By R. M. B. Senanayake
There is no shortage of drama in recent months but they were all staged by the ruling party , the election, the free float, the peace talks with the LTTE etc. So the UNP has staged its own drama beginning the play with rumors whisperings & private parties where apparently conspiracies were hatched while the leader was away. Should the UNP Leader go? It is true that he has lost all the elections he led and campaigned for. But didn’t he put up a creditable show in the last Presidential election against all the dirty tricks employed by his rival, branding him as a supporter of the Tiger cause? Didn’t the President adopt the very policy for an Interim Administration thereafter? What does one call such action?

We are having a fake democracy and to blame the UNP leader for losing elections is to forsake the facts. We are having a party in power, which doesn’t see anything wrong in using the resources of the state for its election campaign. If democracy is about peaceful change of a government by a free and fair election, we really do not have democracy. It is so in Singapore, in Malaysia, was so in Indonesia for many years and prevails widely in pseudo democracies in Africa. No wonder the government refuses to commit hara kiri by setting up Independent Commissions.

Power play in an executive presidency

So Ranil Wickremainghe in the eyes of his party men has achieved little in bringing down the government. But the nature of power in an Executive Presidency is not like in the old Westminster system when JR is said to have materially induced the crossing of SLFP MPs to bring down the government in the 1960s. The President cannot be removed except on an impeachment which to succeed must go through a double barrelled procedure which will be long and dilatory and which permits a successful rearguard action as shown by President Premadasa. Those reformists who think they can bring down the government and take over power themselves because the Government is a fragile Coalition are naive indeed. Defeating the Government on the Appropriation Bill would not necessarily have led to a UNP government. At most it could lead to a new Prime Minister who may clobber together a coalition where the UNP may have a share.

Who is the fool who would like to be in the saddle at a time of an unprecedented economic crisis, which requires for its resolution measures of austerity, which could lead to a revolt of the people? What ideas have the reformists got to resolve the economic crisis? Of course our politics is not the politics of ideas and principles. The people are used to corrupt politicians and don’t seem to worry too much about it as long as they are also fed from the trough by way of jobs, contracts, hand-outs etc. Ranil perhaps understands our penchant for free lunches—the belief that money can be spent without being earned, that wages can be raised while production is flat, that somebody else will pay. Our economy will not be transformed meaningfully until this culture is laid to rest. The age of free lunches is over. Ranil has through his reforms in education when he was in power shown that he understands the problems of he economy although he has prudently not proclaimed the solutions from the housetops—it would be hara kiri in a country where voters are stupid and intellectuals can mount deceptive campaigns in a media ready to publish anything.

What can the Reformists offer?

Can the Reformists in the UNP come up with a credible solution to our economic crisis leaving out the IMF andthe World Bank? Won’t they have to put through austerity measures imposed by theses institutions if they want to bail out this country? The Reformists have not shown any new thinking on the economic front to resolve the crisis. Nor have they formulated any solution to the ethnic problem. The country requires drastic reform. Its long-term success depends on resolving the ethnic issue and ensuring peace.

The needed reforms will threaten almost every interest in sight. Fat cats, organized criminals masquerading as businessmen, corrupt top officials, business oligopolists, state corporation bosses and professionals of every type will have to be shaken up if the clogged economy and the unjust society is to be put right and a modicum of god governance is to be restored. Hence the priority needed to be accorded to setting up Independent Commissions and the enforcement of a Code of ethics on politicians and professionals who are robbing the people. We require a strong government to enforce the law and bring the pressure groups to heel.

Karu, the good man

Mr. Karu Jayasuriya is a man of high values. He has a creditable record as a businessman and a business manager. But such qualities are more suited to take him to the top of the mandarin class. Doesn’t he needs experience in the rough and tumble of politics? For all the worthiest of reasons, it is tempting to support Karu. We have this syndrome of being carried away by the personal qualities of a person,— he is a good man syndrome case. He also has the right ethnic and religious background. But what solutions does he offer to the problems facing the country? What solution does he offer to resolve the ethnic problem and bring about peace? We at least know where Ranil stands on this issue. He has scrupulously honoured the Liam- Fox Agreement in spite of grave provocation by the President at election time when he was branded as a Tiger supporter. Didn’t the President shamelessly adopt his proposals thereafter?. Were the allegations then fair?

These days almost every question that will come up for decision by the Executive will be coloured with economics— of how much to spend, where to cut, how to raise government revenue, how to get back control of government borrowing, how to replenish the foreign reserves, which are depleted perilously, how to revise administered prices,particularly for fuel and electricity etc. Any government in the current crisis will stand or fall by the involvement of the leader in economic issues. What ideas do the Reformists have? Wasn’t it silly to invoke the supreme court against the floating of the rupee by the Central Bank? Doesn’t it betray economic naivete?

The need for a transformational leader

We need a leader with a vision who will have the courage to proclaim his vision to the people, who will explain that we need to work hard, to work honestly, to act justly, to honour human rights not in word, but in deed, who will mobilise the people behind a publicly proclaimed solution to the problems of the minorities In short, we need a transformational leader. Other countries have produced such leaders in a crisis. We have to make do with the material we have. Ranil Wicks may not fit the bill perfectly but then who does? We do not have the best leadership material thrown up in a democracy, where the people are ignorant lotus eaters We failed to appreciate a leader like Felix Dias Bandaranaike and allowed him to be a power behind the throne without acknowledging his dynamic leadership, instead of giving credit elsewhere. We lost a heroic leader in Lalith Athuladmudali, a pragmatic leader in Gamini Dissanayake. Let us learn from our mistakes. Leaders are both born and made. Premadasa could have performed better if we did not adulate him with blind flattery. We had JR, a man of great understanding, but who preferred selfand party before the nation.

If the UNP leader was authoritarian in his ways it is the fault of the rank and file of the party, which passed the party constitution. Didn’t he get a substantial vote at the last election in spite of all the rigging and malpractices? A mere change of prime minister will do nothing to change things, as the Reformists seem to assume. Let the badge of office continue with the leader. Let those who thing clobbering together a coalition with the UNP carry on if they think it will make a change for the better. The Reformists must think that political power is like a game of musical chairs. Bringing down a coalition used to be a past time in Italy. But it is not enough. Let Ranil be the candidate for the next president if a vacancy occurs through political manipulation. Who will be the president is for the country to decide, not for the party.

As for RW, he must realise that he cannot run the party like JR. There must be internal democracy in the party before the people can believe that the party if returned to power will honour democracy.

The crisis is just beginning

Let the Reformists remember Indonesia after the East Asian crisis of 1997. It is useful to recount what happened. It was May, 1998 and the IMF had at last agreed to release funds, which they were withholding in spite of signing an agreement in January. They were waiting for proof that Suharto would do what he promised to do—effedect far reaching economic reforms. The spark for the outbreak of violence was a measure intended to help meet IMF targets—a reduction in subsidies on fuel and electricity, which meant an increase in the price of kerosene, the poor man’s fuel, which went up by 25%.

Riots broke out in Medan against the Chinese, who were looked upon as rich. Student protests followed everywhere. The army after weeks of patience fired, killing a dozen students. The riots escalated into an anti-Suharto revolt with rioting and looting in the major cities. The middle classes shook their heads and said Suharto should go. Bu it is not their talk that led to his stepping down. It was the army.

It is very well for the Reformists to talk of forming a new coalition. But who controls the levers of power under the Executive Presidency? No leader who considers himself legitimately elected will give up power lightly. The Reformers should realise that what is needed is more than reform. The JVP perhaps is biding its time knowing that only the students and workers that can bring down governments with lasting results.