JVP's hour of reckoning

The cost to the government of being too unfriendly to its coalition partners is that it will be painted into an isolated corner. The cost of being too close, would be that the government agenda will start looking similar to the agenda of the coalition stakeholders.

To exit from this dilemma, the government needs to seek compromise with the coalition, and this sounds the all too obvious thing to state. But, seeking compromise with friends will not be as hard as the draining task of seeking compromise with enemies. The latter effort of courting sworn enemies has seasoned the government, so there is no reason that its overtures to friends in the form of coalition partners would be clumsy. Too many groups are waiting to see that a permanent rift evolves between the government and the JVP. This is as a result of a power equation, but this also does not mean that the differences between the JVP and the government are so insignificant that they can be deemed non-existent.

But, the JVP is closing ranks with the government on several issues, and one of them for example is on the matter of the Press Council. The JVP, as the government did, wants the Press Council reconstituted. This may be a relatively borderline issue when the core points of the national discourse are framed against it, but the fact is that on an agglomeration of these somewhat borderline areas, the thinking of the government and the JVP is remarkably alike.

This translates as a cumulative agenda that is shared by both parties. The weight of these totaled shared concerns, could override the sharp differences that seem to exist between the middle of the road SLFP's polices and the rather radically inclined plank of the Marxist JVP.

The heft of a JVP SLFP combine would seem necessary, particularly as a counterpoise to all of the forces that seems to be falling in line in a rather aggressive manner against the homegrown thinking that emanates from the direction of the President's House.

There would be no fear if these opposing forces are homegrown as well, but just of a different persuasion. But most of the challenges to the Rajapaksa administration seem to veer from the direction of those quarters whose interests seem to be dictated from overseas. This would be a fair description of the frequent apologists for the LTTE in the form of conflict resolution specialists, as it would be true for business interests which seem to have taken to being in cahoots with civil society lobby groups that want quick fix to the national question which will appease exclusively, the interests of international players. For example, there are interested parties that seek to exaggerate or place out of context the government's responses to the LTTE's renewal of open hostilities.

The government's response has to be framed in terms of cause and effect: i.e: the state has been forced to retaliate when there was been an intentional violation of the ceasefire from among one of its signatories.

But sometimes the effect can be flagged in red, without any significant reference to the cause.

It's a manifest tendency in media misreporting as well as in NGO report writing, and a keen study of such tendencies will reflect the fact that there is a gradual but focused attempt at undermining the legitimacy of a democratically elected government.

When the common interests of the people of this country and those concerned about its national priorities coincide against insidious challenges, there can only be one effective response, which is an ingathering of all forces that are poised against a devious threat by forces motivated from overseas - while also being propelled by oversize fund accounts and grants.

Daya Master's attack

Hectares of attack has been written already about Daya Master's ride to the hospital under the auspices of a Sri Lankan government directive, and some of what's said will undoubtedly have the ring of legitimacy to it.

But, all politics is compromise, and it's remiss on the part of the national commentariat to forget the fact that there is also a genuine upside to the Daya Master incident, now that it has taken place.

This is that the Sri Lankan government can never be seen as being obdurate, or extremist in this conflict.

The state has embraced the enemy in his hour of need in a Buddhistic spirit of compassion. This has been manifest in deed and not in word.

In which international forum can this not be used in the Sri Lankan government's favour, to show that it's not a Tamil baiting, muscle flexing government that never metes out any justice to its minorities?