|
|
 |
 |
| Sunday, 7 December 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Editorial |  |
| News Business Features Security
|
Please forward your comments to the
Editor, Sunday Observer. E-mail: [email protected] Snail mail : Sunday Observer, 35, D.R.Wijewardana Mawatha, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Telephone : 94 1 429239 / 331181 Fax : 94 1 429230 Balance of power The country's business elite wants it. The religious leadership wants it. The professionals want it. Most of the general mass of Sri Lankans in the north, south, east, west and centre of the country want it. Governments of rich countries that support the Sri Lanka's development want it. They all want the President and the Prime Minister and, the two political formations that they represent, the United National Party and the People's Alliance, to collaborate as closely as possible in the general governance of the country, but especially in addressing the most critical challenge facing our island society: the ethnic conflict. But do these two national leaders and their respective political parties and allied groups want it? Are they ready to make concessions to each other and set out on a path of co-operation and collaboration in the peace process, in managing the economic recovery and in jointly dealing with other national problems? The success of the current negotiations between the two sides can only be demonstrated by the arrangement that is put in place for the Government and the Presidency to work together in an effective and sustained manner. There is little dispute between the two political blocs over policy, except, perhaps in some aspects of economic and social policy. They are both virtually of one mind in relation to the peace process. Unfortunately, they seem to be equally of one mind in their determination to hold on to and obtain political power, especially power over the State and also whatever political advantage they can exclusively gain for themselves as opposed to the other side for the continuation of their hold on State power in the future. The current negotiations pertain to exactly that: the quantum of power and tactical or strategic advantage the UNP and the PA want to hold in the State and in the process of governance. If both political blocs must share in the governance of the country, especially in conducting the peace process, then they must agree to a balanced sharing of power and advantage. The concepts of 'national government' and a 'government of national consensus' must be interpreted in this light. Whatever the mechanism that is agreed to, it must be a mechanism that ensures that both national political blocs enjoy an equal access to political power and the possibilities of tactical advantages. As long as one or the other bloc strives to gain advantage over the other or a greater share of power and governmental responsibility, the negotiations to put in place such a mechanism will fail. That is because the one side will not agree to a mechanism in which the sharing of power is lopsided in favour of the other side. But it is imperative that the on-going endeavour to set up an arrangement for collaborative governance does not fail. Not only most of Sri Lankan society, but most of the world community seem to be demanding such an arrangement and seem to be eagerly looking forward to its birth. A failure means that the national leaders will go against the whole of this societal need and aspiration. They will be virtually holding to ransom the mandate of the people and the expectations of important segments of Sri Lankan society and the world. The longer they fail to evolve such a sustainable working arrangement, the more they are betraying their electoral mandate and the less they retain the right to cling to whatever power or position they already hold. Today, the two national political leaderships must succeed in this endeavour or expose their perfidy, incompetence and mediocrity. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security Produced by Lake House |
