PLEASING THE WEST
The memorandum of understanding between the PA and the JVP has brought some stability to the government and the country. However, that does not mean that the MOU would be able to get the country out of trouble. The non national forces who cannot be happy with the outcome must be trying to topple the government by applying pressure so that the JVP would be forced to withdraw its support to the government. The non national forces are not happy mainly on two counts. Firstly there is the Tamil racist problem and its offshoot LTTE terrorism and these forces want the government to establish a federal state first and then a confederation satisfying the so-called aspirations of Tamil racism. The MOU is very clear on this and there would not be any packages at least for one year.
Secondly the non national forces are not happy with the economic policies. They want the country to be more open, in fact more open than any other country in the world, including USA and would apply pressure on the government to act in contrary to the MOU between PA and JVP. They would apply economic sanctions in effect by increasing tariff, cutting down quotas etc., if the government in order to satisfy the JVP refrain from following the instructions of the so-called experts of the west.
The news conference that was held soon after the MOU was signed, was interesting. At that news conference the ministers who represented the government were trying to tell the western world that nothing has changed as a result of the MOU. Was the government trying to deceive the donor countries by pretending that the situation remains the same after signing the MOU? We also saw the ministers who represented the PA at the discussions between the UNP and the PA writing to the UNP representatives at the discussions inviting them to send a common letter to Prabhakaran inviting him for "peace talks" as agreed at the discussions. What happened to that letter? Was it released only to the newspapers? Was it actually sent to the UNP representatives. The UNP, it appears, has decided to ignore the letter. Why was that letter given so much publicity soon after signing the MOU?
It is clear that the government is trying to send signals to the western powers that they are still for "peace talks" in spite of the MOU. Why is the government behaving like this? Does the government still think that the Tamil racist problem could be solved through negotiations? Or it may be that the government is trying to deceive the western powers especially the donor countries. The government in any event is trying to please the western powers for external survival. Internally the MOU has guaranteed some sort of survival but unfortunately for the government internal survival and external survival do not go hand in hand.
Everybody knows that Sri Lanka is a poor country according to indices such as per capita income expressed in US dollars, the number of telephones per thousand people, the number of water sealed toilets per thousand homes etc., supplied by the western economists. We have been told that these numbers have to be very high and we strive hard to achieve such high values. The ambassadors, high commissioners tell us how to improve these figures and live a comfortable life. There is only one economic model for the whole world and it is worked out in the west. Privatisation, globalisation, openness of economy are the familiar words used by the western economists and we have no choice but to follow the advise given by these masters. As we have only one economic model, our economists being not allowed to think originally and evolve alternate economic models we have to depend on the donor countries for our survival. ( It is interesting to note that the so-called third world intellectuals, whether in economics or physics are encouraged to be applied scientists and not theoreticians. The theoreticians who create concepts and general theories are always found in the west and the "third world intellectuals" have to be contented with applying some theory worked out by a theoretician in the west to the "situations" found in the "third world".)
We are caught in a vicious circle. Unless we construct our own theories and work out say for example our own economic models we would be mere pawns in the hands of western ambassadors and the so called experts who come to advise us on anything from paddy fields to electromagnetic fields. As we have pointed in these columns the PA leadership know only the western theories and they look at the world through the western eyes. It is unlikely that Ms. Kumaratunga learnt any indigenous theories, either at the convent in Colombo or at the university in Paris. In fact she would not have known even the possibility of having any indigenous theories. Those who have been brainwashed to assume that there is an objective world independent of the mind (can anybody demonstrate independent of the mind that an external world exists independent of the mind? All theories, assumptions including that of an external world independent of the mind have been created by men and women with minds), that is understood using theories created in the west, mainly by the minds of the whites would think in terms of national questions, hegemony of the Sinhalas (these people have been taught to ignore the only hegemony, that is of the western world), markets and open economies. The leadership of the PA is full of these people and they have no alternative concepts and theories to understand the world (essentially to create their own world- understanding is nothing but creating some "model"). Thus they have to depend on the theories and concepts of their masters and have to satisfy their ambassadors and high commissioners. The statements issued by the government and the news conferences held by the ministers after the MOU between the PA and the JVP was signed were for the consumption of the envoys of the west.
What the PA government does not understand is that the west had dropped them as far back as 1998. The western powers know that the PA government cannot deliver the goods the way they had wanted and they do not back the government any more. It is futile for the government to attempt to satisfy the western ambassadors and high commissioners and they should be looking in other directions. The so-called foreign investors are not coming to Sri Lanka. From 1994 to about 1998 the net inflow of investments in the stock market was slightly greater than the net outflow. However from about 1998 the opposite is the case except in July 1999 and during the period between 1994 and December 2000 the total net inflow has been Rs. 823,000,000 while the total net outflow has been Rs. 5171,000,000. In other words the foreign "investors" have drawn out more than six times the investments that they have brought into this country. The ratio for the period between 1998 and 2000 must be even higher than this. With or without a MOU between the PA and the JVP this trend would continue as long as we have a PA government.
The PA government instead of trying to please the western powers should work out a consistent policy towards the Tamil racist problem and the economy of the country. I am not an economist but I have great doubts as to the validity of the western economic theories with respect to Sri Lanka. We are not a rational society in Max Weber's sense of the word rational and our economists should go deeply into this problem before applying western economic theories in this country. Though I have quoted figures from the stock market to establish the fact that the foreign "investors" have started to go back after about 1998, do the various indices of the stock market that are quoted like a manthram by the business reporters in the electronic media reflect the status of the economy of the country? What is the role of the central bank and the commercial banking system in Sri Lanka? Are there any business entrepreneurs in this country in the sense of the word as used in western "rational" capitalism?
I am not worried if somebody tells me that the western economic theories are not applicable here, conforming my assumptions or rather the doubts. In fact I would be happy as it gives us an opportunity to work out our own theories and concepts in economics. The PA government should think differently about this whole problem and come out with our own solutions without trying to depend even on Nobel Prize winning Sens from this part of the world. As far as the Tamil racist problem is concerned over the last fifteen years or so we have worked out our own concepts and theories and we are in a position to understand the problem without depending on the histories and sociological theories of the western trained academics. Even if somebody were to establish that Sinhala Buddhism is a concept created by Anagarika Dharmapala, I am not worried as the Sinhala society over the years have evolved many concepts and Sinhala Buddhism is only one such concept. If it was left to Anagarika Dharmapala to create Sinhala Buddhism I would be looking at the specific reasons that compelled him to create that concept. However, it is not the case as it was king Dutugemunu who "mixed" Buddhism with Sinhalaness and gave another interpretation to Buddhism through a kind of metamorphism. Anagarika Dharmapala, if at all may have given a label to a phenomenon that has existed for more than two thousand years.
The PA government, instead of finding out ways and means of satisfying the western powers and their ambassadors, should be looking to making the MOU between the PA and the JVP a success. The MOU represents the wish of the national forces in the country and the PA government should not allow the non national forces to torpedo that wish.
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>