Why Sri Lanka had too many

revolutions?

orty six years ago on April 5, the JVP launched its first
rebellion, which was quickly extinguished though at a hefty cost
of lives. A second uprising followed 17 years later and caused
mass carnage. In between, another insurrection that over time
transformed itself into mindless terrorism flared up in the North,
and held this country hostage, until it was conclusively defeated
in 2009 through equally brutal means.

2017-04-11
The second half of the independent history of this country is
defined by unfathomable mass violence that at first came as a
shock, and then became routinized in a society where not long
ago an occasional murder was such a rarity that it sent the media
in to a frenzy. Surely Sri Lanka was not meant to go that way. At
its independence, it held a promise of peace and prosperity and
had a sound economic system and political institutions. Then, why
did we have to witness so much bloodshed?
The commonplace explanations from average folks to academics
and political commentators writing their polemic read as thus: Sri
Lanka failed in its nation-building because it willfully excluded
minorities from the political process; Tamils peaceful struggle for
equal rights was disregarded thus they had no option other than
opting for an armed struggle. Sinhala Buddhists are such
venomous creatures that they go to bed thinking new means to
persecute minorities next day so that the latter have no choice
but to either become a suicide terrorist or condone terrorism.
Political leaders are corrupt to the core and looted the countrys
wealth.

The youths were disposed and marginalized; their pent up

frustration exploded in two youthful uprising in the South. The
political system lacked legitimacy and the wealth was
concentrated in a few. And the list goes on.
Those might be true at times, but they are overly simplistic
explanations that do not do justice to what Sri Lanka has striven
and achieved even against all odds.

This country has held largely

free and fair elections regularly since independence -- or much
before since 1931 when the first elections for the State Council
were held under universal franchise. And those elections well until
1977 were an exhibition of regular anti-incumbency in fervour.
Those who opted to exclude themselves from the process, be it
the Jaffna Tamil leadership who boycotted the first State Council
election in 1931 or the JVP and LTTE subsequently, did so due to
their own accord, driven by their own calculations. Interestingly,
the JVP waged its first insurrection in 1971, barely within a year
after the coming to power of the United Front Administration, the
most left-leaning government in Sri Lankan history.
And while complaints of youth discontent are true, still a few
countries at our economic development level or even higher could
match Sri Lankas achievement of redistributive justice. Sri Lanka
was a nascent welfare state at its independence.

Ever since, successive governments have expanded it and those

investments are reflected in our social indicators, which were
achieved not through a holistic economic growth, but through an
overbearing focus on re-distributive justice.
The Sri Lankan electorate has a penchant for nagging. However,
the free education and free healthcare that we take for granted
are luxuries for many countries, including those so-called socialist
ones. Certain government actions in the past, such as land
reforms under the United Front government were some of the
most expansive measures in redistributing wealth ever taken by a
democratic state in modern history. However, none of that
stopped a second uprising in the South in the late 80s.
Sri Lankas handling of its ethnic relations is not exemplary.
However, the only community that was excluded from the political
process by a government decision was Tamils of Indian Origin,
who were disenfranchised by the Citizenship Act, which in
retrospect was a callous political act. Such infractions were
nonetheless prone to happen as new states forged their new
identities. (If anything, 21st Century America elected a president
who promised to deport 10 million illegal Latinos)
However, Tamils of Indian Origin did not go to war, instead, not
only did they manage to win back their due rights, but also, by
the 90s Ceylon Workers Congress leader late S. Thondaman
established himself as the kingmaker of local politics.

Jaffna Tamil concerns were a different kettle of fish. It has never

been a question of equal rights as individuals, which were already
granted, and well until the early 1980s, Tamils had a
disproportionate , though gradually diminishing representation in
civil service and coveted professions such as medicine,
accountancy, engineering.
Though mischaracterized as a struggle for equal rights, the
Northern Tamil demand was for a parity of status between the
Sinhalese and Tamil communities, a position which harked back to
G.G. Ponnambalams demand for 50:50 representation or, even
further to the Jaffna elites opposition to universal franchise.Tamil
leadership was not excluded from political process, instead, they
themselves excluded themselves. Certain cultural dynamics best
manifest in Tamil exceptionalism in Tamil Nadu might have been
at work hindering cooperation.
As Lee Kuan Yew once said in 1985, I have said this on many a
previous occasion: that had the mix in Singapore been different,
had it been 75% Indians, 15% Malays and the rest Chinese, it
would not have worked. Because they believe in the politics of
contention, of opposition. But because the culture was such that
the populace sought a practical way out of their difficulties,
therefore it has worked.

That does not absolve the Sinhalese establishment from

overlooking the earlier peaceful struggle by the Tamil leadership.
But, the extreme that the Tamil struggle went to was more a
function of Tamil cultural and political dynamics than anything
that has to do with the Sri Lankan state.
However, why those real and perceived grievances both in the
South and the North easily degenerated into armed mass violence
was due to a particular permissive culture of political dissent that
Sri Lanka fostered since even prior to its independence.
The overgrowth of that culture of peaceful dissent into armed
resistance was primarily due to several perhaps well intended but
short sighted policies of independent Sri Lankan political
leadership. Independent Sri Lanka did not clamp down on
dissent , instead, even while the limits of state power of an
incipient new nation was well manifest, Sri Lanka proceeded with
a premature mass political empowerment, hoping everything
would be fine. Political empowerment without adequate
institutional apparatus of the state to check transgressions is an
exercise wrought with danger. S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, who
unleashed the populist Sinhala Buddhist nationalism, told his
aides that he had never seen anything like the promise of
Swabasha policy that had energized the masses. He did not
foresee the disastrous end that such a populist awakening would
lead to and retard the progress of the nation. Political leaders who
rode to power in a wave of populist support, then by virtue of
their populist clout, overwhelmed the countrys nascent
independent institutions, which over time became subordinate to
politicians. Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike went a step further to
entrench that subordination in the 1972 Constitution.
The Cold War international system was plagued by a myriad of
civil wars. Some countries succumbed to communist takeovers
and others fought with both hands against internal threats.
Successful countries learn from experience of others and make
precautions for their own exigencies. However, the Sri Lankan
leaders, who were cocksure that the battle of ideas would be
fought and won through elections did not learn from their peers.
Thus they did not invest on the requisite coercive power of the
state, which is the ultima ratio in any dispute, be it domestic or
international.
"Sri Lankas handling of its ethnic relations is not
exemplary. However, only community that was excluded
from the political process by a government decision was
Tamils of Indian Origin, who were disenfranchised by the
Citizenship Act, which in retrospect was a callous political
act"

The JVP waged its first insurrection with galkatas and still came
closer to capture the state, until it was defeated with foreign help.
Still, lessons were not leant, and the LTTE that emerged as a rag
tag guerrilla group, managed to confine army into the Jaffna Fort
by the mid 80s.
Sri Lanka became victim of mass violence, because it fostered a
democratic space conducive of mass mobilization, which can be
exploited especially in a new state that is struggling to knit
together a statehood. At the same time, Sri Lankan leaders placed
very low the bar of the probable success of an armed takeover of
the state. That created incentives for insurgents in the South and
the North to give it a try, which they did.

Another factor made things worse. Had Sri Lanka managed its
political empowerment alongside economic empowerment, the
danger of mass upheaval could have been lessened. Instead,
myopic economic policies of the first three decades created a
groundswell of grievances of youth who had been empowered
through the welfare policies of the very state. Until,
J.R.Jayawardene, Sri Lanka did not have a leader who had an
economic sense; all who precededhim either thought good times
would remain forever or were too dogmatic to find practical
solutions. Their path to political power was through dolling out
goodies. Their policies were partly ideational, shaped by Fabian
socialism, and partly opportunistic. Though the successive UNP
governments, up until Chandrika Kumaratunga administration had
historically generated higher growth numbers than their SLFP
peers, their achievementswere minuscule in international
comparison of countries growing from a lower base at the time.
Their Statist economic policies discouraged private sector. What
the country such as ours wanted then and now is gainful
manufacturing jobs for its skilled and semi- skilled workforce.
However, capitalism was by and large an F word in the political
lexicon at the time. Thus domestic imperatives were ignored,
while a host of East Asian and South East Asian states graduated
from sweat shops to become economic power houses during the
corresponding period.

Economic success could have greatly reduced the propensity of

politics of contention drifting into armed violence. Today, Sri
Lanka is shipping its semi-skilled and unskilled labour to the
Middle East, not an enviable achievement, however, that reduces
the demographic pressure on social and political fabric .
Sri Lankas focus should be to create sustainable economic
growth and to get rid of recalcitrant laws that stand on the path of
countrys economic progress. Instead, like in the past, Sri Lanka is
putting the cart before the horse.
Last week, writing to thisnews paper, NiranAnketell argued why
judicially enforceable socio economic rights should not be
included in a bill of rights as proposed by the advocates of
constitutional reforms- as he rightly noted not because in
opposition to advancement of social economic rights, but because
numerous unintended consequences which would in effect have
the opposite effect and exacerbate inequalities.

That is exactly where the mismatch between ideational policies

and their practical implementation lies. Constitutional rights can
lead only so far. Their limits are omnipresent in South Africas
manifest failure in bridging racial inequalities. For those who
believed in more forceful maneuvering by the government,
Venezuela looms large as a grandiloquent failure.
Sri Lankas electoral democracy is well capable in redistributing
justice, but it fares very poorly in generating wealth, which
howeverare the building blocks of any sustainable effort to long
term equality and prosperity. Sri Lanka should prioritize on putting
in place a system that foster economic growth. Even if the era of
youth rebellion is now behind, an economic revival would still
save our idle youngmen from smoking too much pot.
Follow RangaJayasuriya on RangaJayasuriya on Twitter
Posted by Thavam