Making Sri Lanka a ‘democratic hub’ for ‘Wonder of Asia’

By Dr. Laksiri Fernando

Sri Lanka’s independence on 4 February 1948 was never a final act, but a major landmark in a process of evolution from colonialism to independence and underdevelopment to development. It is truly a process of internal emancipation.

It is the 63rd anniversary of this landmark or the 64th Independence Day that the country celebrated on 4 February 2012 in grand style fitting to the occasion at its ancient city of Anuradhapura and the incumbent Government undoubtedly has every right to be jubilant about the occasion given its achievements during the last six years. 

It is primarily a people’s day. There is something unique in the Sri Lankan ‘national character,’ very much similar or more to the Indian, which intends to jealously safeguard its presumed sovereignty and independence, at times excessively suspicious about anything foreign. It is rooted in history. 

Sri Lanka or former Ceylon succumbed to three waves of Western colonisation since the 16th Century or the beginning of the ‘modern era,’ first by the Portuguese (1505-1658), then by the Dutch (1658-1796) and finally by the British (1796-1948). Only few countries were subjected to such a long or varied colonial rule, one after the other. 

It was a happy country or a ‘dream island’ before.

While Sri Lanka undoubtedly benefitted from the Western influence on science, education or governance, it could have benefitted more through a peaceful process or interaction without colonialism. Sri Lanka was never averse to external influence before, being situated near the ‘Silk route’ connecting in fact the West and the East. 

Colonialism adversely affected its economy and society, and compartmentalised ethnicity and religion, from which Sri Lanka is still struggling to, free itself. Before colonialism, both ethnicity and religion were porous entities and people could move freely from one to the other. This is no longer the case. 

Landmarks 

1948 was not the only landmark in the process of independence, before or after. The formation of the Ceylon National Congress (CNC) in 1918 was the precursor to independence, the Left Movement formed in 1936 adding its radical weight behind its achievement. Both movements were free from ethnic rift at least at the beginning. 

Sri Lanka achieved universal franchise in 1931, well before many of the other countries. Its healthy utilisation by the people, added with the formation of political parties and associations, were the foundations of modern democracy in the country although some of their benefits became distorted with the present proportional representation and the presidential system since 1978. 

There have been both advancements and setbacks in the process of independence; the major direction undoubtedly been for progress. 

The formation of the United National Party (UNP) in 1947 and the Sri Lankan Freedom Party (SLFP) in 1952 were healthy developments in a multiparty system, but their failure to win over the ‘minority’ communities was symptomatic of what apparently evolved as the ‘ethnic conflict’ in Sri Lanka thereafter. 

The transfer of power from the UNP to the SLFP in 1956 was a major stride in independence, severing defence ties with the British, but the unfortunate excess of that ‘nationalist wave’ was the ‘Sinhala Only’ policy that alienated particularly the Tamil speaking community. Sri Lanka saw a major communal riot in 1958 and a continuous spell of the same between 1977 and 1983. The story thereafter is well known history. 

The 1972 Constitution which created a Republic in the island could have been a major achievement, if it were to accommodate the minority communities. Unfortunately, a middle solution through devolution between a ‘strong unitary constitution’ and ‘federalism’ was not discussed at all at that time. The 1978 constitution carried the same mistake finally obliging under the Indian influence to a still controversial devolution framework under the 13th Amendment.

By this time, it was not clear whether Sri Lanka was progressing on its independence or regressing. The country was at the brink of separation, and under the strong influence of external forces. Terrorism was an ugly monster devouring the tender lives of the Tamil youth of the country and a similar phenomenon was visible also in the south in 1971 and again in 1987/89. Both movements were rooted in the country’s policy mistakes as well as mistaken ideologies. 

Only in 2005 that the present leadership of President Mahinda Rajapaksa managed to cut a corner. The fruit of that policy was the complete eradication of separatist terrorism from the Sri Lankan soil by May 2009. The consolidation of that achievement might be the best resolution that the country should aspire for, on this occasion of Independence.

‘Wonder of Asia’ 

It is often said that Sri Lanka was in a better position compared even to the East Asian dragons at the beginning of independence. This is partly true. The complacence however spoiled the future. The excessive reliance on primary exports – tea, rubber and coconut – was one of the drawbacks. Even when industrialisation was contemplated, the notion was ‘import substitution’ but not ‘export promotion’. The East Asian policy was different.

Agricultural policy focused narrowly on land distribution, which was undoubtedly necessary, but without going beyond for modernisation like in Japan or South Korea. Mechanisation, the invention of new seeds and soil protection methods could have done miracles. What was holding back was the paucity in science and technology, although the country boasted about its educational system.

Whatever the weaknesses, Sri Lanka not only managed to preserve its welfare system but also promoted a policy of equitable income redistribution. That is how the country managed a high human development, irrespective of a low economic growth. 

The new economic policies since 1977 undoubtedly unleashed the country’s economic potential but unfortunately could not reap the full results due to the ethnic conflict and the separatist war. It is the end of the war in 2009 that has created conducive conditions for Sri Lanka to become a ‘Wonder of Asia.’

A blue print for this ambition is outlined in the ‘Mahinda Chinthana’ elaborated by various documents by the Treasury, the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economic Development. Apart from doubling the per capita income from $ 2,000 to 4,000 by 2016, the concept of five hubs – naval, aviation, commercial, energy and knowledge – is the cornerstone of this programme of action. 

Judging by the recent past, doubling of the per capita income might not be a difficult task although it is not a guaranteed reality by any means. Sri Lanka doubled its per capita income between 2005 and 2010. The world economy particularly in the West, however, has plunged into a great depression more or less since then. Comforting factor nevertheless is the growth momentum in the Asian region particularly in India and China.

Anchoring the Sri Lankan economy, firmly in the Asian trajectory, including the Middle East, might be the way out. Anyway, the concept of ‘Wonder of Asia’ might not make much sense otherwise. This means more economic collaboration, markets, direct investments, learning and exchange of information and technology with Asian neighbours. Even in the tourist sector, an Asian turn might be necessary. 

However, this should not be a 180 degree turn. There are possibilities that some of the Western companies might want to relocate their industries or business in a strategically located country like Sri Lanka, given some of the sluggish economic conditions in their own countries. 

What might be internally necessary is a rapid ‘revolutionary’ change in the educational sector. Apart from language (the trilingual policy), science, maths, technology and business should be emphasised in all education. Students in business competence with IT are necessary for the country. 

‘Democratic hub’ 

The ‘Wonder of Asia’ should not be limited to economics. It should be exemplarily extended to politics and governance. Sri Lanka can be a ‘Democratic Hub’ in addition to becoming a naval, aviation, commercial, energy and knowledge hub.

As the recent developments in Myanmar shows (persuaded by China more than anyone else), there is increasing interest in democratisation of political systems in the emerging and vibrant economies in Asia. Indonesia has already gone well ahead in this direction. China itself has made many changes in its political system. 

The Communist Party itself has become an instrument of ‘deliberative democracy’ with extensive devises of regional autonomy and devolution/decentralisation. 

The ‘Arab Spring’ is another indication of regional or global trends. Sri Lanka is now supposed to do business not with authoritarian Gaddafi but a democratic Libya. This is going to be the same with other Middle East countries in the future. 

The democratic credentials of Sri Lanka can be a great asset in trade and foreign relations in addition to its internal necessities. 

Of course Sri Lanka is a small country compared to China or India and it should have its own devices in resolving its own problems. Home grown solutions are obviously much preferred, but Sri Lanka should not hesitate to learn from or listen to its good friends in resolving its overlapping problems. 

As outlined previously, Sri Lanka has strong democratic traditions and credentials. Unlike many other countries even within the region, it has never plunged into military rule whatever the temptations. Even under the worst circumstances of terrorism, mayhem and killings, the country managed to preserve its democratic system whatever the erosions that it encountered in the fringes. 

Of course people can differ and disagree with the assessment of democracy, human rights or politics. That is part of democracy. There are different angles to confront. There are people who are extremely critical or rather cynical about the ambition of Sri Lanka becoming ‘Wonder of Asia,’ the five hubs, doubling of the per capita income or the prospects for ethnic reconciliation. While critical thinking is necessary, the negation of everything is only a self-satisfying crusade not helpful to the country, people or any community. 

Sri Lanka is at a juncture where the country needs to forge ‘unity with independence’ after clearly establishing that there will be no room for the division of the country through terrorism or otherwise. Unity of the country is also an economic imperative. Only prospects for the resolution of the differences would be through democratic means. The Parliamentary system (with several of its mechanisms) is the major avenue of democracy whatever the weaknesses. 

After winning the war and the suppression of terrorism, both the Government and the people of Sri Lanka (or one may say, the ‘majority’) can be or should be magnanimous for the ‘minority’ grievances. This is, however, not to propose a paternalistic gesture but a genuine effort of rectification. 

There are undoubtedly past injustices committed against the minority communities, for example, the Sinhala Only Act, 1983 or communal violence before, although the present leaders or the people are not directly responsible. Equally true is the atrocities committed by the LTTE against the other communities and some of the responsible people or supporters are still living. 

Reconciliation should be a genuine effort in finding solutions to genuine grievances.

The effort should be genuine from both sides; the government on the one hand and the present leaders of the Tamil community on the other. There are structural reforms proposed through the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and proper implementation of the recommendations should take priority of the reconciliation process. 

It may be advisable to have a permanent Reconciliation Commission to look after the matters, after the initial implementation of the recommendations, or even before.  What appear to be problematic at present are the age old political issues related to the 13th Amendment or taking the 13th Amendment as a scapegoat. While dogmatism might be counterproductive on both sides, the defiance on the part of the TNA might not take the Tamil community anywhere, reminiscence of the LTTE intransigence during the peace process. Much tormented poor sections of the Tamil community might be at the receiving end again, derailing the formation of the much needed Northern Provincial Council in the near future. 

Resolution 

To make Sri Lanka a democratic hub, undoubtedly the cooperation of all sections, all parties and every segment of the society is necessary. But most important might be the commitment on the part of the Government and particularly the President, Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The following could be an Independence Day Resolution: To offer a clear and feasible political solution to the Tamil community by the next Independence Day 2013, without disadvantaging the Muslim community or the Sinhalese community, and implement it within a feasible timeframe. This in itself would make Sri Lanka the ‘Wonder of Asia’. It would be the next landmark of independence. 

Sri Lanka may double human freedom with responsibility by 2016 while doubling the per capita income of the country. 

(This article is adapted from the writer’s recent contribution to Asian Tribune.com.)