ANURA LOCKING HORNS WITH UNCLE SAM
Last week while commenting on the leadership crisis, this column referred to the clash between Mr. Anura Bandaranaike and the ambassador for the USA in Colombo. After mentioning that the USA is behind the UNF government and that the UNF is preferred to the PA by the sole world power it was stated that "Mr. Anura Bandaranaike probably realises this fact and he is resisting interference by the USA in the affairs of the SLFP. Earlier it was reported that the campaign for an "honourable peace" by the SLFP in collaboration with the JVP was not to the liking of the super power, but Mr. Bandaranaike had not listened to the "advice" given by them. Now he has said that Mr. Bush has been elected as the President of the USA only by a few votes and even then the election results are questionable. Obviously the ambassador for the USA is not happy with the remarks by Mr. Bandaranaike and has responded to it."
Now Mr. Bandaranaike has in a letter addressed to Mr. Ashley Wills the ambassador for the USA criticised the policy of the world super power. "The Sunday Times" in its issue of 11 th August 2002, said: " Mr. Bandaranaike in his four-page letter has cast doubts on the US helping Sri Lanka in a time of real crisis and blasted the US saying that they have proved to be the most untrustworthy friends listing out a litany of instances where they have let their friends down. Referring to the 'warning' about the JVP, Mr. Bandaranaike has again slammed the US for having befriended and supported a long list of the world's worst dictators - and then let them down."
Whether the USA is the most untrustworthy friend or not, as Mr. Bandaranaike has said, there are certain facts that come to one's mind when one considers the policy of that country with respect to the LTTE. In spite of the so-called September 11, the USA government has not taken any steps to help to defeat the LTTE, that is ironically banned in that country. Though Israel and the Jewish lobby in the USA have asked for a change in the Arafat leadership, associating the latter with terrorism there is no such move with respect to the terrorist organisation LTTE and its fascist leader. Whatever, some educated people of the country, especially those who look up to the "democratic west", think of "September 11", it has no effect on the LTTE and Sri Lanka. By now it should be clear that the USA has no intention of treating the LTTE, the way it treats the non Christian terrorist organisations that are fighting against Christian countries. As far as the west is concerned Prabhakaran is no Arafat or bin Laden. Though he is not in power, Prabhakaran is more of a Din Diem or a Marcos and as Mr. Bandaranaike has said of some others, it is most likely that the west will make use of him as much as possible and then drop him when he becomes a liability as in the case of the others. Why is it that the USA worried about the JVP while forcing the government to negotiate with the LTTE. Though the JVP had resorted to terrorist activities in the past, today it has chosen the ballet instead of the bullet and is not known to be armed. The LTTE on the otherhand is armed, is in the process of getting more arms, abducting young people and recruiting them as LTTE cadres, is extorting money and having banks, income tax department, police stations illegally and threatening the sovereignty of the country. The USA that has warned about the JVP is feeling quite comfortable with the LTTE, in spite of the so-called "September 11". How does one explain this policy? Is it because the JVP is mainly Sinhala Buddhist though the leaders adhere to Marxism?
If the USA were to drop Prabhakaran, as in the case of Din Diem and Marcos, most probably it would not be due to the pressure of the Sri Lankan government. The UNF government does not have the strength to do so and it is not certain whether even a future PA -JVP government would move in that direction. In this regard it should be remembered that the so-called peace talks between the LTTE and the UNP(F) had been planned before the UNF government came to power in December 2001, as Thamilselvan himself has admitted, reminding the claim by the PA-JVP of an "Ali Koti givisuma". It is interesting to note that he LTTE backs the UNF in the present "struggle to dissolve the parliament". The London based Tamil Guardian in its August 7 issue has said: "Mr. Wickremesinghe's government is now in a fight for its survival and the longer term future of the peace process depends undoubtedly on the UNF's absolute command of Sri Lanka's governance.......While the bickering between Sri Lanka's President Chandrika Kumaratunga and the parliamentary cabinet of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has been a recurrent theme ever since the United National Front (UNF) came to power last December, the turmoil in Colombo this week is indicative of a fundamental - and growing - crisis."
In this connection the LTTE would be concerned with the statement of the President broadcast on Friday the 9th. Ms. Kumaratunga referring obviously to the present situation in the north and the east said: "I shall not hesitate to adopt every necessary measure in terms of powers entrusted to me under the constitution, in the event of any threat to the unity of our motherland or the security and safety of the citizens. I affirm to the people of this country that I will not hesitate for a moment to exercise the executive powers vested in me to prevent the dismemberment of this country and to avert any serious dangers that the country may be called upon to face." It is not only Messrs Ravi Karunanayake and co., who would like to oust the President but Prabhakaran as well. Ms. Kumaratunga may not be the best nationalist in the country but she presides over a party that has the support of the majority of the Sinhalas. The LTTE that demands talks only on interim council, with the aim of establishing a separate state through the interim council, would not like Ms. Kumaratunga continuing to command the armed forces.
The UNF government would not demand the removal of Prabhakaran from the LTTE leadership, nor would extradite him to India. In any event the Indians do not appear to be very happy with the present situation. The Indians who nurtured the LTTE leadership in the beginning, subsequently turned against them but are unable to do much to change it, at present. As Nirupama Subramaniam had observed in a recent article in "Hindu", republished in "The Island", the Indians tried to change the LTTE leadership by appointing the EPRLF as the leaders of the Tamils. However, that too was a leadership installed from outside and Mr. Vardaraja Perumal had to find "political asylum" in India, in the face of a strong LTTE leadership backed by the west. The LTTE leadership, though defeated the Vellala leadership, installed by the Dutch and British, is also maintained by the western powers and if not for this backing it would have been defeated long time ago.
The clash between Mr. Anura Bandaranaike and Mr. Ashley Wills has to be looked into, in the above background. Having referred to the exchange of letters between Messrs. Bandaranaike and Wills we said last week : "This battle indicates that the SLFP resents interference by the USA and is not afraid of indicating that in public. However, the question arises as to whether the SLFP or the PA has the political power to resist these interferences." Can Mr.Anura Bandaranaike lead the SLFP and the PA -JVP evolving a national (Jathika) policy for the party and the country, in the process. At present within the general leadership crisis in the country there is a battle for the leadership of the SLFP, PA -JVP alliance. The old divisions along so-called class lines are no more and one would say that what we witness is a clash of individuals, that is not based on policies.
However, it is not the case and there are certain trends emerging already. By now it is not a secret that there are two main factions within the SLFP. The other constituent parties of the PA are only observers without any say in this struggle for leadership. However, the JVP, that is not a constituent party of the PA, but that was in the "parivasa" government is in the thick of the leadership battle. While Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse leads one of the factions the other is led by Mr. Mangala Samaraweera. It is clear that Mr. Samaraweera has the blessings of Ms. Chandrika Kumaratunga and Mr. Anura Bandaranaike is the Presidential candidate of this faction. The JVP that supports this faction may decide to field its own candidate at the presidential elections with the possibility of requesting their supporters to mark the second preference to Mr. Bandaranaike in case the latter become the presidential candidate of the PA.
It is interesting to note that Mr. Bandaranaike who was considered to be one of the most right wing elements in the SLFP is being supported by the JVP and is coming out with attacks on the USA policy. Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse who is considered to be more left wing is being supported by many NGO elements and it is alleged that he has an understanding with the UNP. Some of these NGO elements are ex, neo or retired Marxists (by a retired Marxist, I mean a person who has retired from being a Marxist as in the case of a retired civil servant and does not refer to a "Marxist" or otherwise who has retired from his job.) and all of them could be categorised under the heading of non national forces. The JVP in spite of its Marxist rhetoric is in the final analysis a national force. Mr. Rajapakse appears to the people as one who is being supported by people like Mr. Vasudeva Nanayakkara, who belongs to the non national forces, and who has the backing of the UNP. The UNF went out of their way to say that Mr. Rajapakse is not involved in the "coup" that has apparently jumped out of the brief case of Mr. Mangala Samaraweera that he had forgotten to take with him after a briefing in the office of the leader of the opposition.
It is difficult to identify Mr. Mangala Samaraweera of the "Sudu Nelum" movement and of the "Thavalama" (caravan) as a nationalist. Mr. Anura Bandaranaike has a long way to go to emerge as a national leader. Ms. Kumaratunga with her Mahajana Party policies is not the ideal person to guide a nationalist SLFP, that emerged in 1955. However, unless Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse who has declared "war" on the Bandaranaikes last week at the group meeting and at the meeting of the party members at Badulla, moves away from the Vasudevas and the NGOs he would cut a sorry figure in the SLFP in time to come. Mr. Anura Bandaranaike who is prepared to criticise and attack the USA would appear to be more nationalistic and anti imperialistic than Mr. Mahinda Rajapakse!
Professor Nalin de Silva
>
>
>