 | |
| Military police surround remaining protestors as they try to clear Tahir square in Cairo, Egypt, Monday Feb. 14, 2011. Egypt's military rulers dissolved parliament Sunday, suspending the constitution and promising elections in moves cautiously welcomed by pro-democracy protesters. - AP Photo |
by Thomas Johnpulle
(February 14, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) Turbulence in Egypt has come as a surprise to many. Hosni Mubarak has finally resigned. When faced with a contest between democracy and geopolitical interests, USA chose geopolitics, not democracy for the past 30 years. Still US officials make absurd demands including better democracy, reforms and a smooth transition of power. However, none of these are in the agenda of the people in the streets. They wanted the pro-US dictator to go without any conditions. It is not rocket science to apprehend that Egypt will go back to the pre-1979 era of Islamic clout in governance after Mubarak.
This is nothing new. Pakistan is another example where the west supported dictators repeatedly for good reasons. The moment democracy determined the rulers, Pakistan went further into extremism and violence. USA follows a similar approach towards Saudi Arabia. Although Saudi Arabia shows tremendous potential for the expansion of democracy in the volatile Middle Eastern region, USA makes no mistake even suggesting democracy.
Hypocrisy may have worked well in the past but more but more superpowers have started using the American strategy. Some see the events in Tunisia and Egypt as a possible response to US backed Sudan disintegration. Trading Egypt for South Sudan is a disastrous bargain for the west.
Rising cost of living, economic stagnation, dictatorship, uneven application of the law and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism are the root causes of the turmoil in Egypt. Will a similar event take place in Sri Lanka? High and uncontrolled inflation, economic stagnation, perceived dictatorship and uneven application of the law are certainly there in Sri Lanka. So it is fair to say that what happens in Cairo may happen in Colombo. Unlike in Egypt, the West will actually finance and help such an uprising in Sri Lanka. May be it has already been planned. But what would a mass movement for further democracy or government change achieve in Sri Lanka today?
Historical Events of Mass Public Movements
There were few mass public movements for immediate change in the past 60 odd years in Sri Lanka. Although there was no mass movement to gain Independence, following 1948 there was a huge public reawakening. Though Don Stephen Senanayake and his western style of conduct and governance didn’t actively promote it, nationalism surged in people’s hearts. This led to wider political, economic, social and historical consciousness. Sri Lanka started to assert its boundaries after almost 450 years. A distinction was made or attempted to be made between citizens and non-citizens. The Citizenship Act was introduced as a measure to reassert the control of Ceylon’s boundaries. Emulating ancient economic prosperity based on agriculture in the likes of the Granary of the East, gathered popularity. Fuelled by the enthusiasm, many new agricultural settlements were created in the East. These events are certainly not viewed favourably by those who support a Cairo type of a move in Sri Lanka. It is not to their advantage.
The next massive wave was in 1956 which elevated SWRD Bandaranaike from his astounding defeat in 1952 to power. His party was extremely powerful in the parliament and communist/socialist parties that were strong until then took a deep plunge. According to some he messed up the system but others argue he put things in due place. However, this mass public movement too fails to impress those who call for a Cairo style movement in Sri Lanka today.
Over a decade passed without any serious mass public movement. In 1970 it was again time for it. The 1970 government won a convincing three fourth majority riding this popular wave. However, it soon lost public support and an even bigger wave was building up. In 1977 the democracy campaign recorded the biggest ever victory unmatched by any previous or later event. Open economy was a bold step taken by the then government. People who gathered around the new leadership supported an aggressive economic, social and defence order for the sake of development. However the nation lost its way soon thereafter as violence engulfed the north and the south. Yet overall there was tremendous development. Those who now calling for a Cairo type uprising don’t recognize the 1977 event in good terms.
In between the two events there was the 1971 insurgency. But it failed to gather mass public support and left no permanent governance change.
There was no major mass movement thereafter for a long time partly because such movements were clamped down and partly due to the fact that there were no new radical leadership. Power transition in 1994 was smooth and calculated although Mrs Kumaratunga recorded a staggering 62.5% of the vote at the Presidential Election. Her peace wave ended in war as she struggled to keep her fragile government in power. By 2001 her government was unpopular.
The next major public uprising came in 2001 forcing the government to dissolution. LTTE influence was pivotal in changing the government and in sustaining the new government.
This was the only public uprising in Sri Lanka that is considered positive by those who want to see something similar to Egypt happening in Sri Lanka.
However the same forces that participated in the uprising very soon turned against the government which was seen as even more detached from the people than the previous government. People revolted again. Absence of war was not a valid excuse to them as they demanded another early election. Leaders who were elected by the people in both the north and the south in 2001, defeated them in 2004. It is worthwhile to note that the votes percentage UNP scored at the 2004 General Election was its lowest by then. When factored for CWC and SLMC defections subsequently, the core UNP vote was even lower. People in two electorates in the Colombo district elevated a new political party by the name JHU over the UNP. It was a historical event by any standard. This more than reversed the 2001 uprising for peace. Its momentum didn’t stop until a hard line president and a Prime Minister were in office.
No major public uprising happened until 2010 April. Following the end of the war and in the backdrop of a convincing victory by the incumbent president, the ruling party almost won a two thirds majority under the PR system.
However, the above two public uprisings are not considered positive by those who pray for a Cairo like event in Colombo.
All mass public movements in Sri Lanka and elsewhere established and strengthened the majoritarian rule. This was what happened in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Iran and now Egypt.
Why was it so?
Why mass public movements have not addressed ethnic minority concerns? Why at most times these mass uprisings actually harmed ethnic minority concerns? The simple answer is, ethnic minorities detached from majority politics don’t stand to gain and in fact lose from a public uprising. In every mass uprising the winner by definition is the majority! Otherwise there is nothing that stops the majority from staging another uprising.
In Sri Lanka there are two distinct minority groups. One that aligns with the majority political stream and the other that is always against the majority political stream. The first group includes all Muslim political forces, all upcountry Tamil forces and all Colombo Tamils. The second group comprises of most Tamils in the north-east.
North-east Tamils had their own separate mass uprising in 1977 but were not part of the national uprising. While both the UNP and TULF wanted the SLFP led government out, they had severe disagreements between them. When the two uprisings that were together until the election realized their differences, it was too late to reconcile as each group had promises to keep or face another uprising against them.
The 2001 uprising was the same.
It is short-sighted thinking to expect a Cairo like event in Colombo today. Although north-east Tamil parties and southern opposition groups love to topple the Rajapakse administration over economic mismanagement, dictatorial powers, uneven application of the law and nepotism, it will land them in an even worse predicament than now. With the absence of the LTTE there is no force to keep these two divergent forces together. And the honeymoon will be shorter than 2001-2004 and the fallout will be even more dramatic with a bigger follow-up uprising.
A First Class Democracy has Little Meaning in a Third World Economy
Ceylon became Asia’s oldest democracy in 1931. When the country with its poor economy was handed down to the people of the country with a first class democracy in 1948, the poor saw it as an opportunity to get rich quickly. Politicians manipulated the poor to win and hold on to power. From complex appeasements to cheap sweeteners all sorts of baits were offered to the people. This is the cost of having a first class democracy in a third world economy.
In short, the level of democracy a nation can sustain depends on the level of economic strength of its majority. If the majority is economically poor, they are likely to misuse the rich democracy to benefit in the short term. Here the majority refers to the political majority irrespective of ethnicity. When ethnicity creeps in, these effects amplify.
It is shocking to note that as close as in 2001 the leadership aspirant promised free denim trousers, gold chains, motor bikes and even chewing gum on political stages! In 1994 the winner promised to lower the price of bread to Rs. 3.50! In 1977 the winner promised eight types of grain at very cheap prices while in 1970 the leadership aspirant promised rice from the moon!
In a developed democracy these promises would have earned the wrath of the people. But not in a poor democracy.
Most nations chose a suitable economic system and then adjusted the level of democracy accordingly. Ceylon/Sri Lanka put the cart before the horse. After experimenting with various economic models and various shades of socialism and capitalism, Lankans seem to have settled for a particular mix. However, most people are dissatisfied with the level of democracy and the performance of the economy. Little that they realize there is a relationship between the two.
That is why economic development is the best way to sustain a high degree of democracy. Economic development can iron out regional rifts as well and integrate people to a great extent. At that point no government can hold back the public because then the change would be permanent; not reversing within a few years by a counter uprising.
It is up to the government to better manage the economy and ensure economic benefits reach most Sri Lankans. It is too expensive politically and economically not to let people of certain ethnicities exploit economic resources of the north-east which is 36% of the landmass and 60% of the coastline. Today 90% of the population depend on just 64% of the land mass and 40% of the coastline for economic survival which is not sustainable. Opening up economic resources in the north-east for people of all ethnicities is paramount to economic development. People want results now. They demand to know what happened to the peace dividend. From an economic sense the only peace dividend is the land mass and coastline that was “won” by security forces. Making good economic use of these is the only additional benefit of peace.
The economy was resilient to war by the turn of the millennium and the boom in a few sectors doesn’t affect most people positively today. Defence expenditure has not seen a reduction and no special economic benefits flow to the common man owing to the end of the war. That is why the land mass and the coastline previously under the LTTE become the only peace dividend. There is nothing else. There will not be anything else. Making good use of these is the only way to economic development. Government must stand and deliver or face the music of public anger. Trying to bottle up public anger only increases it.
It doesn’t mean there is no chance for a Cairo like success for street protests. It means one uprising will lead to another back to back uprising in a few years unless underlying resource distribution problems are resolved. An uprising succeeds only if the majority, not the minority, stages it. But the majority will stage a counter uprising if their demands are not met following the first uprising. And that will more than outdo the first uprising as seen from 60 years of history.
To make matters worse, today there is one additional economic and military superpower overlooking Sri Lankan affairs. Today, a pro-western government will not go unchallenged as in the 1980s, especially when the majority ceases to support it over economic and political disagreements.
Post a Comment