Photo courtesy of JVP
As Sri Lanka approaches the 2024 presidential election, the NPP is positioning itself as a major contender. In the previous articles (part 1 and part 2), we explored the JVP’s historical trajectory and its evolving stance on ethnic relations. This third analysis looks at the NPP’s current manifesto, “A thriving nation, A beautiful life”.
Riding the post-aragalaya wave
The NPP’s rise in electoral polls is closely linked to the 2022 aragalaya protests, ignited by the economic crisis and widespread corruption among the political elite. These protests shifted the national conversation away from ethnic identity politics that had been the dominant cleavage in past elections to pressing economic concerns affecting all Sri Lankans. Historically, the JVP had campaigned against corruption and elite dominance but struggled to gain significant electoral support. However, the aragalaya movement brought issues of economic mismanagement to the forefront, creating a political opening for the NPP. This shift in focus reflects the power of mass protests in creating new spaces for different political agendas, as noted by social movement theorists (Tarrow 2011). The NPP has seized this opportunity; for the first time, its message resonates with a broad segment of the population. By emphasizing social justice, economic reform and anti-corruption, the party taps into the public’s demand for systemic change. This strategy allows the NPP to sidestep ethnic issues, which have historically been a contentious aspect of Sri Lankan politics and present itself as a unifying force capable of addressing the country’s economic challenges.
The “harmonious” nation: Whose harmony?
The NPP’s vision of a harmonious Sri Lanka is appealing. They stress the need for a “harmonious Sri Lankan nation undivided by racist, caste, and religious ideologies” (p. 128). The manifesto pledges to introduce a new constitution that guarantees equality and devolves power, aiming to involve “all people” in governance. However, the emphasis on unity may downplay the specific needs of ethnic minorities. While the JVP has moved toward more inclusive rhetoric in recent years, the NPP’s idea of a “new Sri Lankan” identity is vaguely defined. Though the manifesto promotes unity, it doesn’t clearly explain how it will accommodate minority cultural, linguistic and religious identities.
In the section on “A Rich Cultural Life” (p. 24), the manifesto focuses on reviving “Sri Lankan” traditions and promoting national literature. The absence of references to Tamil or Muslim culture raises doubts about whether the “Sri Lankan” culture being promoted could be largely Sinhala. Similarly, the call for an “Inter-Religious Council” (p. 128) seems inclusive but without specific mechanisms to ensure equal representation, dominant religious narratives could overshadow minority faiths. The manifesto proposes “comparative study of world religions” (p. 129) but this could unintentionally prioritize certain religious perspectives if not carefully implemented. These points raise the question of whether the NPP’s vision of harmony will genuinely include all ethnic and religious groups, or if the focus on unity risks creating a homogenized identity that overlooks minority cultures.
Selective inclusion: Recognizing some, overlooking others
The NPP’s inclusivity is complicated by its selective recognition of certain groups. The manifesto specifically acknowledges the identity and rights of Upcountry Tamils (p. 129), a significant move given their historical marginalization. The NPP’s promise to address their specific needs marks a strong positive step toward rectifying this historical injustice.
However, this targeted inclusion contrasts sharply with the limited attention given to other minority communities. Muslims, for example, who have faced increasing marginalization and violence in recent years, receive minimal mention in the manifesto. Although the document broadly condemns discrimination based on ethnicity, language and religion (p. 128), it fails to offer concrete proposals to address the distinct challenges faced by the Muslim community.
This selective focus may reflect electoral strategy. By appealing to Upcountry Tamils, the NPP seeks support in plantation areas traditionally influenced by the Ceylon Workers’ Congress. At the same time, avoiding strong positions on ethnic issues may reassure the Sinhala majority, wary of any policies perceived as threatening the unitary state. This selective approach raises questions about whether focusing on economic issues can effectively address these deep-rooted divisions.
Devolution: A step forward or a missed opportunity?
The NPP’s stance on devolution provides key insights into their approach to addressing ethnic grievances. They propose introducing a new constitution that “strengthens democracy and ensures equality of all citizens” (p. 128), emphasizing the “devolution of political and administrative power to every local government, district, and province so that all people can be involved in governance” (p. 128). By advocating for devolution within a unified state, the NPP appears to acknowledge the importance of decentralizing power to address local needs and enhance democratic participation. Several initiatives proposed by the NPP point to a potential shift in Sri Lanka’s governance structure. These include holding long-postponed provincial elections, establishing a Commission Against Discrimination, expanding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and implementing the National Language Policy.
However, the manifesto notably avoids any mention of the 13th Amendment or federalism, both critical to Tamil and minority demands for substantial autonomy. The 13th Amendment, passed as part of the Indo-Lanka Accord in 1987, established a framework for devolving power to provincial councils. Its full implementation remains a key demand for Tamil groups, who see it as essential for regional autonomy. The NPP’s reluctance to engage with this issue suggests a cautious approach, perhaps to avoid alienating Sinhala nationalist voters who view any forms of devolution with suspicion. Yet, this vagueness may raise doubts about the party’s genuine commitment to addressing minorities’ political grievances.
Furthermore, while the NPP’s proposals promise to devolve power to local governments and provinces, they lack specifics on how this devolution will work in practice. There is little mention of fiscal autonomy, control over natural resources, or law enforcement – areas that are critical to genuine power sharing. The absence of any discussion on the role of the military in the Northern and Eastern provinces further complicates their devolution strategy. Without detailed plans or clear commitments, the NPP’s proposals risk being seen as symbolic rather than substantive.
Is economic justice enough to unite Sri Lanka?
The NPP’s strategy emphasizes economic justice and anti-corruption as tools to unite Sri Lanka across ethnic lines. By promoting social welfare programs, wage increases and economic empowerment, the party aims to create a narrative where shared economic struggles overshadow deep-rooted ethnic divisions. This strategy resonates with a population facing economic hardships, but it raises questions about whether these efforts alone can address the long standing grievances of minority communities.
While economic reforms are crucial, especially in the current context of economic crisis, research has long established that post-conflict peace remains fragile when ethnic issues are unresolved. Addressing economic inequality without tackling the grievances of ethnic minorities may create only superficial stability. If these deeper tensions remain unresolved, the possibility of conflict recurrence remains, even in countries such as Sri Lanka where rebels were militarily defeated. Focusing exclusively on economic issues may overlook the fact that ethnic grievances such as demands for devolution, land rights and accountability for past abuses are often as much about political recognition and justice as they are about economic redistribution.
Although previous governments have also failed to make significant steps towards reconciliation and the possible NPP’s electoral victory will not suddenly create new risks, its rise presents a critical opportunity to address these longstanding divisions in a meaningful way. Given the NPP’s current political momentum, the party is uniquely positioned to push for systemic changes that previous governments have either avoided or failed to achieve.
This places the NPP at a crossroads. The party’s approach so far shows caution on devolution and reconciliation but this cautious stance may not be enough to bring about the long term unity they seek. Without clear, actionable plans for reconciliation and the political inclusion of minority communities, the NPP risks perpetuating the same patterns of exclusion that have historically fuelled ethnic tensions. Sri Lanka’s ethnic divisions cannot be resolved by economic measures alone and the NPP’s focus on social justice must be expanded to include political solutions that directly address ethnic grievances. As the 2024 elections approach, the NPP faces the challenge of not only winning over voters but also proving that their vision of justice includes all Sri Lankans, regardless of ethnicity. The failure to do so could undermine their broader goals and continue the cycle of unresolved ethnic tensions that have plagued Sri Lankan politics for decades.