Original photograph REUTERS/Damir Sagolj

It is always a curious and odd little matter, to witness how even Buddhists become so obsessively attached to ‘sacred’ lands and in protecting them, commit acts seemingly prompted by hatred, delusion and ill-will.

Ideally, lands should not become ‘sacred’ for simple reasons. The Buddha, in attacking the rigid and unethical caste-system during his time, placed great stress on the importance of deeds or action. That was why it was said (in the Vasala sutta) that one did not become a Brahman (or an outcast) by birth, but by deed. That wonderful message ought to have taught us a very valuable lesson, which, to rephrase the Buddha, could be stated as follows: that a land becomes a ‘sacred’ (or Buddhist) land not by anything else but only by the words and deeds of those inhabiting that land. Even a place of religious worship would lose its sacredness if, in the guise of religion, all manner of nefarious activities are carried out therein. In such cases, your virtuous neighbour’s backyard becomes more sacred than the ‘sacred’ land or place of worship.

However, these are not ideal times and ideal societies. Laws and regulations can be enacted empowering ministers and other officials to declare a particular territorial area a sacred land. And of course, this is not a practice limited to Buddhists alone. But when mob violence is seen to be propagated, as was done in Dambulla on the 20th of April – when a number of Buddhist monks and laymen stormed a mosque in Dambulla and demanded the dismantling of that mosque – we know, very well, that something is not quite right; not only in the ‘sacred’ land of Dambulla, but also in this supposedly Buddhist-country.

Dambulla mob attack: some concerns

The immediate concerns arising from the unfortunate vulgarity exhibited by some Buddhist monks and their lay followers have been already highlighted. In what was said by some of the protesting monks, there are the obvious traces of violence, racism, religious extremism and that burning desire, if necessary, to cleanse the territory concerned of the ‘other’ (the ‘other’, in this case, being the follower of the Islamic religion). How this plays out politically – domestically and internationally, both against the country and against Buddhism – is easy to understand.

But there are other concerns too.

Firstly, the demeanour of such monks – who seem to be going against some of the fundamental precepts of the Dhamma, one being indriya samvara sila (morality concerning sense-restraint), which is one form of sila or morality a monk (a bhikkhu) is expected to follow – contributes greatly to the doubt and skepticism that is generated in the minds of the lay Buddhist follower today. The sangha community (or the community of Buddhist monks) has been traditionally, and principally, looked upon as a community which guides the layman in the path of the Dhamma and morality.

And given that it is the members of this community who ultimately preach and propagate the Dhamma and since they play the principal role of the ‘guardian’ of the Dhamma in the eyes of the ordinary layman (even though the politician is seen to be playing this role too), acts as were witnessed in Dambulla can have the obvious and natural effect of generating a great sense of doubt (vicikiccha) about, and ill-will (vyapada) towards all aspects concerning Buddhism, its fundamental teachings, the community of monks, etc. Doubt and ill-will are factors hindering the path to emancipation. Doubt, of course, can be eradicated through, for example, the knowledge of the Dhamma, confidence, discussion and questioning. But the question is: can a community of monks (of the Dambulla-type) be of any assistance to the layman in this regard when what one witnesses is a community of monks engaged even in, inter alia, ‘animism’? (as Dr. Laksiri Fernando put it, in ‘The government must apologize to the Muslim community’, The Island, 30 April 2012).

Secondly, viewed from a critical legal perspective, the Dambulla incident throws up significant questions about the turn to law, by which I mean a turn towards the laws contained in statutes, ordinances and the like to resolve the Dambulla-incident. Now, resolving a dispute through the law is acceptable and if all parties agree to respect the verdict, the legal-approach naturally turns into a useful mode of dispute resolution. It will soften tensions, calm your nerves.

But this legal-turn has its weaknesses too. By reducing this entire problem to a simple legal dispute, which the law books and laws will now resolve and one which then will be left in the hands of lawyers and judges, the legal profession can also act as a smokescreen which hides or shoves under the carpet some of the underlying moral and ethical concerns relating to the Dambulla-incident. The legal profession, under these circumstances, becomes a profession of irresponsibility, if some provision or the other decides the fate of the entire controversy. Laws, law books and judgments are (as we know) towards which fingers are pointed as a convenient excuse to evade moral responsibility for one’s words and actions: ‘Look, it is not my fault; it is that law, that judgment, which says so.’ Such legal formalism hinders political discussion and the resolution of political or other social problems and controversies through greater public participation and debate. The root causes go unaddressed, and they erupt in numerous other forms and manifestations elsewhere, some other day. And one such problem that law courts don’t discuss is one which is fundamental to the recent controversy: ‘political-Buddhism’.

Buddha and the fundamental problem of ‘political-Buddhism’

The Buddha, undoubtedly, is the most influential and admirable philosophical teacher I have come across.

And, I do not view the Buddha very simply as one who had nice things to say about non-violence, peace and harmony, or as an extraordinary person who, from birth to death, carried out fantastic and unbelievable acts.

But also, thanks to the excellent work of numerous Buddhist scholars (ranging from the likes of Ven. Walpola Rahula to Prof KN Jayatillaka, but more importantly, scholars such as Prof. David J. Kalupahana, et al.) I read the Buddha more as: a philosopher who, unlike any other, stressed the importance of understanding the concept of radical impermanence which runs through all our activities and lives (a concept which is far more complex than what is narrowly and inaccurately defined as one which means that ‘all things that are born end in death’); a critic who went against the traditions of his time and valued critical reflection and inquiry at all possible times (e.g. the Kalama sutta; also note the advice given to millionaire Upali when the latter expressed willingness to follow the Buddha: ‘Of a truth, Upali, make a thorough investigation’); a brilliant social reformer who made timely use of ideas and concepts that ordinary men and women believed in, to introduce the notion of morality as a counter response to the dangerous nihilism promoted during that time by the likes of Ajita Kesakambali (e.g. the Buddha’s deft use of the concept of ‘god’ to narrate the different destinies confronting human beings, stressed in a way that makes ordinary people believe in that concept and thereby are inevitably influenced to do good to reach the world of gods, devaloka); a master linguist who developed words to bring out the nuances of meaning which were not captured in the language during his time and which still baffle the traditional Eastern and Western mind (e.g. the coining of the term paccuppanna meaning ‘arisen with a background’, which expresses the meaning that the present is conditioned by the immediate past; which was in contrast to the strict manner in which ‘time’ was categorized during the Buddha’s day as belonging to the past, present and future, a categorization which did not make allowance for the complex and nuanced connection of the past and present, for instance); and a teacher who employed similes which had an extremely sarcastic bite, to drive home a point which could be somewhat discomforting to a traditional, conservative, mind (e.g. in explaining the futility of praying for salvation and the end of suffering, the Buddha tells Vasettha that such praying is similar in effect to a man who, having approached the river desiring to get to the other bank, calls out: ‘Come here, other bank, come here!’).

But how, one may wonder, could this noble message of a profound philosophical teacher go so wrong in the hands of those preaching that teaching? The seeds lie in the very notion that the Buddha had advised his followers to be extremely mindful of: excessive attachment. From that springs all problems, and when that clashes with other ulterior objectives and motives of various groups (reasons pertaining to history, tradition, race, ethnicity, nationhood, politics, culture, ideology, etc.), Buddhism ends up being another tool in the hands of the politically-motivated. Promoting Buddhism becomes political, and in the process, Buddhism ends up being another political language.

Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong in the practice of preserving and promoting Buddhism. In fact, Buddhism should definitely be protected and promoted. What is problematic here, however, is the way in which it has been promoted and is sought to be promoted and preserved. The noble teaching of the Buddha becomes a problematic form of political-Buddhism when under the guise of promoting the teaching, various other ethnic, political and similar agendas begin to be nurtured and promoted to the detriment of those believing and following different other teachings or religions [This is perhaps the significant problem shared by those following Christianity and Islam, in particular. While all these teachings and religions are a great source of inspiration to the individual, they become extremely problematic when brought into the public realm of politics and governance where people respond differently to different teachings and faiths].

And more seriously, it is very easy and convenient for bigoted and narrow-minded followers with ulterior political motives to intentionally misinterpret and misunderstand the teachings if necessary. To take one example: in the case of Buddhism, it was once the late Ven. Soma Thero (a priest I admired, but critically) who pointed out that getting hold of the wrong end of the Dhamma could cause unimaginable disaster. For instance, wrongly interpreting the meaning of impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and no-self (anatma) could end up in promoting violence and terrorism – because if everything is impermanent, suffering and without a ‘self’, then causing harm to anyone doesn’t mean much! So, one can imagine how dangerous even these fundamental notions of Buddhism can become in the hands of those who are more interested in politicizing Buddhism.

Responding to Dambulla’s ugly political-Buddhism

It is another version of this kind of political-Buddhism that we witnessed in Dambulla, in the face of which the question arises over and over again: how should one respond to such acts and events? Three broad responses have come to be suggested during recent times. One, the need for a government-apology; two, secularism; three, citizen-initiatives condemning the acts as being not committed in their name.

One: the suggestion has been made that the government needs to apologize for what happened (as usefully made by Dr. Laksiri Fernando, et al). This argument, in general terms, lays much of the blame squarely on the government for being responsible for creating the conditions for inter-religious disharmony. A different version of this ‘government-is-the-culprit’ form of argument has been also raised by those who would not agree with some of the views expressed by the above mentioned authors. So, for instance, even Janaka Perera usefully points out that the real culprits for the present crisis are successive governments and that in the present case, the “ball is now in the government’s court” (Janaka Perera, ‘Dambulla Crisis: Who are the Real Culprits’ in Sinhale Hot News, 3 May 2012).

The suggestion, in principle, is a very valuable one. As regards the Dambulla incident, certain reports suggest that a politician is behind the instigation of the mob-attack; and if so, the government definitely should apologize. But, over-stressing the need of this demand for an apology from the government has the (unintended, but at times even intended) consequence of shifting the blame away from others who ought to be held equally responsible. The government becomes the main culprit, sometimes the only culprit, whereas others go unchecked.

Two: the above form of critique of political-Buddhism and the politicization of any religion leads to the famous argument which demands for a secular state and secular constitution. It makes perfect logic to demand so, and in principle, is a demand that one who is seriously concerned about inter-religious harmony cannot easily dismiss. But one of the nagging problems concerning the demand for secularism (through legal and constitutional means in particular) is that it often has the effect of reducing a complex problem (concerning religion) to a matter that can be addressed through law. Principally, ‘secularism’, when viewed as a term representing a particular mindset, is an immensely difficult destination to reach.

Generally, it calls for: an entire rethinking of the place of religion in life and society, its role in the matter of politics and governance, to what extent religion should be a guide in such matters, and more fundamentally, about how education of religion should be conducted from school-level upwards, etc. In the case of Sri Lanka to argue, for example, that Article 9 of the Constitution is what leads to religious fundamentalism is based on the inaccurate assumption that taking away the provision leads to a better, harmonious and peaceful society. And for the secular argument to be accepted by a majority of the people, it cannot be seen to be made by those who are rabid opponents of Buddhism and Buddhists; which, in other words, calls for a politics of persuasion which has to be undertaken from within.

Three: one of the prominent initiatives undertaken by citizens nowadays, given the advancement of information technology, is the mode of online-petitions. A very useful and important recent initiative concerning the Dambulla mob attack was undertaken in the form of a petition titled ‘Not in our name’ (see http://notinournamesl.wordpress.com). It is yet another important way of expressing the thought that the kind of violence witnessed in Dambulla is not acceptable, is condemned, and is not undertaken in our name. This is, to reiterate, not only an immensely useful form of public protest but also one which has today gained much support. It has, most usefully, generated greater awareness of the incident.

However, what is hoped in the case of such forms of protest is that one is not deluded into imagining that this form of protest could be very effective at the end of the day. While supporting such initiatives, one still needs to be quite skeptical about them. Firstly, it just could be the case that it is precisely this form of protest (online-petitions, etc) that those who instigate and promote religious extremism are comfortable with. And in a sense, the very form of online-protest carries the image of our helplessness in the face of such violence and extremism. Secondly, and perhaps more seriously, the problem with the ‘not-in-our-name’ kind of language is this: contrary to our imagination, the kind of mob attacks seen in Dambulla could be acts which are not carried out in our name in the first place. They may be acts carried out in the name of those who are anyway having very rigid and fixed views about the place of religion in politics. And given the polarization that exists in contemporary society (NGO – anti-NGO, peace activists-war mongers, anti-Buddhist – Sinhala-Buddhist, etc), it is generally understood that those who resort to such violence/silently approve of such violence (group A) and those who say such violence is not in their name (group B) are anyway not on the same page ideologically and politically. Politically, then, group B’s resistance in the present case doesn’t shock group A into adopting a markedly different attitude. In other words: group A has to be critiqued, first and foremost, from within.

Common inadequacy: where are the monks?

This then brings us to the principal question: who constitutes this group within group A? I believe this is none other than the sangha community: the community of Buddhist monks. In all of the above responses, what is essentially missing is the role of the Buddhist monk.

At the end of the day, it needs to be reiterated – not once, twice but a hundred times if necessary – that it is the community of Buddhist monks which can most effectively and significantly end this madness that is being carried out by some in the name of Buddhism. When Buddhist monks are seen to be acting in the way they did, no amount of criticism can prove effective unless those from within that community itself come forward and respond adequately. And it is this glaring absence of a critical response from the community of Buddhist monks which has been the most unfortunate absence in the overall responses that followed. It is this that all of us (especially those who are admirers of the Buddhist philosophy) must perhaps resolve to remind the monks, lay followers, and ourselves, whenever possible.

However, while not abandoning the forms of protest and critique so far adopted, it is also necessary to call for a further nuanced critique and also the adoption of a skeptical (not dismissive) approach to certain comforting arguments which are made concerning the matter of religious harmony in Sri Lanka. The two are inter-connected.

Firstly, the kind of critique necessary is not that which pins the blame entirely on a single monk: in this case, Ven Inamaluwe Sumangala. Rather, it has to be pointed out that this is a problem not limited to the attitude of Ven. Sumangala alone but could be shared by many others in the sangha community who not only directly support him but also do so indirectly, by maintaining a studied silence (and that too, in the name of ‘tolerance’!). Secondly, one needs to be somewhat more skeptical (but not dismissive) of the ‘reservoir of goodwill’ argument that we often raise (see Javed Yusuf, ‘Dambulla: A challenge for all communities’, The Sunday Times, 29 April, 2012). While one can broadly agree with the sentiment expressed, our continued reference to this sentiment could even have the indirect effect of making us utterly complacent and even irresponsible. A probing examination should remind us that while Dambulla-type incidents are somewhat rare, the Dambulla-type mindset may be a more prevalent and rooted one, given the silence of many in the ‘Buddhist-camp’.

In short, the critical intervention of monks in particular is quintessential if they are serious about protecting and preserving Buddhism (and not the grotesque and dangerous aspects of political Buddhism). This is their duty, their responsibility. And this critical intervention, to be sure, is not one which calls for the spewing of hatred and malice directed at monks by monks. Certainly not. As the monks would well know, one can condemn certain practices and policies without hatred or ill-will (ujjhana).

Therefore, before people cry out that Buddhism is too serious a problem to be left in the hands of the contemporary Buddhist monks, or that Buddhism should be protected not from politicians but from Buddhist monks, it is necessary for the monks to come out more openly and critically in expressing their views about the incidents, attitudes, policies and practices that the Dambulla-incident represents. This is also a vital task that critical Buddhist scholars (far more than laymen and women like us) should be mindful about.

Conclusion

It is the Vesak season, and one often remembers that moment which has traditionally been considered the most poignant in the story of the Buddha; the moment the Buddha passed away, the moment of parinirvana. There is great silence that envelops the moment. The Buddha, who is now physically weak, addresses the monks surrounding him and inquires whether there is any doubt in their minds about any aspect of the Dhamma. Venerable Ananda, who is deeply attached to the Buddha, musters up all courage in the face of the great and noble light that now flickers before him, and informs that he has confidence that there is not one bhikkhu gathered there with any doubt or problem. And yet, the Buddha, the ever-mindful, declares: “All conditioned states are impermanent. Strive on with diligence.”

But when witnessing the manner in which the words and teachings of the Buddha have been misused, I, perhaps like many others, tend to consider a different moment to have been the most poignant and moving in the entire life-time of the Buddha. That moment comes soon after the Buddha gains enlightenment, and just before Brahma Sahampathi invites the Buddha to preach the Dhamma.

In this moment, the Buddha, with great compassion, wonders (quite unexpectedly, to our minds) as to whether he should or should not go out into the world and preach the Dhamma. It is this moment, this picture of the contemplating Buddha, which captures that poignancy. For, it is a moment when the Buddha, now surveying the world, realizes that the decision to go out and preach the Dhamma contains enormous risks and challenges, that there are many in the world who have a lot of dust in their eyes, that they are deluded by wrong concepts, ideas and beliefs.

In other words, that moment contains the very fundamentals of the philosophy the Buddha thereafter preached: that element of radical impermanence; that blend of the good and the bad; the happiness and sadness that enwraps a single moment and event; the great opportunity that was before the Buddha on the one hand and the tremendous risks that very opportunity carried with it on the other; the incomparable message of freedom that now had to be spread, and the glaring possibility of a restriction of the freedom of others that very message of freedom, if improperly and wrongly understood, could bring to others.

It was perhaps a moment in which the Buddha saw hundreds of men and women cross the metaphorical river with the aid of the raft named the Dhamma and put an end to their suffering, while a thousand others failed, and failed miserably, and in the process, did all manner of things to the raft, the river and all around them. To strive on with diligence is what is required. And those words contain a very valuable lesson to the socially-engaged monk, in particular, who is genuinely and sincerely interested in preserving and promoting the noble teachings of the Buddha.

• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• The transformation of Buddhism in Sri Lanka
• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• Monks of War – Al-Jazeera on the JHU
• The Mind of Compassion: Buddhism and Violence

This Koran is tattered because Buddhist monks had been tearing the pages out of it. Asked if the monks had tried burning a Koran, I was told no – Caption and photograph by Navin Weeraratne

This is in response to the comments to my previous post – Dambulla Mosque Attack: Is there a hidden hand? At the time of writing this, there were nearly 50 comments displaying a variety of stands taken by commentators. The very positive ones are the ones seeking introspection invoking to put the Buddhist house in order to commensurate with their civilised principles and precepts. This identifies the remorseful feelings of the silent majority of the Buddhist who vehemently deplore the mosque attack as an uncivilized act whilst taking a principled stand on the miscarriage of justice by Senior Political leaders at the highest echelons, law enforcement authorities and other wheeler dealers. This is a positive sign indicating that that the majority are not chauvinistic but inclusive. Their comments were also testifying that on the other side, the extremists too are hijacking the silent majority in their name. This is evidently clear in the modus operandi employed where a mob assembled of hooligans from elsewhere is coordinated to cause trouble in Dambulla. Clear evidence of premeditated trouble making that surprised the people of Dambulla.

Peace loving people in this country should be alert to the machination of extremists who work in collusion with bankrupt politicians wishing to create religious, ethnic and other strife in society so that they can emerge as ethnic/religious saviours creating a new voter bank by taking advantage of an artificially created trouble.

Apart from these, there were also negative and irresponsible comments bordering on naivety and foolishness wishing to fish in troubled waters and sensitise the issue to cause more division in society by citing irrelevant and alien factors that has nothing to do with Dambulla. Drawing cues from these hints, the following negative trend settings are evident in the comments:

Failed State Phenomenon

There were complacent comments trying to disprove the emerging failed state phenomenon. The following are some of the distinct feature of failed state phenomenon as evidenced by this incident.

1. Failure of Law Enforcement: Failure of the executive to bring law and order. Dambulla attack is a result of premeditated plan to attack, illegal assembly, organised mob, assault on a public/community asset, taking law to their hands under the gaze of the police/army in broad daylight. Now it is almost two weeks, the violators are yet to be booked.
2. Failure of Justice: Rights, feelings and peace of the peaceful place (Dambulla) its community and the sanctity of the Mosque and the Kovil is violated and yet the perpetrators are deemed above law. A clear evidence of inoperability of the justice system in this case. Though there are rules in the statute, application is evidently discriminatory.
3. Failure to protect the Constitution: Buddhism is the state religion and it is protected by the state as enshrined in the constitution. The non Buddhists in the country accepts this without reservation on the understanding that Buddhism being a philosophy of humanity would not be discriminatory upon them and therefore their religion and their institutions will have protection under Buddhism as a state religion. The state’s failure to protect Buddhism is evident by their incredulous silence to condemn this un-Buddhist act done in the name of Buddhism violating all principles of moral and legal limits. This silence possibly tarnishes the image of Buddhism in Sri Lanka and abroad by implicitly condoning a wrongful act by failing to be just and the failure to protect the interests of all citizens without discrimination.
4. Failure of the state to assert and allowing non state actors to dominate: In this incidence, the state organs miserably failed to prove their credibility as institutions upon which the citizens can repose their trust. The police failed to prevent wrong doings, the sacred land statute/AGA Office failed to define the physical boundaries of the sacred land, the AGA Office/Pradeshya Sabha calls the Mosque an unauthorised structure for a building pre existing Local Government Planning and Building Regulations which effectively came into practice in the region only since 1978. How many buildings in Dambulla have plans approved by the Local Council and how many are built according to the plan as required by the statute? Why did the AGA/Local Council take a discriminatory stand than find a way to regularise and bring such structures within the statute and diffuse social tension. The state authorities are yet to define their stand based on the available statutes, this shows the extent to which the state is equipped to respond to the suffering of the people. This apathy on the part of state rewards ‘non state actors’ and weakens the state supremacy in administration.
5. Rule of Law versus Rulers’ Law: Though Sri Lanka is a modern state, the strains of feudalism and neo colonial Brown Sahib mentality is still prevalent. The highest and the sacrosanct entity in a nation state is its constitution where the sovereignty of its people is enshrined.   In the day to day life of a citizen one is administered by the rules that govern and not the rulers who govern. The government only governs the people through the constitution and not otherwise.  The constitutional ruler is impersonal and everlasting. The failings of modern Sri Lanka is that we are yet to be governed by rules, instead we are still ruled by rulers who  yet decide outside the framework of law, like the Prime Minister’s decision to relocate the mosque to diffuse tension without giving time for the  possibility of judicial intervention.
6. Failure of the state to protect its image: The role and responsibility of the GOSL is questioned by the people, the parliamentarians, and the International Community about this incident. Incredibly the GOSL is silent and not taking any remedial measures to solve this lawlessness. The frailty of the GOSL to protect the image and credibility of the country and doing nothing undermines credibility both within and without.
7. Threat to the Government of Sri Lanka: Should this incident go unsolved, the extremist forces that unleashed this attack would potentially snowball to capture more grounds in their turf war. This would make situations worse for the GoSL . Such a situation would require more power and resources by the GOSL to quell and would render this contagion to spill over. It is wise to nip this violent extremism in the bud.

Allegiance Elsewhere

There were also comments hinting against my Sri Lankan posture and trying to paint me as a Rajapakse sycophant and ‘West’ basher. It is a citizen’s responsibility to protect the state whilst fighting within it to correct it to deliver the rights of its citizens. One’s allegiance should not go outside the state just because the state is wrong, as when such allegiance goes outside the state, there is propensity for one to turn anti-state and play into external factors inimical to a state.

Today Sri Lanka is a fractured society however unified it pretends to be. The reality is that as noted above, there are blatant violations by many actors (state and non state) and failure to uphold justice, and fair play. This has marginalized many both within and without and hence there are resentments, grudges and ill will against many such actors which makes the allegiance of some eccentric to state. This unwittingly makes the resentful citizens to be bought over by foreign players and use to espouse their goals. The state inaction to rein in law and order is implicitly undermining sovereignty by spawning dissenters and creating conducive conditions to turn to be perfidious.

Conflict Resolution

Emergence of conflict in any society is natural and it is part and parcel of humanity. Therefore no conflict is unique except how such conflict is caused. In a civilised society too conflicts do emerge and the responsibility of the citizens and the state is to diffuse conflicts and reinstate justice, fair play and bring normalcy and cordiality to seek peace amongst its peoples.  Disquiet, conflict and violence does no good to either to the state or the citizens and therefore it is a right and a duty of responsibility to diffuse conflict and ease tensions in society.

When conflicts emerge the first victim is the truth. During such times even the paragons of virtue ally with falsehood as was seen in Dambulla. Therefore saner and responsible citizens do have a duty to mankind to speak the truth even if such truth is against their own interest. This is how civilised nations are built upon and not on the basis of ‘might is right’ and take advantage of opportunities. Any capitalization of the opportunity for short term and parochial gains would cause long term damages to society as have happened before. These challenges are opportunities to prove how civilized one is in the way in which truth, justice and fair play are administered in society and not to boast of history but to be correct now in flesh and blood.

Deplorably, some of the comments advocated ‘a pot calling the kettle black’ paradigm and was fuelling exacerbation of this conflict by citing irrelevantly. These clearly display their ignorance and  insidious intents.

The way this crisis in Dambulla is handled is a test to see how credibly the Sri Lankan state and its people depart from chauvinism to a more inclusive and just society.

Unfortunately, Sri Lankans are yet to come out of their ‘mind set created by others for them’ and discover their ‘own by pooling all the positives from all religions and communities’ to build this nation as a model for others as an astute and sustainable nation.

• Dambulla Mosque attack: Is there a hidden hand?
• Photo essay: Freedom, Religion, and Dambulla
• Is Dambulla, Babri Masjid Redux?
• Deeds of mosque in Dambulla and photos of damage: How is this structure illegal? (UPDATED)
• Bigoted monks and militant mobs: Is this Buddhism in Sri Lanka today?

A lion carries a dead wild boar in his mouth. He is walking through the grasslands, victorious after the hunt. On the dead boar is a crudely imprinted crescent moon and star.  This is an image found in a Sinhala Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/pages/මාගේ-හෘද-සාක්ෂිය/351343628228268) that among other things compares Sri Lankan Muslims to wild boar, puppies (the Sinhala wording is cruder) and crows. The Facebook page has more than 5,000 likes and increases daily. It is only one of many that stalks cyberspace. This is Sri Lanka in 2012!

We are recovering from 26 years of war but it seems like some of the citizens of this country want to be at perpetual war. The latest fracas is the ‘Dambulla incident’  where a mob led by Buddhist monks of the area are agitating for what they call an illegal structure masquerading as a mosque to be torn down as it contaminates the sacred Buddhist area of the Dambulla temple. It is news to me that other places of religious worship can be considered as less sacred or contamination to a sacred area. But such is their complaint. Soon after this incident was made public, I had a conversation on the topic with a good and close friend of mine who is Buddhist. She is a decent woman, a devout woman. She is charitable and generous and kind but, and here is the surprise: she sees nothing wrong with the incidents of violence involving Buddhist monks. Regrettably she is not alone. Much as we would like to think that those who perpetrate Buddhist chauvinism are in the minority, it is not so. Increasingly, I see Buddhists who believe and engage in violence and un-Buddhistic behavior, trumpeting their achievement as champions of Buddhism.

Let us start with our constitution. I have often wondered how a country can claim to be Buddhist. In my mind it is technically impossible to apply Buddhist values  and survive as a nation in the world as it is. It would be an ideal world indeed to look forward to the time when all countries will be able to say they implement the values of Buddhism and the world will be a much better place for it. But for now, in todays time and place a country may need an army, may  need to engage in battle if  required to do so – both instances that we have experienced. But isn’t that against true Buddhist principles? Then I have wondered how Buddhist monks  who have been charged with drug possession, sexual misconduct, rape, treasure hunting, temple pillaging, murder, violence… the list of offences goes on and on which in itself is astounding,  continue to wear the robes, manage temples and call themselves Buddhist monks. Is there no authority that can expel disgraceful Buddhist monks? In addition, I am astonished that citizens who call themselves Buddhist, who are devout, pray, meditate and do pooja, attend sil, listen to bana and pirith, continue to condone  violence in the name of Buddhism by agreement or staying silent. I just don’t understand.

In my mind, Buddhism is one of the supreme non-violent movements of the world. The Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path (right vision, right emotion, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right awareness, and right meditation) the Five Precepts (do not kill, do not steal, do not engage in false speech, do not engage in sexual misconduct, do not take intoxicants) and the Threefold Way (ethics, meditation, wisdom) are meant to be applied in daily life. How is this in any way possible or compatible with the violence and injustice committed in the name of Buddhism? Bernard Faure, Professor of Religious Studies of the University of Stanford, has this to say:

Which brings me to the question: What are the Chief Prelates of all the Nikayas doing? What is the state doing? If silence is acquiescence, then it appears that the powers that be – both religious and state, endorse the violence, the persecuting of minority communities and sending them the clear message of being second class citizens.

But let us go back to Dambulla. In  disputed cases there are legal avenues to pursue  to rectify the situation. If the mosque is illegal and needs to be demolished, there is a legal mechanism in place that will achieve it. Why the need for violence? For the destruction? For the barbaric and shocking behavior of both monks and men?

War is not unknown in the Buddhist world. In history, there has been what is termed  ‘Buddhist wars’ especially in China, Tibet and Japan. Most of them were begun as a cleansing process to rid threats to its very existence and fought in the name of liberation. Yet, of all the great religions and ideologies Buddhism remains the most pacific – a trait that is increasingly rare in the violent world of today. There are a number of verses from the Buddha’s sermons that support this:

In times of war
give rise in yourself to the mind of compassion,
Helping living beings,
abandon the will to fight. Kutadanta Sutta, (Digha Nikaya V)

Another is:

Even if thieves carve you limb from limb with a double-handed saw, if you make your mind hostile you are not following my teaching. Kamcupamasutta, Majjhima-Nikkaya 1 – 28-29

I am not a Buddhist, but I appreciate the Buddhist ethos. And I wonder: if the behavior of violent Buddhism is puzzling to me, why isn’t it to you? One of the advantages Sri Lanka has is its multi-religious, multi-ethnic population. It is proof that for thousands of years the people of this country, whatever their religion and beliefs, have been open and welcoming , even embracing different cultures and people. It has made our country vibrant, rich in traditions and a truly wonderful place to live in. So we should be concerned when some elements in our modern history want to change that feature. In fact I have noticed intolerance apparent in all our communities not only the Sinhala Buddhist community. Perhaps it is a reflection of the times we live in but this is something we need to avoid. And if it happens we have to speak out.

I leave you with a favourite modern story that to me  embodies the quintessence of Buddhism:

A Vietnam veteran was baffled by Vietnamese Buddhist monk, Thich Nhat Hanh’s unswerving dedication to non-violence. The veteran in an attempt to question the monk, asked him if someone wiped out all the Buddhists in the world and if the monk was the last one left would he not try to kill the person who was trying to kill him and in doing so save Buddhism. Thicht Nhat Hanh answered: It would be better to let him kill me. If there is any truth to Buddhism and the Dharma it will not disappear from the face of the earth, but will reappear when seekers of truth are ready to rediscover it. In killing I would be betraying and abandoning the very teachings I would be seeking to preserve. So it would be better to let him kill me and remain true to the spirit of the Dharma.

• The transformation of Buddhism in Sri Lanka
• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• Akon and Buddhism in Sri Lanka: A Response to Bhikkhu K. Tanchangya
• Monks of War – Al-Jazeera on the JHU

When going through the album, make sure to read the captions.

• Groundviews on Twitter and Facebook
• Launch of Groundviews Facebook Fan Page
• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero
• Like Slaves In Jaffna
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)

A week ago, we disgraced ourselves. Racist louts, some in the garb of Buddhist monks, engaged openly in speech and behaviour so violent, even those who led it were forced to suggest later the footage broadcast on TV and now globally viewed on YouTube was doctored.

This was, of course, not the case.

Sri Lanka’s tryst with militant Buddhism is not new. It is the fundamental basis of the JHU, which is today deeply embedded in government. As much as the telegenics of last week’s outrageous violence shocked many, it is this very behaviour that most temple-going Buddhists in Sri Lanka have nurtured over decades, and continue to unquestioningly venerate when they support, through silence, word or deed, this violence.

Much remains to be said by the President, government and media on Dambulla. Not so long ago, a journalist – J.S. Tissainayagam – was jailed, tortured and humiliated for writing the government thought incited communal hatred. No such action will even be contemplated against the Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero.  The Ven. Thero joins the ranks of good Buddhists like Mervyn Silva, openly protected, supported and championed by the Rajapaksa regime. Sadly, it is not over Dambulla’s priapic priests that we must be most ashamed about, but our President, his family and government.

There is some hope. On Thursday, fearing more violence, I created a simple blog for people to register their opposition to the soi-disant Buddhism on display in Dambulla. The responses, available online, are a humbling counterfoil to a saffron rage, and showcase a Sri Lanka that’s extremely diverse and refreshingly different. Excerpts from a few I reproduce below. There are literally hundreds more online.

Read them, and I urge you, add to them.

I am Mohamed Niyas, a Sri Lankan Muslim, professionally a Teacher. I respect all religions and beliefs in this country and teach the same to all my students of all ethnic groups. I was shocked how can the monks who always preach saamaya, maithriya, karunaawa like great philosophies could lead such a racist mob in Dambulla. I feel relieved to know many of Buddhist people in Sri Lanka condemned this violence.

fahima7s: This is the first time the violence towards other faiths has been filmed so vividly. Many churches and kovils have also been bombed and burnt in the past. What do these Buddhist monks want? Don’t they know that our culture is enriched with other faiths? We have already lost a lot of our Burghers and Tamils and we are impoverished by it. Even if we build highways and prosper economically, we will still be poor. Cannot Buddhism flourish without the Buddhist monks protecting it?

Iranganie H. Fernando: Have these perpetrators of this incident of shameful violence learnt nothing from the terrible experiences of the past 30 years? All religions teach love & compassion to all beings and respect for each other… there must be action & strategies to prevent such abominable behaviour. I am a 73-year-old woman who grew up in a mainly peaceful society in pre & post independent Sri Lanka… Certainly these horrific acts of violence are not in my name!

Maithri: During the war, the government tried to show the world and the country that SL is a nation of cultural and religious diversity. And I believed in it, and to an extent that is still true. But this whole thing has just gone to show that the government don’t care about that unless it is in their own interest. Shameful behaviour from them, and members of the sangha who should really know better.

My name is Chhimi Tenduf-La. I am not Sri Lankan but I am embarrassed. I am proud to live in this amazing country and, for the most part, I think you would be hard pressed to find nicer people than Sri Lankans anywhere in the world. Most foreigners would say this (except, to be honest, when driving). The actions of this mob, and the official response which as good as sanctioned it, is very sad indeed. We can only be proud of the brave woman in the video who stood up to these bullies. She is a Sri Lankan. Not really sure what the other people are.

David Blacker: Some of us fought, killed, died, were crippled, and watched our friends die beside us so that this country would remain united and free. We did not do it so that another bunch of violent extremists could divide our country again in the name of religion; nor for you, the government, to support it.

###

Published first in the print edition of The Nation, 29 April 2012.

• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• Monks of War – Al-Jazeera on the JHU
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero
• The Mind of Compassion: Buddhism and Violence

A week ago, a violent a mob of about 2,000 Sinhalese, including a group of Buddhist monks led by the Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero, stormed and vandalised a mosque in Dambulla. The mosque was declared an illegal structure, but it is unclear how this far this is accurate.

The shameful behaviour and expression employed by the Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero, along with the monks he led and the crowd of thugs is not remotely associated with or reflective of the philosophy of the Dhamma, the teachings of the Buddha, or the way in which a Buddhist monk is supposed to behave and speak. Many online have already expressed their dismay and deep concern over the actions of a few, placing Sri Lanka in the media spotlight again for all the wrong reasons.

We have a choice, but time is running out. Speak up. Sign up to this online statement and say that this violence was not in your name, and that more calls to violence are futile. Renounce a fringe lunacy and resist extremism. By putting your name below, you are opposing mob violence and bigotry as ways to resolve disputes.

If we have to fight, let’s fight to keep Sri Lanka free of extremists who threaten not only what they seek to destroy, but also who and what they claim to represent. Add your name, and please pass the message on.

Read the full statement and sign up in English here, in Tamil here and in Sinhala here.

• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero
• The middle finger to the middle-path in Sri Lanka
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• Bigoted monks and militant mobs: Is this Buddhism in Sri Lanka today?
• Monks of War – Al-Jazeera on the JHU

A Buddhist monk flashes a mosque in Dambulla. Screen grab from News 1st TV footage. 

The events in Dambulla over the past week, when Buddhist monks led the storming of a mosque, bear chilling resemblance to events in Ayodhya, India, on and around the 6^th December 1992, when mobs lead by Hindu fundamentalist clergy demolished the Babri Masjid. The consequences of the events in the run-up to the demolition and its aftermath are still being felt across India today.

The similarities between Ayodhya 1992 and Dambulla 2012 go well beyond frenzied crowds trying to storm a mosque egged on by saffron clad clergy. The reference to this act as shramadaanya sounds disturbingly akin to kar seva, a euphemism coined by Hindu fundamentalists for an otherwise unholy act. Images of a monk apparently exposing himself to the mosque in a vulgar frenzy underlines the same deeply macho, misogynist militancy that Hindu fundamentalism has embodied in India, paving the way for the brutal sexual violence against hundreds of Muslim women in Gujarat in 2002.

The arguments that the mosque in question was illegal, that it stood on sacred grounds, that it was not new or not used regularly etc., are all well rehearsed and nor will this be the last time they will be heard, with respect to a mosque, a kovil, or a church for that matter, as past and present are rewritten. The call to Sinhala race and blood, the brazen defiance of rule of law and the eventual capitulation of the government also bear ominous similarities.

Needless to say, one can point to many differences between Ayodhya and Dambulla. The former was central to a massive nation-wide mobilisation while the latter was far more localized, though arguably reflective of a larger nation-wide trend. No doubt the Sri Lankan government will claim that the mosque is being ‘relocated’ not ‘demolished’. And there are many others too but all that apart, there is no mistaking the basic message and nor should anyone be under the illusion as to which side the Sri Lankan state stands with. The events in Dambulla, especially the alacrity with which the state consented to a chauvinist clergy, will no doubt further embolden militant Sinhala-Buddhist fundamentalists, already well fed by the Rajapakse regime on a heady cultural-nationalist diet.

The rising tide of Sinhala-Buddhist fundamentalism in a society already brutalised by war and ethnic cleavages, coupled with a resurgent militarisation that is undermining democratic institutions and restricting political freedoms, poses huge challenges to Sri Lanka. In a post-war context, this will leave nascent social movements, progressive political forces and a section of politically engaged NGOs, all already hounded by the state, struggling more than ever to build precariat and proletariat solidarities across ethnic and religious divides.  A fractured Tamil and Muslim political society, long hostage to identity politics from the inside, will possibly dig deeper still and render no favours. Precious little can be expected from the middle and upper classes anyway, already well on their way to being wooed by the cleaner streets and well-trimmed parks of Colombo, all thanks to the military of course, and lop-sided economic development.

If the recent history in India is anything to go by, events in Dambulla are a cause for alarm. Ayodhya 1992 came to pass, despite Indian civil society continuing to harbour hope (alongside deep fears) that the Babri Masjid would survive, that India’s institutions were strong enough to withstand that test. However, civil society could do little of significance to even stop what followed the demolition. Worse, ten years later Gujarat happened. The events in Dambulla may not have cost lives, like the many still unaccounted for tragedies in the final stages of the war. Yet, the consequences of what it portends are likely to be as far-reaching and as damaging to the wider polity and social fabric.

• Photo essay: Freedom, Religion, and Dambulla
• Deeds of mosque in Dambulla and photos of damage: How is this structure illegal? (UPDATED)
• Bigoted monks and militant mobs: Is this Buddhism in Sri Lanka today?
• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero

The Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero, one of the key figures in the on-going tensions in Dambulla over the presence of a mosque and kovil near his Temple, perhaps in response to the public outcry against the violence instigated by him, has told the BBC that TV footage that showed monks engaged in violence – including one monk disrobing and exposing himself to the mosque – were fake.

The Mahanayaka of the Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero told BBC Sandeshaya that he only led a ‘peaceful and democratic protest against illegal constructions’.

He maintained that no violence was used.

“Videos that portrayed the protest as violent were technically manipulated,” said the Mahanayaka thero who also heads a media outlet.

Let us for the sake of argument not disbelieve or dismiss what Inamaluwe Sumangala thero says. Musāvāda veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi, or refraining from incorrect or false speech, is after all one of the five Noble Precepts. Let us believe that TV broadcasts of the violent mob were doctored.

There is however, a slight problem. Rangiri Dambulu chapter Inamaluwe Sumangala thero is the Director General of the private radio station Rangiri Radio.

Rangiri Radio also has a Facebook fan page. As it notes, “Rangiri Sri Lanka is a radio channel that has been inaugurated with the intention of promoting the Buddhist cultural values and development of personality including aeasthetics values.”

On both the homepage of the Rangiri Radio website, and prominently, at the time of writing, on the Facebook page of Rangiri Radio, the following video appears. The well crafted introduction and end credits suggest that this is a professional production, featured on Rangiri Radio with the awareness if not also the blessings of Inamaluwe Sumangala thero, who also appears in it.

If one glosses over the racist chants, the video footage fully supports Inamaluwe Sumangala thero’s submissions that he only led a peaceful and democratic protest. Up until, that is, around a minute and twenty seconds into the video. 1.27 to around 2.20 showcase the most violent moments of the mob, where you don’t need to understand the derogatory, racist expressions in Sinhala to observe just how far the monks and the mob are from being peaceful, democratic or indeed, Buddhist in expression and behaviour.

In light of the divide between Inamaluwe Sumangala thero’s submission to the BBC and what really was said and done, we wonder if there is a more righteous sangha in Sri Lanka or abroad who can urgently remind the monks in Dambulla about the first and fourth Noble Precepts in particular?

• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• The middle finger to the middle-path in Sri Lanka
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• The Mind of Compassion: Buddhism and Violence
• Monks of War – Al-Jazeera on the JHU

Groundviews was sent a copy of what we were told was the deed of the mosque at the centre of an on-going controversy in Dambulla, Sri Lanka. We were also sent photos of the damage and vandalism wrought by the mob violence a few days ago.

We’ve uploaded the document to Scribd as a PDF, and the high resolution, original scanned images of the deed to Flickr. Both are embedded below, along with four photos of vandalism to copies of the Quran and the cupboards in which they were stored.

Groundviews has already flagged that the basis upon which the PM, in a televised submission, said that the mosque was an illegal construction is hugely suspect.

In a video of a community meeting uploaded to YouTube two days ago, in the presence of Senior Minister for Urban Affairs A H M Fowzie and the Assistant Government Agent, there is a discussion in Sinhala about, inter alia, the legality of the mosque. The discussion on the mosque’s location and legality starts around 6.20 into the video. at around 7.50, the AGA is directly asked whether she thinks the mosque is an unauthorised structure. Seconds before, the discussion was about the fact the mosque had been there for decades. The AGA unequivocally notes that the structure is unauthorised. When asked why she thinks so, she says nowhere in the AGA’s office is the structure recorded as a mosque. When the crowd informs her that this is not necessary given the law in Sri Lanka, she responds that she doesn’t even have a copy of the records that some in the crowd say have been for years with the central government.

From around 8.40 to around 9.30, a lawyer present at the meeting politely and patiently runs through the relevant laws around registering a mosque, reiterating that the AGA’s office is not the location, under the law, that it should be registered with. The AGA persist and says that her office has no record of a mosque or kovil in the area. A person from the crowd retorts that while this may be the case, it is irrelevant under the applicable laws. In response however, the AGA simply notes that there is no record of a mosque or kovil in her records.

Given the exchange above, we publish the deeds for wider public scrutiny in the hope that informed persons, including lawyers more familiar with the registration of places of worship, and in particular, mosques, are able to shed light on why a structure that has, by multiple accounts of residents in the area, been present and used for decades, and ostensibly for which the deeds are also available, is now considered illegal and unauthorised.

5:53pm: Pursuant to the vibrant debate on Twitter (follow on @groundviews) over the original post, Groundviews has just been forwarded copies of what we are told is the original deed, and other relevant documentation over the land for the extension of the mosque. This documentation was kindly sent to us from the office of Reyyaz Salley.

• Sharing a common god: The Sivasubramaniam Kovil in Slave Island
• A bizarre polling card: Evidence of a flawed election?
• What must it be like to live behind these Kovil gates?
• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero

Image courtesy BBC

The storming of the Dambulla Mosque on Friday the 20^th April and chasing away of the Muslim worshippers attending Friday prayers by a mob led by Buddhist priests is epoch making in modern Sri Lankan history. The majority of the people of all communities are shocked and incensed by the way Buddhist priests lead this violent and destructive mob against the Dambulla Mosque.

According to authorities this mosque has been in existence since 1964 and built with the support of the people of the area and the Viharadhipathy, the Chief Incumbent of the historic Dambulla Rajamahavihara. Deplorably the pretext used by the mob led by the Monk is that this mosque is built on sacred land. This casts aspersion upon the goodwill of the people and the then Chief Incumbent of the Dambulla Rajamavihara as lesser Buddhists than the latter to permit the Muslim countrymen to worship in the place they domicile/work.  This raises several questions about the authenticity of the Buddhist Monks who participated in this about their true Buddhist credentials.

The Buddhist –Muslim relation in Sri Lanka is more than ten centuries old and this bond has hitherto been not broken despite the 500 years of colonial rule, the post colonial period and beyond. The Muslims did not succumb to the divide and rule politics of the colonial powers and they distinctly identified those that are alien from those that are their countrymen. This is the reason why Muslims did not become surrogate of the colonial masters and therefore bore the brunt of suffering with the majority Buddhists during the colonial period. This is because Buddhist –Muslim relationship is not built on opportunities or marriages of convenience but of sincere understanding and goodwill, time tested by centuries of coexistence. This is the reason why Muslims stood as a buffer against the division of the country inspite of the bulk of them being Tamil speaking, therefore they got battered and butchered when they were praying in the mosques by the LTTE and still, more than 100,000 Muslim IDPs are living in squalid conditions and are deprived of their livelihood and domicile in spite of the end of war, which, neither the GOSL nor the International community shows pity on them. The reason why this bond is stronger is because both these communities strongly believe in the unhindered sovereignty of the Sri Lanka state. A cursory glance at the history of Sri Lanka would testify why the colonial invaders found the Buddhists and Sri Lankan Muslims as their enemy and not otherwise.

Dambulla mosque attack is not a yardstick to measure the strength of the Muslim-Buddhist bond and it is not going to be broken just because some believe that few frictions here and there would weaken both communities by polarization. This attack is not against the Muslims, this is an attack against the sovereignty of the state judging by the way these are emerging. Since Buddhists cannot be taken head-on, the strategy is possibly to polarize the Muslims and the Buddhists so that would create justifications to paint the majority Buddhist community as racist to achieve the grand plans of those who are pulling strings.

Prelude to Geneva Resolution

With the end of the war and elimination of the LTTE, India and the western powers lost leverage in Sri Lanka. India lost its geopolitical spindle and so has the West. Ever since both entities were on the lookout for regaining leverage in Sri Lankan affairs and the hype created by the Channel 4 and the lackadaisical response of the GOSL to the suffering of the Tamil community gave them the opening. In the prelude to the Geneva Resolutions too, the Muslims played a distinct role to safeguard the sovereignty of the state from interference and interventions.  The Muslims staunchly sided with the GOSL not because they were against their Tamil brethren but because the sovereignty of Sri Lanka is a shared responsibility.  The ministers, deputy ministers and their bandwagon went with fanfare and squabbled upon their return. This shrouded the catalytic role played by the Muslims. Sheik Rizvi Mufthi and Sheik A.C.Agar Mohammed, both senior Islamic scholars from the All Ceylon Jamiyyathul Ulema toured Geneva and influenced and invoked Muslim country representatives to vote for Sri Lanka at the resolution. These are unofficial ambassadors who volunteered to save the sovereignty of Sri Lanka from being tarnished.

Those who harbour ill will against our country know that Buddhist-Muslim bond is formidable and would be a deterrent to their schemes and therefore polarizing both these communities would be the first step. Attack against the Muslims should be viewed in this light. The more we are divided external interventions would become stronger.

Nuwara Eliya Mosque opening by the President

President Mahinda Rajapakshe set a precedent in modern Sri Lanka by opening a Mosque in Nuwara Eliya on the 11^th April 2012 . This is the first time in Sri Lanka’s modern history that the Head of the Nation a devout Buddhist inaugarated the opening a Mosque for the Muslims. It is also noteworthy in the President’s speech, that he pointedly mentioned that   “the Muslims have always been friends of the Sinhalese historically as well as today and that they have been defending the country together with the Sinhalese”. This is a testimony to the Buddhist – Muslim bond which some can feel disturbed about. Definitely this visible emerging bonding relation between two communities is an eyesore to those who harbour ill will against Sri Lanka and they would go to all means to polarize its people.

Extremism

Extremism is not a part of the religion of the Muslims or Buddhists in Sri Lanka or the world over. Widespread extremism in modern societies is a modern phenomenon. Extremism is a by product of seeking change at an accelerated pace with emotional overdrive or is an intelligent manipulation of the gullible. Studies indicate that in post colonial Muslim countries, extremism is identified as the product of the Western or proxy intelligence agencies’ manipulations.  This was done to hinder gradual transition from post colonialism to nation building in their own terms and choice. So that nation building would take a rational and evolutionary process and result in formulating a peaceful and stable society. Such a stable and peaceful society would effectively discard colonial vestiges and build nations based on their values and ethos. Extremism is an anathema to progress and hinders stable growth of a society. The post colonial societies are not immune from this scourge and in particular Muslim countries are the most spawned to keep them divided. Extremism does no good to a society. It breeds conflict and violence and acts as a barrier to gradual progress and inhibits sustainable development in society. It makes society unstable and contributes to failed state conditions. Religious extremism of any hue or colour is not a positive contributor; instead it destroys the very religion it represents and polarises societies. Such societies will be unstable and vulnerable to external interventions.

Fortunately in Sri Lanka religious extremism from all religious groups is a rare commodity and violent extremism was non-existent. It was only chauvinism that had notoriety in Sri Lanka. The debilitating three decades separatist war brought sense to our leaders about the need for nation building which we should have embarked upon immediate to the British exit from the shores of Sri Lanka and which we didn’t. With the end of the war and decimation of the LTTE, time was ripe for nation building. This includes physical building of the state as a sustainable and stable system and mending hearts and minds of all people across the country and building a single nation of diverse cultures, beliefs and values. Unfortunately at this stage Sri Lanka as a majority Buddhist country is experiencing emergence of Buddhist extremism. The timing of this emergence raises many questions of why it did not emerge during the war and why not immediately after independence from Britain in 1948? Why should it emerge now and who are behind such an emergence?

What national benefits does the country get by Buddhists destroying mosques?  Are they going to increase our GDP or Gross Domestic Happiness? Are we not driving our motherland to another abyss? It is very doubtful that any sane Buddhist would embark on such a suicidal mission at a time the sovereignty of the state is questioned and with a partner community that has an asymmetrical advantage to grant to the Sinhalese. This creates suspicions about genuineness of the group that attacked the Dambulla Mosque. Whether they are for a parochial gain or are mercenaries working for agents of a foreign master should be probed into.

Failed State Phenomenon

Sri Lanka is turning out to be a lawless country and a failed state phenomenon. The  Dambulla Mosque and similar incidences where mobs led or instigated by Buddhist monks goes unpunished for violating all the legal norms and public decency and the victims are victimised by the state by not providing legitimate protection a state ought to provide its citizens. This is a distinct failure on the part of the state to protect its citizens and their assets from these marauding mobs. If the state continuously fails to provide security to its citizens and their assets, where can the citizens seek protection from?

The Government is caving into extremism; in this case of Dambulla Mosque which is existing since 1964, the GOSL seems weak and has approved the relocation of the mosque to a new site. Is this the right answer, aren’t they setting precedent which would drive score of mosques to seek new sites and create commotion all over the country? Such a move would certainly play into the hands of those who are fomenting trouble in the country using the mobs as their mercenaries to cause division amongst the people and open the country for external interventions.

Would this be a threat to the GOSL?

In the post 9/11 world, the West is in the process of restructuring the architecture of power and global controls. This revivification and realignments are today achieved through some NGOs and Dissenting Groups (DGs) in societies amongst other tools. Therefore the West and regional powers are strengthening DGs & NGOs and surrogating them. At times they provoke the surrogates to foment conflicts within societies and use such artificially generated conflicts as pretexts to intervene in nation states in the guise of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). There are ample evidences in Egypt, Libya and Syria proving the fact of how DGs were used as de-stabilizing forces in countries followed up by Western intervention of some sort. In this scenario, GOSL impotence to uphold law and order and failure to bring quick and effective control of mob pressure and violence at the incipient stage is very dangerous. Such mob pressure if let loose would possibly snowball into a mammoth mob almost threatening the GOSL and swarm and immobilize them as happened in Egypt and other countries.

In light of this, it is recognised how spurious the claim of those who attacked the Dambulla Mosque. Sri Lanka as a historically Buddhist country, any part at any time can become ‘Sacred Land’ and conflict can emerge anytime anywhere. These spurious claims do not help the living to live as peaceful citizens but disturb the stability of the country eternally. This inhibits nation building and peaceful co-existence.

Taking note of these facts, the GOSL should never allow anyone to take law into their hands.  Maintaining law and order and civil administration should be the prime prerogative of the GOSL and the state machinery unless the GOSL wishes to abdicate their authorities to the mobs and stamp Sri Lanka as a failed state.

• Is Dambulla, Babri Masjid Redux?
• Dambulla Mosque Attack: A Litmus Test of a Nation in Transition from Chauvinism to Civility
• TMVP in same dustbin as LTTE in the past?
• Not In Our Name: Against religious extremism in Sri Lanka
• Photo essay: Freedom, Religion, and Dambulla

As noted by Raashid Riza, the Multimedia Editor of The Platform,

Last Friday a mob of about 2,000 Sinhalese, led by a group of Buddhist monks, stormed into a mosque in the historical city of Dambulla. They caused disturbances so severe that Friday prayers had to be cancelled. Reports suggest that the mosque had been hurled at with petrol bombs the night before, causing minor damage, and security forces were deployed to control the situation. The targeting of the Muslim community was instigated by a group of racist Sinhalese individuals, consisting largely of hooligans, who were motivated by the uproar and attention such an act would create, rather than by any identifiable ideology.

News channels have since broadcast footage from the incident. It is extremely disturbing, and warrants attention. Since the content is in Sinhala, we offer rough translations of the most disquieting sentiments.

00:47: Buddhist monk in orange robe: “The Divisional Secretary promised that on Monday, which is to say in two days, there will be a meeting at 3pm to take a decision on this matter.”

1:15: Buddhist monk in brown robe: “This is how the written promise came. Listen carefully. 2011.4.20. This is a historic day for us. In the Kingdom of Dambulla, in the absence of a Sinhala King, when there was no King… the Head Prelate, led by Ven. Jayaratana in front of the Buddhist clergy we will come to a verdict. This verdict is not just for Dambulla, but all of Sri Lanka… We are number one in self-governance. Because of this, against the courts, without the President, this written promise is a first, a victory for those who love the race (hela), have Sinhala blood, and are Buddhists. This is what it says. There are reports of an illegal Muslim mosque near the Rangiri Dambulu Temple. That a huge swathe of people were part of a protest is also reported. After 1.11pm no Muslim, for whatever reason – you can’t even go to the toilet – (derisive laughter from crowd) I promise to the Sinhala Buddhist people who love the country. Signed – is he Muslim? (derisive laughter from crowd) Senior Police Superintendent… With this victory, we temporarily depart. To be continued with your pooja”.

3.20 to 6.20 features Sri Lanka’s Prime MInister speaking about the incident, which he said he first got to know about from the newspapers. He notes that for around 500 Muslims in the Dambulla area, the contested mosque is the closest place of worship they have. What’s quite bizarre about the PM’s statement is that he notes (3.19 to around 3.36) that the Dambulla Temple grounds have been declared a sacred area by the Town and Country Planning Ordinance. But as Namini Wijedasa notes in Lakbima News,

The government last week withdrew an amendment to the Town and Country Planning Ordinance that if passed would have given the Minister of Buddha Sasana and Religious Affairs vast powers over any private property in the country.

The Town and Country Planning (Amendment), a copy of which was obtained by LAKBIMAnEWS, consists of just eight clauses. Legal practitioners described the bill as ‘bizarre.’ It was presented to parliament close on the heels of another controversial law–the Revival of Underperforming and Underutilised Assets bill–under which the government acquired overnight the assets of 37 private sector companies.

Thus, the illegality of the mosque, going by the PM’s definition on TV, is very suspect. In fact, Deputy Minister of Women’s Affairs A.L.M. Hizbullah notes that the mosque is over 50 years old,

..If there is any dispute, it must be discussed and seen to. Surrounding the mosque and staging a protest only disturbs the harmony in this country that has been restored after a 30 year war… I have prayed at this mosque as early as 1985 when I was still in university. There have been no issues in the past. Only recently have there been problems when the number of people coming into the mosque on Fridays for Jummah prayers increased.

In the clip above, at around 4.47 the PM says that there is no provision for the erection of temples belonging to other religions within the land owned by Buddhist temples. Smiling, he wonders aloud why there was a sudden inflammation of disharmony around the mosque in Dambulla. Noting the government’s foremost responsibility to protect Buddhism, at around 5.36 the PM notes that the government’s responsibility is also to ensure that people of other religions can fairly observe their own religious practices. He ends by stressing the need for religious harmony and peaceful co-habitation, and flags the need to follow the tenets of each religion.

However, a longer clip of the segment first broadcast on TV suggests that some leading members of the Buddhist clergy in Dambulla are, clearly, not even remotely Buddhist in thought, expression and action.

There are members of the Sangha engaged in mob violence. There is a member of the Sangha who disrobes, jumps up and down and exposes himself, in public, against the mosque. Others break down the entrance of the mosque. A Chief Prelate from the Dambulla Temple suggests that the mob is a shramadaanaya, and that destroying the mosque is something that they should in fact be helped by the government.

At around 3.47 in this video, there is a particularly chilling exchange between one of the Chief Prelates of the Dambulla Temple and a Hindu resident of the area. The female resident, who is not once dis-respectful in her submissions to the Prelate, says that from when she was small, she had worshipped at a Kovil in the area. The Prelate’s immediate answer is whether she is referring to the 1800′s. In a menacing Sinhala idiom that loses a lot of its original violence in translation, the Chief Prelate threatens to either remove the Kovil, or have it removed along with the homes of the Hindu residents, noting that they are all there illegally. The Chief Prelate notes, through a Sinhala adage, that not only are the crows attempting to fly over their heads, they are now attempting to enter the nest as well – a clear reference to the Hindus and Muslims in the areas. The woman assures the Chief Prelate, in a very deferent expression, that there is nothing for him to fear about their worship. However, the Prelate’s answer is again menacing in Sinhala, noting that she can take her gods wherever they want to, but away from the sacred ground of the Temple.

The whole exchange and clip is sickening.

As Concerned Citizen in Spirtuality, Religion and Human Conflict avers,

In Sri Lanka, we can also see the negative impact of nationalizing Buddhism as a state religion and the obligation of the state to give it primacy of place over all other religions and foster its practice as required by the Constitution. The politicization of Buddhism favours the majority Sinhalese as it happens to be practiced only by Sinhalese in Sri Lanka and therefore marginalizes all other ethnic/religious minorities, particularly the largest minority group, the Tamils which has contributed to the ethnic conflict. Although the conflict culminated in a war resulting in the successful decimation of the extremist terrorist movement by the state, it has given rise to fanatical Buddhist supremacy which is intolerant of other creeds.

In a Twitter conversation with Dinouk Colombage (@Dinoukc), a journalist with the Sunday Leader newspaper, he notes that according to reports he has received, people of the Dambulla area are ashamed at the behaviour of the Buddhist clergy.

tweeted:

Forgetting and moving on, however, is easier said than done when mob violence, outright racism and violent expression are so closely associated with the practice of Buddhism in Sri Lanka. Late last year, a similar mob also led by Buddhist monks destroyed another Muslim place of worship. Photos of the incident show Police just standing by, and a green flag with Islamic iconography being burnt. Mervyn Silva, a senior government Minister whose public record of violence is well documented and is protected by no less than the ruling family, openly threatens to maim and kill human rights defenders and, literally, in the same breath says he is a good Sinhala Buddhist. Some of these statements were made in a leading temple in Colombo, with members of the Buddhist clergy present, who went on to bless the Minister.

Positively frightening Facebook groups that go unnoticed in mainstream discourse because the content is completely in Sinhala demonstrate the fringe lunacy that drives Sinhala-Buddhist extremism. Each of these group have over 4,000 fans, and by the looks of it, are extremely active and influential. Both feature incredibly inflammatory content over the Dambulla incident.

From https://www.facebook.com/pages/මාගේ-හෘද-සාක්ෂිය/351343628228268

From https://www.facebook.com/pages/Protect-the-Buddhism-බුදු-දහම-ආරක්ෂාකරමු/318576704821497

Though the denigration of Islam and Muslims in these respective Facebook pages is too outrageous and maniacal to translate, in every single instance, it is justified by way of protecting Buddhism and the motherland (a violently reductionist conflation of maathru and punya bhoomi).

As Raashid Riza’s article goes on to note,

I have seen Facebook and Twitter updates of Muslims visibly upset, as they should be. But the actions of the Muslims should be based on rational thought, accountability and logic, otherwise they will play into the ploys of those who seek to have them driven by their emotions. These communities should be patient and understand that, despite the odds, their interests will be best served in acting within the confines of ethics, morality and legal jurisdiction.

Muslim politicians have to realise these matters and work with the government and the opposition in consolidating their status as a community that has always acted in the best interests of the Sri Lankan state, and continue to enjoy their status as fully integrated Sri Lankan citizens bar none.

Conversely, given damning silence of the Chief Prelates of all the Nikayas over the violence in Dambulla and hate speech in the name of Buddhism, how do you think the Buddha, were he present, would have responded to this frothing chauvinism?

• Ask Ass. Sec. Robert Blake a question on Sri Lanka over Twitter
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• Photo essay: Freedom, Religion, and Dambulla
• Groundviews on Twitter and Facebook
• Fake video and lies: The strange case of Dambulla’s Inamaluwe Sumangala thero

Farming in a sustainable, productive manner has been a hallmark of every human tradition that has endured history. There are many traditional farms existent today that have been productive for hundreds of years. Agrarian societies with long histories, posses the credibility of having sustained themselves successfully under the rigor of survival in a natural world. Having no access to fossil fuel driven technologies, they relied on renewable agriculture based upon energy sources internal to that society or region.  Expansion of farming was constrained by the environment and ecosystem of each area. The advent of fossil fuel changed all this.  The gasoline to power tractors, the biocides and fertilizer salts produced by fossil oil enabled agricultural productivity to transcend environmental constraints.

It was not that movement to fossil fuel went unquestioned, when a display of the new ‘ agricultural tractor’ was done in Sri Lanka around 1933. A race was set up between the traditional buffalo drawn plough and the tractor. Of course the tractor won. When asked what the prime minister, the hon. D.S.Senanayake, thought about this machine. He walked around it with great interest and asked the director of the company “ This is truly a wondrous machine sir, but tell me, where is the dung?” He saw, at that time, the Achilles heel of modern agriculture.

The availability of cheap, subsidized energy encouraged increases in productivity. Agriculture began to be seen as effective production oriented breeding programs coupled with seed and input delivery packages.  Genotypes with optimum performance characteristics for high external input agriculture became the standard for agricultural development.  However, the bioaccumulative nature of these inputs were not considered and resulted in many cases of food and environmental contamination. The first public alarms on the nature of there chemicals, were sounded in the 1960’s with the publication of books such as ‘Silent Spring’. People suddenly became conscious of the effect that the ‘new’ agriculture was having on biodiversity and health, workers became aware of the tremendous risk to human health posed by these new chemicals. It was very much this concern that saw the emergence of ‘organic agriculture’ as a system for the production of clean, safe, healthy food.

Organic Farming, arose from this need, ‘to produce clean food and sustain a healthy environment’.  Organic farming, seeks to re-establish the balance that was maintained between farmers and the land for centuries.

In contrast to the observations of decreasing biodiversity and sustainability in monoculture situations, the pattern of increasing ecological stability with increasing diversity in land use is corroborated by studies of traditional land managers, whose management systems are sustainable and conserve a much higher level of biodiversity than conventional responses.  High levels of diversity in the agricultural field produce positive effects of biological control, spread the risk in marketing and production, as well as distributing labor needs to fit with a single family unit.

The traditional Sri Lankan agroecosystems provided ideal models.  Operating in a sustainable manner for millennia they became co-evolved units, supporting and developing the biodiversity element of the natural landscape, to confer sustainability to the production system. Further, the traditional knowledge of rice production encompassed the whole landscape, its impact felt at the Tank (reservoir), the rice field and its supporting elements.  The value and utility of the traditional knowledge base within the Sri Lankan farming community was also well expressed by the farmers themselves, for example Mr. Mudianse Tennekoon of Nikaweratiya. A traditional rice farmer, he was quick to grasp scientific ideas and could relate them to traditional practices. Although he traveled widely and discoursing modern concepts, he was not a ‘scientist’ and his views were ignored.

Further, In a statement to a national meeting of Sri Lankan farmers, supported by the CGIAR and presented for the Mid Term Meeting of the CGIAR to be held in Brasilia in May 1998. Over 300 delegates issued the following statement:

“We, the farmers of Sri Lanka would like to further thank the CGIAR, for taking an interest in us.  We believe that we speak for all of our brothers and sisters the world over when we identify ourselves as a community who are integrally tied to the success of ensuring global food security.  In fact it is our community who have contributed to the possibility of food security in every country since mankind evolved from a hunter-gather existence.  We have watched for many years, as the progression of experts, scientists and development agents passed through our communities with some or another facet of the modern scientific world.  We confess that at the start we were unsophisticated in matters of the outside world and welcomed this input.  We followed advice and we planted as we were instructed.  The result was a loss of the varieties of seeds that we carried with us through history, often spanning three or more millennia.  The result was the complete dependence of high input crops that robbed us of crop independence.  In addition we farmers producers of food, respected for our ability to feed populations, were turned into the poisoners of land and living things, including fellow human beings.  The result in Sri Lanka is that we suffer from social and cultural dislocation and suffer the highest pesticide related death toll on the planet.  Was this the legacy that you the agricultural scientists wanted to bring to us?  We think not.  We think that you had good motives and intentions, but left things in the hands of narrowly educated, insensitive people.”

In this context, it is sobering to reflect on a favorite quote of the Hon D.S.Senanayake:

“ Agriculture is not merely a way of making money by raising crops; it is not merely an industry or a business; it is essentially a public function or service performed by private individuals for the care and use of the land in the national interest: and the farmers in the course of securing a living and a private profit are custodians of the basis of national life. Agriculture is therefore affected with a clear and unquestionable public interest ….”

However, the goals of modern agriculture discount this public function, based on the premise that the main goal of agriculture is productivity increase, has created a plethora of problems that bedevil all of humanity. The most significant of which are, a loss of sustainability, a loss of biodiversity, a loss of independence, a loss of traditional knowledge and a loss in nutrient breadth. We need a new paradigm in agriculture.

The current developments in agriculture in Sri Lanka run completely contrary to the vision of our founding fathers, contrary to the farmers voice and contrary to scientific knowledge of the impact of agrotoxins on our population. Driven by greed for profits, public interest has been forgotten. In a rejection of the needs of humanity, poisons are sold as agricultural panaceas. In the rejection of a need to become self-sufficient we are being made ever more dependent on external inputs, in a rejection of national needs huge tracts of native forest and handed over to persons and corporations, to be raped and poisioned. The future looks bleak.

Much of the traditional rice agroecosystem has disappeared to pave way for new varieties and management measures. The quantity of toxins sprayed into the environment began to increase and the component of fossil energy in our agricultural production continues to rise. The grim reality of fossil energy based agricultural production is that the price of energy will continue to rise. In order to respond, agricultural productivity should be planned for transitioning towards optimal production with little or no external inputs. Organic Agriculture, Traditional Agriculture and Ecological Agriculture are all approaches to agriculture that have lowered the need for external energy and will benefit the farming community as well as the consumer. A well-planned national program can contribute greatly to a move towards agricultural sustainability.

It is in the context of such a history, that we must address the need to change the current suicidal trend of agriculture in Sri Lanka: As a component of a new paradigm of agricultural development.  There are four critical and fundamentally important goals

1. Reduce the reliance of external inputs to maintain agricultural productivity
2. Increase crop value through better market access
3. Increase the biodiversity of agroecosystems
4. Reduce the threat of non-communicable diseases for the population of Sri Lanka (est. 74% adults in 2011).

If future agriculture aspires to such goals, it is possible to contribute effectively towards sustainable development.   All investment in agriculture should be required adhere to or respect these goals.  This will facilitate the manifestation of a national vision.

A vision is not a set of economic policies that assist in the growth of the global economic system nor should it be an excuse for business or politics to increase their capital. A vision is something that can be shared not only among us but also with the future, a future that can judge the realization of the vision with each passing day.

A land where the rivers flow clean.

A land where its citizens can breathe the air without being poisoned

A land where food security is the cornerstone of development

A land where the wellbeing of the poorest is a national priority

A land where health, education and mobility are vital indicators of progress.

A land where parents are given the opportunity of raising their children without fear.

A land where the values of its people and their traditions are recognized and defended

A land where local business is not penalized in order to attract foreign capital.

A land where ethnic or religious differences do not constitute a barrier to national progress and nor create social tensions

However, national goals such as these are not time bound.  An individual acceptance of the need of such goals are the only thing required, the process to achieve it may take its time depending on how fast these goals achieve public acceptance.

Farming in Sri Lanka is at a crossroads, do we see it merely an industry or a business or is it an essential public function?  If it is also a public function, it must work with the component biodiversity of farms to further the aims of providing humanity with clean, healthy food while at the same time contributing to the goals set out in international conventions such as the CBD, CSD and Kyoto protocol. The standards set for the management of on farm biodiversity must resist the degradation of farm landscapes into broadacre monocultures by maintaining diverse, mixed, production systems, which also provides answers for the current crises brought about by climate change.

• The Loss of Identity: Development and Agriculture
• Agricultural Madness
• Subsidizing Addiction?
• Desertification and Biodiversity
• Right to Food: Ecologically based agriculture

The map above identifies the main flood-affected regions, sites where relief and rescue operations have been conducted, areas prone to landslides and specific locations that are at risk.  Please click on the link below the map to view it on a larger screen. You may click on individual markers for detailed information and zoom in to view the location of specific shelter camps located in the east. Please note that this map is updated as soon as the Editors of Groundviews receive detailed information and reports from the ground.

After our last updated post on 12 January 2011, a Daily Mirror SMS update at 12:50PM reported that there were 21 deaths and over 1,000,000 people affected as a result of the floods and bad weather that continues to devastate these regions. The Eastern Province is the worst affected with over 860,000 flood victims according to the latest figures released by the Disaster Management Centre. There have been widespread reports that it has become increasingly difficult to access specific areas due to submerged or damaged roads and the prevailing weather conditions in the North Central Province and the Eastern Province. The Director General of Disaster Management Centre stated the following in a news report published by the Daily Mirror,

Batticaloa District is worst hit by the floods with 533,000 people belonging to 30,264 families have been displaced. He said eight deaths have been reported from the district and 225 displaced camps have been set up in the district.

He said the district is experiencing a rainfall of 113mm/day continuously (Emphasis ours.) Yesterday it had been 200mm. Major General Hettiarachchi said two air force helicopters had been deployed to distribute relief and to rescue the affected people but they could not be taken off the ground due to bad weather yesterday as well.

More than 200 tanks have been extensively damaged while nearly 20,000 acres of paddy land were also destroyed.

Overall 996,757 people have been affected by the floods with 1727 houses have been fully destroyed while 12,151 have been partly destroyed. Total numbers of deaths stood at 18 while 49 were injured as at yesterday afternoon. Some 52, 391 families who have been displaced have been housed in 502 camps.

The Daily Mirror notes that Health Minister Maithripala Sirisena has informed “officials about the necessity to repair the submerged roads as early as possible as it has hampered the relief supply to flooded areas in the country.”

We now face a real threat of severe food shortages due to the complete destruction of over 130,000 acres of paddy field. Agriculture Minister Lakshman Yapa Abeywardhana stated the following to the Daily Mirror,

“There is no doubt that we need an advanced strategy to face the food crisis that is inevitable. We can have a better picture only after the flood waters have fully receded. Therefore, we cannot say what kind of response we have to the crisis right now. What I can assure is that the government is going to face this with resolve and people must be prepared to it.”

Over a quarter of Sri Lanka is currently under water and 40 per cent of cultivated areas are submerged according to the Minister of Agriculture.

Update at 14:26PM: The death toll is now at 23.

Update on 15/01/11 at 4:13PM via JNW SMS update: “Total 1,053,718 persons affected by floods. 3744 houses fully damaged and 19,534 partially damaged. 37 deaths with 18 in Batticaloa – DMC – JNW.”

###

HOW TO HELP

The Editors of Groundviews appeal to all our readers to assist in any way possible and to spread the word. For more information on how to help the victims of flood-affected areas, please visit our previous post here.

• Google map on flood-affected areas in Sri Lanka – February 2011
• On Flooding and Disaster Management
• UPDATE: Situation report on flood-affected areas and a call for assistance
• First images: The flooding in Menik Camp and the increasingly dire situation for IDPs
• Abandoned War Displaced People From Border Villages

All elections are important and these will be no exception. It is worth reminding that we are still in a post-war situation and far from the post-conflict one we ought to be in. What this requires is the prioritization of peace, reconciliation and unity and the firm commitment to ensure that the causes of ethnic conflict are not reproduced and sustained.  This means at least the rights of the IDPs as the litmus test for all else, a political settlement of the conflict and a reversal of the culture of impunity in respect of human rights along with facing up to the questions of whether there can be unity without reconciliation and reconciliation without accountability.  This is not all.  There are serious questions to be considered on the economic front with regard to employment and indebtedness – the real consequences of the fate of GSP Plus and the IMF loan – and most importantly in light of recent demonstrations, the ability of the system of education to meet the requirements of the economy.  And given Angulana, what happened to Nipuna Ratnayake and the Bambalapitiya drowning, the overarching issues of the Rule of Law, the supremacy of Constitution and the intentional violation of the Seventeenth Amendment.

Constitutional reform, at least in terms of the abolition or reform of the executive presidency will be on the agenda, as a consequence not so much of the requirements of governance but the emerging imperatives of regime survival and stability.  There is the danger that on this score, what is in store is the abolition of the form and title of the executive presidency with the transfer of its substantive powers to an “executive prime minister”.   The electoral system too, could be up for debate with the virtues of the ‘first-past –the post’ system and constituency MPs being eulogized to discredit proportional representation.

There is a crying need for a national debate on the future of the country and the issues on which the next presidential and general elections are to be fought.  The challenges ahead are far too serious to treat these elections merely as opportunities to register electoral approval, appreciation, admiration and gratitude for the defeat of the LTTE.  There has to be a tomorrow and a time when the war is truly behind us.  We need a plan to move towards that time and in order to design one, as many of us as willing and able must be part of that process.  An agenda for change and reform is critically needed and it will not come from the politicians who are trapped in fighting yesterday’s battles.

The island wide debate, discussion or conversation on change and reform is a vital and integral part of this.  Where however, through or on what medium or channel or site can it be conducted?

The obvious answer is the mainstream print and electronic media.  For a variety of reasons, very real and crucial constraints ranging from official displeasure, threat and sanction to self censorship, ideological disposition, market demands and problems of professionalism, the robust exchange of ideas called for will not happen here and not beyond the efforts of a persistent few, as required.  Moreover, since it is an exchange of ideas – a discussion, debate or conversation- that is called for, many voices need to he heard.  This is not about letters to the editor, about comment and observation alone but about participation and engagement with passion and conviction about the Sri Lanka of the future, we desire and deserve.

Citizens’ journalism and given its record as a forum for quality debate, Groundviews is ideally positioned to make a major contribution to this exercise in national rejuvenation and renaissance.  Is it not possible in the lead up to the elections that citizens use Groundviews to canvass their ideas for constitutional reform, governance, human rights and the economy and whatever else they see as constituting essential elements of an agenda for change and reform? The exchange could, but need not be time bound. As in the nature of a conversation it should be ongoing and active.

This would be a convincing demonstration of the strength and value of citizens’ journalism and its substantial utility in empowerment for peace, governance and human rights – An enabling facility for a functioning democracy.

• Abolition or reform of Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka?
• In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
• In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
• 1,000 posts on Groundviews: Bearing witness, shaping peace
• Strange proposals and broken promises: Constitutional reform in Sri Lanka

The strap of my bag unbuckled under the strain as I squeezed out of the bus in Kurunegala. The clock tower read an unrushed 6.40 am on its weary face. It was quite possibly a relic from the Premadasa era, bearing testament to a President who erected large clocks in many city centres and villages, subtle messages about punctuality woven into a fabric of ageless and often useful, chaos. I checked my wrist watch, because the clock face that looked over the sleepy town looked too burdened to be reliable. If the train was on time, I had forty minutes to get to the railway station which I knew couldn’t be too far.

Struggling to buckle the strap, I went into the nearest shop to ask for directions. “It’s that way, you won’t miss it”. The little I knew about Kurunegala town was enough to give me confidence that I had all the information needed to walk to the station in time. As I stepped out on to the road, I realised that I may have left my cap in the car when my father dropped me – sleepy eyed and still jet lagged – at the central bus-stand in Kandy an hour and forty minutes ago. It seemed like I was going to miss it a lot.

Walking to the station through the light mist, trying to read the faces of over worked strangers on a regular Monday morning, I resisted the temptation to take a three-wheeler. Busses limped past me on all fours, saturated and overflowing with white uniforms, heavy schoolbags, briefcases and flowery saris – battle fatigues of sorts I thought. I called Shazard to make sure that they were on the train and that the train itself was on track. Time has also steadily eroded the Railways. Over years of being one of its loyal customers, the Railway Department had taught me to expect its services to be reliably late and not to take such minor blessings for granted.

What if we missed the train or never even volunteered to dedicate a week of our time and energy to help out at the camps? We had no grand illusions about what we were trying to achieve or contribute. I could not believe that my efforts were going to make a noticeable difference as far as the plight of the refugees was concerned, because in my absence there would have been plenty of others to take this place. But I hoped that our presence there on the other hand would register in the eyes of at least a few of the estranged Tamil Sri Lankans there that fellow countrymen in the south – especially the Sinhalese – cared for them. They needed to know – or at least think – that we at least acknowledge what they were going through and that we would act and do what we can to make a difference. We hoped it would personify a more meaningful expression of a message of national unity and patriotism that was being preached from high platforms. While the notion that forces of evil in this country have been defeated was being celebrated with fireworks and parties, this was a personal acknowledgement on our part, of the hard work that lie ahead of us to actually make that part of the present reality and future hopes.

Perhaps we needed to do something – if only to convince ourselves that we have done ‘something’. Even though we have all been brutalised by the violence and horrors of war, demonstrating that we still had a capacity to empathise and care would make us feel better. Maybe we were guided by our moral obligation to serve. Despite having lived under the clouds of war, I have never been exposed to the downpour of its terror and violent images. Now the war was over and this was a fleeting chance to catch the last glimpse of what it was all about. I had read about the psychological implications of war and violence on society and tried to understand how soldiers are trained and prepare for battle. I have tried to understand what they experience on the battlefield and afterwards. Survivors or war have had little time to write about it and the stories of the victims will forever be silent. I felt intellectually and morally obliged to hear the silent stories and find out for myself what so many around me were speaking about with unquestioned authority. I felt obliged as a Sri Lankan, to find out and share in whatever way I could – the experiences of so many of my own countrymen and women who has known this war as a fact of daily life. Their lives have so far been so very distant from my own.

The train was indeed on its way and a stranger assured me in his haste that I was making good time to get on it.

• Whose “bomb” is it anyway?
• What must it be like to live behind these Kovil gates?
• A night in war time …
• Living in a very small world: and dying to have a piece of it
• An encounter in Puttlam: Peace as seen by two youth who served in the Army

I took these photos in Dambulla. Today, on a day we celebrate Human Rights, I hope we spare a thought for thousands of children in Sri Lanka who have been affected by the conflict. 

• Photo essay: Freedom, Religion, and Dambulla
• The untold story of a child
• A different take from the Sangha: The dhamma and religious co-existence in Sri Lanka (UPDATED)
• Whiter justice? – The killing of Thillainayagam Theeban
• No respite even after war: The rape, execution, torture and disappearances of IDPs in Sri Lanka

The United People’s Freedom Party (UPFA) claimed its second consecutive provincial electoral victory on the 24^th of August by winning a clear majority of seats in the North Central and Sabaragamuwa Province.  This election was more competitive than the previous Eastern Provincial Council election,  where the government managed to get the Tamil and Muslim votes by  their crafty handling of Pillayan and Hisbulla.  Unlike in the Eastern province, the government contested in the North Central and Sabaragamuwa provinces with relatively unpopular politicians and more importantly on a platform where the opposition politicians too enjoyed almost equal access to votes. However, election results proved that the desperate United National Party, has once again failed to shake up  the electoral support of the ruling coalition despite introducing new celebrities for the chief ministerial  candidacy. The third party that secured a representation in these provincial councils, the JVP  is experiencing the bitter truth of politics; the government that they brought into power is now gunning them down mercilessly.  However, more than about the winners and losers this election has given us a glimpse into electoral politics: This election puzzled the political observers with its odd relationship between election violence and the high voter turn out. Further the results of the Provincial Councils reiterate the fact that Provincial Council elections do not provide a mechanism to hold regional policy makers accountable but rather reflect the support for the centre. Thirdly, this election results confirm that under the PR system there is  less opportunity for the smaller parties and independent groups even at the regional level. This election also highlighted the JVPs true electoral strength by denouncing the third force myth that had currency for sometime ever since the JVP’s 2004 electoral performance. Last but not  least, the outcome of this election sends a strong message to the government to change its track from Provincial Council elections to parliamentary elections.

 

Elections and citizen participation

A friend of mine once shared an interesting personal experience that he had had as a returning officer of a polling booth in a Colombo suburb.  He had found six people standing at the gate of the school where the polling booth was located two hours before the booth was opened.  My friend had asked them to leave the place and come back once the booth opened especially  since some of the officials were still not out of their beds at that time.  Interestingly, an angry old man from the crowd refused to leave the place, because he though that it was a ploy to break  his un broken record of casting the first vote in that village.  This signifies how, for some, voting is more of a ritual and civic responsibility than a democratic right and means of holding politicians accountable. Places like schools and temples where polling booths are usually located also may have contributed to the cultivation of this notion amongst the people.

In a representative democracy, elections provide a means through which citizens can choose their representatives to the office and more importantly it provides an opportunity to evaluate the performance of their representative. Therefore, regular elections are a good indication of strong democracies. However, it is doubtful that everyone who participates in an election has this objective in mind when casting their vote.  

 

Election violence and its outcome

In order to ensure the accountability of the Governors regular election are essential, but holding elections only would not suffice unless all parties are allowed to compete on an equal ground and the citizens are give an opportunity to make their choice with out fear.  Especially the ruling party who have unprecedented access to government resources that is usually misused for their own political advantage at election time. This is a common practice among all parties when they are holding office. Therefore, usually elections are not held on equal ground. It is in this context, that the role of independent election monitoring groups become vital. These monitors won’t be able to stop election malpractices completely but can contribute to minimizing violence by playing the role of the watchdog.

According to the press release from the Centre for Monitoring Election Violence (CMEV), in the run-up to the election there had been 127 incident of election violence in NCP and 110 in Sabaragamuwa. On Election Day, violence had been less than anticipated and limited to 22 in NPC and 20 in Sabaragamuwa.  This sudden decline in violence and the relatively high voter turn out is widely being used to justify that the election has been free and fair. Can we take the election turn out as a strong indicator to claim that the election was free and fair?  The following table shows a comparison of  election related violence incidents reported by the CMEV and voter turn out at the Wayamba Provincial Council election in 1999 -considered to be the one of the most violent provincial council elections  - with the 23^rd August  2008 election.  According to the statistics we see that both the voter turn out and election violence is higher in the 1999 Wayamba election. This shows that the voter turn out is not linearly and exclusively correlated to the level of violence at the election, but is a more nuanced and complex scenario. Therefore, the present argument that the higher voter turn out observed  in the recent elections as an indication of free elections is miles away from the truth. 

 

One should not ignore the fact that violence does not necessarily mean  spontaneous and sporadic violence, they can also be systematically and carefully manipulated to disrupt only the electorate of the competitor. It is not something new to politicians as it is almost understood that whoever is in power always monopolizes the violence and realizes the importance of violence free elections when they have to sit in the opposition benches. 

 

Mandate for the Centre?

The second important factor highlighted in this election was that representatives were elected in the region to give a mandate to the centre. During the election campaign all the government ministers who took part in addressing election rallies clearly asked people to support the president’s war against the LTTE by voting for the UPFA. Even after wining the election the Chief Ministerial prospects and the President described their electoral victory as an approval of the government’s military campaign.

If this is how the  government wants people to vote at the Provincial Council elections, then there is a serious flaw on the government’s  understanding of devolution of power and its use of the 13th Amendment as a means to find a political solution to the ethnic conflict.

The Provincial Council system was introduced to provide greater control to the regions over matters relevant to the provinces. Therefore, people should find Provincial Councils closer than the central government and should be able to influence regional policies effectively. In this context the Provincial Council elections are a very important mechanism for the people of those regions, as it allows them to evaluate the performance of their regional and provincial leaders and exert pressure on them to demand greater accountability. Hence, this election should be seen as a greater tool  to build  the democratic process to counter the deficits of democracy such as corruption, wastage and other  such malpractices.  

However, I think the government is right in interpreting the results of the Provincial Council election as a mandate to the centre. Because, although the majority of the people in these two provinces have chosen the UPFA, they did not indicate the same support for the chief ministerial candidates of the government. Instead Janaka Perera and Ranjan Ramanayake, national celebrities from out side of the respective provinces, were given more preferential votes. What does this mean? This is a clear sign of the backward walk of the Provincial Council system.

Therefore, this is a clear sign that in the minds of the government the Provincial council will hardly be a stepping stone to greater devolution of political power. Instead it would most probably function as an intermediary  administrative layer with more institutional authority that merely decentralize the deficit of democracy, rather than decentralizing political power.  Therefore, this election once again vindicates that professor Vitharana ‘s APRC is something limited to a café that only caters to appease foreign concerns exclusively. Perhaps that may be the reason why K.M Narayan- the  Indian defense advisor – also felt that though the government is defeating the LTTE it is far from eliminating them.

 

Small parties and JVP

The third factor one can observe from the electoral outcome at this election is the plight of the small parties. The PR system was introduced on the premise that it would give more space for the smaller parties, especially the ones that represent the ethnic minorities to be elected to the policy making body.  However, this election’s results prove otherwise.  Over 90% of the votes in these two provinces are distributed between the UPFA and UNP.

Even though there were several small parties and independent groups taking part in this election, none managed to obtain at least 1% of the votes. This raises a serious concern over the electoral process.  Though political science theorists like Arend Lijphart argued that PR gives more opportunities for marginalized groups, due to other deficits of the PR system what we see today is that it has strengthened the national parties even at the regional level. Perhaps that is why people like Dietrrich Rueschemeyer argued in his essay on equality, that the actors with more wealth and cultural capital have disproportionate power to shape the citizen’s policy preference.   To campaign across the district of over half a million people you need a goldmine when compared to the resourses need to campaign in a small electorate that houses less than ten percent of the district. Therefore, there is hardly any chance for an independent and relatively less wealthy  candidate to promote  him /herself across an entire district.

In this context, this article would not be complete if it does not discuss the electoral performance of the JVP. This election must have been a bitter experience even more than they could have ever imagined possible. On the one hand, this must have added ‘more salt’ to their raw wounds than the Weerawansa  defection caused. On the other hand once again it proved that the JVP is far from being the third force in Sri Lankan politics. The following table highlights the JVP’s electoral performance at the local government and provincial council elections  where they contested alone.

Electoral achievement of JVP at the District level by contesting alone

 

According to the above table, it is clear that the JVP  voter base has always been 5% to 10%  and not more than that. However, the electoral outcome of the 2004 election where for the first time the JVP managed to win the 39 seats in the parliamentary election  gave an exaggerated calculation of it’s real electoral strength. In fact, not only the outsiders but also the JVP leaders themselves miscalculated their own strength as some even claimed that they are ready to be the second political force in the country. 

As a result of the electoral coalition and thanks to the preferential voting system, some district leaders even managed to score the highest popular votes in their respective districts in 2004 .  But during the 2006 election for Local Authorities and the 2008 Provincial Councils election, by contesting alone, the JVP could win only 6% of those districts. 

As a cardre based party the JVP hardly has any option other than to accept the reality and confine itself to pressure politics. Otherwise, as JNP suggested recently, the JVP need to strip its cardre based politics and attempt to transform itself into a mass based party by forming a greater coalition with larger political force. This means that the JVP will have to seek some electoral alliance either with the Rajapakse government by putting aside it differences or make a more drastic transition to form a coalition with its all-time enemy, the capitalist UNP.  However, it is highly unlike that the present leadership of the JVP will make that move.

Even though the reaction of the JVP is not clear, the JHU and the JNP, parties with a Sinhalese voter base won’t ever attempt to contest alone. The leaders of these parties will attempt to hold onto the ruling party while being critical of some of its policies. This will only assure the political career of some individuals in these small parties rather than the survival of the party itself.

 

Changing the Itinerary?

Not only for the small parties but also for the government, these elections provide valuable insight. This election hints of the potential danger for the UPFA in continuing these Provincial Council elections as a means of mobilizing the electorate for the general election.  The government called the elections of these two provinces solely on the assumption that they can be won comfortably. But the election outcome suggests that even after exploiting the public office and banking on the progress made on the war front  they could not showcase an exceptional performance in these two provinces. In the case  of contesting for Provincial Councils that are advantageous for the main opposition, UNP, would be dangerous for their future parliamentary election victory. Because, if the UNP wins an elections before the general election it will set a momentum for he UNP by disturbing the government’s wave of victories.  On the other hand, the government can not afford to go for Provincial Council elections campaigning solely on the basis of their war record indefinitely. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the government will concentrate on its provincial election map in the future.  It is more likely that they would call for general election, when the forces arrive at Killinochchi’s doorsteps.   

• Provincial Council Elections 2008/2009: Nominations for and representation of women
• Brotherhood Bloodshed Again?
• Suggestion to the Select Committee on Electoral Reform
• The loud and clear message from the voter turnout and the voters in the North and East
• Provincial Election Campaign: Battling for the Centre?

In the wake of numerous interpretations and reinterpretation of the present political situation as a result of the recent crossover by the political elites, the authors of this article attempt to discuss how citizens perceive the crossover. The results of the latest poll, that was conducted by Social Indicator – Centre for Policy Alternatives are used to discuss the public views in this article. This survey was conducted amongst 1300 individuals residing in 17 districts using the interview technique. It should be noted that this survey was conducted Islandwide with the exception of the North & East and therefore does not capture the opinion of the Sri Lankan Tamil community.

Who’s hurt the most: UNPers or JVPers
Despite the justifying rationales put forward by the MPs who have crossed over, the present political accusations and counter accusations indicate that the crossover has hurt many parties who lost their MPs as well as who lost their political positions. If we were to look at the UNP itself, it lost a group of heavy weights including its deputy leader as a result of the recent crossover. Also it led the opposition leader Mr. Wickramasinghe to a new battle in order to retain the opposition leadership from the JVP; a party that has shown a remarkable capacity in mobilizing the masses against any ruling party. The present government too, is faced with issues resulting from the crossover. President Rajapakse’s main electoral ally, the JVP, permanently walked into the opposition while vowing to topple the Government, accusing the government of going against the electoral mandate, it received in November 2005. Not only that, but this parliamentarian exodus triggered a battle between the president and the two ministers, Mr. Mangala Samaraweera and Mr. Sripathi Suriarachchi, who have done tremendous work in bringing President Mahinda Rajapakse into office. On one hand the crossovers shook the status quo of the government while on the other hand it annulled the memorandum of understanding signed between the SLFP and the UNP even before its ink dried up. In addition, this disappointed the groups who were optimistic and overjoyed about the rare opportunity of a southern consensus.

The disapproval of the crossover is highest amongst the JVP loyalists – 68% disapprove while 15% approve of it. Perhaps this could be a reflection of the feeling of humiliation that they are undergoing after the SLFP sidelined them ignoring the crucial role they performed at the elections. Amongst the UNPers, only 48% disapprove of its own party members crossing to the SLFP while 34% of them could not decide whether to approve or disapprove of it. However, 18% of the UNPers approve the crossover. While on one hand this reflects the frustration of the UNPers with their leadership on the party reforms, on the other hand this is a clear indication of the confused status of the UNPers in the aftermath of losing a group of the most senior members of the party. Interestingly, this survey does not indicate that the SLFPers are over-jubilant about the newly captured elephant herd. This is apparent as only 50% of them approve of the crossover while 30% disapprove.

Crossover for Democracy or Vise Versa:
In the present electoral system, more primacy has been given to the parties than to the MPs. When selecting candidates for an election, most members are at the mercy of the party leaders. Even after being elected to the parliament, MPs will have to support the party decision rather than acting on their conscience. In this context, MPs do not have much option other than crossing over to another party that allows them to voice the concerns of their communities or adhere to one’s conscience. Therefore, MPs crossing over to another party can be considered as an expression of democracy that one may want to practice. This was not the first time where MPs crossed over to another party in the parliament and neither, we suppose, the last time. However, when analyzing the history of crossing over, usually it has been the opposition MPs who crossover to the ruling party instead of otherwise. Some get cabinet portfolios with other privileges while others allegedly receive huge sums of money. Therefore, it is very difficult to decide whether it is principle or perks that matter when deciding to crossover.

It is interesting see on what grounds people have approved or disapproved of the recent MP drain from the opposition to the ruling party. Amongst the people who approve of the recent crossover, 50% think that the move strengthens the Government and the President while 24% think that it would help the Government’s present war with the LTTE. Only 6% approve of the crossover on the basis that it is an expression of democracy. Interestingly, more SLFP loyalists than UNP loyalists approve of the recent crossover as it strengthens the Government and the president. Nevertheless, even for UNPers who support the crossover, the main reason for their approval is that it strengthens the Government and the president.

Amongst the people who disapprove of the recent crossover, 46% disapprove on the basis that it adds a bigger burden to the public due to the the increased number of ministerial posts. However, 9% disapprove on the basis that it damages democracy while 7% and 6% reject the crossover as it goes against the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ and as it will lead to the abrogation of the SLFP- UNP MOU, respectively. It is interesting to see the varying reasons on which different party loyalists disapprove of the recent crossover. The primary reason for the SLFP and UNP loyalists to disapprove of the crossover is the fact that this will become a bigger burden for the already suffering Sri Lankans. However, JVP loyalists who disapprove of the crossover seem to have two main arguments. They think this is a clear violation of the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ that they successfully advocated during the presidential elections and that the large number of present ministerial posts would (will?) increase the burden on the citizens. 29% of JVPers see the recent crossover as against the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’, while only 9% of SLFPers think that way.

Hence, when looking at the rationales for approvals and disapprovals, it seems that it is based on three arguments, namely forming a national government, waste of public funds and betraying the mandate received for the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’. According to Mr. Karu Jayasuriya, his motive of crossing over was the dire need to join the two main parties in the South, in order to solve the ethnic conflict and establish good governance. When analyzing the (often vague) interviews of President Rajapakse in the wake of the crossover, it seems that both the President and Mr. Jayasuriya are trying to voice that they have the same objectives. If it is the case we do not think anyone would disagree with such a noble objective. Nevertheless, unfortunately what we see in the government today does not reflect the stated objectives.

If the recent cross over means to assist the Government in solving the protracted ethnic conflict, then the Government must be keen on a negotiated settlement on the basis of a federal structure, because, the heavy weights of the reformists who crossed over were the individuals who led the UNP Government’s peace process that insisted on a solution within a federal united Sri Lanka. However, having had their cabinet portfolios, they have not yet shown any active engagement in such activities. Therefore, Minister Thissa Vitharana has to be engaged in a solo battle at the APRC, in bringing forward a constitutional transformation. Given the SLFP’s negative stand on the CFA and the passive commitment to constitutional arrangement, it is not clear what the role of UNP reformist is in transforming SLFPers to perceive for the federal solution that has been agreed in the Oslo Communique in 2003.

Given the wastage of public funds in maintaining the large number of ministries, which was the primary result of the crossover and the prevailing impunity that has high potential to worsen in months to come, do not show a rosy picture on good governance that Mr. Rajapakse and Mr. Jayasuriya are dreaming about. Therefore, the rationales given as the basis for the crossover are difficult for people to stomach.

However, it is undeniable that this recent crossover has made President Rajapakse stronger – a personage whose popularity is anyway on the boom in the context of the recent military victory in the East. Therefore, we believe President Rajapakse enjoys a stronger political position, empowering him to make drastic political decisions in order to solve the country’s ethnic conflict even if he is unable to clean the office of corrupt officials and politicians.

Therefore, in next few months public can witness the real impact of the cross over on the Sri Lankan society and how distance the reality from the claimed motives of the UNP reformists.

Authors:
Pradeep Peiris and Rangani Ranasinghe are researchers of the Social Indicator, the survey research unit of the Centre for Policy Alternatives.

• Crossing over into chaos
• The General and his necessary evils
• Political solution or political illusion?
• Federalism: Some debates never die
• Public Perceptions: National Security and/or Human Rights

In this post I talk about the rapidly disappearing shoe-repairmen, a Singer-Mega mega hoodwink, and the high security nature of migratory birds…

Click on Notes of a Citizen Journalist to read my missive.

• Notes of a Citizen Journalist
• The Death of a Priest
• A Citizen’s Notes – Thoughts on Human Rights in Sri Lanka
• Thoughts on violence against and the future of independent media in Sri Lanka by Dinidu de Alwis
• Amidst shackles – Notes of a citizen journalist