This election is about risk management, not about taking chances

The LTTE and the three decade reign of terror was defeated less than eight months ago.

However, some seem to have even forgotten that the LTTE existed, leaving aside the fact that they were responsible for many children not knowing whether their father or mother were going to return home alive after going to work in the morning, and parents not knowing whether their children will return from home alive when they set out to school in the morning. Businessmen did not know whether their business premises will be there the next day or destroyed by an LTTE bomb. Prabakaran was right when he said Sinhala people did not have a memory span of more than ten days.

Can the country risk a change of leadership at this critical juncture?

These very people seem to have forgotten that the country had to spend billions of rupees to fight the war against the LTTE, not leaving much for economic development purposes. They do not wish to believe that despite that, Sri Lanka had managed to undertake several major development projects unprecedented for any country forced to spend so much on defense to save the country from terror perpetrated by the most formidable terrorist organization in the world.

They have also forgotten that had President Rajapaksa caved into international pressure, and backed down against the LTTE like what all his predecessors did, LTTE terrorism would still be there. They also overlook the fact that the commanders of all Armed Forces took orders from their Commander in Chief, the President of the Republic, and had the President ordered them to withdraw, as did President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s predecessors, all the Commanders would have had to obey such an order. No one in the Armed Forces could have been able to continue the battle against the LTTE, and claimed he won the war, because there would not have been a victory, and neither the UNP, nor the JVP would have been interested in a General who could not have boasted that he won the war.

Those who criticized General Sarath Fonseka barely eight months ago as being unfit even to lead the Salvation Army, and who are now his best buddies, would still be critiquing him even with worse insults. Such is the fickleness and sickening opportunism of Sri Lankan politics.

Less than eight months ago, there were no two better leaders than President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa to General Sarath Fonseka, the Commander of the Sri Lankan Army.

Less than three months ago, General Sarath Fonseka made public his unhappiness about the way he was treated by his former idols, President Rajapaksa and Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and commenced politics by working with the UNP and the JVP to draft his letter of resignation, still wearing his uniform and holding the position of Chief of Defense Staff, the highest position in the Armed Forces. Out of some seventeen reasons given for his resignation, just two referred to issues besides his unhappiness the way he had been treated.

In less than two months ago, General (Rtd) Sarath Fonseka’s main reasons for contesting the Presidency, and taking on his political idol, were issues relating to how he had treated by the latter and his brother, and nothing to do with reasons he has given barely 6 weeks ago about saving the country from alleged corruption and other unsavory practices.

Less than four weeks ago, the very same General (Rtd) Fonseka, the Presidential candidate, who had led the Sri Lankan Army against the LTTE, condemned his own Commander in Chief, his Defense Secretary, his subordinates and his soldiers and caused the UN Human Rights Organisation to re open the case relating to human rights issues during the war.

Less than four weeks ago candidate Sarath Fonseka said his role as President would be to help make the Presidency a non executive job and transfer power to the Parliament. Progressively, candidate Sarath Fonseka started changing his mind and less than 2 weeks ago he stated publicly on TV that important ministries like Finance, Planning, Health, Education, to name a few, will be directly under him.

Less than a week ago, candidate Sarath Fonseka, Presidential aspirant, demonstrated his anger against a former friend, and used highly intemperate language to denounce his former friend publicly on TV for providing Sri Lankan with some valuable information about candidate Fonseka.

Candidate Sarath Fonseka is backed by two political parties whose fundamental political philosophies and policies are so diametrically opposed, making any co habitation, except, in their quest to defeat President Rajapaksa, just impossible. Of course in fickle Sri Lanka, anything is possible, and nothing should surprise anyone. The JVP leader, who was a well known anti imperialist, was seen demonstrating his new look the other day, a dapper Marxist in a two piece suit in the company of the same Western imperialists who he would not have been seen with even when dead.

Although the traditional rank and file of the UNP and their faithful followers should be squirming in disbelief, the UNP leader is seen nowadays in very cordial company of the JVP leader, perhaps patching up old wounds, and perhaps telling the UNP leader that the JVP has to accept the world order and the spread of capitalism, and go back on traditional JVP policies for the good of the country. Obviously, the very forgiving nature of Sri Lankans would have made the JVP leader forget that thousands of his party men, sympathizers and many innocent people were killed during the regime that the current UNP leader was a senior cabinet member.

Such is politics in Sri Lanka.

So on the one hand, there is a candidate who has changed his persona so much in less than eight months making it very difficult for the voters to know who he really is and who he represents, and what he stands for. He has demonstrated his indecision about the extent of his executive involvement if he becomes President, and from an initial position of being the change agent who will transform the Executive Presidency to a non executive Presidency, he has moved on to say publicly that he will have Finance, Health, Education and Economic Planning, among others subjects, directly under him, indicating that he has no intention of reducing any of the Executive powers of the Presidency.

This decision of Sarath Fonseka surely should have sent a cold chill down the UNP spine, as this is not what they bargained for when they sponsored him to challenge his former Commander in Chief. One can only speculate what an unhappy UNP will do if they are sidelined by Sarath Fonseka should he win the election. What is certain however is that there will be a change towards political instability as a result of infighting within the Fonseka/Wickramesinghe/Somawansa camp.

On the other hand, we have a President who has, with all his flaws as a human being, demonstrated his guts and determination, to withstand intense international pressure from the West, and shown his mettle in giving political leadership and shielding the Army Commander and other service commanders to do what they were good at; battling and winning the war against the military might of the LTTE.

While doing this, President Rajapaksa has not ignored economic development, and he has undertaken several mega projects, besides repairing and renovating the road, bridge, ferry and railway infrastructure in the country, and he has re invigorated the agricultural sector as no previous leader has done in his quest to make the country self sufficient.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa is a known quantity, and he has produced results. He gave Sri Lankans what none of his predecessors were able to deliver; freedom from LTTE terror.

One perception that the Opposition has been able to plant amongst many voters is the perception that the President and his brothers are corrupt. Allegations of corruption against him and his brothers are just that, allegations, and no one has produced any evidence implicating the President or his brothers in corrupt activities. In the absence of such evidence, one is forced to conclude that these allegations are part of a deliberate attempt on the part of the Opposition to sell the idea that their candidate Sarath Fonseka is “Mr Clean” and he is the man of the hour who will rid the country of corruption. If only this were true!

Firstly, there is no evidence of corruption involving the President or his brothers, and therefore the question of “cleaning” becomes an academic exercise until some evidence is presented by those accusing them of corruption. Secondly, even if there is corruption, the person who is being promoted as “Mr Clean” does not appear to be so judging by the many exposures carried in numerous Asian Tribune columns.

Defeating President Rajapaksa at this juncture when he is promising to embark on a development phase after nearly four years of terrorism and war during his first term, would be a major drawback for Sri Lanka. Some obviously are not seeing it this way, and they seem to be of the opinion that it is time for a change. They seem to overlook the fact that we have already had the biggest change in nearly thirty years, a country free of terrorism and war!

Our per capita income has risen to more than USD 2300 from USD 1100, and our foreign exchange reserves are at an all time high, and our stock exchange has been listed as the best performing one in the world, and yet, some consider we have not changed!

This election is therefore is about risk.

Should we risk changing the driver who has delivered what others before him could only have dreamt of, and who has, based on his proven performance, the potential to deliver what he is promising under his manifesto, Mahinda Chintana 2.

Or, should the country vote in a total unknown quantity in local and international politics to lead the country in post war development, a person who either does not know his own mind, or is confused with the masks he is wearing at different times trying to shield the voters from knowing who he really is. Should the country vote in a person who would not have been there had President Rajapaksa caved in to international pressure and let the LTTE carry on their terror activities? Should the country vote in a person who had only but praise for President Rajapaksa and Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapksa just eight months ago and who has now become a political enemy?

What the country needs at this point is political stability and an environment where economic development could continue without hindrance, and where all communities could discuss a solution to the ethnic conflict acceptable to all communities.

Voters should ask themselves who is better suited to achieve this goal, a man who has managed to defeat terrorism and introduced some political stability and engaged in economic development and who has set the stage for the country to find its own indigenous solution to its ethnic issue, or a man who would have been a non entity had his contender been as weak as his predecessors, and who has shown all hallmarks of divisiveness and one who will lead Sri Lanka towards instability rather than stability, and who hides behind several masks that makes it impossible for people to know who he really is.

Can the country risk a change of leadership at this critical juncture?

- Asian Tribune -