Politics Of Humbug

Despite attempts by the JVP to pose off as the high priests of political morality, its flip-flops for and against the Rajapakse government underscores its political opportunism.

The posture of JVP leaders is one of high-dudgeon over the Rajapakse government for its corruption, inefficiency, failure to live up to the joint SLFP-JVP pledges given to the people before the elections, and above all its inability to prevent the spiralling cost of living bearing down on the masses of the country. However, despite the stinging criticisms that are being made, the JVP just as much as the UNP defectors continue to prop up the government at crucial moments thereby being stake holders not only to the misery heaped on the people but their very accusations of corruption, nepotism et al.

The government may face a crisis come November during the budget debate because if the JVP votes against the budget, the combined opposition will need only seven more votes to defeat the government. JVP Trade Union Leader, MP Lal Kantha has warned of a general strike before the budget unless a wage hike of Rs. 3000 and cost of living allowance are provided to the private and public sector workers.

But all this muscle flexing appears to be with the intention of fooling their impoverished constituents. The JVP spokesman, the loud mouthed Wimal Weerawansa, was reported last week saying that they would never topple the government under any circumstance to help the UNP to come to power.  He was speaking with reference to the alleged change of UNP policy to drop its stand for a 'federal structure' on the national question. Weerawansa said that it was a move to muster JVP support. The JVP would not help the UNP ascend to power because they knew the 'hidden agenda' of the UNP, he had said.

This raises the question whether the JVP would stand by the government, despite its own claims of corruption, nepotism, and inefficiency in addition to the insufferable burdens heaped on the people because they don't want the UNP to take over? Isn't the well being of the people and good governance, the priority of this party? Is it not for the people of this country to decide at an election who is to govern them, be it the UNP, SLFP, JVP or even the TNA?

The issue the JVP has to decide is whether the Rajapakse Government is good for the well being of the people. If the answer is 'no,' then their duty is to ensure the defeat of the government. It is then up to the people to decide a government of their choice. That is how democracy works. Or is it that the JVP itself has a 'hidden agenda'?

The JVP leaders know very well that if the government falls and an election is held they will not fare as well as they did the last time when they were allies of the SLFP and in fact drove inroads into the SLFP vote. As a party contesting an election on its own, they will not be able to repeat the performance and thus reveal their true strength which is about 5 per cent of the vote, mainly concentrated in the southern electorates.

This is sheer political opportunism and not politics for the benefit of the people. On the other hand as a 'revolutionary party' it has to keep its militant cadres aflame. It cannot relax as a party of the bourgeoisie. Hence the Rajapakse government is fired on but rescued when in trouble. President Rajapakse knows well the power of his JVP comrades and their empty rhetoric in addition to Weerawansa's own business dealings which is used to subdue him when necessary and therefore ignores their blood curdling threats.

And what of the UNP? There was much ado about the UNP having changed its stance on the ethnic issue and moved away from a federal solution to appease the JVP. If it had in fact changed its policy just to win over the JVP, then its Leader Ranil Wickremesinghe risks losing not only his party's but his own credibility. Wickremesinghe by standing by his basic political principles, despite the many defeats he had suffered, has come out as a rare credible politician. He took a risky and a political stand not in favour with the Sinhalese extremists when he stood fearlessly for a ' federal solution' at the presidential election while Mahinda Rajapakse  and the JVP beat the communal drums loud and clear, and swore by a unitary constitution. Yet, Wickremesinghe lost only by a wafer thin margin, a mere 0.5 per cent and would have triumphed if not for Pirapaharan's fatwa and names of UNP supporters disappearing from voters' lists thanks to the hidden agendas of some comrades.

The UNP mercifully came clean on its position Friday in a detailed statement which is published elsewhere in this newspaper spelling out clearly where it stands on the ethnic issue.

The UNP it is clear, given the statement still stands committed to extensive devolution of power where the centre cannot take away the power given to the regions. What the UNP has in fact done is moved away from semantics by focusing on the content rather than hang on to words such as 'federal' or 'unitary.' The bottom line is the UNP going by its statement still stands for a solution which is federal in content much as what the APRC Majority Report of Minister Tissa Vitharana spells out and that in our view is a welcome clarification even if it meant giving the JVP the required excuse to justify propping up the Rajapakse Government.

 Indeed, there is a move stemming from the international community to help evolve a solution by working round the main obstacles - a 'unitary state' and a federal solution.' Various personalities including some of the 'notable and quotable' have been pleading to stop using political shibboleths that work up emotions and instead find a solution that is acceptable to all communities. This is indeed possible if there is genuine commitment by the key players to find that elusive peace.

But are these key players in such a mood to launch a quest for peace? The optimistic Chairman of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) Tissa Vitharana says that consensus is being reached although there are no external indications of it. The UNP in that context has taken a step in the right direction by supporting extensive devolution of power without sticking to the use of mere terminology.

President Rajapakse in his address to the United Nations General Assembly said that the government's military operations were aimed at 'only to exert pressure on terrorists' to convince them it will not be possible to obtain a military victory and that the government's goal is a negotiated and honourable end to the unfortunate conflict. Among the Sinhalese there are those who believe in what Rajapakse says and there are those who don't. 

If there are lessons to be learnt in this 25 year old conflict, it is that preaching to the convinced can only be good for ones own ego. On this issue the main antagonist, the LTTE, does not believe the Rajapakse theory 'of exerting pressure on the LTTE to convince them that a military solution is not possible.' Leading Catholic cleric Bishop Malcolm Ranjith who with other leading clerics of his Church recently held talks with LTTE Political Wing Leader Tamilselvan had said in an interview with Asia News that they did not get the impression that the ongoing attacks had weakened or frightened the LTTE. Tamilselvan had said that they did not want to respond tit-for-tat and that if the offensive continued, the LTTE would go back to fighting and involve the entire country.

Soon after that the LTTE issued a statement upping the tempo by claiming future talks will be based on recognising the Tamil people's right to sovereignty thereby effectively sidelining the Ceasefire Agreement.

Thus, if the LTTE is not moved by the Rajapakse strategy and is now set to resume the struggle for separation, where does the country go from here? What the President should do if he has the brass is call the LTTE bluff by devolving extensive power to the regions and win the hearts and minds of the people. It is only then that the LTTE will feel the heat in its own backyard. If he makes bold to do so, it is the LTTE that will be seen as the party that is standing in the way of the Tamil people fulfilling their legitimate aspirations. The UNP too given its own policy statement will be left with no option but to support him. But such a bold move is too much to expect from Rajapakse who is fighting too many ghosts in his own ranks.

Meanwhile the people are finding it impossible to cope with the escalating prices with inflation now galloping at 17 per cent. The prices of consumer goods have gone through the roof,  the increase in bread being from Rs 12 to Rs 35 - almost a 200 per cent increase since 2004! Increasing fuel prices in international markets are being blamed for everything but it should be noted that in India, which imports 70 per cent of its fuel requirements, the rate of inflation has come down, the lowest in two years!

Some analysts have said that the government may not want to present the APRC solution before the presentation of the budget, lest the budget be defeated. But if the budget cannot find some solution to the problems of day-to-day living of the people the need to survive demands that the budget be defeated irrespective of any political solution.

In Myanmar (Burma) thousands took to the streets last week to protest against the sharp increase in the price of fuel and now they are demanding that the military junta steps down. The Burmese reaction indicates that people will suffer only up to a point. Thereafter they will rise. That is a point which all legislators including the JVP will have to bear in mind.