Editorial

Security

Politics

World

Letters

Sports

Obituaries

Archives

Observations by LAKSHMAN GUNASEKERA

Even provided with divine eyesight by the Supreme Lord, Brahma, the semi-divine hero, Arjuna, in the Baghavad Geetha, is unable to see and comprehend the Divine in its fullness and is overwhelmed by the sheer complexity and variety of the little he saw: "I see You possessing numberless arms, bellies, mouths and eyes, infinite in form on all sides. Neither Your end, nor Your middle, nor yet Your beginning do I see, O Lord of the Universe". (Baghavad Geetha 10: 20-24).

And the Supreme Lord does not hesitate to point out the human inadequacy of his favourite hero, all-conquering though he might be: "Even without you will they all cease to be these warriors who arrayed in the opposing armies" (Geetha). Arjuna alone cannot handle the situation. There are many actors, though they may not necessarily coordinate nor complement. (By the way, isn't it remarkably coincidental that we, Lankans, had our own Arjuna to take us to victory on the cricket field even as we wallowed in misery on the ethnic battlefield?)

Such is the immense (infinite) plurality of reality, the multiplicity of being, that the ultimate Supreme Being is seen to embody it all but that 'all' cannot be conceived in its entirety by the Human. Neither can the mere Human be expected to cope with that whole universe of possibilities. This conception of a complex, fluid, intricately inter-active reality has prevailed in South Asia for several thousand years, while the conception itself has never remained static, with numerous parallel and opposed schools of thought and philosophies from the Sankhya to the Advaita, to the Buddhist and Sufi.

Even the outburst of Human omniscience expressed in the European Enlightenment, born of the colonial triumph of European capitalism, has been all too brief with the Westerners themselves now increasingly aware of the limitations of rationalist scientism and modernity. What Einstein first theorised for the Western physical sciences, others, such as Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyeraband, Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan (and more), theorised for the social sciences and Western epistemology as a whole. The certainties of scientific materialism have been undermined by the uncertainty of sub-atomic physics, and the fluidity of post-structuralism, de-construction and the 'free-fall' of post-modernism.

If mainstream Western liberal political thought cannot yet acknowledge the transformations of its parent episteme, that is more to do with the ideological compulsions of global hegemony rather than ignorance. That is why mainstream liberal political thinking even in this country yet clings to one universal political-economic value system and a single, global, socio-cultural paradigm.

Not only must rights and aesthetics be universal, the local purveyors of Western liberal thought insist, but local intellectual endeavour must depend so heavily on stock, simplistic Western models for solutions to burning local problems, such as the current ethnic conflict. Worse, the institutionally dominant intelligentsia must humbly be guided by expatriate Western advisers now comfortably in situ.

The conception of the local problem is so simplistic as to enable the superimposition of Western 'model' solutions with seeming ease, with a little modification, perhaps, to satisfy suppliant local scholarly sensibilities and career needs. The grand design, or 'road map', or grand strategy, is the guiding principle, so familiarly Christian-colonial in epistemology. After all, the European-colonial God (Yahweh or Jehovah), monotheistic in His (patriarchal) desert-tribal simplicity, commands and controls.

Spoiler

This 'command-and-control' mentality is the essence of the dominant conception of governance and the conception of politics that flow from it. After all, this is the inspiration of the 'development' model which, in turn, presumes a grand strategy of 'social engineering' via modernisation. How very reminiscent of Christian Creationism! Everything must go according to a single (God's) Plan. And everything (and everyone) that goes contrary to this intention or fails to complement it must be deemed a 'spoiler'.

One almost hears the expletive "spoilsports" from our fawning liberal scholars, bureaucrats and NGO-crats, as they react to actions by political actors outside their control or their realm of influence.

Or does this secularist striving to copy the omniscience of the Divine merely betray the desperate seeking of lost souls? Is it some unconscious, misguided, perverse stratagem to recover the Soul? Are the uncertainties of the current peace process exacerbating the underlying psychological crises engendered by the philosophical and ideological emptiness of our post-colonial intellectual subservience?

My philosophical caveats are but a preface to a reflection on a year of operation of the Cease-fire Agreement of 2002.

As we enter a second year of the Cease-fire, even as we celebrate what is truly a historic development of a substantive suspension of hostilities after decades of war, one thing that is certain is the uncertainty of it all. Why such uncertainty must necessarily be traumatic is to do with our spiritual-ideological condition and, after the preceding philosophical hints, must be left for future discussion.

No doubt, it is but human for us, Sri Lankans, after decades of war, political betrayal, duplicity, corruption, violence, shock etc., to seek some quick return to normalcy and at least a modicum of stability and certainty.

But we must realise that things are not going to be quick and easy. Actually, the best thing would be to follow Lord Buddha's injunction for a 'right attitude': to adopt a perspective of accepting the uncertainties as inherent in our, at least, intermediate future. In fact things are being made even more uncertain by the global political situation created by a 'sole superpower' going on the rampage, deaf even to the exhortations of its civilisational fellows in "old Europe".

Fragmented

It is important to grasp two things about the current Sri Lankan situation. Firstly, it is a very fragmented reality (as all realities are). Secondly, our various human endeavours to deal with the situation are similarly fragmented, although they need not, necessarily, be fragmented and contradictory to this degree. I propose, in this column and in the next, to examine the diverse aspects of this Sri Lankan reality and the paths being struck by diverse political actors.

My larger argument in this column is that it is facile to attempt to coordinate these diverse aspects in some seemingly holistic 'map' on which all paths are directed towards one goal. Rather, it is important to recognise that there are many roads being trod by diverse political actors, and to understand the politico-economic and socio-cultural forces that drive these actors. Ultimately, there can be no single, unified understanding and unified course of action (even if multi-track). Rather, the different actors, including the Government, must respond to these diverse dynamics in different ways, ideally, not in ways that cause further confrontation and turmoil, but in ways that promote peace and social harmony.

Interestingly, even if the 'experts' of 'civil society' keep insisting on first overcoming this fragmented approach, a priori, as it were, to actively dealing with the situation in an 'unified' manner, some of the dominant political actors are more realistic. Being the most pragmatic politicians that they are, the current United National Front leadership is refreshingly candid in its acknowledgement that it does not have a 'grand strategy' for peace and stability.

Indeed, this is one of the major ideological differences between the J.R. Jayewardene and the Ranil Wickremesinghe regimes, although Ranil himself was very much a protege of the 'Old Fox' as Mervyn de Silva used to call JR. Although Ranil does come from the old school (i.e. Royal), somehow, much of the Old School thinking, in terms of the Anglo-colonial-liberal tradition does not seem to have stuck on despite the JR tutelage. If JR was quaintly 'British Raj' in terms of his particular authoritarian style (with his deference to both British and Indian tradition), Ranil Wickremesinghe and his current associates in power are markedly post-colonial.

JR had an old-fashioned Cold War bias to the West and a knee-jerk distancing from the modern Indian regionalism. Ranil, in stark contrast, has made the recognition of Indian regional dominance, both economic as well as political, the cornerstone of his regime's international outlook; an admirably pragmatic policy in my view.

This pragmatism in foreign policy, is complemented by a pragmatism in national policy, at least in relation to the ethnic conflict. More than ever before, the UNP has shed any pretensions to Sinhala ultra nationalism and has held consistently to this position - correctly reading the popular Sinhala pulse - despite the seemingly great political risk in the face of agitation by ultra nationalist pressure groups. Of course, the UNP has had the advantage of time and additional war attrition afflicted on the Sinhalas by the LTTE which the preceding PA regime did not have.

Paradigm

In stark contrast to either the previous Centre-Left regime of the PA or the preceding JR-Premadasa regime, the current UNP does not have, nor attempts, any grand vision for the country. If there is a paradigm at all, it is a piece-meal approach on all fronts: in national politics, the economy and foreign policy.

This is in refreshing, and possibly life-saving, contradistinction to the grand geo-political fantasies of the UNP's politico-economic mentors in Washington. In fact, it is possible to argue that, except for perhaps a few young conservative idealists with intellectual ties to the Ivy League, the current UNP leadership has a remarkable ideological independence from the current centre of global imperialism.

This pragmatism has been the hallmark of the United National Front Government's approach to the management of the Cease-fire. Despite all the (expected, obvious) manoeuvres by the LTTE to squeeze whatever comparative advantage it can get out of the Cease-fire Agreement, the UNF Government has refused to either significantly yield or to be provoked to a degree that could undermine the whole process. This alone is a remarkable achievement.

The UNF regime's primary objective is the sustaining of the Sri Lankan capitalist order, if not the unified State, and virtually every action it has taken in the management of the Cease-fire has contributed to the sustaining of the politico-military equilibrium that is the principal basis of the continuity of the current larger social-political order prevailing on this island.

In previous columns I have pointed out how the LTTE attack on Katunayaka airport struck the most telling blow to the stability of Sri Lankan capitalism and how the capitalist elite moved quickly to ensure its continued hegemony by striking a deal with the LTTE to freeze the military equilibrium before things got any worse.

Today, we can count twelve months of sustained equilibrium. From the perspective of the UNP's goal of sustaining the capitalist order, it is possible to conclude that the Government has done a great deal in terms of social and economic concessions to the Tamil leadership. I think it can afford to do even more (given the inflow of resources) in this area without running any risks.

On the hand the Government has remained firm on military issues and may claim a singular success in the LTTE's climb down on the military withdrawal issue.

The risks lie in the area of politico-military strength and comparative advantage and in this, the Sri Lankan capitalist state has conceded much and cannot concede much more very quickly or easily without upsetting the current equilibrium.

The military equilibrium is linked to a larger set of dynamics and a larger national political equilibrium. Political equilibrium is not just one between the Government and the LTTE, but also pertains to Government-Presidency and Government-Opposition dynamics as well as the tensions between socio-economic-cultural groups within Sinhala society, within Tamil society, between the ethnic groups, and between Sinhala liberal/radical and Sinhala ultra-nationalist forces. These multiple dynamics will be examined in my next column.

For the UNP-UNF, the next major task lies in maintaining the current Government-LTTE equilibrium while taking up the urgent task of evolving an equally fruitful equilibrium between the Government and the Presidency and between the UNP and the PA. In this the UNP has so far singularly failed. While this is most certainly a difficult task, the very real success of the Cease-fire can only be built on by tackling it.

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager