead. These two superfluous moves, coming in the wake of clear victories, de-legitimized the administration, generating a huge crisis with a bloody denouement. One can only hope that President Rajapakse is not nudged along the same path.

What now, what next? The Sinhalese have voted overwhelmingly one way, the Tamils the other. What this means is that despite developmental successes and economic reintegration, the Administration’s stewardship of the North and East and relationship with the ethnic minorities in general has been as stark a political failure as its relationship with the Sinhalese has been a political success. One is the reflection upside down, of the other.

Today, the majority of the Tamil–speaking people of the North and East have voted as a single bloc, and barring the Sinhala majority areas, the North and East have psycho-politically re-merged! The failure to win notably large political support from the Tamils and Muslims in the East, despite the progress of economic development, not only reveals the flaws of that model of development - perceived as ethnocentric - but of the administration’s central and abiding weakness so far: its blind-spot regarding the political and psychological dimensions of the ethno-national question and its insensitivity to the dimension of ethnicity and the management of difference.

The ethnic polarization of the map of Sri Lanka reveals a basic structural weakness of the Lankan state formation. Samir Amin tells us that systems decay precisely at their periphery, and this I believe is true of state formations too. While President Rajapakse has resolved the long crisis of state power, in that he has restored the state’s territorial borders (once again co-extensive with its natural ones) and monopoly of violence, he has not yet resolved the state’s crisis of legitimacy at its periphery. There is no political consensus which cross-cuts ethnicity and runs from North to South, East to West. Thus, the crisis continues.

Sad, troubling, but more affordable in the final analysis for the Sinhalese than the Tamils because the former have the sheer numbers, the big guns, the relative resource endowments, the engines of economic growth, the ideological fuel of re-assertive nationalism and the historical memory-driven collective political will to maintain or restore coercive control over the North East. This means that the majority of the Tamil minority, having now seen that (a) they wield no veto over political outcomes (b) Sinhala sentiment tends overwhelmingly one way, and (c) the incumbent is here to stay another term, have one more chance to negotiate its way into the mainstream or remain an alienated periphery in more senses than one.

That last chance or those last chances are at the parliamentary and provincial council election (as well as within a constituent assembly if one is constituted). It is not a seller’s market. The Tamils need to become stakeholders of the Rajapakse administration and partners – neither posturing competitors nor pliant clients — of Sinhala nationalism. This entails a double and mutual shift: on the part of triumphant Sinhala nationalism and the re-elected presidency, to greater openness, generosity and accommodation of Tamil sentiments, and on the part of the Tamils, to leaders from their community with whom the Sinhala nationalist dominated centre is willing and likely to deal with. Here, I can only think of Devananda and (perhaps) Dharmalingam Siddharthan. Prudence, responsibility and constructive partnership are the need of the hour. Let us hope the hour is not too late.

“The actual vote on the 26th of January is perfectly within this ball-park of figures. So, why was the election victory such a surprise to many people? Why did our newspapers and pundits claim that there was a “neck and neck" range. Why was the issue hyped to a case of immanent regime change?”
…………………………………………………..

By Gam Vaesiya

(January 31, Ontario - Canada , Sri Lanka Guardian) The results of the 2010 presidential election in Sri Lanka are depicted in the color-calibrated map shown here (courtesy: external link). The colours range from deep blue for Mahinda Rajapaksa (MR), to bright green for the opposition contender Sarath Fonseka (SF).
The vote in the North and the East

The strikingly large green areas are deceptive and demand attention. The green areas in the North and the East correspond roughly to the "exclusive Tamil homelands" claimed by the LTTE, and also by the TNA. The later spear-headed the Tamil supported for SF. However, although these green areas loom large in size, they merely added up to about 615,000 votes cast (see attached table). We have included tha nacient names of these regions to emphasize the historical connection of these areas to the rest of the country. The 615K vote from Jaffna, Trinco and Vanni combined is no more than one typical small area in the south, e.g., the Galle district!

Some commentators have claimed that the voter turn out in the North and east is only 20% of the listed voters. However, the voter lists do not reflect the current situation in these areas. The 158,000 votes in 2010, from the Jaffna district, of which nearly 50,000 went tp Rajapaksa, compare well with the 130,000 or so that the TNA polled in the post 2000 elections. Then the TNA members were the only candidates allowed by the LTTE. If the actual resident numbers and voting patterns in Jaffna during past elections (1994, 3.0 %, 1999, 19%, 2005, 0% -under LTTE boycott) are considered, the turn out in the North and East in effectively at the 40-50% level.

Modeling the voting using previous polling data

In Sri Lanka there had been recent provincial polls in most parts of the country. We could attempt to use those data, under the zeroth order assumption that the voters hold onto their basic allegiances, to make a prediction of the outcome of the 2010 presidential election. Such a calculation, using linear response estimates and the provincial-elections data base yield a 61% vote in favour of Mahinda Rajapaksa, with an error margin of plus or minus 4% depending on how the math is done (more technical details will be published
else where).

The actual vote on the 26th of January is perfectly within this ball-park of
figures. So, why was the election victory such a surprise to many people? Why
did our newspapers and pundits claim that there was a "neck and neck" range. Why was the issue hyped to a case of immanent regime change?
Rarajpaksa's bid for a second term

The incumbent president had successfully, in 3 years, brought to an end a very expensive war which had dragged on for 30 years. If he were a commission wallah, bent on making money and business, surely his game plane should have been to join up with the Western and Eastern arms dealers, mercantile groups etc., and milk the war for as long as he could! The war-based economy, with its patterns of self-serving NGOs, human-rights vendors, as well as western diplomats using the troubled waters to make a name for themselves, would have all become friends of the regime. Rajapaksa came in with a weak minority government. Instead of following the clear cut path well-trodden by his predecessors, Mahinda Rajapaksa undertook a path which was declared to be utter folly by all the experts, military and civil. An Indian expert claimed that Killiniochchi (Giraanika of ancient times) will become Rajapaksa's Stalingrad. The political opposition satraized that Rajapaksa had confused Alimankada (Elephant Pass) with Pamankada (a suburb of Colombo). However, defying enormous military odds, and enacting parliamentary stratagems based on splitting the opposition using pork-barrel tactics, recreating new foreign friends to defend himself against western interest groups, Rajapaksa and his team played a dizzying game that would have been the envy of any politician faced with such enormous odds.

And yet, the Colombo mercantile class as well as their commentators whose sentiments and sympathies are more well attuned to the interests of western capitals were utterly unimpressed. In their view, Rajapaksa should not have pursued a war against Prabhakaran, irrespective of his crimes against his own Tamils, and against the Sinhalese and Muslims. They are utterly uninterested in the nationalist agenda of the Rajapaksa program. In their view, they are better equipped to push the mercantile agenda of the west in Sri Lanka. Ranil Wickremasingha and the TNA both belong to the essentially right wing, elitist, westernized mercantile class of the country. Clearly understanding that they have no political strength in the country, they needed a disguise to appear in the nationalist garb that has become popular in the Country as a reaction to the secessionist war. They succeeded in recruiting a disgruntled army commander as their front man for the election. Thus the Green regions of the map, showing the voter pattern in many of the urban centers (Colombo, Kandy, Galle) should not be interpreted as a pro-LTTE vote.

It should be interpreted as a pro-western, pro-market vote, directed by those
market players who lost their profiteering enterprises to a new, more nationalist regime. They gambled on the hope that Sarath Fonseka might be able to sway enough voters to their side, to create a "neck-to-neck" race. If the race had indeed been neck to neck, they expected that the resulting mayhem would benefit their future political and mercantile agenda.

This simply did not happen. Unlike in the west, there are no "undecided votes" among the Sri Lankan voters. Indeed, after a very emotional war, it is completely foolish to expect that there would be any significant undecided votes.

The results of the 26th January election, and the agreement with the predictions of our zeroth order mathematical model, confirm that the Sinhalese voted as they normally would, while the Tamils also did what they have done for decades, i.e,
follow their leaders.

The enormous new emergent factor.

However, there is an enormous difference in this election. For the first time in
decades, a Sinhalese leader has garnered 30% of the Tamil votes in the so called
"exclusive Tamil homelands", just a few months after a very emotional and horrific war. This giant first step will become an even bigger reality when all parts of Sri Lanka are more effectively connected by fast rail networks and other communication lines. Sri Lanka is a small country which can be fitted easily between Boston and New York. Modern IT technology can solve the political Gordian knot of language and geographic isolation that had plagued previous generations. A Tamil trader speaking in Tamil on his cell phone to a Sinhalese trader in Colombo or Galle can each converse in their own languages, while the voice chip will do the language translation. A Tamil can live in Mullaitive (Mooladoova) and yet commute to Colombo on a fast bullet train moving at 200 km per hour. It is not divisive constitutional bickering over the 13th amendment etc., that will solve the problems of Sri Lanka. What is needed is the jettisoning of those old oddities and going forward to a new world where very basic priorities hold. These priorities are universal human priorities of jobs, education, health, justice and human dignity which are the same for Sinhalese or Tamils. There is an excellent chance that Rajapaksa may succeed in delivers those objectives, and the voters may well have chosen very wisely.

The Travels of a Journalist—9

By Shelton A. Gunaratne © 2010

(January 31, Washington, Sri Lanka Guardian) As a habit, I invariably combined my professional (journalistic) and scholarly interests in planning my travels. My winter 1992 tour of the Rhine Valley wine route (Wienstrasse) and the Black Forest (Schwarzwold) was no exception.

I had made arrangements to visit the editorial office of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) one of the superb elite newspapers of the world and to enjoy the luxury of a grand hotel before I set off to the Black Forest to write a free-lance travel piece for The (Fargo, N D) Forum.

My flight landed in Frankfurt-am-Main Airport just before 9.30 a.m. on a Friday (28 Feb 1992). I rented a stick shift Ford Fiat from Hertz at the airport. After getting lost several times, I finally got to the FAZ office at Hellerhofstrasse about noon. Because I was both a journalist and a professor of international communication, I received a warm welcome from managing editor Werner D’Inka whom I interviewed for about one hour. We discussed the possibilities for American students to work as FAZ interns and as foreign correspondents. (D’Inka became co-editor of FAZ in 2005, and he still continues in that position).

Then I drove 40 km west straight to Wiesbaden (population 275,000), the capital of the federal state of Hessen, on A66 and checked in at Hotel Nassauer Hof on Kaiser Friedrich Platz, one of Europe’s remaining grand hotels. Julia Reichert, the guest relations officer of the hotel, showed me all the facilities of the establishment, including the luxury suites graced by eminent celebrities. Later in the evening, I was the dinner guest of Heidi Gokeler, the hotel’s executive secretary. Finishing the full-course dinner European style at the restaurant Die Ente von Lehel took us about three hours. After dinner, I visited the Kurhaus Bath Quarter (Kurviertel) located around the Wilhelmstrase promenade, the Brunnenkolonnade and the Spa Park (Kurpark).

I learned that the Nassauer Hof had blended wellness, physical fitness and beauty on its fifth floor facility to create an oasis of well being with an ambience of subtle design. The next morning, a hotel employee of Sri Lankan Tamil origin directed me to the hotel’s thermal pool. Guests walked on light brown bamboo floors in a winter garden-like atmosphere and relaxed on teak loungers in front of arched windows.

I visited the Russian Orthodox Church of Saint Elizabeth and made it to the summit of the Neroberg Hill to get a panoramic view of Wiesbaden late morning. Then, I headed southward for Mainz (population 200,300), the capital of the federal state of Rhineland-Palatinate, across the River Rhine. Although these two capitals are only 15 km apart, I lost my way a few times before I reached Mainz around mid-afternoon.

Lying at the confluence of the Rhine and the Main, the city is noted for its fine university named after Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), the supposed inventor of movable type and the printing press. Gutenberg was born in Mainz, where he also died. (Now, it is widely accepted that Bi Sheng, a Chinese alchemist, experimented with movable type for eight years from 1041—four centuries before Gutenberg.). The Gutenberg Museum in the city proudly exhibits the original Bible that Gutenberg printed in the mid—15th century.

Mainz also serves as a center of Germany’s wine industry with the Wienstrasse, where I was heading, located within 100 km of its reach. Mainz is the home of the Haus des Deutschen Weines (House of the German Wine).

After stopping at Stadtpark to visit the Favorite Parkhotel, I drove north on Rheinestrasse to see the city’s Cathedral Quarter. I entered the 1,000-year-old Mainz Cathedral of St Martin (the Mainzer Dom) through a doorway on the Market Square. To my surprise, what I saw was a carnival going on inside. Carnivals are a regular feature in Mainz.

Luther and Worms

My plan was to stay overnight in Worms (population 86,000), another 50 km to the south. I got there on the scenic highway along the Rhine. Having got there about 6.30 p.m., I was inquiring about a place to stay when a kind-hearted old couple directed me all the way to the Youth Hostel / Jugendgästehaus Worms, Dechaneigasse 1.

Worms is Germany’s oldest city (or one of the three claimants to be the oldest with Trier and Cologne). Established by the Celts, who named it Borbetomagus, Worms became well known during the Protestant Reformation. My thoughts went back to the days when Mr. Dissanayake taught us European History at Ananda College in the mid -‘50s. The connection between the Diet of Worms and the Protestant Reformation came to my mind.
Let me dramatize the proceedings of the Diet of Worms (with the help of Wikipedia), which took up matters relating to dissident Martin Luther from 16 to 18 April 1521.
• April 16: Luther arrives in Worms. Ulrich von Pappenheim, the reichmarschall, tells Luther to appear the following day at 4 p.m. before the Diet. Jeromee Schurff, Wittenberg professor in Canon Law, acts as Luther’s lawyer before the Diet.
• April 17: The Imperial Herald Sturm and Pappenheim come for Luther. Pappenheim reminds Luther that he should speak only in answer to direct questions from the presiding officer, Johann von Eck. Eck asks if a collection of books is Luther’s and if Luther is ready to revoke his heresies. Schurff says, “Please have the titles read.” There are 25 of them, including The 95 Theses, Resolutions Concerning the 95 Theses, On the Papacy at Rome, Address to the Christian Nobility, The Babylonian Captivity of the Church, and On the Freedom of a Christian. Luther requests more time for a proper answer, and gets time until 4 p.m. the next day.
• April 18: Luther prays for long hours, consults with friends and mediators, and presents himself before the Diet. A large crowd gathers. Luther is no longer in awe or feeling timid. When the counselor puts the same questions to him, Luther begins, “The Most Serene Lord Emperor, illustrious princes, most clement Lords, etc.” He concedes that he lacks the etiquette of the court and admits, "They are all mine, but as for the second question, they are not all of one sort." Luther goes on to place his writings into three categories: (1) Works pertaining to the Protestant Reformation that no one disputed. (2) Works attacking the abuses, lies and desolation of the Christian world and the papacy. “If I now recant these, then, I would be doing nothing but strengthening tyranny,” Luther declares. (3) Works that attacked individuals. He apologizes for the harsh tone of these writings but insists that he cannot reject them until he could be shown from the scriptures that he is in error. Luther concludes, "Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen."

The Edict of Worms, issued on 15 May 1521, declared Luther an obstinate heretic and banned the possession or reading of his books.

On the Wienstrasse

The next morning, after eating breakfast at the youth hostel, I went for a walk in Worms mulling over the historical events while visiting the Romanesque Cathedral and the Church of St Martin (both built in the 13th century). I also went to pay my respects to the Luther Monument (Lutherdenkmal) and the Jewish Cemetery.

Then I set out to explore the Wienstrasse (officially opened in October 1935), which runs approximately 85 km from the Alsace-Palatinate (French-German) border to north of the Palatinate Forest along B 38 and B 271 terminating at the House of German Wine in Bockenheim, which is just 15 km west of Worms.

Although the geography was clear in mind, I still lost my way when I found myself in Horchheim, where a young man asked me to follow him until I was on the correct road to the Wienstrasse. He left me at Dirmstein in the vicinity of the wine route. I looked around me to see vast stretches of plains with vineyards prospering under the watchful eyes of the Hardt Mountains. Being the warmest region in Germany, this area is most conducive to the cultivation of figs, lemons, grapes and the like. The almond blossoms, which painted the area pink and white, pleased me.

I stopped at Frensheim because the ramparts encircling it and its 12th century church intrigued me.

Then I crossed more vineyards to get to Weisenheim am Berg, where I joined the official wine route and proceeded driving southward tasting wine at places that caught my fancy. (Although I was not a habitual wine drinker, I was not averse to wine tasting, which I first did during a visit to Napa Valley in California during my travels as a WPI journalist.)

The spa park in Bad Durkheim caught my special attention. I stopped there for a leisurely walk. Bad Durkheim hosts the world’s largest wine festival every September at the Wurstmarkt in front of the world’s largest wine barrel. I drove past the wine towns of Wachenheim and Deidisheim and stopped at Neustadt an der Wienstrasse to fill up my rented car.

Just to the south of Neustadt, I stopped to see the Hambach Castle, considered to be the symbol of the German democracy movement because of the Hambacher Fest that took place in its premises in 1832. Although parking was free, a young lady at the parking lot was seeking donations.

I turned west at Maikammer to go to the Kalmit (673 m) lookout, the second highest point in the Palatinate. A short walk uphill to a "Pfaelzerwaldhuette" rewards the visitor with great views of the upper Rhine Valley in the east. On the way back, I also stopped at the tiny town of St. Martin, the location of Kropsburg, once the residence of the highest barons of the Reich, the knights of Dahlberg.

Fascinated by the enchanting beauty of the area, I decided to stay overnight at the nearby town of Edenkoben (population 6,800), where I checked in at Pfaltzer Hof. A German couple, Walter and Margaret Ecker from Karlsruhe, joined me for dinner and conversation.

After a hearty breakfast at the hotel next morning, I paid a visit to the nearby Villa Ludwigshohe, the Italian-style summer residence of Ludwig I of Bavaria. Ludwig bought the grounds from the municipalities of Edenkoben and Rhodt in 1845 and built the castle in 1852. The abdication of Ludwig I in 1848 delayed its construction. The villa now houses the Max Slevogt gallery.

My “discovery” of the charm of Pfaltzer Wald committed me to spend an additional day to go deeper into the forest. Thus, after leaving Edenkoben, I headed 50 km west to Dahn (population 4,800) via Rhodt under Rietburg (known for its 350-year-old Traminer vineyard, the oldest in Germany), Frankweiler and Annweiler am Trifels, where I stopped to see the ruins of the castle of Trifels on the Sonnenberg (493 m).

Rain spoilt my enjoyment of the steep climb to the castle, where Richard the Lionhearted of England was imprisoned in April 1193 after his return from the crusades. Trifels (three-fold rock) occupies one of the three peaks arising from the split of a red sandstone mountain. Anebos Castle is on one peak and Munz Castle is on the other.

Dahn, a rock-encircled country resort lying on the headwaters of the Lauter creek just 15 km from the Alsace-Palatinate border, was the ideal place for me to spend my last night in Rhineland-Palatinate. The place is a magnet for rock-climbers. Its landmark is the 70- meter high Jungfernsprung rock. Spending the night at Jugendherberge Dahn Am Wachtfelsen 1 was a pleasure because it gave me much needed rest and time to prepare for my adventures in the Black Forest.

NEXT – Exploring Germany: A drive in Schwarzwold (Black Forest)

(The writer is professor of mass communications emeritus, Minnesota State University Moorhead)

By Terry Lacey

(January 31, Jakarta, Sri Lanka Guardian) While Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa leads a delegation to the London talks on Afghanistan, Indonesian Trade Minister Mari Elka Pangestu has just signed an agreement to increase Indonesian trade with Somalia. Both moves reflect the policy of the new five-year Government led by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. That Indonesia must go global, and take a lead in the Muslim world.

The Indonesian delegation in London just held a bilateral meeting with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. President Barack Obama as well as British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, are pushing for Indonesia to play a bigger role in Afghanistan and on the global stage, and Obama once lived in Jakarta !

But for the US and UK, soon to have 100,000 and 10,000 troops respectively in Afghanistan, it is painfully obvious to US Central Command General David Petraeus, and Pentagon Chief Robert Gates that negotiations with the Taliban and the need for soft-power solutions, backed by hard-power, are the order of the day.

In the global Muslim hot-spots of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, the battle for development is the only battle that can be, and has to be winnable, and there are no military solutions.

Indonesia-Somalia trade slumped from $8 millions in 2008 to $1.5 millions in 2009. Indonesian Trade Minister Mari Pangestu said “This year, we can rebound back to $8 million as the direct trading will contribute to this.”

Somali Ambassador Mohamud Olow Barrow said, “Even though Somalia´s population is only 9.8 million the total number of Indonesian sarongs being exported to Somalia via Dubai is 20 million pieces per year”.

Indonesia has now decided to boost textile exports to Somalia through direct trade, instead of via Dubai, and to push its increasingly global construction companies into the reconstruction of war-torn Somalia.

Indonesian state-backed construction companies like Adhi Karya, Waskita Karya and Wijaya Karya, are increasingly active in the Gulf, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Morocco and Algeria.

Somali Trade Minister Abdirashid Mohamed Abdi said, “With many of our construction experts working abroad due to the instabilities that our country has been experiencing, we will require support from Indonesia, which is why construction materials that Indonesia exports will be given a 0 percent tariff rate.” (The Jakarta Globe, 19.01.10).

Juniman, an economist at PT Bank Internasional Indonesia praised the Yudhoyono government for its efforts to penetrate new markets in East Africa but warned about security issues, especially maritime piracy.

But there is a thread of logic in an emerging Indonesian foreign and trade policy that will engage non-traditional markets and use the Indonesian comparative advantage arising from its status in and commitment to the Organization of Islamic Congress.

The fact is that the biggest majority-Muslim nation in the world is on the move and its sheer economic weight, as potentially the seventh largest economy in the world by 2040, could make it increasingly significant in the deployment of the soft power needed to consolidate global Muslim modernization across the diversity of the ummah – the global Muslim community.

And if that were to mean that an Indonesian frigate should join the multilateral force on pirate patrol off the coast of Somalia, or that Indonesian troops might eventually end up as UN blue-helmet peace keepers in Afghanistan, Somalia or Yemen, alongside Turkish or Jordanian troops, then that would be no bad thing.

Better the West pay for the blue helmets and equipment that are needed, than set itself up as the target and recruiting agent for extremists.

If World Bank economist Timothy Bulman is right, Indonesia could soon be galloping along with growth rates reminiscent of those during the Soeharto era, at 7 or 8 percent growth a year. “The real economy has returned back to solid growth”, he told a seminar of the Institute for Development of Economics and Finance. (The Jakarta Post, 29.01.10).

Time to use the growing economic weight of Indonesia, with its 230 million people, to help make progress in the Arab and Muslim world.

Terry Lacey is a development economist who writes from Jakarta on modernization in the Muslim world, investment and trade relations with the EU and Islamic banking.

Dear Mr Douglus Devananda

(January 31, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) At last you have realised after a long time; I welcome your decision. This will pave the way for Karuna, Pillaiyan, Sitharthan and the TNA MPs who entered parliament with the help of LTTE to leave Tamil political arena.

Most of the political representatives in the North and East have come into power through undemocratic means. I am sure you are a man of your word. You promised earlier that you will leave politics when LTTE renounced violence ( Now the LTTE is no more) .

People have rejected you, Karuna, Pillaiyan and Sitharthan and if all of you would leave politics, Tamil people will reject many TNA parliamentarians in the forthcoming parliamentary election. Please remember that people in the North and East were not misled by TNA. They are intelligent and resilient unlike the Tamil Diaspora that had escaped the country for a better life. If you leave politics I will respect you as a man who paved the way for democratic politics among the Tamils.

People in Batticaloa voted for Sarath Fonseka not because they wanted to revenge President Mahinda Rajapakse as interpreted by some substandard ignorant political analysts.

They voted for:

1) Undivided Sri Lanka
2) Restoration of Law and Order.
3) Restoration of democracy.
4) End to paramilitary political culture
5) End to fear of persecution.
6) End to extortion and intimidation.
7) Stepping stone for new political culture.
8) End to impunity.
9) Restoration of normalcy.

People cannot enjoy any devolution without democracy and Law and Order.

Any Political Solution should be discussed only after building the trust among the communities.

Ending paramilitary politics in the North and East is the foundation to building trust among the communities. The trust building among the communities should be left to the moderates in the North and East.

People also rejected the advice of those who left the country long ago and returned to Sri Lanka ( ?vested interest) to appear on DAN TV and on political forums.

With the demise of LTTE all arm culture should end.

Thank You
Dr C Neethirajan.

NB: pl send this to Mr Devananda if you have his contact details