The Prince of Kandy

Maya Angelou once said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” This piece of wisdom underscores the urgent appeal of this article: to encourage voters to solidify their decisions about presidential candidates sooner rather than later. As election season unfolds, with candidates’ manifestos publicly available and their campaign strategies increasingly apparent, any informed citizen should be poised to make an early, well-considered choice. This is not just a call to vigilance but a plea to avoid the entanglements of last-minute political drama.

By hovering in a state of indecision, we become vulnerable to a well-oiled machine of manufactured incidents and misinformation campaigns. The problem is exacerbated by modern communication tools. For instance, WhatsApp, despite its ubiquity, often serves as a conduit for misinformation, impacting public discourse negatively. In contrast, traditional newspapers, despite their corporate allegiances, are occasionally compelled to acknowledge certain truths when they become overwhelmingly evident.

Previously, emails and websites were sufficient for disseminating information that could challenge or critique state narratives. The shift to instant, mobile-accessible information hasn’t necessarily enriched our political dialogue. Instead, it has sometimes muddied the waters, making it harder to discern truth from fabrication.

A potent lie always contains elements of truth, making it alluring and believable. In the complex dance of politics, the choice to abstain from voting can indeed be as significant as the decision to support a candidate, particularly in scenarios where choices are reduced to selecting the lesser of two evils. In an era where candidates often present overly polished personas and campaign materials tend to gloss over deeper issues, this critique aims to cut through the superficial narratives presented by each major candidate.

In essence, this article is a clarion call for early and decisive action in the political sphere, urging voters to sift through the theatrics and make informed decisions based on the core values and track records of the candidates. It is an invitation to look beyond the surface and engage with the substantive issues at stake in the upcoming election. I shall attack each candidate and note why their base may consider not voting for them.

The incumbent: Ranil

On coming together

Mark Twain’s observation that “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes,” aptly describes Ranil, a candidate whose name is synonymous with Sri Lankan politics. Having directed policy across multiple governments and with one of the longest tenures in parliament, his experience is unparalleled. His early calls for unity, as seen in a recently resurfaced video from his youth before his hair greyed (source), starkly contrast with his controversial political journey.

Here from the perspective of his base as I have written before “The United National Party has by far the worst record on ethnic harmony. The UNP though antecedent of the Ceylon National Congress was behind much of the racial tension in Sri Lankan history. Through extremely divisive policies the UNP created both the JVP and LTTE. 

The UNP of the 1980s time embodied, contrary to the principles of the Ceylon National Congress and the notion of a United Nation within its name, the very ethnocentric elements of the SLFP. 

This worked wonders as any intelligent criticism of the government would also probably be by someone who would be easily castigated as being against the majoritarianism of the government. In other words, people like Cyril Mathew could be used to reign in any elements averse to the brazen corruption of the executive presidency.” (https://www.ft.lk/opinion/Against-the-consensus-view/14-723203)

Recent fiasco in the North

Ranil Wickremesinghe’s political maneuvers, particularly in relation to the Tamil community and figures such as Karuna Amman, reflect a complex strategy of alliance and division that some critics describe as “divide and conquer.” Karuna Amman, a former LTTE commander who later entered democratic politics, has publicly supported Ranil in various capacities, including during recent presidential elections. This alliance has sparked discussions about possible political motivations and strategies aimed at creating rifts within the Tamil polity, especially as Karuna has historically been a controversial figure due to his past actions and statements during the civil conflict.

Critics argue that Ranil’s failure to more openly address and reconcile the actions of his uncle during the 1983 riots—events that significantly deepened ethnic tensions in Sri Lanka—further complicates his position on ethnic reconciliation. Instead of taking a path that might foster broad reconciliation, Ranil has been involved in initiatives to prosecute members of the armed forces, a move seen by some as not sufficiently addressing the root causes of ethnic strife and possibly alienating certain sections of the community. Prosecution of the armed forces would also have to include former members of the LTTE and cause further communal disharmony.

Though not as passionate as other people on the issues I believe as I wrote in the piece quoted from earlier “The Tamil polity should build ties not with the policies but with the people of the JVP and form a united movement against the executive presidency.” I am suspicious of the way in which things have played out within the TNA and ITAK and wouldn’t be surprised if Ranil played a hand in influencing it.

On the economic front

On the economic front, it’s important to recognize that economic recovery was likely inevitable despite the crisis, given the inherent tendency of the economy toward growth. After all you can only stop paying on your debt once. Evaluating Ranil’s economic policies as unequivocally superior only makes sense when contrasted with the notably flawed strategies of Cabraal and Dr. P B Jayasundera. For example, under Ranil’s tenure, there was a continued emphasis on non-essential construction projects in Colombo, and the importation of luxury cars which, once exposed on social media, sparked considerable public unrest. This may not have been under his direction, but it did happen.

Concerning the efforts to combat corruption, Ranil is expected to establish an effective system to address this issue. However, a significant part of the corruption problem remains deeply embedded within the political framework itself. For instance, there has been a notable increase in the smuggling of cigarettes and alcohol, for which Ranil, overseeing the Excise Department, bears some responsibility. Rather than pursuing complex legislation like an imputed rental tax, which could conflict with the 13th amendment, a clearer revision of the Excise Act might be more beneficial.

Furthermore, Ranil is unlikely to instigate major changes in the economic landscape or to effectively address high-profile cases of fraud, such as the sugar scam. This is compounded by allegations of malfeasance within the Primary Dealer network with one scam connected to him. That failure is however well protected by the even larger failure at Entrust Securities. The Entrust scandal undermined the entire government securities issuance system, serving as a buffer that potentially allows other offenders in the industry to take mitigatory measures when scrutiny intensifies.

To the UNP base

The prospect of achieving ethnic reconciliation is unlikely to be realized by the current cohort of politicians. Many of them have risen to prominence by exploiting ethnic divisions and have even inflamed these tensions. For instance, consider the stance of the Muslim MPs in the current parliament who believe that their daughters should not have the right to consent to marriage. This type of religious extremism is fueled by the pervasive identity politics that afflict our nation. Like his fellow major candidates, Ranil has made considerable efforts to emphasize his Sinhala Buddhist identity. Unless we as a society firmly reject this clear divisiveness, we will find it challenging to progress together in unity. My vote for him is cast with reluctance.

I am naturally wary of Capital Maharaja’s recently favorable coverage of Ranil, although I anticipate a shift in the coming weeks. I am not concerned as those responsible for the regrettable “Sri Lanka Decides” sound bite will likely continue to demonstrate their incompetence in other areas as well.

The eloquent Anura

From May Day onwards

As I have written before “May Day rallies spotlight the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) not as a fleeting sensation as some media portrayals suggest, but as a steadfast and consistent voice in the Sri Lankan Parliament. The JVP has been vocal on several critical issues: the role of the Executive Presidency, the hurried privatization of state-owned assets, and the pervasive corruption among the political elite.

Contrary to what some narratives imply, the public’s attendance at JVP rallies is not just passive observation but a calculated demonstration of support for the party’s stance on key issues. This participation highlights a collective dissent against certain governmental policies rather than an endorsement of a militant JVP-led government.

There is also an intriguing aspect of manipulation in how the JVP is positioned within political dialogues. For example, a significant incident involved Sirasa, a media outlet owned by the Capital Maharaja group, which seemingly orchestrated Anura Kumara Dissanayake to ask their question in parliament. This question, which Dissanayake brought up in parliament, pertained to PVC piping and subtly benefited the media group’s associated manufacturing interests, showcasing a complex interplay between media and politics.”

Anura is by no means a clean character. The immense coverage he gets from the Capital Maharaja network would come at great cost in a subsequent government.

Policy documentation

Policy documentation reveals that the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) presents a policy platform that fluctuates between hard-line communist ideologies and more moderate center-left positions. A recent and notable example of this inconsistency is their support for the partial divestment of the Trincomalee Oil Tanks. This stance is somewhat perplexing, given the state of the oil tanks, which are now too small and too deteriorated to serve the modern oil transport infrastructure effectively. Historically, it’s worth noting that during the initial discussions about these investments, factions similar to the JVP were vehemently opposed to any form of divestment. It is a moot and cheap attempt at trying to portray themselves as reformed.

Concerning the East Container Terminal, the JVP staunchly opposes foreign ownership, specifically from Indian stakeholders. They fail to recognize that allowing an Indian company to control this terminal could strategically discourage India from further developing its own competing port infrastructure, which could be an advantage for Sri Lanka. Instead, the JVP insists on nationalizing this asset, driven by a desire to keep it under local control for the benefit of their supporting unions. This nationalistic approach ignores the broader strategic benefits that could arise from foreign management and is also mandated by conditions tied to Asian Development Bank financing for expanding the Colombo Port.

Believing in the JVP’s public manifesto without considering their actual policy actions and historical stance would be naive. The policies they advocate often reflect the more radical ideologies of their student factions and show little evolution over the decades, revealing a gap between their public positions and their more pragmatic political maneuvers aimed at appealing to a broader electoral base.

Expanding into the SLPP abyss

The SLPP, in breaking away from the SLFP, committed a significant blunder by identifying as a right-wing party. This decision, while seemingly rational due to their extensive looting, hence aligning their interests with capitalist gains, blatantly ignored the fundamental nature of political engagement.

The party has been conspicuously silent on critical issues like trade agreement negotiations and extensive privatization strategies under Ranil’s administration. This silence likely stems from a desire to avoid scrutiny of their questionable practices and alliances. As a result, their voter base feels alienated, turning instead to the JVP for representation.

With Namal presenting himself as a new option and ostensibly an opportunity to redefine the party’s trajectory, there might be a shift back towards left-leaning policies. However, whether this repositioning will cleanse their tarnished image remains questionable. Namal is anticipated to perform better than Anura in the upcoming election, and a potential coalition could secure them a respectable number of seats. Nevertheless, it would be wise for the SLPP’s tainted old-guard to retire from the political arena and spare themselves further embarrassment.

The JVP is not some major party but rather one that is gaining as the reigns of the leftist parties are handed to Namal Rajapaksa.

To the JVP base

Anura is just a very strong talking head. He has yet to have any major political or policy achievement. Not voting for a standalone JVP party this time would force them to collaborate with the SLFP which in turn would moderate their views.

The Smattering Sajith

Sajith publicly called for the death penalty in his 2019 campaign.

Rewriting the passage:

Reviewing his previous campaign tactics, Sajith has notably softened his stance on capital punishment compared to 2019. This shift marks a departure in his campaign strategy, likely influenced by a new team of marketing and public relations experts. His campaign is characterized by a memorable anthem and the most lavishly funded rallies this election season. However, pinning him down to consistent stances remains challenging. The incumbent President has accused him of shifting his rhetoric depending on the audience—appealing to Harsha and Kabir for some, while aligning with Nalaka Godahewa for others.

Sajith has ambitiously expanded his policy platforms to include even minor sectors like Sports, Tourism, and Capital Markets. Yet, these policies appear underdeveloped and lack cohesion, with many ideas seemingly borrowed from other sources. For insights into his approach to Capital Markets, one could examine his speech at the Capital Markets Conference.

My father’s son

His father was a polarizing figure—many opposed him vehemently, yet he remained unwaveringly dedicated to the UNP’s hierarchy. As a minister, he committed himself fully to his duties. This level of dedication does not seem to extend to Sajith, who approaches his role with less rigor, reminiscent of other beneficiaries of nepotism.

Like Namal, Sajith carries the burden of his extended family’s legacy and old business connections. While he publicly criticizes major debtors of state banks, this appears hypocritical given the questionable associations and financial standing of the firms that were linked to his late father.

For those interested in further scrutiny, examining his asset disclosure may reveal substantial debts and a risky, poorly judged stock portfolio.

Sajith’s failings as a housing minister

During his time as Housing Minister, Sajith failed to implement any significant policy changes or reforms. For a detailed understanding of his tenure’s impact, one can examine the activities of the National Housing Development Authority (NHDA).

Allegations have surfaced suggesting that Sajith used employment opportunities within the ministry as a form of bribery to gain favor with the public. This practice not only raises ethical concerns but also questions his integrity and commitment to transparent governance.

Moreover, there have been numerous reports that Sajith allocated state resources in a biased manner, favoring his supporters disproportionately. This selective distribution undermines the principle of equality and fairness in public service.

Sajith has also been criticized for merely echoing the electorate’s misinformed opinions instead of educating and guiding them towards more informed perspectives. This approach can perpetuate misinformation and hinder progressive change within the community.

To the SJB base

Reflecting on Maya Angelou’s profound advice, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time,” it is evident that Sajith’s conduct during his tenure as Housing Minister reveals much about his leadership qualities and priorities. His performance during the ongoing economic crisis further underscores his unsuitability for leadership in times of adversity. If Sajith truly aspired to the presidency and aimed to correct the alleged misdirection of Ranil’s policies, he would have demonstrated consistent and clear leadership throughout his career, not just in the fleeting allegations we are to see in the last three weeks.