Aftermath of Sri Lankan Election

By Seema Sengupta

KOLKATA ― As the information of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa's landslide electoral victory trickled out of Colombo, this columnist like most political analysts was taken by surprise.

A vast majority had indeed forecast a neck-to-neck fight between Rajapaksa and the opposition presidential candidate, Sarath Fonseka, in this historic poll.

Theories of the spiraling cost of living and unfettered nepotism and corruption denting Rajapaksa's political support within the Sinhala community has virtually bitten the dust.

It seems that the incumbent President has managed to garner gratitude vote en masse thereby nullifying any possibility of Tamil and Muslim voters deciding the eventual winner.

Apparently a large chunk of the majority community considers him to be the savior of Sinhala nationalism. The big question is whether the sizeable increase of 8 percent in President Rajapaksa's kitty is a reflection of Fonseka's unpopularity or his unacceptability as a political figure.

Was there an inhibition against an ex-general taking charge of the civil administration within the Lankan psyche? Do the people of Sri Lanka have any aversion to give the former general his war due especially when he is an equal stakeholder in the campaign against the Tamil Tigers?

While President Rajapaksa orchestrated the political and diplomatic maneuvering, Fonseka is the one individual who virtually led the operations on the ground to turn the dream of an insurgency-free Sri Lanka into reality.

It is therefore unclear as to why the Sinhala community rejected General Fonseka's bid for ushering a revolutionary change in the island nation's body politic.

Rajapaksa's brute majority on the other hand has given rise to an apprehension of the Tamils ending up at the wrong end given his expertise in using the available political instruments to run his writ.

The perception is that this phenomenal Sinhala support might encourage Rajapaksa to deviate from his promise of evolving a political solution to the ethnic crisis.

It is therefore a bit peculiar that a majority section of the minority Tamil population in the country's northeast chose to abstain from voting.

In the end General Fonseka managed to get only 19 percent of the Tamil vote despite a strong backing from the Tamil National Alliance ― a pro-LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) political group.

However it remains to be analyzed whether the lethargic voting pattern on the part of the Tamil community is due to fear factor or a trend toward the diminishing credibility of the Tamil political class among its constituencies.

Uncovering the extent of passive Indian involvement in this election will help substantiate the reasons behind the distinctive electoral trend properly. President Rajapaksa's proximity to the ruling Congress Party in India might have tilted New Delhi's sympathy away from Fonseka.

But then whatever the causes of this electoral verdict, Rajapaksa must lead his country through a process of reconciliation and reconstruction in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility.

As the beautiful island nation remains stranded at a crossroad with the ethnic divide threatening to become sharper than ever before, he will be required to display genuine statesmanship to tide over this crisis.

While the entire world watches with utmost eagerness the post electoral developments in Sri Lanka, the Lankan political fraternity must denounce the manifestation of confrontational politics unequivocally.

It is indeed a paradox for South Asia's oldest democracy that the victorious candidate is propagating vindictive politics against his rival while the opposition is questioning the veracity of the people's verdict.

Unfortunately, the bitter internal political dynamics in Sri Lanka is turning into the sole instigator of social upheaval and unrest. By refusing to accept criticism from his political opponents in right spirit, Rajapaksa is in fact encouraging dictatorial traits thus denigrating the democratic structure and spirit in Sri Lanka ― a nation that elected the world's first woman prime minister.

It is the solemn duty of the President to evolve a pattern of consensual politics by reassuring his political opponents and recognizing their role and duties.

General Fonseka on his part should refrain from taking political exile and seeking asylum in foreign shore. He should work in tandem with the President to eliminate the sense of acrimony prevailing in Sri Lankan society.

Neither the general nor the President should ignore the fact that a whopping four million voters have shown preference to the opposition manifesto and programs.

It is the sacred constitutional obligation of General Fonseka to firmly standby his electorate instead of bidding adieu. Perhaps, the most potent factor for development can come in the form of President Rajapaksa incorporating the salient features of Fonseka's manifesto in future government policies.

By courting his political opponents, the president can approach the ethnic and economic issues with greater understanding and conviction.

Last but not the least, President Rajapaksa must strengthen the freedom of expression in Sri Lanka. A robust democracy cannot survive without a strong and independent fourth estate and the triumphant President basking in the glory of a historic victory should inquire into the killing of journalists with due earnest.

Seema Sengupta is a journalist based in Kolkata, India. Her articles have been published by The Tribune, The Telegraph, The Pioneer, The Asian Age and other newspapers. She can be reached at seemasengupta@vsnl.net. The views expressed in the above article are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial policy of The Korea Times.