DAY 1 (3 October 2014) Dr. Pakinsathy Saravanamuttu of Centre for Policy Alternatives succinctly discussed the key characteristics of SriL Lanka’s security situation and the politics. He strongly asserted that Sri Lanka is in post-war situation, not a post-conflict situation, and noted the importance of the difference. While the “30 years war” has ended, the elements of conflict continue to exist and new ones are starting to crop up. He then went on to discuss the pillars of Sri Lanka’s modern political structure – (1) militarization, (2) impunity of the ruling party and family, on issues of war crimes, human rights violations and extra-judicial killings, as well as of those associated with them, (3) the friendliness of the judiciary with the executive branch, resulting in the lack of checks and balance, and (4) the complicity of the government to cultural and religious intolerance (between Singhalese-Buddhists and Muslims and Tamils). Concretely there is a rise in the hate speeches and repression of Muslims who are seen as a key threat to the Singhalese survival/dominance (underlying material interest is the competition in retail trade), a trend that is very reminiscent of the treatment to Tamils in the 1980s. He concludes that the Sri Lankan political structure is dynastic. For one, the President’s brothers are the minister of Economics, the minister of Defense and the speaker of Parliament, and his son (who is being treated as the ‘crown prince’ is a member of Parliament. He argues that the dynasty cannot lose office, otherwise it will lose its immunity (from prosecution for allegations of war crimes and various other HR violations), and corruption). The government argues that the solution to peace is economic development, particularly infrastructure improvement and the tourism sector. A human rights-approach to development is absent in the government framework, as evictions and denial of access to famine lands continue. Moreover, anyone who talks about human rights is portrayed and seen as a traitor to the state. In a nutshell, he characterizes the post-war Sri Lanka as ruled by a populist, authoritarian government underpinned by a political dynasty and characterized by a militaristic ideology. The ruling Sri Lankan class – a political settlement between a ruling political party/dynasty and the military – is capitalizing on and flaming the deep cultural and religious divisions in the Sri Lankan society in order to maintain its position in power. In the first place, they have won the war (against the Libertion Tamil Tigers of Ealam/LTTE), thus, their huge political and moral ascendancy. One question that quickly came to my mind is how are the other political actors doing? What does the Singhala majority think of the political and economic repression of the minorities, the extrajudicial killings, the allegations of war crimes and human rights violations, and the impunity of the ruling political elite? Are their lives too convenient and is the government’s narrative (that they won the war and the Singhala majority needs them) that persuasive for them to turn their eyes way from this grim and unequal reality? Further, is there a modernizing and able faction in Sri Lankan society that can start a change in perspective, for example, the youth and the civil society and mass movement? On the flip side, how are the oppressed minorities taking these and what will they do when they reach their breaking point? I look forward that the other sessions with other resource people can further shed a light on these areas. - Marc
Posted on: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 04:34:59 +0000