11 December 2014


SRILANKAN POLITICIANS AND THEIR PARTISAN MEDIOCRITY
Kanthar P Balanathan
General

This article is written with an objective of propagating the truth of SriLankan political manipulations to the citizens of SriLanka, both in SL and overseas. As SriLankans, sometime we cling onto partisan politics to take sides without recognising and understanding the truth of, national unity, national security, growth, economics, economic growth, technology, and social integration. We should never, ever assume that there are different ethnic groups in SL. We are all the same humans from one gene, however, different social and political environments over centuries, have made people to use different language, scripts and religion.

For example Lord Buddha was born into a Hindu family; history records. However, Buddha generated an inner, erudite, divine, desire to put across a great superior philosophy, which was accepted by billions of humans across South East Asia and India.

SriLanka is an island, which was invaded by the Indians over several centuries. Several millions of Sinhala people were massacred over centuries. Jaffna was not a Tamil colony until the 13th century, when Kalinga rowdy; “Magha”, with Kerala coolies, invaded and established a colony. Sinhala kings were able to overthrow and bring Jaffna under their control. Illegal migration commenced from that time. People from Kerala, Karnataka, Andra, Marathi, Bengali, Indonesia etc. were brought as coolies, labour and traders.
How did the Tamil issue start?

Mr. Mahindapala explains in his two part series. Please visit and read: (i) Chelvanayakam’s Maradana speech (1949) paved the path to Nandikadal (2009) part I & II Ref; (ii)http://nrnmind.blogspot.com.au/, (iii) (http://nrnmind.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/whyranil-is-unfit-to-be-prime-minister-h.html, (iv) http://nrnmind.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/mou-biggesthoax-in-electoral-politics-h.html

It is not proposed to repeat the writings of Tamil politics. Please read the document: A letter to Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam Tamils political actions have been detailed in chronological order. (Ref: http://nrnmind.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/letter-to-mrgajendrakumar-ponnambalam.html).

SriLankan Politics since Independence

SriLanka became an independent country in 1948. A Malaysian born, Filipino looking, Christian, Malaysian/Ceylonese by registration, SJV Chelvanayakam (Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam) became prominent among the imprudent Hindu Tamils of SriLanka by his move of forming a racial “Federal Party” (ITAK), just because he was overlooked for a portfolio in the Ceylon Cabinet. Note:- If we cut the ‘m’ from his surname the name will be Chelvanayaka. SJVC did not understand the historical name flip. If he could be a Christian, it does not stem that he is a devoted Thamizhan. A race is identified by its religion, language, and culture. Majority of Tamils are Hindus. At the personal level, sociology investigates the social causes and consequences of such things as romantic love, racial and gender identity, family conflict, deviant behaviour, aging, and religious faith.(Ref: Dept. of Sociology, University of North Carolina)

DS Senanayaka (Mudaliyar family) governance did not take the political scheming of SJVC seriously and he (DSS) failed. The dynasty and family governance begins with DSS, which is the Senanayaka Mudaliyar dynasty. Dudley Senanayaka takes over from 1952.

It could be bluffed off that there were no other matured political candidates among the Ceylonese? Ceylon/SriLanka has practiced a dynasty culture, even though the country moved to democratic governance since independence.

The truth, we have to understand here is that the dynasty did nothing to protect the country from secession manoeuvring by the Tamils. If we turn the pages we could study that dynasty and the wealth power has been ruling Ceylon/SriLanka since independence.

Following the Senanayaka dynasty, SWRD takes over by promising a racial dogma, which was bringing “Sinhala” as the Only Official Language. Though SWRD was an Oxford scholar; he failed in this politics of language. This was an impulsive counterproductive act to the whole society in the island. Sinhalese are the majority and it is fair to say that Sinhala shall be the language of the island, however, the mode of implementation could have been a gradient implementation, as impulse has an impact.
What was the outcome of SWRD’s policy?

1.       An unprecedented widening of social disparities and social injustices.

2.     A severe strain on co-existence among different ethnic and religious communities and increasing disharmony and distrust.

Following the implementation, racial violence broke out in 1958, where Tamils in the South were raped, killed, and their properties looted & destroyed. It was a chaos in the island. In the following year, SWRD was assassinated by his own people.

1.      Has there been any conclusive judgment and pronouncement on the person or gang who assassinated SWRD?
2.      Why was he assassinated?
3.      Who assassinated SWRD?
4.      Isn’t SWRD an Oxford scholar, loyal to Ceylon then?
5.      Was “Rule of Law” present then?
6.      Was killing of SWRD, a national security issue, because the media was not propagating true events?
7.      Was the government accountable then?

The Australian government Attorney General’s Department on “Rule of Law” states: (Ref; http://www.ag.gov.au/About/Pages/Ruleoflaw.aspx)

[The rule of law underpins the way Australian society is governed. Everyone—including citizens and the government—is bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws. 
We uphold the rule of law through our daily work to ensure:
  • laws are clear, predictable and accessible
  • laws are publicly made and the community is able to participate in the law-making process
  • laws are publicly adjudicated in courts that are independent from the executive arm of government
  • dispute settlement is fair and efficient where parties cannot resolve disputes themselves. 
We support the Australian Government in being accountable for actions, making rational decisions and protecting human rights.]

On the death of SWRD, another dynasty begins, the Radala dynasty: Late Srimavo Bandaranaike takes over power. It would be necessary to emphasize at this juncture that politics is the only profession/employment that does not entails a Job Specification and a Job Description. Although politicians take oath that they will work to the “constitution” (Job Description), DO THEY?

What was Srimavo’s qualification? The only qualification was: [Sirimavo Bandaranaike was born on 17 April 1916, as Sirimavo Ratwatte to a prominent Radala family, who were descended from Ratwatte Dissawa, Dissawa of Matale] Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirimavo_Bandaranaike

If the people have to vote for Radala/Nilame/Mudaliyar/Govigama, qualification, then why do we bullshit about “Democracy and Freedom” (ප්රජාතන්ත්රවාදය)? What happened during late SB’s time? Insurrection broke out in 1971. SB ordered military to shoot to kill hundreds of thousands of educated Sinhala youth. Did “Rule of Law” prevail during her time? NO!

Since 1970, cost of living rose to a gargantuan level. Even to get a loaf of bread, people had to get permits, and wait in queues. People had to drink කහට තේ. It was a misery for the people of SL. SriLankan were subjected to “Absolute Poverty”. However, SB was able to build a multimillion dollar Bandaranaike memorial Hall to preserve her prestige.

Although SB’s motive was to make people to grow food, the mode of transportation was a failure.

From 1977 to 1994 the capitalistic clan was in power. JRJ took power in 1977. As soon as JRJ took power racial riots broke out in 1977, with rapes, killings, colossal destruction to properties and loots.

Following the devastating riots of 1977, a racial riot broke out in 1983. The root cause for the 1983 riots, of course, are the LTTE and the Tamils. We wanted it and we generated it.

What happened to the Rule of Law in 1977 and 1983?

Was the government then able to eliminate terrorism undertaken by the Tamils? With lack of perception, and understanding of the counter-productive outcomes, and the economic corollaries, JRJ succeeded in pawning the country to the Indians by signing the 13th amendment in 1987. 13th amendment is deemed a white elephant.

Sequentially, the performance of subsequent President, R Premadasa was to mass slaughter JVP youth using his “Black Cats”.

The Banda dynasty returns to power in 1994. Chandrika assumes power as the President. Referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrika_Kumaratunga, CB is claimed to have qualifications as follows. “Chandrika was educated at the St Bridget's Convent, Colombo, and at the Aquinas University College Colombo where she studied for the bachelor of laws”. The only fact we could see is that there is a college, but they do not have a degree program in Law. Is this true? Ref: http://www.aquinas.lk/.  

In 1995, LTTE invaded Vani, and took control and established a mushroom illegal administration, keeping civilians as human shield. CB did nothing to this illegal establishment. Vellupillai Prabakaran continued to build his military and weaponry with the help of R Premadasa, RW, and the subsequent governments. Of course, LTTE was ungrateful, they assassinated Mr. Premadasa.

The sixth amendment was passed in 1983 and a circular was issued on the 18th August 1983.

What happened to the Rule of Law?

It has to be comprehended that, although we blame India as the contrivance, which machined LTTE to be a military, terrorist organisation, the main perpetrators are the western countries, particularly UK and USA. Strategic forethought of certain countries and their intelligent moves cannot be easily understood. The leaders of SL, in governance up to 2005 paved the way for the west to build up the military capability of LTTE.

Why did our leaders not understand these moves by the west? Could the people of SL assume that they were subjugated and controlled by the west to be their political friends, while the Tamil Diaspora and the Tamil politicians were plotting and conspiring their way towards separation?

Democracy
Let us address “Democracy”. Definition of Democracy? “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, direct or representative; State having this form of society ignoring hereditary class distinctions and tolerating minority views”. US department of state definition of “Principles of Democracy” is, Majority Rule, Minority Rights. USINFO Publications outlines elements of the Principles of Democracy, which SriLanka has failed ever since they were granted independence.
Democracy is defined as a set of principles and practices that protect human freedom. It is defined as the institutionalization of freedom. It is also said as to rest upon fundamental principles, not uniform practices. It is also known that Democratic societies are committed to the values of tolerance, cooperation, and compromise.
Democracy is said to subject governments to the “Rule of Law”, which ensures all citizens are protected under the Law, and their rights are protected by the Legal system.
It is also a reality that democracy recognizes diversity as an enormous asset, treats these differences in culture, identity, and values as a challenge, which can strengthen and enrich, however, not as a threat.
It is known that political parties have faith in the principles of democracy to recognize and respect the authority of the elected government even if they are not in power.
All democratic political parties, whether small or large national coalitions should share the values of tolerance and compromise. Leadership and vision can be provided only through broad alliances with other political parties, which will win the support of the people of the nation. In democracy, political parties struggle is not for survival through fights, but a competition to serve the people.

SriLanka failed in the principles of democracy as the majority rule had divisions; (i) upcountry Sinhalese, (ii) low country Sinhalese. Even, political parties were formed on racial grounds. To the Tamils, division among the majority politics is an advantage, like the Hyenas. They play their trump card like that in Mahabharata. Citizens of SL lack in political maturity, lack of understanding in the National Security issues, which drives them to partisan politics.

SriLankan should ask a question: What is patriotism? Are we patriotic? What is National Security? Why should we be concerned about National Security?

The writer’s open letter to MA Sumanthiran answers some questions. (Ref: http://nrnmind.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/open-letter-to-ma-sumanthiran-tna-mp.html)

Politics - Current Opposition Coalition

Every SriLankan should address, and understand the political contriving of the opposition, and their policies on social integration and national security. Since independence, the country has been fleeced and divided, however, not socially integrated, and the country was subjected to threat to national security.  The current opposition leader failed attempts to become the President. The Opposition fails to even select a candidate to contest for the Presidential election. For years, internal conflicts drove them to enmity between party members. Key members of the opposition group has paranoia to contest, as they feel demise, and loss of respect among supporters. RW does not want to give up his leadership voracity and hence is holding on to the position. Isn’t that dictatorial?

Can the country claim the move of the three musketeers (3Ms) a great move in politics? The opposition cowardly moved into the governing platform to kidnap My3 to bring to their spineless and gutless platform and contest for the president. Could it be that CB’s goal is to bring her children (Vimukthi Kumaratunga) in to politics via nomination and a portfolio? CB may have an ulterior motive, which SriLankan may not be aware of at this stage. Why can’t CB give up politics and give it to the youngsters who are politically matured and cultured in the 21st century.

Current opposition politics is seen as My3 is contesting on behalf of RW, because RW is scared to contest. RW imagines that he could attain a powerful position of PM with the Presidential system abolished. Once a person (My3) amasses power, can we think that My3 will give up his position to someone in another block? Isn’t that an imprudent, ridiculous assumption?

SIGNING A MOU IS LIKE BUILDING A CASTLE IN THE AIR.

If SriLankans are wise enough, they could understand with pure reasoning, this election philandering, and laugh off.

Analysis of MOU


Following are specific election promises:
[“As Sri Lankans we face several grave challenges. The country, which was once seen as a model of democracy, has degenerated in recent years into a place where its citizens cannot live with dignity and in safety. Among the manifestations of this situation are:

* The total breakdown of the Rule of Law,

* The erosion of democratic institutions essential for governance,

* An unprecedented widening of social disparities and social injustices,

* A severe strain on co-existence among different ethnic and religious communities and increasing disharmony and distrust.

In this situation, the following programme is presented so as to re-establish democracy, good governance, social justice and the rule of law.

Accordingly, it is proposed that the present authoritarian and corrupt regime be defeated by fielding a common candidate acceptable to all those in agreement with the programme. The immediate tasks will be implemented within a hundred days. They include the abolition of the current executive presidency and the re-establishment of a parliamentary form of government and the rest of the programme to be implemented through a new Parliament.]

·         Pre2005, the country never, ever, practiced real democratic environment. The Radala, the Mudaliyar, were elected to rule the country by force. The Radala are a small minority in the Kandyan kingdom. The foolish people of SL were brain washed and mind set to vote for Radala, Mudaliyar and the high caste goons. Lack of education and poor knowledge in politics drove the people to be cheated for 56 years of post-independence.
·         Breakdown of “Rule of Law” was experienced during the governments of the Radala and the Mudaliyar.
·         During the period 1958, 1977 & 1983 the country faced breakdown in the Rule of Law. Gap between the two ethnic groups commenced to widen with the birth of terrorism.
·         Since independence to 1971, domination by the minority Radala and Mudaliyar, widen the gap between the minority and the majority, which gave birth to “Jathika Vimukthi Peramuna” that led to the 1971 civil war.
·         Lack of wisdom and improper practice of “Rule of Law”, by the governance gave birth to terrorism by the Tamils: LTTE.
·         Post 2005, terrorism was eradicated, terrorists were rehabilitated, trained to do a specific skilled job. Underworld gangs were eliminated, gang warfare was purged, and people were given the freedom to commence business and become entrepreneurs. Majority of citizens are happy now as they have become “Muthalali” (මුතලාලි). Becoming a මුතලාලි was restricted to certain Radala and Mudaliyar and Govigama only, during the pre-2005 period.

In short, post 2005, everyone enjoys total freedom, reducing the gap on social disparity and social justice.

We are trying to bluff off, and bull shit by stating “severe strain on co-existence among different ethnic and religious communities”. Colombo, Jaffna are typical examples of co-existence and social justice. Question: Has My3 clan ever visited Jaffna after 2009?

How many trains and bus service scuttle the A9 road every day between Jaffna and Colombo? Has any politician thought, why such traffic?

It is of the view that social integration and economic integration are on the ascent, now, within the statesman, HEMR’s governance. 

Has My3 visited the North to observe the co-existence of the communities?

Authoritarianism, dictatorial, crudity, inflexibility did prevail, pre-2005, barring late Dudley Senanayaka, who was a patriot and an honest cognisant politician.

It would be wise to analyse the post-independence era governance to make judgement of dictatorial and authoritarianism practices.

Has the My3 clan been driven by the west? If so, please visit the following web site to know the truth about the west.

US actions:

1.      Ex US marine speaks out on The US govt...the truth couldn’t have been said better!
:https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152348483923806
2.      Diego Garcia: http://youtu.be/lxVao1HnL1s

It is certain that Tamil Diaspora in Canada is dynamic in marshalling momentum for separation of Tamil Eelam. The political weakness of the opposition group may drive them to grant more powers to the Provincial Councils, which is detrimental to the economy of the nation. Do SriLankan want to be driven back to 1970?

Turning our pages to history: during historic time, King Elara, 205 BC to 161 BC, was ruling from Anuradhapura. No king was able to defeat Elara. (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elara_(monarch)

(Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutugamunu). Dutugamunu (Sinhala:දුටුගැමුණු duugämuu), also known as Dutthagamani duṭṭhagāmaī and Gamani Abhaya ගාමිණී අභය gāmaī abhaya ("fearless Gamini"), was a Sinhalese king of Sri Lanka[1] who reigned from 161 BC to 137 BC. He is renowned for defeating and overthrowing Elara, the usurping prince from the Chola Kingdom, who had invaded the Kingdom of Rajarata in 205 BC. Dutugamunu also expanded and beautified the city of Anuradhapura and projected the power of his native Rajarata region across the island of Sri Lanka.

While there were copious amount of kings and petty kings, it was only king දුටුගැමුණු, who was able to defeat Elara and unify the island.

It was the same and similar historic event by HE Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was the only leader who was able to defeat LTTE, and terrorism from the island and unify SriLanka, and the country since 2005 is marching towards social integration and economic recovery from the past ill fade leaders.

Since 2009, the country gangsters, underworld gangs, and dominance of individual politicians, and especially Tamil separatism is fading away. Don’t we SriLankan have the courtesy and gallantry to honour HEMR and GR to have achieved the goal?

SriLankan should ask a question. Did we practice “Rule of Law”, Accountability, and democratic principles from 1948 to 1970 - 2004? Who benefitted from the governance? All the rich became richer and the poor became poorer and were victimised. From 1970 to 2005, the country was run by terrorists and incompetent western puppets giving in to the terrorists.

People of SriLanka: Let us think; why has My3 gone into another platform whose ideology, totally differs. It is obvious that power avidity, power hunger, power thirst has allowed the opposition to accept a different person from another ideological platform as a common candidate. My3, whose ideology totally differs from that of the opposition has entered into another platform.

In time to come the opposition with My3 may have critical internal war among themselves that may lead to situation like that of Egypt and Libya.

Today any woman from the South can freely walk on the streets of Jaffna, and a woman from Jaffna can freely walk on the streets of Matara. Isn’t that a country needs in terms of unification co-existence, and social integration.

SriLanka needs HEMR for another term, for the country to climb up to its position, fulfilling people’s ambition of economic growth, economic integration, social integration, rule of law, accountability, business growth, industrialisation, foreign investment, independent freedom, elimination of social disparity, and mainly maintain NATIONAL SECURITY, and unification of SriLanka.