The arrest of former army chief Gen. (retd) Sarath Fonseka has led to some interesting questions being raised in political circles. The Opposition asks why President Mahinda Rajapaksa is behaving like a loser, in victory. It says if he has really won the Jan. 26 presidential election, he should not be so paranoid as to harass his political rivals; he should act magnanimously without resorting to a witch hunt.

The Opposition is obviously trying to bolster its claim that the presidential election was not free and fair and therefore it is justified in not having conceded defeat. The SLFP-led Opposition acted in a similar manner after its defeats at the 1982 and 1988 presidential elections. It refused to accept defeat on both occasions. The UNP and its allies have a democratic right to dissent, though the final arbiter as regards election results is the judiciary.

The UNP has undertaken to file a presidential election petition on behalf of Fonseka. That is a step in the right direction; if it has any doubts about election results, it should take recourse to the law. If the UNP believes Fonseka is the victor, it ought to treat him as such.

The UNP's claim of Fonseka's victory is tantamount to an admission on its part that he has outdone its leader Ranil Wickremesinghe, who lost the 2005 presidential election. If so, why shouldn't the UNP allow Fonseka to lead the Opposition at the parliamentary elections as well under the Swan symbol? By blocking Fonseka's attempt to use the Swan symbol at the parliamentary polls and by refusing to let him lead the forthcoming election campaign, the UNP has only contradicted its claim that Fonseka has won the presidential election.

The UNP's logic of convenience is self-defeating. On the one hand, it tries to safeguard its leader Wickremesinghe's personal interest by claiming that Fonseka polled much less than Wickremesinghe (in 2005). But, at the same time, it strives to protect its overall interest vis-à-vis the mega boost the presidential election results have given the government's parliamentary polls campaign, by claiming that Fonseka is the real winner. The UNP cannot have it both ways!

One is reminded how the SLFP acted after its late leader Sirimavo Bandaranaike's defeat at the 1988 presidential election. It insisted that she had won but been denied victory by the UNP through rigging and manipulation of results. However, about four years later it brought in Chandrika Kumaratunga and catapulted her to the party leadership thus contradicting itself and betraying the fact that it was convinced of Sirimavo's inability to win elections. If the SLFP had genuinely believed Sirimavo was really deprived of her victory in 1988 owing to rigging etc, it need not have looked for an alternative leader!

So, the question is why the UNP, which asks President Rajapaksa why he does not behave like a winner, if he has no doubts about the legitimacy of his re-election, does not treat Fonseka as a real winner and give him his due place in the Opposition alliance, if it really believes he has won the presidency. Curiouser and curiouser!

Dale Carnegie famously said: "When dealing with people, remember you are not dealing with creatures of logic, but creatures of emotion, creatures bristling with prejudice and motivated by pride and vanity."