Colombo, Constitutional Reform, Peace and Conflict, Politics and Governance, Post-War

A response to Mano Ganeshan: Beyond engaging the ‘Sarath Fonseka worshipers’

Once in a way, in this sad little Republic as Mano Ganeshan aptly calls Sri Lanka, there happens discussions, worth following up on. So thank you Mano, for following up on my previous article to respond positively and I take it from you to develop this discussion further, leaving space for you especially and any other to join in.

Let me first take on a few issues that Ganeshan had raised in his response, before taking up the larger, more important issues.

First is that, I did not base my article as Ganeshan tends to feel, on media speculations, though there are too many these weeks. All my arguments instead, were based on quotes from Ganeshan and their sources credited at all times. Therefore Mano Ganeshan, please note that my whole article was based on the assumption that you and your political party the DPF, has already decided to back “even if it is” General SF, while trying to find out more about his politics.

The quote from Ganeshan in the Sunday Times of 08 November, was pretty clear, although now he says, he and his party has not decided on any candidate for a presidential election. That it would be disclosed when time comes. The ST quoted Ganeshan directly as saying, “We are supportive of a common candidate, even if it is Sarath Fonseka”(emphasis added). I presume, Ganeshan would have assumed same as me on the above quote if any one else had said it, as long as it is not contradicted.

Now that he says, there are four other options for the Tamil leaders, let me assume Ganeshan is still undecided on a presidential candidate, even if its SF. But on the questionnaire issue, I maintain my position as right. The first is, who SF is and what his politics is, something that needs no more query. At least for some one of Ganeshan’s political standing. That is clear as a hard line Sinhala Buddhist position without compromise.

The second is, I am yet to hear anything direct from General SF on his availability or non availability as a presidential candidate, whether common or not. As Ganeshan had noted in his response to my article, all of it is sheer media speculation and unknown (to the public) manipulations, God knows among whom. But Ganeshan thinks it is logical to send a political questionnaire to SF. He says very bluntly, “We have discussions with Sarath Fonseka” in his response to me. What for ? Why on earth should any politician ask political questions from a serving Army Officer in the highest ranks, unless there is some wheeler dealer negotiations ?

As for me, all of it leaves Ganeshan in a very suspect political arena, despite his claims for innocence, as regards General SF’s candidature.

Getting into the larger arena of national politics, let me say that Ganeshan’s claim of engaging with General SF is best explained in his quote, “Kusal fails to understand that there are millions of people in this country who consider Sarath Fonseka as the god sent hero. You cannot simply dismiss this worshippers as communalists. We have to engage with them because we are living with them by sharing the one same country.” (Ganeshan in response to my article)

Yes, Mano Ganeshan, there are those few millions who think he is a saviour of their Sinhala “right”, whether God sent or not. Yes, I do also agree, that one has to politically engage with them. But how ? Is it by accepting SF as a presidential candidate ? Is it by sending a personal questionnaire that the society only gets to know by “media leaks” ? This my friend is not political leadership.

Don’t forget that leaving the Tamil vote that did not express themselves at the November 2005 presidential elections, there were 4.7 million Sinhala and Muslim people who voted with Ranil W and his “United Country” slogan, despite the most rabid racist Sinhala platform ever put up at any elections since independence in 1948, that campaigned for Mahinda Rajapaksa’s presidency on a Sinhala “Unitary“ State. Thus there are a few million who do not accept General SF that way as a “God sent“ gift. One has to engage with them as well. Can Mano Ganeshan engage with them by accepting General SF as a presidential candidate ? Or by sending in a questionnaire to General SF ?

This talk of engaging with the racist Sinhala position my friend Mano Ganeshan, is only an escape route for easy and comfortable populist politics. That has nothing to do with seeking answers to the most burning issue of this country.

That issue is, how do we, after 61 years of political stupidity and failure in forging a pluralistic, inclusive State to develop this country, challenge and defeat this racist ideology to develop this country. The political necessity is to present to this society an alternative progressive ideology to unite and forge a Sri Lankan nation that would accommodate every citizen of this little “sad Republic” as equal to all others, to harness our social capital for development.

The Sinhala constituency has been taken on a ride on a Sinhala “merry go round” and they have not gained anything from this Sinhala racist politics and its “Unitary“ State, both under a Prime Minister and under the Executive Presidency. Therefore this slogan of abolishing the executive presidency is not the major issue, though that provides an excuse for all bankrupt political leaders including the JVP to evade the serious political challenge this country is faced with, since independence. The challenge of achieving national development within a pluralistic, inclusive nation State.

The Census and Statistics Department (CSD) in a survey on “Poverty in SL – Issues and Options” carried out in 2006, says, very clearly, “…..in certain districts outside the Western Province, such as Hambantota, Badulla, Moneragala, Ratnapura and Kegalle, the percentage of population under poverty has remained more than 30 percent during the 12 year period, covered by the three surveys.” [page 14] The situation perhaps and probably is far worse now in those and other districts. (for any politician, who wish to know who their voters are, it would be worth reading the full report)

What does it mean ? Five districts in the South has not seen any worthy development, not only during those 12 years surveyed, but even before. Not that other Southern districts are any better.

Therefore my friend, if you are very keen and convinced that you have a right to share this country, which I most certainly do without doubt and without any question, then unification and development of this country, is your responsibility as any other politician’s what ever the political label you carry. That responsibility does not allow any one to engage General SF, simply because he could be a war hero of a million Sinhala biased voters.

The moment Ganeshan says that he is also trying to engage those Sinhala voters through General SF without any concrete programme for ethnic reconciliation, democratisation of the society that should also include repeal of the PTA, the full implementation of the 13th Amendment at least for the present and the implementation of the 17th Amendment, he falls short of what he tries to say, he is politically standing for.

I have already in my previous article explained, what such non-programme sans politics with SF as a presidential candidate would bring forth in terms of power politics around an executive presidency. That can be extremely dangerous even after SF hangs his uniform in his grand old cupboard at home and Ganeshan’s argument of engaging the SF worshipers, thus falls short of any credible logic for the future.

Yet, if present is what matters for my friend Ganeshan in establishing his own political empire, then, I would not disturb him, hereafter.