No limits?

Tuesday, 24 June 2014 00:01 -     - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

  • Southern fascism and the politics of resistance
“Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity” – WB Yeats, The Second Coming The Aluthgama attack on the Muslims was followed by several incidents, the exact nature, causes and perpetrators of which have yet to be ascertained. These include the acid attacks on the Police in Mawanella, and the fire that gutted the ‘No Limit’ store in Panadura. To me what seems to be happening is that someone or something is stepping up the pace or is out of control. This is eerily reminiscent of violent neo-fascist movement in Italy in the 1970s, which committed acts of terrorism as part of what it termed ‘a strategy of tension’. What is most troubling is the possible existence of Sinhala-Buddhist terrorist cells and their possible embedding within, interface with and resonance in the State apparatus itself. In the right conditions and atmosphere of perceived external threat and internal opportunity, a tipping point could be reached, spiralling downward into assassination (as in 1959) and/or a military putsch by mid-level ‘Young Turks’ sanctified and legitimised by Buddhist ayatollahs. Rise of contemporary Sinhala Buddhist ultra-nationalism The history of this descent dates back at least to the interregnum of President D.B. Wijetunga, when the deliberate process of de-Premadasaisation took the form of the revival of the Sinhala Buddhist conservatism which was a long-running current within the UNP. President Premadasa’s multiethnic, multi-religious, multilingual policy, which didn’t save him from being murdered by the Tigers and probably helped ensure it, was overthrown in favour of a Sinhala Buddhist conservatism best exemplified by President Wijetunga’s creepy line of the majority and minority being akin to a tree and creepers. The second stage of the rise of contemporary Sinhala Buddhist ultra-nationalism was the backlash against the adventurist ‘union of regions’ political package of President Kumaratunga in 1995 and 1997 (her August 2000 draft was a far more moderate version with bi-partisan authorship). The Rev. Soma phenomenon thrived in that atmosphere. The Sinhala backlash grew most rapidly during Ranil Wickremesinghe’s CFA. The armed forces felt helpless and targeted by the Wickremesinghe administration, especially after the humiliating and wholly unjustified arrest of Directorate of Military Intelligence operatives at the safe house in Athurugiriya. This led to a two-way traffic. The JVP, of which the most prominent element at the time was Wimal Weerawansa (who was more of a nationalist and less of a Marxist than his peers such as Anura Kumara Dissanayake), and the JHU of Patali Champika Ranawaka, understandably and rightly championed the cause of the military. Sources within the military began to seek out and ventilate their grievances, again understandably, to these two parties and in the media controlled or influenced by them. It is as part of the traffic on this two way street that the more militant Buddhist monks began to interface with the military. The PTOMS deal between President Kumaratunga and the LTTE generated a backlash from the patriotic Sinhala nationalist forces that had mobilised in support of her to oust Ranil Wickremesinghe and win the election that immediately followed. The open bloc between candidate Ranil Wickremesinghe and incumbent though outgoing President Kumaratunga in 2005 left Mahinda Rajapaksa with the prospect of an SLFP which had a strong loyalty to the Bandaranaikes and a bureaucracy that was instinctively sympathetic to the UNP. He felt he had little choice but to lean on the JVP and JHU – and their supportive intelligentsia — when taking over the reins of power. This move reminded me of President Premadasa’s desperate attempts to construct a counter-bloc to the Establishment by reaching out variously to the SLMP of Vijaya Kumaratunga and later Ossie Abeygoonesekara, the JVP, the EPRLF, EROS and LTTE. It is this unavoidable wartime bloc that Mahinda Rajapaksa felt constrained to construct that formed the bridge for the traffic that would follow. When the final war began, the relationship between the ultranationalist Buddhist clergy, the ultra-nationalists political formations and their front organisations such as the National Movement against Terrorism (NMAT) and elements within the security apparatus/the military had reached a level that went beyond the usual invocations and ritualistic blessings. The orders or signalling that resulted in the Trinco-5 incident were traced in the newspapers of that time to an advisor within the security bureaucracy, who was a member of an ultra-nationalist political party. When the war was won, the most organic representative of the new ideological amalgam—the old amalgam with boots and bayonets—was not Mahinda Rajapaksa but Sarath Fonseka, which is why the latter felt confident enough to mount a serious challenge to the former. In a brilliant move Rajapaksa drew him out of the fortified institutional arena into the much larger national political arena where Sinhala nationalism was far less martial, and bested him. Gotabaya Rajapaksa was correctly moved in to guard the flank, but became Fonseka’s ideological successor – while Fonseka had repositioned. Something born out of sight While all of this went on at the visible and macro level, something had been born out of sight. In other parts of the world and at other times, ranging from the Italian fascists and the Nazi movement to the Ku Klux Klan and the French OAS, such phenomena have involved elements within the armed forces and police or former members of both. In the 1930s they captured the State in Italy and Germany, while in other places they functioned as death squads or armed militia, engaging in assassination and ethno-religious mayhem. In Sri Lanka these elements grow in a socio-psychological atmosphere. It is vital to forestall their acceptance by the armed forces at large and the successful leveraging of the armed forces and STF as part of their project. The acceleration of their appeal within the ranks of the armed forces will come with the confluence of several factors:
  • The greater visibility and pressure of the UN International Inquiry, now joined by Martti Ahtisaari, Finnish facilitator of separatism in Kosovo and Sudan, who was brought to Sri Lanka by President Chandrika Kumaratunga and resisted by Lakshman Kadirgamar with the support of the JVP.
  • The outrageous slogans emanating from Tamil Nadu
  • The provocatively dissonant slogans and activity of the TNA/NPC radicals;
  • The double failure of Mahinda Rajapaksa and his brothers to (i) successfully defend the armed forces from the UN international inquiry as Sri Lanka did in Geneva in May 2009 by rebuilding that coalition and returning to that strategy and (ii) counter Sinhala extremism by reviving the SLFP’s moderate centrist ideology and appeal to the middle ground;
  • The chronic and utter failure of the UNP to re-profile and re-brand as party of multiethnic patriotism and open the safety valves at the upcoming national elections by a strong showing. (Wimal Weerawansa and Champika Ranawaka will wreak polemical havoc on the UNP in an election campaign so long as Ranil Wickremesinghe or CBK is the candidate even with Sajith as backup, but will be unable to do so to a Sajith or Karu candidacy).
The momentum of the Sinhala extremists can be retarded only by a diversion of discontent, but the JVP alone is too small for such a re-channelling. Thus President Rajapaksa will win his election but as J.R. Jayewardene discovered, that alone cannot stop the real crisis and deeper dynamics. Mahinda Rajapaksa is harbouring Sinhala extremists within his cabinet just as J.R. Jayewardene harboured Cyril Mathew until it was too late. And it was not only Mr. Mathew. How many recall that Ven. Elle Gunawansa had been appointed the ‘spiritual advisor’ to the Mahaweli project? The fact is that having sown the dragon’s teeth, not even Cyril Mathew had the ability to control July ’83 when it happened. JR Jayewardene basically abdicated for days (Premadasa was the only one with the guts to go on radio and excoriate the rioters) for the same reason that SWRD did so in 1958. They were afraid. The creature is far more dangerous today The creature is far more dangerous today than it was in July 1983, because it may have greater resonance among serving or former members of the middle and lower ranks of the armed forces and police – and therefore greater training and experience of lethal violence – as well as of Sinhala Buddhist caucuses within the business community. Three decades after July ’83, the current tactic is to set the pace, outflank the political regime, and create situations and ‘facts on the ground’. Today, most disconcertingly, Mahinda Rajapaksa may possess the leadership of the state but not the initiative; it is the extremists who have wrested the initiative and are attempting to keep it. Today, the ambition is almost certainly to trigger anarchy and chaos in the form of a Sinhala Buddhist uprising – thereby providing the conditions and context for takeover or installation. How then is our society to survive? In facing and fighting the threat of fascism, humanity has learned many lessons at the most enormous cost. What is the principle contradiction in Sri Lanka today? Is it not the contradiction between, on the one hand, the interests ( not necessarily the ideology) of the overwhelming majority of its citizens including most certainly the Sinhala Buddhists and the Sri Lankan armed forces—that of a secure, peaceful, stable, sovereign, united, democratic country-- and on the other hand, those who threaten national sovereignty, stability, security, peace, unity and democracy, namely the external forces including the Tamil secessionists propelling the international inquiry and the militant sectarian Sinhala Buddhist extremists? Sinhala-Buddhism as such is too old, rooted, broad and organic to be frontally confronted and ruptured with. Instead it must be externally contained and countervailed, and its plasticity recognised, it must be internally reworked, re-calibrated, re-set and re-assembled so as to fairly and justly accommodate multi-ethnicity, multi-religiosity, multilingualism and multiculturalism, i.e. pluralism. The gap between the interests of the Sinhalese, including the Sinhala Buddhists, and the extreme, sectarian versions of Sinhala Buddhism, must be exposed, highlighted and utilised to combat the latter. Fight against Sinhala fascism The fight against Sinhala fascism must be waged by and from within the national political mainstream and must resonate with and within it. Sinhala fascism cannot be defeated by frontally opposing Sinhala Buddhism or Sinhala nationalism as such. Nor can it be defeated outside of a national-democratic strategy to build a united Sri Lankan nation and state, resisting external interventionism and Tamil secessionism. This means a patriotic, popular-democratic platform, but may well require the adoption of a populist and nationalist one. Democratic political strategy must entail the neutralisation of or even unity with lesser evils so as to fight the most dangerous enemy: radical evil. This is no time for faddish pseudo-intellectual posturing from a far left lunatic fringe or deracinated cosmopolitan civil society caucus. The price of failure is the ultimate one. …And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?” – Yeats, The Second Coming  

Recent columns

COMMENTS