groundviews » Rajapaksa vs Fonseka: Tweedledum vs Tweedledee?

Rajapaksa vs Fonseka: Tweedledum vs Tweedledee?

November 25, 2009 at 5:02 pm · Categories: Colombo, Elections, Peace and Conflict, Politics and Governance | by Dr. P. Saravanamuttu

The results of the national elections are now by no means certain. There is a contest and as a consequence, there is the possibility that the presidency could change hands, which in turn will have its impact on the general elections. This is attributable to the Fonseka presidential candidacy and it depriving the incumbent of claiming sole credit for the defeat of the LTTE.

Contests in themselves are good. Elections being the principal mechanism for choice and change in a functioning democracy, the lack of a contest could breed a lack of interest in elections on the part of the electorate, which in turn is not healthy for participatory and representative democracy. The Fonseka candidacy ensures that the Rajapaksa dynasty is not assured. They will have to fight and fight they will, to turn appreciation and gratitude for the defeat of the LTTE under their watch into a mandate for government into the next decade. Yet, challenging the Rajapaksas or indeed defeating them is not a guarantee for a functioning democracy in Sri Lanka, anymore than defeating the LTTE in the way in which it was done is a guarantee for lasting democratic peace, reconciliation and national unity.

The Fonseka candidacy on the face of it is in the nature of the curate’s egg – some part good in ensuring a contest and other parts bad given the stink the general brings with him on human rights protection and the essential pluralism of the peoples he wants to be president of. Moreover, what is the Sri Lanka that can be expected to emerge and evolve out of this contest, which some may characterize as one between war heroes and others as a pan Sinhala majoritarian fight fuelled by personal animosity between two individuals who should be held accountable for military excesses at least, war crimes at worst? As it stands it is not unreasonable to assume that the minority communities in the country and what remains of liberal opinion are left effectively stranded by this choice before them – between the devil and the deep blue sea or between the frying pan and the fire are some of the remarks that this choice has elicited from these constituencies. Oscar Wilde’s remarks about fox hunting – the unspeakable going after the uneatable – have also been used to describe this contest.

There is of course the possibility already identified by some, that both candidates will have to court the minorities and liberals to win the election – a pan Sinhala nationalist fight within the pan Sinhala nationalist community being insufficient to produce a clear winner. Already, there is ostensible relief for the IDPs – screening and demining notwithstanding – and the general in some public pronouncements is sounding like a determined and enthusiastic aspirant for a human rights award! Yet the ethnic conflict and bad governance in this country were not produced by promises made and kept, but by broken promises and the widening gap between promise, performance and delivery. The minorities and liberals will be voting if they do, in an act of desperation, with hope trumping experience. Can either candidate be reincarnated into being the president of all Sri Lankans?

There are those who have steadfastly maintained that Mahinda Rajapaksa in a second term would be the model of national unity and reconciliation and the architect of a new and truly plural Sri Lanka in terms of constitutional design and political culture. Pragmatist that he is, he will forge a new coalition of forces to embrace and institutionalize unity in diversity. To this is now added the argument that he is the only bulwark against the militarization of our politics. This is yet another leap of faith and trumping of hope over experience. One need only look at the north and east, to identify the number of appointments in civilian governance that have gone to ex-military personnel. And as for embracing unity in diversity, need one look beyond the protracted farce of the APRC, the absence of proposals from the regime for a political settlement and the cunning focus of debate in this respect on the Thirteenth Amendment, thereby making Thirteenth Amendment Minus a higher probability than Plus?

And General Fonseka? The immediate political arguments for his candidacy are that it will stop the Rajapaksas in their dynastic tracks and deliver political reform as per the agenda set out by the opposition. Fonseka is to stand as the common candidate of the opposition because they cannot field anyone from within their ranks with a ghost of a chance of defeating Rajapaksa and once elected to the executive presidency, Fonseka is to abolish that office and turn over government to the opposition, staying on however as minister of defence! Truth is stranger than fiction and even more the case in politics. Will the general agree to this? Would you?

The story about two resignation letters suggests that he has every intention of being his own man and not one subject to the conditions and priorities of the joint opposition. In any event, were he to be elected the executive president, the opposition will have no hold over him. It is surely highly unlikely that General Fonseka will agree to be the presidential candidate who in effect will be campaigning to make Mr Wickremasinghe the Prime Minister and chief executive of the country? Even if he agrees to do so, will the electorate accept this candidacy by proxy?

In either event – on his own or on behalf of – General Fonseka, like the incumbent owes the country honest and clear explanations on the culture of impunity in respect of human rights violations and the allegations of actions that could be tantamount to war crimes. General Fonseka in particular, needs to, if he sincerely thinks it warranted, explain his remarks to the Canadian National Post and in his Ambalangoda speech, which is cited in the US State Department Report to the US Senate Appropriations Committee. We must know what is on offer; we must know what we are getting or indeed getting into. And we must know the real difference between the two candidates.

Is there any difference between them on a vision for a future Sri Lanka, on governance, the economy, the 13^th and 17^th Amendments, corruption, media freedom and human rights?

It looks like the choice is increasingly going to be between the incumbent and the general. Bar some unforeseen, fortuitous and pleasant surprises, what if anything recommends this contest is the contest itself. As such, it is important that we the peoples of this country ensure that there is a debate about the future of the country and that the result we deliver will facilitate a continuing dialogue on this most crucial of subjects beyond the contest.

However daunting the task may be, there are especially compelling arguments for effective checks and balances on the exercise of executive power in the event of either of these candidates winning the presidency.

1,514 have read this this article so far. You may also find these articles interesting:

Presidential hopefuls and escape-routes for the ‘hopeless’ The buzz in political circles these days is the possibility of there being a ‘common candidate’ (CC) to challenge President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s bid for a second term in the event that a Presidential Election is called before he completes his term, most likely in January 2010. Among the names thrown around for the CC post... Malinda Seneviratne, October 27, 2009
Visualising key speeches and submissions of Sarath Fonseka Now officially a Presidential aspirant, erstwhile Army Commander Sarath Fonseka has, since late October 2009 made a number of verbal and written submissions regarding his candidacy and political life after retirement. In October 2009 he made a speech at a Buddhist Temple in Washington DC. On the 12th November, he handed in his resignation addressed... Sanjana Hattotuwa, December 4, 2009

Permalink | Share this article on Facebook

Heshan said,

November 26, 2009 @ 1:18 am

My prediction is that Rajapakse will win the election, whether by hook or by crook. While no one can deny Fonseka played a prominent role in the war effort, he has been largely out of the public eye. On the other hand, Rajapakse has been preaching to his Southern constituency for quite a few yrs now. So long as he can prevent a massive economic catastrophe or similar phenomenon, he is basically assured of the rural Southern vote, which is the foremost deciding factor in these elections. Sarath Fonseka forming his own party and running on his own platform will only take votes away from the UNP… in other words, votes that would have gone exclusively to the UNP will now be divided between the UNP and whatever party Sarath Fonseka decides to form. Kandy and Colombo will probably go to the UNP as they did in the last election. There will most likely be a poor voter turnout in the North. In the East, there will be massive election fraud, now that Rajapakses cronies have taken the seats of power.

To assume that things will change after Rajapakse wins is also a far-fetched notion. Things will drag on, as they have been.

Nimal Sandaruwan said,

November 26, 2009 @ 5:13 am

Dr Sravanamuttu’s (who has an extensive network of contacts and collaboration within the highest layers of US foreign policy makers and defence officials in relation to South Asia in the US administration ) assessment on SF’s presidential candidacy certainly helps us to connect the dots. All the liberal cerebrals in Sri Lanka seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet.

It is not Hobson’s choice for the ordinary Sinhalese and Tamils when it comes to MR or SF. SF’s promotion as the “common candidate” of “the joint opposition”, is the manifestation of the next “form ” of government, the Sri Lankan elite has to have in place in order to keep the oppressed in check.

Though the Curate’s egg was inedible at all, likes of Dr PSs would not mind guzzling kabaragoyas in Sri Lanka.

punitham said,

November 26, 2009 @ 7:41 pm

We have had six decades of agony. If the future should be better for the country, Sinhalese should make an informed choice. The Sinhala masses should know what the government institutions have been doing to the Tamils in the last six decades( they know what the Tigers have been doing – every government saw to it). An informed choice by the Sinhalese is likely to be fair and strong. Representatives from all districts outside the Northeast must be taken all over the Northeast as part of ”information”.

Tamils will be forced to vote for Rajapakse by the army present all over the Northeast. Opposition must be allowed free canvassing in the Northeast for Tamils to make a choice of their own.

The Titular Republic said,

November 27, 2009 @ 6:46 am

Punitham,

Why can’t we aspire to get beyond ethnic politics and shift to a policy based paradigm? Then it won’t matter if its Singhalses, Tamil or Penguins for that matter.Although, as you rightly point our free canvassing is required. I just wanted to make note of the fact is that we need to get beyond the ethnic divide.

asanka said,

November 27, 2009 @ 8:52 am

Hell will freeze over before 17th or 13th changes…

saman said,

November 27, 2009 @ 8:54 am

i think the executive presidency is good for checks and balances over the parliment

imagine if the war was to be fought with parliment votes, two srrong but non controling parties and ethinic minority driven parties actings as king makers,,,
hell , we would have been handling out the east and north to LTTE if it wasnt for the executive presidency……

smoulderingjin said,

November 27, 2009 @ 10:43 pm

I like the Oscar Wilder quote! “The unspeakable going after the uneatable”.

What I am wondering right now is whether we have ever been this kind of no-win, lose-lose situation before? We didn’t really have the unspeakable and uneatable laid out on the election banquet for us!

We didn’t exactly like some of the govts or the presidents we had dished up for us in the past, but that was more in retrospect. We always chose the lesser of the two evils back then. Now what we have on offer is the “equal evil” scene…and how is one supposed to vote then?

The chances of SF (I prefer to forget the “General” bit because I dislike the currency it has and the highlighting of his alleged “saviour of the nation” role here) handing anything over to the opposition he is representing are nil. We all know that, and as PS points out, his letters of resignation are evidence enough of his dislike of restricted authority. The “threat” to the dynasty can’t be a bad thing, but at the end of the day what the voting public faces is this nightmare of a choice: MR, because they do not want what SF represents; SF because we do not want what MR has already done! This is what deserves the term “farce”!

The chance of the country receiving an “honest and clear explanations” in terms of human rights violations and war crimes are slim. If SF refused to be honest thus far, in his capacity as the “general”, why should his levels of honesty suddenly be upped when so much more – such as being President and having absolute power – is at stake? Of course he might “rat” on the current president, and offload all the muck…that perhaps might be the only good that comes out of this whole thing, although the offshoot of that would be that we will have ensconsed in power “His excellency SF”! I think I would not like that!

As for the question PS raises at the end…there is no difference in the vision the two candidates have for the nation. With either individual, “governance, economy, 13th and 17th Amendments, corruption, media freedom and human rights” will disappear down the rabbit hole fast.

The contest *is* the best thing about the contest. Cold comfort for Sri Lanka today!

In Your Face said,

November 28, 2009 @ 6:09 am

Smoulderingjin,

Do you have any more Oscar WILDER quotes? I’ve only read Oscar Wilde.

jansee said,

November 28, 2009 @ 9:24 pm

Heshan:

Churchill was so popular during the war (WW2) but lost out in the election. By this, I am not saying that your analysis is wrong. The chances are the contest will be close with the liberals and the minorities holding the key and this is where, I belief (and I could be wrong too) SF has an edge over MR. Despite the loud and chattering pronouncements of MR of his achievements of the the Mahinda Chintana, save for the victory over the LTTE, he had very blatantly demised the very important of what he promised to do – to discontinue the Ex Presidency and maintain vibrant democratic institutions. Now, for MR, everything is about him with his stooge brothers closely following his heels. Almost everything he did was a farce. The 17th Amendment was foolishly consigned to the cold storage and look at Gotabaya – I did once mentioned that Gotabaya would be MR’s undoing. If MR had some matter in him, he should have placed his trust on the people but when power gets to your head this is what happens. In short, MR is nothing but an opportunistic politician, not the great king he has been decorated as.

Not that I am a great fan of SF – in fact, I detest what he had stood for all this while but the reality is it looks like that he is the only candidate who could MR run for his money. MR had the chance during the last four years – he abused them and should be simply thrown out as any promise now would invoke the memories of his faltering and wavering promises. It is peacetime now and the people come first not MR’s family. I am pretty sure that he will face the fate of Churchill and this may be a warning sign to SF that he can exceed the people’s mandate at his own peril – at the end of the day people will choose and with the sort of split in the southern votes anticipated, this is democracy at best. As for the minorities, show MR that he failed to appreciate and understand that their absence in the polling booths gave him the presidency. MR had the chance – six months after the war to unite the people of SL but he failed, and he failed miserably. Just boot him out or else it will another six years of agony. Not that anyone in SL has not guessed, who do you think MR will prefer to install after his term expires – Basil or Gotabaya or his son?

Pakiasothy S mentioned that the choice is one of between the devil and the deep blue but let us be frank – if SL has to get rid of the mind-set that prevails, hailing MR and his brothers as someone and something royal, then the lead of that sort of thinking should go.

Heshan said,

November 29, 2009 @ 1:34 am

@ Jansee:

Actually I agree with you. My whole argument is based on the premise that there will be low minority voter turnout. The reason I said that was because of the voter turnout in the last local council elections in Jaffna and Vavuniya: 49% in Vavuniya and 18% in Jaffna with the UPFA winning 50% of the Jaffna vote. You can get more detailed info here: http://www.nowpublic.com/world/tamil-tigers-get-boost-srilanka-elections-asia-times

Now this was in August. The mood has probably soured even more since then. Now that the IDPs are free, they are going to “spill the beans” to the rest of the Northern populace about what they went through.

On another note, Mahinda is indeed quite ineffective as a politician. The reason he was able to execute the war so effectively is because he surrounded himself with hardliners of the likes of Gotha and Sarath, and basically curtailed every humanitarian dictum that would have prevented the war machine from rolling onwards. This kind of thinking works just fine in a military setting (some would say, unfortunately), but an experienced politician these days must tread numerous fine lines when forming public policy. He has to know where to concede and when to persist. MR has conceded virtually nothing, except in extreme cases. For example, he is letting the IDPs go free because loss of the GSP facilities would deliver a devastating deathblow to his election prospects. He is letting SF run for Prez because – well because its Sarath. Like you said, maybe the only man in the island right now who can oppose MR (and not find a white van come his way). These have nothing to do with public policy though. Why he hangs on to the Executive Presidency, does not implement the 17th Amendment or APRC recommendations, does not reduce the size of the cabinet, etc. etc. – I think he is just following in the footsteps of CBK. The mindset here is that any meaningful reform will just create opposition to the status quo and thus undermine their “executive” grip on power. To be fair, though, at least CBK engaged in negotiations with the LTTE. I agree that surrounding himself with people like Gotha is sheer folly. From Gotha’s interviews (who is Lasantha!), and his actions (hounding the media, deporting Tamils in Colombo back to their “homeland”) we can see that his character is hardly conducive to any pragmatic political environment. Not only him, but Mervin Silva, Champika Ranawaka, etc. – all handpicked by MR – are out of the control. Hopefully the Southern voter can see that MR’s unwillingness to reign in all these characters is emblematic of his own madness.

I am not sure of SF. While he is clearly “efficient” (I doubt he is the type to start up a Mihin Airlines type venture, or place his family in high positions of power) and honest, he is nevertheless the product of the military. I would think that SL has had enough of the military, what from the JVP times through Prabhakaran’s demise. It has done its job. There is no reason to glorify it further because there is little else it can do (besides fight wars). You really do need someone well-educated and well-versed in foreign and public policy… otherwise Sri Lanka is going to continue on the beaten track of promises made by inefficient politico’s – promises which, in time, are never kept. We need someone capable who can actually implement something despite opposition from his own party (or the Opposition). Whether SF can do this is anyone’s guess – because SF has never been in politics. He has not been a lawyer, neither has he studied political science, nor has he has served in any diplomatic capacity. In short, I question his ability to negotiate effectively… in the military environment, one either gives orders or takes them. He is used to giving orders; whether he can take them is another question altogether.

niranjan said,

November 30, 2009 @ 3:10 pm

Heshan,

“You really do need someone well-educated and well-versed in foreign and public policy… otherwise Sri Lanka is going to continue on the beaten track of promises made by inefficient politico’s – promises which, in time, are never kept.”-
It looks as though SL will continue a downward spiral. Both MR and SF are not suitable for the top job even though MR is popular and is likely to win the Presidential election. Ranil W is the only politician who is well educated and well versed in foreign(accepted internationally) and public policy from the present crop of possible leaders in the country. But then he is not contesting.

Jansee said,

November 30, 2009 @ 9:34 pm

Heshan:

Observation noted with thanks.

niranjan:

I, too, would have preferred Ranil W and among the devils (I mean politicians) he is of a lesser evil and his international standing and credibility is also commendable but alas in politics there appears little recognition for such traits, and in this instance to the detriment of SL.

Heshan said,

December 1, 2009 @ 2:33 am

Niranjan & jansee:

I too support Ranil. He already demonstrated his capabilities (on the economic, political, and foreign relations front). What he lacked is the grassroots support that MR has been able to consistently count on. Ranil is quite the aristocrat, having won both Kandy and Colombo in the last elections. Unfortunately, the CFA made him lose his credibility among the average Sinhalese voter; it is unlikely he’ll ever regain nearly enough of that to become President. In this context, can we fault the UNP for choosing a populist candidate… even if there were someone with extremely strong credentials, he would most likely be unknown to the average rural voter. While SF has been not in the spotlight to the extent that MR has, practically everyone knows the role he played in the war. Let us not forget that it was the rural South which contributed to the war effort; SF will be able to strike an emotional chord with these people. Ranil simply cannot do this.

What remains for SF is to publicize his agenda. He needs to exploit people’s frustrations with the current regime, and outline his own timely solutions. And finally, he needs to reach out to traditional UNP supporters (most of whom likely consider him too hard-core for their liberal tastes). If we can reach a consensus with them, then Kandy and Colombo will surely be his. I am not sure he will much have following with the minorities, since the recent events of the past are still strongly etched in their minds. This will not be entirely to his detriment however, because the minorities are unlikely to vote for MR either. It just means he will have to contest harder for the South. This is going to be an election decided by the Southern vote.

Heshan said,

December 1, 2009 @ 2:34 am

*If he can reach a consensus

niranjan said,

December 2, 2009 @ 9:49 am

Heshan,

SF was a soldier and now a retired one. I cannot comprehend why he is contesting? It is highly unlikely that he will win against an incumbet President who is quite popular. SF may have stood a better chance against an unpopular politician. All incumbent Presidents have got a second term. Premadasa was killed that is why he did not get a second term.
Even if Ranil contested he would have lost. Therefore, it would have been better for Ranil to contest and lose than support a total outsider in politics like SF who will also be a likely loser.

niranjan said,

December 2, 2009 @ 9:57 am

Heshan,

Diehard UNP’s will not vote for either MR or SF. Therefore, quite a few solid UNPers may not cast their votes. That will only help MR.

Heshan said,

December 2, 2009 @ 10:51 am

Niranjan:

I agree with you… SF doesn’t stand a chance. I will be surprised if he gets 40% of the vote. If Ranil runs and loses again, that will be the end of the UNP, credibility-wise. How many lost elections can one man take (especially to the same opponent)? The UNP is still the party of opposition (not the part of defeat)… it must needs maintain some degree of credibility.

The die-hard UNPers you speak of are most likely to be found in Kandy and Colombo. Kandy and Colombo went to the UNP in the last election; hopefully the trend will continue.

Sohan Bones said,

December 3, 2009 @ 8:10 am

“minority communities … this choice before them – between the devil and the deep blue sea or between the frying pan and the fire …”
Just to add my thoughts to that:
I feel this applies not just to minority citizens but to ALL citizens. As I see it, the way I’m tentatively thinking of voting, would be “out of the fire and into the frying pan” – or, more accurately: “out of the nuclear furnace and into the coal furnace”…
And I believe this applies to ALL Sri Lankans. Unfortunately too many of us seem to have managed to avoid the worst of the “heat”, thus far, by silence/denial/apathy – and therefore we don’t even truly understand what an inferno we’ve been in for the past many decades, nor do we see the black hole looming ahead of us; and therefore we still don’t fully understand the situation in the correct light, but instead incorrectly analyze it with concepts such as ethnic minorities and so on; yes that IS accurate because it’s the reality of how people think, but that reality really needs changing. E.g., I just so happen to be a Sinhalese, but I am strongly wondering if perhaps the solution is to vote for a (moderate) Tamil candidate – if one was put forward – and I wouldn’t have any hesitation on ethnic grounds.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI