Archive for the 'Colombo' Category

Sri Lanka votes against compromise

As published in The Samosa

Sri Lanka’s opposition talked of giving concessions to the country’s defeated Tamil minority. The Sinhalese majority said no. Melanie Gouby analyses Sri Lanka’s presidential election.
For all the talk of a close election, in the end President Mahinda Rajapaksa was re-elected comfortably when results were announced on Wednesday. General Sarath Fonseka, the former head of the Sri Lankan army and Rajapaksa’s main opponent, lost with 40.15 per cent of the vote amid questions over the fairness of the elections.
Indeed, Dayananda Dissanaoke, the Elections Commissioner, announced that he would resign following the election as he felt his directives had not been respected by the state media and the government.
“He is not satisfied with the state media and the authorities, who did not follow his instructions regarding how the state media should handle the coverage of the campaign. It is a disappointment,” said a consultant at the Department of Elections.

Although the opposition has claimed votes were rigged, so far no proof has been put forward. “I think the elections itself were transparent. It is the way the campaign was reported by the state media that is an issue,” said the consultant.

Rajapaksa had called the election early in order to bank on his victory against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the guerrilla movement that divided the island for over thirty years, but his plan seemed to be seriously jeopardised when victorious former army chief General Fonseka decided to run against him.

With the Sinhalese population apparently equally split between the two contenders, it seemed the Tamil minority would decide the victor. But a close look at elections results shows that Fonseka’s gamble to woo Tamil voters actually turned against him.
Indeed, while he won by a large margin in Tamil-heavy districts such as Vanni and Jaffna, and had a strong argument as the “national hero” and military mind behind the victory over the LTTE, Fonseka could not convince the Sinhalese majority that he would deliver as president.
“To me it seems obvious that he would not win. He said he would make concession to Tamils – although very small, that’s enough to put off many people here,” said Sudesh Jayarante, a 25-year-old Sinhalese engineer living near Colombo.
Fonseka’s hotel in Colombo, the luxurious Cinnamon Lakeside Hotel, was also surrounded by nearly a hundred soldiers on Wednesday for reasons that remain obscure.
Fonseka, as former leader of the national army, retains loyalty within the troops he led to victory last April, and it seems Colombo authorities may have feared he would rally soldiers and attempt to seize power on grounds of electoral fraud.

Numerous accusations that the other side might attempt a coup were made during the campaign, and international observers feared that clashes between partisans of the two candidates would occur following the election results. But the streets of Colombo remained relatively calmed yesterday.
The campaign was also marked by mutual accusations of responsibility for war crimes during the final decisive attack against the Tamil Tigers. Fonseka had taken a strong stance, claiming he would allow the military campaign to be scrutinised by an international commission.

But Rajapaksa never made concessions on either war crimes or the Tamils’ yearning for self-determination.
In spite of the effect created by Fonseka’s surprise candidacy, Rajapaksa’s campaign remained in line with his policy against the Tamil rebellion, and his refusal to make concessions secured him Sinhalese votes, and victory.
Rajapaksa also appealed to a section of the Tamil population. The Guardian quoted a Tamil truck driver from Jaffna on Sunday, saying: “When the war was going on, we suffered enormously at the hands of both pro-LTTE and pro-government groups. But all that ended with the elimination of the LTTE. Although many young people want a change we who have seen much in life strongly believe that credit goes to the president.”
Rajapaksa has thus been re-elected for a six-year term, and today Maithripala Sirisena, a minister in his government, announced the president would shortly dissolve parliament to ensure he holds a strong majority.
With an unchallenged second mandate, a country free from terrorism and a strong majority in Parliament, Rajapaksa will have free rein.
Given that his first term as president was characterised by corruption, nepotism and attacks on journalists that led Reporters Without Borders and Transparency International to include Sri Lanka in their respective lists of “troubled” countries, this is not something the Sri Lankan opposition and media will look forward to.

Rajapaksa re-election

It is not surprising news, but a very disappointing one. Rajapaksa has been re-elected as the president of Sri Lanka. His main opponent, General Sarath Fonseka, was relying on the minorities’ votes to win the elections, but reaching out to the Tamils may be the reason why he lost. The majority of the Sinhalese population is not ready to make the necessary compromises and his willingness to include Tamils in the debate was a risky bet. Sri Lanka is still a long way from peace.
Read my analysis of the elections results tomorrow in The Samosa, or later on this week on Insight into a post-war country.

Sri Lanka’s war chiefs fight for the spoils of peace

By Melanie Gouby
As published in The Samosa

He may seem the most unlikely candidate of all, but former army chief General Sarath Fonseka has shaken off the Sri Lankan establishment and engaged in a fierce campaign to beat his former ally to the presidential throne.General Fonseka, the very man who led the army to victory, and once part of current president Mahinda Rajapaksa’s inner circle, dramatically turned against the power in place and declared he would run against his old friend in the election.

President Rajapaksa had called for early elections, hoping to strengthen his rule thanks to the nationalist sentiments prevailing in Sri Lanka following his government’s victory over the Tamil Tigers rebels last spring, ending a 26-year civil war.

Rajapaksa was expected to win the January 26th election hands down – but he didn’t reckon on Fonseka entering the fray.

As a military man who took tough decisions in the war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) guerilla movement, Fonseka was not exactly the designated candidate for the opposition, and certainly not for the Tamil minority.

Nevertheless, last Wednesday the Tamil National Alliance, a party representing the Tamil population, declared it would “request from all Sri Lankans … to vote for General Sarath Fonseka”.

The campaign revolves around ethnic issues, but little is being said by either candidate about actual policies or how they will realise their lofty promises of good governance and economical revival.

Fonseka has committed himself to abolishing the executive presidency – which currently gives the president over-arching power – as well as fighting corruption and making concessions to the Tamil minority.

He promises to grant an amnesty to former militants and says that government troops will return occupied private lands to their Tamils owners.

But Fonseka is also an ardent Sinhalese nationalist and has yet to declare he will make concrete political concessions to the Tamils and recognise their right to self-determination. Some think his courtship of the Tamil population is simply a calculated electoral move.

“Personally I don’t believe him because he made literal statements as the leader of the army, saying that the minorities don’t have a place here,” said Sheila Richards, the head of a Colombo-based peace and reconciliation NGO. “The military is also behind the violation of media rights and the lack of freedom of expression.”

Fonseka promised he would pass a freedom of information law, and recently claimed that Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the Minister of Defence and brother of Mahinda, should take responsibility for the killing of journalists in recent years.

At the heart of the feud between Fonseka and the Rajapaksa brothers lies a dispute over both who should take credit for the victory against the LTTE, and who is to blame for the high civilian death toll.

It was army chief General Fonseka who commanded the troops that finally defeated the LTTE after 26 years of bloody civil war, but President Rajapaksa credited the victory mainly to himself and his brother.

And when Fonseka was asked by US officials to testify in an investigation into possible war crimes in November, palpable tensions began to emerge within the power triumvirate.

Fonseka later declared that he would welcome such investigations once he was elected, and accused Gotabaya Rajapaksa of being responsible for the alleged crimes.

Since then, the election has been little more than a media circus, with each side hurling accusations at the other.

This blame game does not fool many Sri Lankans. To many, Fonseka is just the lesser of two evils, an anti-establishment candidate who will keep the establishment running.

“We are left with the choice of an extremely corrupt, centralised government which has disregarded the written constitution and runs the country like it’s a family business, or we’ve got an ex-General who was hired for the job purely due to his ruthless past and is just a mouthpiece for the opposing parties at the moment,” complains Sammath Gammampila, a 22-year-old Sinhalese student.

“What can you expect of someone like him, who led the war and denies his implication in the violation of human rights during the war? He was leading the army. But the presidency will be more ruthless if Rajapaksa is elected,” adds Sheila Richards.

Even if he is genuine about his fight against corruption, General Fonseka will be confronted by the realities of Sri Lanka’s establishment.

“The way things are now, it will be difficult to change it rapidly. Because Fonseka comes from a background that is close to this corrupted power, he was at the top of the army, it seems unlikely that those promises will be kept,” explains an opposition MP who wishes to remain anonymous.

On top of this, Sri Lankans wonder whether Fonseka will have what it takes to turn around the economy and bring them the comfort they are longing for.

“Full stomachs, a home and a job, that’s what most people want. They have forgotten long ago about their rights and about democracy. The war brainwashed them into thinking that this near state of dictatorship is normal,” adds the opposition MP.

But the rival candidates have barely touched on the economy during the campaign, and Fonseka’s manifesto does not make promises beyond easing the cost of living and providing employment for the country’s youth.

The reality is that economic issues may well be left in the hands of foreign powers, with India and China struggling to impose their respective spheres of influence over Sri Lanka.

New Delhi has a history of meddling in the island’s politics, and it was thanks to an Indian intelligence tip-off that Fonseka was ousted from his position in the army, according to Seema Sengupta, a freelance journalist based in Kolkata, India.

This is likely to push Fonseka closer to China, who largely funded last year’s decisive attack on the LTTE.

Whoever is elected will have to choose his allies carefully, but a stable Sri Lanka will also require foreign powers to act responsibly.

“India, as the largest South Asian neighbour, will be required to play a constructive role in ensuring that Sri Lanka can prosper”, says Sengupta. However, international pressure has had little effect in bending the will of the Sri Lankan elite either during or since the war last year.

Tamils voters, the “kingmakers” in the election according to observers, will have difficulty forgetting recent events and the ruthlessness with which they were repressed.

On the 26th, they will have to make a tough call on Fonseka – is the enemy of their enemy their friend?

Last Updated on Thursday, 14 January 2010 03:36

Next Page »


Twitter Updates

SocialVibe


Blog Stats

  • 1,292 hits