Chinese numerology supersede Sri Lankan Astrology?

| by Upasiri de Silva

( November 30, 2014, Sydney, Sri Lanka Guardian) Mahinda Rajapakse who is having his personal astrologer and most of the time he is around temple Trees, to check for best times and days to engage in any activity, as Mahinda do everything according to Astrological dates and times. But the President who always use Astrological dates and times for everything he do, change his mind this time when he selected the dates for the Presidential elections, according to a very reliable source from the Presidential House.

The Astrological dates for Nomination and Election were different to the dates Election Commissioner announced this time. Why Mahinda now not following the Astrological dates and go for Numerical dates? Chinese has so much influence on Mahinda he is now forced to discard his Astrologer for Chinese auspicious dates as dictate by them.

The day Presidential elections was proclaimed, I never thought about the importance of the two dates in December and January. But after reading a Chinese article on Numerology, I suddenly realise Mahinda Rajapakse is well and truly is under the Chinese power. Number 8 (Eight) is the most important number for Chinese in their Calendar and their influence helped Mahinda Rajapakse to throw away the Astrological dates given to him and choose 8th in December and 8th in January as the nomination and election dates, as he was told by the Chinese that he will be able to defeat anyone contesting him if he used those dates.

Unfortunately late PM SWRD Bandaranayke was born on 8th January, and now this day he selected is creating problems for him and his advisers.

Why Rajapakse discarded the Astrological dates is a mystery to many, and the person who provided me this information told me he got very agitated when he heard January 8th is the Birth Day of SWRD Bandaranayke. Even he select any date this time he is going to lose very badly as he is hated by most in Sri Lanka. But now his trust on Chinese numerology has eroded and he is fuming about using the Chinese numerological dates for this crucial Presidential election.



Fake Tales for Elections

| by Tisaranee Gunasekara

“Real patriots ask questions.”
Carl Sagan (The Demon-Haunted World)

( November 30, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) It is a union more perfect than perfect. Bodu Bala Sena has returned to its maha gedera (ancestral home) to openly assist its progenitors in their hour of need.

cartoon courtesy: ft.lk
The BBS’s public alignment with the Rajapaksas provides yet another indicator about the sort of campaign the Siblings will run. There will be temporary price decreases and other giveaways. But the main theme of the Rajapaksa platform will be Fear. Fear of omnipresent threats and omnipotent enemies, the great big ogres out there waiting to get us. The identity of the enemy will vary depending on the time and the place; it could be rejuvenated LTTE, Islamic Jihadists, foreign conspirators, religious converters, economic saboteurs….. But the enemy will always be there, threatening to destroy national independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, sow anarchy and drown the country in blood. The only bulwark against this terrible calamity, the citizenry will be told, is of course the Rajapaksas; so elect them, even if you are economically hurting and hopeless.

The world out there will be depicted as an unholy cabal of capitalists, imperialists, colonialists, Christian fundamentalists, Islamic Jihadists, Tamil Diaspora, NGO-types and human rights campaigners – all of them obsessed with Sri Lanka and united in their determination to destroy the country’s sole defenders, the Rajapaksas. Acolytes will wail that if Mahinda Rajapaksa is defeated, he, his brothers and all ‘War Heroes’ will be dragged before an international war crimes tribunal, found guilty wholesale and sent to the electric chair en masse. Candidate Rajapaksa will thunder that he will brave the electric chair a thousand times for the sake of the ‘War Heroes’ and ask the electorate to vote for him in gratitude.

Galagoda-Atte Gnanasara Thera has already fired the first salvo with his word-picture of the heroic Rajapaksas bidding a poetic farewell to Mother Lanka as the evil international forces take them away, bound hand and foot.

Will the public fall for these fake tale?

The only ‘War Hero’ to be dragged into undeserved incarceration, literally kicking and screaming, was the war-winning army commander Sarath Fonseka. And that act of base injustice and ingratitude was perpetrated by the super-patriotic Rajapaksas, just because Gen. Fonseka exercised his democratic right to oppose them legally and peacefully.

The only ‘War Heroes’ to be publicly humiliated were the soldiers who were officially assigned, by the state, to guard Candidate Fonseka during the 2010 Presidential election. They were ordered out of the Colombo hotel where Gen. Fonseka was staying, made to kneel on the road and taken away to jail manacled hand and foot. And that act of viciously petty revenge too was perpetrated by the Rajapaksas.

Then there was the senior intelligence officer who had an encounter with the abominable offspring of Minister Mervyn Silva. That ‘War Hero’ was accused of all sorts of crimes and forced to incriminate himself publicly (rather like the Samurdhi official), to save the ministerial brat. The Rajapaksas authored that egregious deed as well.

That is how the Rajapaksas treat any current or former military man when it suits their purposes.

That is their patriotism and their gratitude.

The Rajapaksas are covering themselves with the tattered patriotic flag and arming themselves with past-the-sell-by-date gratitude argument because they cannot conceive of a life without power. Other presidents could retire and go home. Presidents JR Jayewardene, DB Wijethunga and Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga did so. President Premadasa already had his retirement planned and was getting his future office in Colombo Central ready when he was killed by the LTTE.

The Rajapaksas cannot go home because there are all too many of them, occupying unmerited positions across the state and wallowing in luxuries at the expense of the people. Can most of them go back to being nobodies? Can they manage without power and its many trappings and privileges?

There is nothing they will not do to prevent their world from unravelling.

An unusually perceptive piece on elections quotes a small-scale bakery owner (and a Sinhalese) calling on all candidates, “Make sure our lives are better off than they were before” . It is a sentiment most Lankans, irrespective of the usual divides, are likely to agree on. Currently most Lankans are focusing on their own very real economic issues. And the Rajapaksas, in order to win without massive violence and utterly de-legitimising rigging, need to change this focus. In order to win with even a fig leaf they need to make Sinhala voters concentrate on imaginary enemies and imaginary threats.

Fear is the way to do it.

The BBS would play a major role in this campaign of fear-mongering.

BBS as Shock Troops

Cognitive linguist George Lakoff, who came up with the concept of ‘frames’, argues that “People use frames – deep seated mental structures about how the world works – to understand facts. Frames are in our brains and define our common sense. It is impossible to think without activating frames and which frames are activated is of crucial importance.” The Rajapaksas would try to imprison the election – and the electorate – in a frame of fear. They will seek do so with fake tales about enemies, threats and conspiracies. They will use all resources of the state to take this message into every Sinhala home. This may not suffice to prevent a large chunk of the Sinhala voters from deserting them. But the Siblings have no alternative, this side of generalised violence.

The BBS will be invaluable in this effort, because it can be delegated with the task of coming up with the really lurid anti-minority, anti-Western rhetoric. What will be said with a little obliqueness on the official UPFA platform will be shrieked with open belligerency on the BBS platform.

The BBS may also be used to physically attack opposition campaigners and supporters, especially monks who back Maithripala Sirisena. The possibility that thugs/former servicemen disguised in robes and led by a couple of bona fide BBS monks will be used to cause mayhem at opposition gatherings cannot be ruled out. The BBS after all has a history of physically assaulting political opponents. By using the BBS as shock troops the Rajapaksas can claim that the opposition is being attacked by patriotic monks enraged at the planned treachery.

If the Rajapaksas succeed with their fake tales, by the time the election is over, the divide between the majority and the minorities would have widened and deepened exponentially, rendering a peaceful Lankan future utterly impossible.

In real life, the story about the Emperor’s cloak can have several alternate endings, Terry Pratchett reminds us. It could be the story of the boy who was punished by his father for being rude to royalty; or the story of the crowd forced by armed guards into affirming that the emperor was always gloriously clothed or “the story of how a whole kingdom suddenly saw the benefits of the ‘new clothes’” and followed the imperial example, resulting in economic recession and/or a Pneumonia epidemic .

Which ending will the story of the Rajapaksas and their glorious patriotic cloak have?

Will Sinhalese see through the fake tales or fall for them? Will they succumb or will they overcome?




References;
  1. This particular chapter was co-authored by Ann Druyan, Carl Sagan’s wife.
  2. Visura Building which subsequently housed the Premadasa Centre
  3. http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/11/elections-offer-little-solace-to-sri-lankas-poor/
  4. Don’t Think of an Elephant
  5. Thief of Time



BBS Support, A Blessing In Disguise

| by Helasingha Bandara

( November 30, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) All along, people of Sri Lanka knew whose creation Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) was. No one was surprised when Gnanasara announced his support for Mahinda Rajapaksha (MR). Instead of worrying about BBS’ support for MR, those who wish a change were jubilant for the fact that BBS support for MR was a blessing in disguise for the opposing forces.

With due respect, this writer would like to call the leading figure of BBS, Gnanasara Unnehe, instead of Gnanasara Unnanse although the subtle difference in the meaning of the two terms can only be attributed to the practice rather than to linguistics . I must admit that I am a Buddhist by default. I do not worship monks or do not go to temples to worship. Yet I like the serene atmosphere of a temple and grandeur of the buildings. I believe I am a good Buddhist nonetheless, because I have enormous respect for the Buddha and his preaching about how to lead a good life and I lead a reasonably generous, magnanimous and peaceful life without causing any harm to anyone.

As far as Gnanasara Unnehe is concerned, people have qualms about as to whether he is a monk or a layman in a yellow robe. His physical gestures, abusive language and mannerisms are neither of a sage nor of an ascetic but of an ordinary thug. He was alleged to have been penalized in a court of law for drunk driving. He has tried to justify this ‘unmonklike’ behaviour in patriotic terms claiming that he accepted the blame of drunk driving to prevent an important security forces person from falling into trouble. However, he himself had admitted at a TV interview that there are many females interested in him and one even stalked him in the recent past. Judging by his personal behavior and evil traits, it is hard to believe that Unnehe would reject an offer from a good-looking female. Lastly the type of Buddhism that he wants to nurture in Sri Lanka is so violent that it defeats the purpose of the core of Buddhist Principles that are nonviolence and the tolerance of other religions. The Buddha has said those who do not respect religions of others do not respect their own either.

In a recent press conference Unnehe has said that for him the country, the nation and the religion are the most important things in his life in that order. By the country he means an undivided Sri Lanka. I guess this is his sincere desire, and no disagreement with this. However the desire to have an undivided country under the Rajapakshas, at any cost, is questionable. In his opinion if MR is defeated at this election the enemy forces would take him to an international court to try for his misdeeds. He quoted a certain person of Tamil ethnic origin who has said something to that effect at a TV interview. This one person who does not possess any international power has been drawn on as the main conspirator who allegedly has gathered all opposition parties to help his conspiracy.

If there is any international conspiracy to overthrow MR at this Juncture, MR must be the lead role in that conspiracy because he himself alone wanted to hold elections in January 2015. No foreign government, agency, person or a pressure group has pressurised him to do so. Opposing parties within the country have not only opposed the premature election but have even threatened with legal action. Yet MR has decided to go-ahead with the election having received the green light from a Judiciary that he himself has appointed. Instead of ruling happily for two more years he has announced an election. Now he has got all his henchmen to call the emergence of a strong opposition a conspiracy. If he feared that he would be tried at an international court, he would not have declared an election. The claim that he would be tried at an international court is only an election gimmick. Rajapaksha opportunism seems to have backfired and he does not know what to do now other than trying his usual tactics to deceive the public. According to Gnanasara Unnehe the people of Sri Lanka should go on electing MR or one of his family forever for the fear of them being charged with war crimes, despite the bad governance, criminal activities of his close associates, increasing lawlessness in the country and escalating poverty among the poor.

As far as I am concerned, Gnanasara Unnehe’s nation is not Sri Lankan but Singhalese, his religion is not Buddhism but some philosophy that is full of hatred and divisiveness. So I hope that the people will know the difference between the truth and a lie and a good monk and a bad one.


Capturing Kashmir

The Lotus and the Chinar

| by Farzana Versey

( November 30, 2014, Mumbai, Sri Lanka Guardian) They lined up in the wintry chill, some still homeless after the floods, because hope lies in hoping. As one more predator swooped down on Jammu and Kashmir, democracy was declared after the first round of voting on November 25. The uber nationalists had spoken in the dictatorial tone they adopt to thrust their assembly-line idea of consensual politics.

Kashmir is a target to be achieved, no less than a Mission 44 to bag enough seats to ensure that the ruling rightwing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) at the Centre captures the state. Anybody likely to get in the way has to be silenced. The polls were announced a month ago. Around 35 people per day have been detained since. According to a report in the Indian Express, many of them were scanned from their pictures at protest rallies and categorised as “stone pelters” and “trouble mongers”. The bigger threats have already been confined: “Among prominent Kashmiri leaders, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq and Syed Ali Shah Geelani are under undeclared house arrest. Shabir Shah is in prison. Yasin Malik has recently been moved from prison to hospital for the treatment of a kidney ailment.”

Dissent won’t be heard. This does not concern bespoke democrats. Mission 44 reveals the cussedness to hold a state hostage by using every trick, be it through the army’s planned errors, floods or religion.

Sympathy factor

Election month has resulted in fast-track justice to work its magic on the sympathy vote. If the government employs AFSPA (Armed Forces Special Powers Act) that gives a carte blanche to the army to make a point, it can also dictate when the forces should perform public penance. In a state where encounter killings are common with unmarked graves and half widows standing testimony, what has prompted the sudden change in modus operandi? It is not as egalitarian as it looks.

On November 3 two teenagers, Faisal Yusuf Bhat and Mehrajuddin Dar, were shot dead in Budgam. 118 rounds were fired; 28 bullets were pumped into the boys. The operation was so shoddy that it seemed like the soldiers were parodying themselves. Headlines such as ‘The Army accepts its mistake’ imbued the forces with the magnanimity of accepting their fault.

Now, just three weeks later, the verdict is out. The army has “indicted” nine soldiers and recommended court martial proceedings for the “mistake”. The mistake in the words of Lt General D S Hooda of the Northern Army command was this: “There was some information about a white car with terrorists. Obviously, the identity was mistaken in this case. We take responsibility for the death.”

Terrorism has become a good excuse, even if it means shooting the unarmed. This has been a pattern, which is why the parents of the young men rejected the compensation money of Rs 10 lakh offered by the army. Said Faisal’s father: “The blood of my 14 year old son is not so cheap that I could barter it. I reject this compensation. I will pay Rs 20 lakh to army in return if it hands over the killers to us.”

It is reminiscent of some locals rejecting the central government’s gestures during the September floods. A group throwing away food packets back into the waters that had rendered them homeless was about anger and self-respect, the latter a luxury when life is at stake, but the assertion of it remains a potent image of a people holding their own despite the helplessness.

Those reporting it, however, sought to convey that it amounted to ungratefulness. Nothing quite ‘otherises’ people like a formal transaction, a quid pro quo, especially when they have a right over the state machinery. “Aren’t you grateful to the army” became the slogan as those stranded for days without food or water and trapped on the roofs of houses were pulled up into helicopters even as another army of Kashmiris volunteers reached the smaller villages in makeshift boats.

For those outside the state the army reputation acquired a halo. The soldiers were working under directions from the government. Their role was as political as it was humanitarian. Majid Pandit, a media person and photographer, astutely observed, “Militarization of Humanitarian Assistance: Vulnerability of this space in present times. This calls for a case study.”

Mainstream media infiltrated the state to communicate to the rest of India the picture of a land being rescued by the same soldiers who Kashmiris have thrown stones at. Additional Directorate General of Public Information tweeted from its official account, “Despite fighting the fury of floods in Kashmir, Indian Army carried an operation at Laribag, Kupwara eliminating one LeT terrorist.”

Even in the midst of such tragedy where 85 per cent of the populated areas were under water, the message sent out was that this is a terrorist region where assimilation is possible only by elimination.

Co-opting

In the Valley where the desire for azaadi might be deemed as separatism, the political establishment can use different strands of separatist compulsions. Sajjad Lone is just the sort of person they would go looking for — an ambitious man with a chip on his shoulder and nothing to lose (he lost in 2009 and 2014). His whiter than the rest stand had made him into the black sheep of the separatist family. His calling card today is that of an ex-separatist. So when Narendra Modi with his ultra-nationalism approached him, he felt indebted: “The national party that dominated the political scene in Kashmir was the Congress, and they confined themselves to the Abdullahs and Muftis. Now there is another national party in power and its national leaders come to Kashmir and meet people like Sajjad Lone.”

This was done without any reference to the elections to suggest that there was no axe to grind. Lone turned into emotional jelly: “I cannot tell you how humble he is. He was talking as if I was the Prime Minister and not him.” He was baited not with anything real, but that titillating phrase, “wait for a little while and then see whether there is change or not”.

Personal history is being repeated. His father Abdul Ghani Lone was killed in 2002. The whitewash job had peddled him as the “lone moderate voice” even though he said that he had nothing to do with the Indian government. The PM from a blatantly Hindutva party was handing a posthumous certificate to a blatantly separatist leader who had once commented that his life was in danger “wherein many guns work at the same time”. Sajjad was to comment later: “At the end of the day, the man who takes up the gun is responsible for his own actions. We can’t criticise them because we are not risking our lives, but, as a Kashmiri, I feel politics should have a much bigger role in the current world scenario.”

Twelve years after the senior Lone was killed, the son is being ‘moderated’ to be fit enough for a saffron mainstream.

The sellout

The shrewd strategists manning the goalposts are not averse to playing along, ideology be damned. At a rally, Modi invoked “Allah Ta’ala”, giving full credit to the exalted god of Islam for the river Chenab. With his emphasis on “a Kashmiri is a Kashmiri” he debunked the role of religion in politics to the crowd, but the backroom boys were busy with meeting clerics. Ramesh Arora who is in charge of the BJP’s Kashmir affairs wing said, “This notion that BJP is a communal party is wrong. Kashmir is the land of Sufi saints and Islam will grow better during our regime.”

This is no different from the BJP position of bettering other faiths by claiming them to push the Hinduisation agenda. What comes across as a secular statement — “the religion of the chief minister is immaterial” — is really a means to keep options open and pave the way for a non-Muslim candidate.

However, it is not about catering to the Kashmiri Pandit population that is being used only for seats to be captured. Obfuscation prevails: “From Jammu and Kashmir we will find solution to the issue of the refugees. I want to tell those spreading lies that they should not mislead people.” Modi did not mention the Pandits by name. Worse, he spoke about the “problems of refugees that have been existing for 50 years”. For someone who is willing to sup with the separatists he has no sympathy for, political compulsions forced him to avoid mentioning 1989 as the year of Pandit ‘exodus’, when infiltration had peaked.

From the Pandit point of view, this is unpalatable. Unlike the Kashmiris still in the region who continue to suffer, they have always been comfortably ensconced in the capital political scene irrespective of the party in power. What they seek is a restoration of their identity and are not ready to be a watered down version in an all-purpose ‘Kashmiriyat’. The Panun Kashmir movement has its own separatist notions, yet the community’s aspirations are being sidelined to favour the Valley’s pro-independence groups. Ram Madhav of the BJP, a former top-rung RSS leader, said of the separatists: “This is the time for them to work for development. They should fight both the corrupt NC and PDP.”

Such is the level of opportunism to grab space from the ruling National Conference and the People’s Democratic Party that even azaadi is being wooed to build the development cage. Also, there is no mention in the manifesto of Article 370 that grants the state special status.

Campaign manager Ramesh Arora observed, “We have a clear stand on Article 370, which Modi and other leaders of the party have made specifically clear that we want debate and discussions on the issue. If people think it benefits them, then let it be but if they say it has not benefitted them, we will proceed accordingly.”

The foundation of the Kashmiri ethos is based on its separateness and specialness. For the people, benefit is not about a cost-effective analysis and it is unlikely that their views will be sought. Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, chairperson of the Hurriyat Conference, had written an open letter to the ‘People of India’ just before the May general elections: “We urge you to recognise that the Kashmir issue is not a peripheral or isolated one… (It) continues to destroy life and obliterate the rights and aspirations of our people in Kashmir who desire only to live free, peaceful and dignified lives. The continuation of this tragic conflict is also a direct threat to your interests and well-being as a people.”

This sounds like a more honest understanding of democracy than the gleam in the eye over Srinagar as a smart city. The ski resorts and tulip gardens are for others. Kashmiri pragmatism about these does not dilute their idealism that goes beyond the number of seats to grab.

Farzana Versey
can be reached at Cross Connections.

Rajapaksa’s cutouts cause massive losses to CMC

පිà·ƒ්à·ƒෙක්
( November 29, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The cutouts put up in many parts in Colombo have resulted in a Rs. 21 million loss of revenue to the Colombo Municipal Council (CMC).

This revelation was made by the ruling party of the CMC, the United National Party (UNP) at the Council's sessions yesterday (27).

The President's cutouts have been put up in Colombo without the payment of any fee to the Council.

CMC members have stated that such actions in fact brought disgrace to the governing party.

Meanwhile, an employee of the Road Development Authority (RDA) has been captured on camera pasting posters of President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The BBC has reported that the RDA employee is attached to the Authority's Chilaw office.

The photograph was taken on Thursday (27) morning in old Madampe town area.

Sources: The Colombo Post


Is there anything called luck?

| by Victor Cherubim

( November 29, 2014, London, Sri Lanka Guardian)
In today’s unstable and unpredictable world, it may be right for some of us to think if there is something called, “luck”.

To some observers, you are born lucky. To have been born at the right time, at the right place and in the right circumstance, confers luck. Others accept this premise as the reason for being lucky. Still many others maintain there is no such thing as being “lucky”.

As luck is so elusive, why is it that “people thrive in uncertainty, take the lead in times of chaos, deal with a world full of disruption, take on forces that we cannot predict, manmade, or an Act of God, like the weather, which we can hardly control. What then do we see as the role played by “luck”?

Luck, in my opinion, happens to everyone, every living being. A leader like Nelson Mandela, a social reformer like Mahatma Gandhi, an eminent theologian like Thomas Aquinas or to come closer home, even to a pop group like, “One Direction,” the difference between them and an ordinary citizen, is that they did not depend on luck to “turn them on”. Was it a leap of faith into the unknown that made them change their life plans, that challenged the time, the place and the circumstance, into which they were born, lived and even endured pain and/or pleasure?

Thousands, in fact thousands of millions, are born with “self worth” or have had the ability to achieve self worth, but perhaps, have been mislead, sometimes “conned” or “conditioned”, to be guided in their path in life as part of their fate, their allotted state, as their destiny. This conditioning is very often an excuse for acceptance.

When we examine the lives of men and women, great and small, in any walk of life or in any field of endeavour and compare them to any one of us, we may be able to note one common factor or feature, everyone has had or experienced at some period extraordinary bouts, periods, sequences of good fortune, yet showed an equally “spectacular” inclination to deny its existence or rather to fritter it away. When the time came to execute their “lucky break,” they perhaps, stumbled, were overwhelmed, or even fell down on their expectation. In short, they failed to “grab luck.”

Research has continually pointed out that it was not for “lack of good luck” but for “lack of proper, precise and punctual execution.” Thus the sayings “take luck as it comes”. “When the going gets tough, the tough get going,” is for those who don’t rely on luck.

What can be construed as a “lucky break,” is when “preparation meets opportunity”. In the words of Winston Churchill, “a pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity, an optimist, sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

Preparation for opportunity

The Presidential election in Sri Lanka could be an opportunity. Are we prepared for the unprepared, the unexpected? Of course, many will say, we cannot change the weather, we cannot we change an “Act of God.” We also cannot change a low turnout; we may not be able to take on all the forces outside of our control. But we can certainly, conduct the election in all manner of civility.

Placed with this challenge, the Presidential election is an imponderable task, nobody can underestimate President Mahinda Rajapaksa, and likewise nobody should underestimate the strength and the will of our security forces and our services to maintain law and order.

It is equally understandable that the Common Candidate, Maitripala Sirisena, has taken on an impossible task. He has in the true spirit of the contest accepted to play by the rules of the game. with the right attitude, to woo the voter on the 8th January 2015.

To quote Nietzsche: “What does not kill me makes me stronger”. It is up to everyone in Sri Lanka to showcase to the world that resilience and not just luck, is the signature of our great democracy.




Sri Lanka at the cross roads again

| by Izeth Hussain

The more it changes the more it’s the same thing – French proverb.

( November 29, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) According to widespread Sri Lankan perceptions, we came to a cross roads by 1989 and in 1994 we chose what seemed to most of us to be the right road, which would lead to definitive solutions of the two major problems bedeviling us: that of restoring a fully functioning democracy and establishing unity through a solution of the ethnic problem. Today, twenty years later, many Sri Lankans, perhaps most, share the perception that we have again come to a cross roads at which it is imperative to choose the right road that would lead to definitive solutions of the two major problems bedeviling us: the restoration of a fully functioning democracy and the establishment of unity through the solution of our ethnic problems. It looks like the more it changes the more it’s the same thing. Or rather it’s the same thing but worse, because we now have two ethnic problems – the Muslim one as well – instead of just one. That fact suggests that the major problem underlying everything else in Sri Lanka is that of establishing national unity – which is the main case that I will be advancing in this article.

It should be useful to chart the salient points in the political trajectories that led to the two cross roads because that could enable us to spot common factors between them. When the Jayewardene Government came to power in 1977, it was the confident expectation of most of us that problems that had been bedeviling us for decades would be set right. In the economy there was a turning to the market leading to phenomenal economic growth, a change that has established itself as irreversible. JRJ showed himself to be more prescient about our economic future than any of our other leaders, and wrought the bourgeois revolution that traditional Marxism saw as the necessary penultimate stage before the establishment of socialism. That was a major achievement, but it was his only one. Since he and his Government had overwhelming popular support, hardly anyone expected that he would want to deviate even one jot from democracy, but he quickly made himself a dictator. On the ethnic front, we confidently expected that the promised all-Party Conference would be held without much delay, resulting in a definitive solution to the ethnic problem. Instead he unleashed a program of State terrorism which reached its apogee in the holocaust of 1983, resulting in the thirty-year war. The record was as follows by the time he relinquished office in 1989: there were two rebellions going on simultaneously in this small country; the IPKF troops were here behaving like conquerors; and the Government had lost control over a third of the national territory and half the coast line. Premadasa also continued the dictatorship and could not solve the ethnic problem.

In 1994 we chose an alternative road. The market oriented economy was continued with – for the most part – very satisfactory growth rates. The economic difficulties we are experiencing, along with many other countries, can be seen – partly at least – as following from the defects inherent in the capitalist system. Democracy was restored. On the ethnic front our Governments were over a long period very accommodative but a solution eluded us mainly because of the intransigence of the LTTE. However, with the assumption of power by President Rajapakse the road has been veering in a totally different direction. But we must first acknowledge his two mighty achievements. If not for the military victory over the LTTE we would today almost certainly be living under a confederal arrangement amounting to a de facto Eelam. The other achievement is that with consummate political skill he has saved this country from one of the worst scourges that could have befallen it, a military government, though that has been at the price of allowing an excessive intrusion of the military into the civilian realm. On the negative side, he is clearly veering towards an absolutist dictatorship with the eighteenth amendment, the ridiculous impeachment of the Chief Justice, and much else. On the ethnic front there has been no political solution for the Tamil ethnic problem, which could have fateful consequences in the future, and he has allowed the eruption of yet another ethnic problem, the Muslim one. Sri Lanka could be moving towards another doom-laden 1989. It is understandable that many Sri Lankans should feel that we have arrived at a cross roads again.

There are several common factors in the two political trajectories that I have outlined above. All our Governments since 1977 have followed market-oriented economic policies, but that is not seen as a factor leading to a political cross roads in which we have to turn desperately to an alternative road. Two other common factors are seen as leading to the present cross roads: dictatorship and the failure to solve ethnic problems. We are still a quasi-democracy, but the drive towards absolutist dictatorship could become irresistible because a known fact about power, differentiating it from victuals, is that the appetite grows in the eating. As for our ethnic problems, there has been a failure to solve them but there have been no mass murder of minority members. That however could follow because Islamophobic extremists – who indisputably have a privileged position with the Government -profess to believe that the Muslims pose an existential threat to the Sinhalese. We could be well on the way to another 1989. It should be understandable that many Sri Lankans today feel that we desperately need to turn towards an alternative political road.

The burden of this article is that the desideratum over-riding everything else in Sri Lanka is the unity of the nation. This article is not being written from a partisan political standpoint. A new President, or for that matter a Prime minister under a Parliamentary system of government, can make himself a dictator if the conditions are propitious for that. And of course our politicians can go on mucking and wrecking our ethnic relations as they have been doing since 1948. We need new thinking about building an inclusive nation. We need, not necessarily a new Party in power, but a new road in our politics. Hitherto the majority assumption has been that there is no need to build a nation because it already exists: this is the land of the Sinhala Buddhists, or it is the land of the Sinhalese inclusive of the Christians, while the minorities are no more than visitors. This has led to a deep sense of alienation among the minorities. It has also, I believe, aggravated the divisiveness among the Sinhalese themselves.

What could be the reason? I have identified two factors – the drive towards dictatorship and the failure to establish ethnic harmony – as having led to the disastrous situation that prevailed in 1989, and those same two factors are threatening to lead us again to another 1989. I suspect that those two factors are really one and the same. A dictatorship can be assumed to have a tendency – not inevitably so but a tendency – towards division and hierarchy. A dictator places himself above the people, and he and his coterie constitute an elite that is above the people, which means that the tendency to division and hierarchy is at the very core of dictatorship. Furthermore, that tendency applies not just to the minorities but to the majority ethnic group as well. That is why under the dictatorship of President JR the ethnic problem got completely out of hand, the result of the hierarchical principle being taken to an extreme, and that is why after the IPKF troops came here the Sinhalese slaughtered each other, showing that the divisiveness extends to the majority as well as the minorities. Sometimes a dictatorship puts up a meretricious show of unity, but the ethnic and other divisions erupt violently once the dictatorship breaks down, as in Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, and the former Soviet Union. Sri Lanka’s ethnic problems can be solved only under a fully functioning democracy.

I have raised issues in this article that evidently require in-depth treatment. As that will not be possible within the ambit of a single article, I will conclude by merely mentioning some facts that we must bear in mind about national unity. How did the West gain its ascendancy so easily over Asia? Contemporary scholarship rejects the familiar notion of Western dynamism and Asian decadence because the evidence shows that Asia remained economically and culturally dynamic in the eighteenth century. Pankaj Mishra in his book The Revolt against the West and the Remaking of Asia argues that the ascendancy was due to the West’s superior skills for "industrial civilization", more simply for organization, for acting as members of corporate groups, churches, or governments. In my view behind it all was the nation state which enabled a far higher degree of unity than was possible under any other state formation.

The interested reader should take a look at the DVD of the film Invictus. Under apartheid the South African blacks used to cheer any foreign team playing against the legendary white South African Springbok rugby team. After apartheid the Springboks were faring miserably and didn’t seem to have the faintest chance of winning the World Cup. Nelson Mandela took charge and resorted to concrete measures to make the South African blacks support the white Springboks, who proceeded to win the World Cup spectacularly. It was a victory that had behind it a deep sense of national unity. All our politicians should view that DVD.

SAARC Meet - Is It Become A Ritual?

| by N.S.Venkataraman

(November 29, 2014, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) One more SAARC meet has now ended at Kathmandu . Certainly, this is no different from the earlier meet and does not appear like giving any new sense of direction to the SAARC movement. Whatever the speeches made by the leaders in Kathmandu look like old wine in new bottle

Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif reacts as he attends the opening session of 18th South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit in Kathmandu November 26, 2014.

The ground reality is that all members of SAARC are having severe domestic issues and suffer from economic hardships. All the SAARC countries are facing difficult situation due to terrorism in their territory . No SAARC country is really in a strong position to help another SAARC country in solving the economic and other issues. The suspicion and misgivings between India and Pakistan are too glaring to give any sense that the deliberations in the SAARC meet would be productive and purposive.

The SAARC countries need to significantly promote industrial and economic growth in their regions to eliminate the poverty conditions. It is not clear as to whether this issue has been addressed in any meaningful way and no integrated strategies to help each other by coordinating their industrial and economic plans have been worked out. Atleast , some worthwhile efforts could have been made to coordinate trade activities between SAARC countries in a mutually beneficial manner but nothing of this sort has happened. Such deliberations would have raised some hopes about the future of SAARC.

Certainly, there are immense possibilities to strengthen the trading activities between the SAARC countries and the issues could have been discussed in a transparent and pointed manner.

The real fact is that the issues between the SAARC nations have not been openly discussed and perhaps even some discussions have been avoided, so that there would be no embarrassment for any participant in the meet.

Not a single day passes without India and Pakistan accusing each other on one pretext or other and shooting continues at the borders in Kashmir. It would have been appropriate if other SAARC nations have raised this issue and advised both India and Pakistan to find an amicable solution soon. On the other hand, the other SAARC nations behaved as if they are not concerned about the problems between India and Pakistan. How can there be a harmonious relationship between SAARC countries in such conditions ?

Sri Lanka is now facing criticism with regard to the human rights violations during the recently ended ethnic conflict. Resolutions have been passed in United Nations but SAARC meet did not discuss these issues at all.

Afghanistan is having turbulent times and one thought that the Afghan issue should have been discussed threadbare and the feasibility of other SAARC nations helping Afghanistan in one way other should have been examined.

There are so many other subjects that could have been raised during the SAARC meet but none of them were raised.

Finally, one gets an impression that SAARC meet at Kathmandu has ended as a mere cosmetic and routine exercise.

Mahinda in dire-straits

| by Rajasingham Jayadevan

( November 28, 2014, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) President Mahinda Rajapakse has taken a calculated gamble when odds were seriously against him to call the Presidential election on 8 January 2015. Intoxicated with power, greed and destined by his fate, the President could not imagine or visualise the predicament he could face at the forthcoming presidential election.

For those who believe in astrological predictions, the major Saturn change on 2 November 2014 for his Aeris Raasi is definitely not helpful for him. According to general predictions- Overview:

‘Sani Bhagawan is moving from the 7th house to the 8th house. You are coming out of Kandaka Sani but entering onto the worst part of Asthama Sani. Right now things are bad, but going forward it will become worse and terrible. You may expect to have problems in each and every aspect of your life. The intensity of the problems will be extreme from Dec 2014 to July 2015. You will have good relief when Jupiter is moving onto your Poorva Punya Sthanam by July 2015. Overall, you cannot expect any good results from Saturn, but other transiting planets can help you. Avoid doing any kind of investments for the next 3 years. Even though Jupiter is in your favourable spot for one year, you need to take my predictions to make sure you are prepared for the worst and hope for the best. Otherwise you do not need to continue reading my predictions from this point ( KT Astrologer - Network Bandwidth Monitor).

Detailed predictions do not give any hope for Mahinda Rajapakse for next two and a half years.

He could have patiently carried on with his present Presidential term for a further two years, but the power hungry President, worried about his stakes in two years time, decided to manipulate his way through to out beat his astrological change, thinking his constitutional power of even ‘making a man a woman and woman a man’ will be in his favour to call the election.

Having gone to the extent of punishing the astrologers for making adverse predictions for him in the past, there is no one to teach the power intoxicated President some simple arithmetic, based on available statistics of presidential and legislature elections.

In 2005, Mahinda Rajapakse secured a little over 50% of the popular vote against the main opposition rival Ranil Wickramasinghe. Turnout was put at 74% in the south and west, but almost no Tamils voted in some minority Tamil areas due to Tigers preventing them from voting, allegedly due to them being bribed by Mahinda Rajapakse. He won his first presidential election in 2005 by just over a razor thin margin of 180,000 votes.

In 2010, Mahinda Rajapaksa secured re-election by a clear margin, winning around 58% of the vote; an estimated 74.5% of the electorate cast their ballots and the victory margin was over 1.8 million votes. The 2010 election was a significant one as the hyped up slogan of Mahinda was his drum beating claim of his decisive victory over the Tamil Tigers. As the constitutional Commander in Chief of the armed forces, he was challenged by his former Commander of the Army Gen Sarath Fonseka. Mahinda was able to gain the 8% vote from the opposition UNP vote bank in the election. His war victory did not give him the absolute margin of 75% - 90% despite the nationalist parties joining Mahinda to hard sell his war victory hysteria. Mahinda was only able to increase the overall voter turnout by 676,574 i.e., 0.77% (under 1%).

The 2015 Presidential election will be a testing time for Mahinda. There will be multi-pronged impacts on the vote pattern this time. Hypothetically, if UNP vote bank is the average of the last two Presidential elections of 44.9%, in the present declining political climate for Mahinda it is not difficult to predict the outcome at the election. Maithiripala Sirisena has to score a simple 5.1% to hit the 50% break-even point.

The established vote bank of the JHU was 550,000 in the 2005 parliamentary election. This will not be there for Mahinda this time. There is a possibility that JHU will increase their share of votes due to its wider focus on very serious national issues that made them to leave the government. The Chandrika Kumaratunga Bandaranayake factor is the lease of life for the opposition candidate. She too has a strong support base amongst the masses. Working on a minimum projection - it is not difficult for her to bring another 5% to her favourite opposition candidate. Popularity of Mahinda Rajapakse amongst the Tamil vote bank is almost near zero and he has to rely on the unpopular Tamil paramilitary forces for some votes. Having been denigrated by the Mahinda camp on the issues affecting the Tamil people, TNA’s will be anti-Mahinda in the election, thus increasing the voting of Tamils for Maithiripala Sirisena.

Muslim vote is also significant in the election. Having been battered and bruised by the Mahinda Rajapakse’s right wing anti-Muslim campaign, the Muslim masses are not in the pious mood to support him. Sri Lanka Muslim Congress and its allies have become irrelevant for the Muslim masses. Even if Mahinda promises hope from hell for the Muslims, they are unlikely to vote for him. The lame duck SLMC has to respond to the mood of the Muslims and will join force with the opposition to earn some credibility from the Muslim people.

With the fever pitch campaign following filing of nominations, the political and astrological turf for Mahinda unfortunately will not be friendly. With the amazement of wealth and arrogation of unlimited power, anything could happen if the election fails for Mahinda. There is a strong possibility that Sri Lanka will experience its first ever coup that will undermine the democratic will of the people. Mahinda & Co have fully prepared the contingencies and 8 January 2015 will be crucial for Sri Lanka to either swim out of troubles or to sink in the slumber.

Needed: A Politico-Economic Roadmap

| by Tisaranee Gunasekara

“Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered.”
Paine (The American Crisis)

(November 26, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The Floating Market is one of a kind. A brainchild of Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, it was built by the UDA at a cost of Rs.100 million. Its row of shops-on-boats looks rather quaint from afar. Closer encounters, reportedly, are not so pleasing. The shops have no proper walls or doors. Instead they have loosely woven coir-covers which provide no impediment to inclement elements or robbers. Every night the shop-owners face a Hobson’s choice: do they carry their merchandise home with them or do they sleep in the shops to protect their merchandise? 

Shops in this part of Pettah are patronised almost totally by bus-passengers. Time is of essence and the passengers rushing from one bus to another will stop at a shop because it is literally by the roadside. The Floating Market is picturesque, but it is not located by the road side. This inconvenient setting is affecting sales; most shop-owners reportedly find it hard to make ends meet . 

A market which is pleasing to the eye, but is neither convenient for buyers nor profitable for the sellers is the infrastructural twin of an international airport with no international flights and a port which has created zero-employment opportunities. 

Attractive, but impractical, unproductive and wasteful - that is Rajapaksa development.
Ordinary Lankans may not know that the cumulative losses of the UDA (that fief of Gotabhaya Rajapaksa) from 2006-2011 amounted to a colossal Rs.1.23 billion . But they would know from their day-to-day experiences that Rajapaksa development is of scant benefit to them. 

The Rajapaksas are destroying Lankan democracy from within. But the Siblings have been able to disembowel basic rights and freedoms without resorting to generalised repression. This, together with their Orwellian media policies, has enabled them to dismantle democracy behind a democratic façade. 

The latest CPA survey reveals the success of this strategy: 58.7% of Lankans think that the country has become more democratic, post-war while only 10.6% of Lankans think it has become less democratic. 

Popular perceptions are not necessarily a measure of democratic health. The gentile and politically inactive German majority did not regard Nazi Germany as a land of unfreedom. Public faith in Rajapaksa democracy does not make Rajapaksa rule democratic; but it does demonstrate the limits of ‘restoring democracy’ as an electoral slogan. 

Dismantling familial rule and turning Sri Lanka into an ordinary democracy (with the usual warts) is imperative. But campaigning on that basis, solely or even primarily, will not help the opposition to defeat Rajapaksa rule. Democracy must be restored; but it can be restored only via an electoral platform which accords primacy to economic issues.

There are no factual reasons to believe that a majority of Lankans either support or oppose the presidential system. Most Lankans probably do not care one way or the other. This does not mean that the current executive presidency should not be replaced, ideally with some sort of hybrid system. This means the opposition should pay at least equal attention to rice-and-curry issues.

What will replace the executive presidency? What will be the new electoral system? What about devolution? How will the new constitutional provisions be enacted? (If Mahinda Rajapaksa is defeated, it is almost certain that a majority of parliamentarians will consent to abolish the executive-presidency.) These are important issues. But to resolve them, the opposition must win the presidential election. That requires a roadmap which is political and economic. 

The opposition roadmap should not only explain how democracy will be restored in 100 days. It must also explain how prices of certain consumer essentials will be reduced in 100 days. A roadmap which focuses solely on political issues and ignores/marginalises ordinary economic concerns of ordinary voters will be as effective as a one-limbed runner in the upcoming presidential race.

The Socio-economics of Familial Rule

In September this year, an eight year old girl was raped in Akmeemana. The mother was a tea-plucker; she had to go out to work everyday leaving her two daughters alone in an inadequately built house .

This story symbolises the connection between poverty, insecurity and such horrendous crimes as child rape.

As the UNDP pointed out, Sri Lanka has an abnormally heavy reliance on indirect taxes, “which account for over 80 percent of total tax revenue. This shifts the burden of taxation onto the poor.” Rajapaksa rule neglects the concerns of poor people while imposing ever higher burdens on them via indirect taxes. In the past, governments subsidized the poor; now the poor are subsidizing the government. In Sri Lanka, the President and his political and personal cohorts are the real welfare kings and queens.

The Rajapaksas are building eye-catching but wasteful First World infrastructure projects by imposing crippling indirect taxes on poor/middle class Lankans. Absolute and relative poverty in Sri Lanka can be dented not by giving more handouts, but by reducing the crippling tax-burden on the poor.

Take that mother in Akmeemana. She has to pay more for basic consumer essentials, because of the exorbitant taxes imposed on them. The Rajapaksas take a large component of her meager earnings and squander it on unproductive and wasteful projects. The money she could have used to build a safer house for her two young daughters is spent on airports and expressways. Millions of ordinary Lankans get cheated out of their earnings in a similar manner.
This is Rajapaksa development.

The people feel the economic pain. But they must be shown, again and again, the connection between their personal economic problems and Rajapaksa rule.
The economic component of the roadmap must not be the pie-in-the-sky, rice-from-the-moon variety. The roadmap must contain clear and concise information about how prices of selected items can be reduced in the first 100 days. The people can also be told that the consequent reduction in governmental revenue can be covered by making cuts in wasteful and unproductive ventures – such as Mihin Air or Mattala airport or the astronomical sums allocated for the misuse of the executive president.

Eric Hobsbawm argued that the purpose of government is not to look after the gifted minority but to care for the ‘ordinary run of people’: “Any society worth living in is one designed for them, not for the rich, the clever, the exceptional, although any society worth living in must provide room and scope for such minorities.” In other words, a meritocracy which does not ignore popular concerns; a meritocracy committed to the alleviation of the problems of the less-merited majority.

Rajapaksa Sri Lanka is the antithesis of this – it is not a meritocracy; nor is it concerned about the ordinary problems of ordinary people. The Rajapaksas ignore both the ordinary and the exceptional in favour of familial. Rajapaksa governance exacerbates both brain-drain and popular discontent. The brain-drain gives the Rajapaksas a freer hand politically and socio-economically while popular discontent provides them with a flexible weapon which can be used against political opponents and ethno-religious minorities, depending on the need.

Most Lankans and most Sinhalese know, instinctively, that they do not benefit from Rajapaksa rule. The opposition needs to come up with a politico-economic roadmap which can bring this discontent into political-life.




References;
  1. http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2014/11/16/business-sinking-at-floating-market/
  2. Ibid
  3. http://www.sundaytimes.lk/140427/news/uda-losses-since-2006-total-rs-1230-million-auditor-general-93978.html
  4. Struggling Mother Earner Families Vulnerable to Predators - The Sunday times – 21.9.2014
  5. Sri Lanka Human Development Report - 2012
  6. On History


The mastermind behind the common candidate

| by Shihara Maduwage 
Courtesy: Daily Mirror, Colombo

 ( November 26, 2014, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Last week, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) stalwart and its General Secretary Maithripala Sirisena’s decision to cross over to the opposition and his nomination as the common opposition candidate shocked the country. In an interview with Dailymirror Jaathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) General Secretary and the leading figure of the Pivithuru Hetak (Clean Tomorrow) National Council Ven. Athuraliye Rathana Thera revealed that he had played an instrumental role in this political twist.

As a party has the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) reached a decision on whether to support Mr. Maithripala Sirisena as the common candidate?

I don’t think there will be any issues with regard to the JHU’s support. But the JHU has to reach an agreement on common principles with Mr. Sirisena. Even on Sunday, the party’s Central Committee held discussions. Without reaching an agreement on these principles, JHU won’t extend their support. In other words, the party’s support would be conditional.

What about your support?
Well, I also have to consider the stance of the JHU as I am a part of the party. When I take decisions I have to discuss with my party and be in agreement with their stances and principles.

What we have done so far is, we have created a common candidate. Our next step is to reach a consensus about how the candidate is going to proceed. We need to come to an agreement on the principles and the way forward of the candidate.

However, we cannot create the candidate and then abandon him. So I am confident that we will succeed in our next step.

Has the common candidate signed a MoU or any document indicating that he was in accordance with the proposed 19th Amendment and would implement it in the event of his victory?


Not yet, but we hope to sign such a document in the near future. Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe is in agreement with our proposals so I believe that coming to an agreement with the candidate put forward by him and his party would not be a problem.

The revelation that Mr. Maithripala Sirisena was put forward as the common candidate came as a shock to most people. Even now, no one knows the process or who was behind this plan. Could you reveal how Mr. Sirisena ended up as the common candidate?

A lot of people have various theories about how it happened and who was behind it. But I know the true story. I will reveal the truth on how this political twist took place in due course.

There is a rumour that it was former President Mrs. Chandrika Kumaratunge who had the biggest hand in bringing Mr. Sirisena as the common candidate. Is this true?

Actually, I was the one who approached Mr. Sirisena and suggested to Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe that Mr. Sirisena would be the suitable candidate to lead the common opposition. This happened about a month ago.

It was a very difficult task. Until it happened, I was not sure whether our plan would be successful.

Why did you think that Mr. Sirisena would be the suitable common candidate? Has he approached you and expressed his wish to contest as the common opposition candidate?

No, Mr. Sirisena did not approach me. This was actually the result of logical reasoning. When we tried to bring a candidate from the UNP, there were disagreements within the party. Whether it was Karu Jayasuriya or Mr. Wickremasinghe or Sajith Premadasa, there were certain people in the party who opposed these people. This was when we realised that bringing an external candidate would be a better option. I would like to add here that we have certain pre-conceived notions about Mr. Wickremasinghe based on past incidents. However, this has proved that he is a very flexible, mature and an intelligent leader.

Have you always had such a positive impression about Mr. Wickremasinghe?

Well, we do have criticisms about his past conduct. However, if there is societal pressure, we can change people. I am always of the idea that no one is perfect and no one is completely bad. I am not afraid of people and I never divide people into categories when I work with them. I believe that through discussions and unity, we can change some of the negative ideas and actions of people. With dialogue, people can reach compromises. According to Buddhism, anyone can rectify their mistakes and become a better person. A person who has a strong vision and courage can influence others in a positive way and change their ideas.

Has Mr. Sirisena put forward any conditions or any demands on his part when he left the SLFP and joined the common opposition?

No, he has not made any conditions or demands. What he did was to volunteer himself to become the common candidate.

How can you say that the promise to abolish executive presidency won’t be another broken promise?
When there is such a strong consensus on a principle – as there is today – it is difficult for any ruler to ignore it. Today, all the opposition parties have reached an agreement to abolish the executive presidency, put an end to the rampant and large-scale corruption in the country and for a united ruling.

Do you think achieving this would be an easy task?

I think it won’t be too difficult if societal forces unite and stand together. What we need to do now is to line up these forces.

Today politics is very dirty; in fact I have never experienced such dirty politics. There are no principles. Politics are solely based on financial deals and opportunism. After 2005, politics in this country is shameless.

Are you trying to say that those who left the government are different and they do have principles?

I am not going to give character certificates to anyone. However, there comes a time when anyone – no matter what flaws they may have – will listen to their conscience and take a decision based on his principles. At least some people have realised that the dictatorial way this country is heading is wrong.

Can you tell me what the next steps would be in the event that Maithirpala Sirisena does win the presidential elections?

What would happen is that a care-taker government would be formed together with the SLFP and the UNP for about three months. The Prime Ministerial post of this care-taker government should be given to Mr. Wickremasinghe because he made a sacrifice. However, this would be only to amend the Constitution. After April, Parliament will be dissolved and a general election will be held. Afterwards the President will not be able appoint the Prime Minister. A Prime Minister will be appointed according to the parliamentary majority.

Mr. Sirisena is from the SLFP. Mr. Wickremasinge is from the UNP. These two elements coming together have created the perfect environment for the constitutional amendment. It seems like this process has come together naturally.

Nobody expected things to go this well. Apart from the President, the Leader of the SLFP is Mr. Sirisena. He is a senior SLFPer who has been with the party throughout. His roots are in Polonnaruwa and he has a rural, agricultural background. He is a pleasant, flexible leader. He is the ideal person for this role that it seems that this is the way nature intended things to be.

However Mr. Sirisena has been sacked from the SLFP, has he not?

That will change once he becomes the President of the country. After winning the presidential election, the whole political atmosphere of the country will be different.

By the time the next general elections are held, which coalition would the JHU be affiliated with?
We have to make that decision after considering the political situation at that point. We have to think about the principality of each party and take a decision.

Are you confident that the opposition will be able to win the upcoming presidential elections?

I think the opposition was victorious the moment Maithripala Sirisena was nominated as the common candidate from the opposition. There was a new revival in the country within 24 hours after this historic announcement.

Do you have a back-up plan just in case the opposition loses?

We should be ready to accept any outcome. However, we are not preparing for a losing-election. We are thinking of this as a victorious election. As a monk, I don’t overly plan for the future. I will act according to the present situation. I prioritise the present moment. We cannot predict the future and we cannot jump into conclusions. We have to consider the future depending on the outcome of these moves.

Is there any threat of terrorism raising its head again if the opposition is successful in abolishing the executive presidency? In other words, will this move create a conducive environment for another LTTE to be created in the country?

No, we are not completely abolishing the presidency. The 19th Amendment is such that in a situation where national security, integrity or unity is threatened, the President does have some responsibility and the power to take action. We will only agree to an amendment where the post of the Defence Minister is vested with the President. So the President will not have simply a ceremonial role. He will have some amount of power and responsibility as well.

We will not agree to anything that goes against the 19th Amendment or threatens national security. We are only agreeing to strip the unnecessary powers of the executive presidency; this won’t be a complete abolishment of the presidency. According to our proposals the national leader would be the President and the leader of the government would be the Prime Minister. We will not agree to any other system. Different people might have different ideas but we are not going to act according to the whims and the wishes of these people. We need to be very clear on this.

Have you faced any problems, threats or intimidation since Mr. Sirisena was nominated as the common candidate? 

There were a few incidents where thugs on the street tried to cause issues. Also, the municipal council workers were influenced to protest and ask to retake the land where Sadaham Sevana was located. But nobody can reclaim property or possession of the temples. This land has been given to the Buddha Sasana and no one has the right to reclaim it or give it to someone else. Even I don’t have the authority to do that, neither does the President. So this is a baseless demand. This is not my personal property and if someone tries to take away property that belongs to the Sasana, it is a concern of the Sasana and should be solved by the Sasana.

Furthermore, there are foreign monks who study here. There are classes and clinics held to serve the people. So reclaiming this land would be a disservice to the public.

Another thing is, when this temple was built and given to the sangha, we did not promise to support the President or the regime. We are not under any condition or obligation to help the regime just because they built a temple. Just because the government helped the Sasana, we are not bound to support all their wrongdoings.

Have you faced any threats to your life?

There has been a lot of mudslinging in my direction and a lot of lies are being spread in the media about me. Anyone can understand why they are trying to assassinate my character.

However, not many people know about my spirituality. They only know me as a very vocal political leader. But they don’t know that I meditate every morning. A team of us chant pirith every day, blessing this cause. I have built my own spiritual strength so that I can face any challenge without fear. I am not afraid of life because I know this life is impermanent. Nobody can bring me any pain or fear. If I die tomorrow, it is detrimental to the country, not to myself. Once someone immerses himself or herself in the Dhamma, that person won’t be intimidated. This is my vision. I am not someone who is constricted to any political party and I will take my decision bravely no matter what. The best way to protect ourselves is to be with the people, among the people.

The SLFP has alleged that the common candidate is a foreign conspiracy. What are your comments on this? 

This is a natural process which took place in the country. Since the government needs some excuse, some way to console themselves, they are now saying that this is a foreign conspiracy. They are trying to hide their own flaws and faults.

We have no such foreign connections. I will not be aiding something that has such ties. I don’t know if some people have any such ties but the principles would be created according to what we want. I am a part of this campaign and I have not received any finances or other aid from foreign sources.

The President made a statement recently saying he has files on those who left the party. How do you interpret this comment by the President?

If he has files, he can reveal them and take necessary action. We don’t know what he is referring to. As for me, I don’t know what kind of file he has on me and am not concerned. The real file about my life is not with him but in my conscience. I alone will have to bear the fruits of my doings, nobody else. This is according to the Dhamma. I cannot determine Mahinda Rajapaksa’s file. Whatever I have done in this country has been transparent. I have not harmed anyone. So I am not scared of any file he might be having on me.

Are there any other government ministers joining the opposition?

There were some who were ready to join but we cannot say anything for certain right now. Let’s wait and see.

Don’t you think what happened to the common candidate last time will happen to this time’s candidate as well? 

Not just Maithripala Sirisena, but we will all face problems in the coming days. There will be a very violent atmosphere in the country; we can just feel it. Terrifying bursts of violence will take place if we win. However, there is justice in the world and I am confident that we can face whatever challenges that comes our way. But we will continue forward with the people; we are not ready to back down no matter what happens. Every time I face a problem or a threat, Mr. Sirisena will get more and more votes. If I am killed, he will win by a great margin.

We need to ensure that free and fair elections take place. This is the responsibility of the Elections Commissioner. If the people stand together, no one can cheat at the elections.

Finally, what do you hope to achieve by your campaigns? 

We have no need to topple Mahinda Rajapaksa. Our aim is to make a change in the way the country is run. We have no underhand intentions or hidden agendas. We gave him a golden opportunity to implement the 19th Amendment. We tried to influence him in many ways and get him to listen to us. We held personal discussions with him as well as discussions as a party. We had huge rallies. Even the day before Mr. Sirisena’s nomination was announced I tried to get the President to implement the proposals. Breaking away from the government and joining the opposition was our last resort. He had the opportunity to go down in history as a golden leader. But now he will be known as a power hungry, greedy leader who is extending his term for a third time. He could have at least implemented the amendment before running for a third time. But he lost his chance. Even by joining the opposition we tried to get him to see sense but it was nearly impossible. We had no intention of toppling the government but had to do something to stop this dictatorial, corrupt regime. If we didn’t act, the future generations would curse us.

If somebody says that they will implement these amendments and does not keep the promise, we are ready to sacrifice our lives for this cause.

However, we will not let anyone take Mahinda Rajapaksa to international war crimes courts or let any international forces harm him. In those issues, we will defend him, stand by him and support him. But we will carry out a public investigation with regard to bribery and corruption allegations and take necessary actions.