Sunethra, Chandrika, S.W.R.D. and Anura, I guess. From Asia Week

I’ve been reading this book ‘Render Onto Caeser’. It’s Bradman Weerakoon’s story of serving under 9 Prime Ministers and Presidents. Only gotten a few pages in, but it’s striking how things have stayed the same. Here is one curious fact. Sri Lanka has been independent since 1948 – 57 years. Of those 57 years, the country has been ruled by a Bandaranaike exactly 49% of the time. That is, for half its history as a state, Sri Lanka has been ruled by the Bandaranaikes. I know that term limits don’t apply to families, but it’s getting a little ridiculous.

table{border:1px solid lightgrey; width:100%}.
| S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike | 1956-1959 | 3 years |
| Srimavo Bandaranaike | 1960-1965 | 5 years |
| – | 1970-1977 | 7 years |
| – | 1994-2000 | 6 years |
| Chandrika K. Bandaranaike | 1994-2005 | 11 years |
| Total (minus overlap) | – | 27 years |

As I read the parts about Solomon, it’s weird how much it sounds like today.

As against the forces of capital, both local and foreign, and the mainstream Press which supported the UNP, the _pancha maha balavegaya_ – the five great forces of the Sangha (Buddhist Clergy), the vernacular, school teachers, the ayurvedic physicians, the farmers and the workers – which he conceptualized and mobilised seemed ephemeral and insubstantial…

A major factor in the 195 election was Bandaranaike’s ability to consolidate the opposition to the UNP. He formed a grand coalition with four distinct political groups agreeing to fight the election as a single front on a comman programme and with the promise of making Sinhala the official language. The MEP was not a political party but a _peramuna_ a loose, less disciplined entity with a specific purpose, the defeat of the UNP.

The only difference is that S.W.R.D. had some policy, whereas Chandrika seems to be holding power for its own sake. That policy, unfortunately, is at the root of our ethnic conflict.

Giving effect to his chief election pledge of Sinhala Only in 24 hours was Mr. Bandaranaike’s immediate concern… Although Mr. Bandaranaike tried hard to soften its impace by permitting English and Tamil to be used for a transition period and candidates for government service to sit for examinations in those languages, the hardliners had their way and the key clauses were dropped. The introduction of the Bill satisfied those important constituencies but triggered a convulsive reaction in the Tamil majority areas of the country. I was personally a witness to the Tamil reaction through the _satyagraha_ the Federal Party launched on the northern end of Galle Face Green. About 150 _satyagrahis_ dressed in white were seated on the grass that morning as I drove slowly by on my way to office. Among them were some whom I recognized – Dr. E.M.V. Naganathan and my university colleague C.S. Navaratnam.

Soon after I had passed I learnt that the peaceful protest had been broken up by armed thugs who chased the _satyagrahis_ off the Green. Later that morning when the House convened, I was in the officials box to see Dr. Naganathan come in with his head swathed in a bloody bandage. It was sad to hear the usually gentlemanly Prime Minister taunt the wounded MP with the words “here he is with his wounds of war”

Of course, the UNP under JR was no better, marching when Bandaranaike tried to temper the bill later to allow some sensible use of Tamil. Regardless, it seems to show a tendency among the Bandaranaike’s to win power, country be damned. In terms of parlimentary politics, they seem to cobble together loose coalitions of often noxious elements. In terms of policy, they seem to completely sell out to nationalist/socialist (re: racist and backwards) interests towards the same end. In terms of economic consequences, S.W.R.D. also turned the country away from Western Capitalist interests towards communism, at great cost. His wife was bad too. I’ve been uploading stuff for Sarvi in Point Pedro all day, here’s a quote from one of his papers on the 2005 budget.

The earliest attempt at economic liberalisation between 1965-1970 received a backlash after the election of the United Front government in 1970. This resulted in inward looking closed economic policies being pursued between 1970 and 1977. Though the maiden budget of the United Peoples Freedom Alliance (UPFA) does not appear to revert back to the harsh economic regime of the 1970s, it has several indications pointing to that direction. For example, export ‘cess’ is back in vogue and free floating of rupee is under threat – “In the exchange rate policy our main focus shall be competitiveness in the currency to promote more exports as well as a competitive import substitution industry. Competitiveness is not ensured by merely allowing demand and supply forces to determine the exchange rate”. A ‘cess’ has been levied on export of raw rubber and scarp metal. Import substitution has re-entered the economic vocabulary. This policy shift gives a wrong signal to potential foreign investors.

Another major departure of the Budget 2005 vis-à-vis the three budgets of the previous government is that fiscal profligacy has taken over fiscal prudence. In essence neo-liberal economic thinking is replaced by Keynesian economics. The major thrust of Keynesian economics is that public expenditure even at a rising budget deficit can stimulate growth. We have to understand Keynesian economics in correct perspective. It was propounded at a time of ‘great depression’ in advanced industrialised countries in the 1930s. To apply the same policies to a low middle-income country such as Sri Lanka in the early-21st century is out of place.

For an emerging economy like Sri Lanka what is utmost required is consistency and continuity in economic policy regimes despite changes in government. The markets will not react favourably to change in course of economic policies and reforms. At present the macroeconomic indicators are moving in the wrong direction as a result of drought, world oil price hike, change in economic policy regime, and stalled peace talks. Agricultural and industrial productions are declining, interest rates and inflation are rising, and foreign exchange reserve is declining as a result of growing trade deficit and drops in foreign aid and investment.

The Indian government confronting similar economic problems has been able to withstand the gloom that surrounds Sri Lanka primarily due to unwavering commitment to economic reforms. There were changes in governments in both Sri Lanka and India in April and May respectively. India also experienced failing monsoon in many parts of the country throughout this year. Further, soaring world oil prices affected India also severely. Due to these factors cost of living and interest rates are on the rise. Nevertheless, the foreign exchange reserves of India are on the rise primarily due to growing foreign investments in the country. This is due to Indian government’s continued commitment to economic reforms despite having Marxists as the power brokers in the ruling coalition. Indian Marxists are much more matured and pragmatic than their counterparts in Sri Lanka as demonstrated by the ruling Marxist government in West Bengal state. It is this maturity and pragmatism that is required from the leftists in Sri Lanka.

We’ve seen stagnant growth and racial disentegration under the Bandaranaikes, and the last tired old queen simply refuses to leave. Her term is up in 2006, but she simply refuses to leave. I don’t think the country can take much more of this feudal bullshit. It is papered over with socialism and fired by racism, but underneath it’s just feudalism. Beneath the veneer of democracy there’s an old feudal family, desperately clinging to power by whatever means necessary. The Bandaranaikes will hold power by racism, profilgate spending, or simply by extending their own terms. After 27 years, it’s getting old.

Posted on Tuesday, July 26th, 2005 in GoSL, Politics, Sri Lanka.