Sri Lanka’s Rajapaksa Shows True Colors with Autonomy Comments
Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa began his visit to India today amid protests over recent statements he made that appeared to rule out political autonomy for Sri Lanka’s Tamil ethnic minority.
While the president had previously promised to delegate authority to the provinces, as required by the constitution, while also broadening dialogue with the Tamils, he said in a speech for Sri Lankan Independence Day on Monday that it would not be practical for the island country “to have different administrations based on ethnicity.”
Alan Keenan, project director and senior analyst for Sri Lanka at the International Crisis Group, told Trend Lines that the remarks were the latest reflection of the true feelings of the president and his powerful brothers, all of whom hold high office. He explained that Mahinda Rajapaksa’s brothers Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the defense secretary, and Basil Rajapaksa, the minister of economic development, had said similar things in the past.
“All three Rajapaksa brothers had made statements indicating that rather than expanding devolution, or devolving more power to the Tamil areas, they actually intend to reduce or eliminate those powers given to provincial councils,” he said, adding that Chamal Rajapaksa, speaker of the parliament, had not made recent comments on devolution.*
Keenan said the intentions of the Rajapaksa brothers, including the president, “run absolutely counter” to past promises they have made to the United Nations, India, the United States and others.
Keenan said that the Rajapaksa government has embraced a formerly marginal posture of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism that has alienated minorities such as Tamils and Muslims andis damaging the prospects for peace in a country that concluded a bloody civil war only four years ago. And Keenan said ethnic tensions are only increasing.
The current government, he said, “has cultivated the mindset that Sri Lanka is a Sinhalese and Buddhist country and Muslims and Tamils are here through the generosity of the Sinhalese people and are not really equal members” of society. While Tamils have the same formal rights as everyone else, the Rajapaksa brothers promote the view that Tamils “are just guests” in Sri Lanka, Keenan explained.
Officially, however, the 13th amendment of the Sri Lankan constitution requires the establishment of provincial councils and the recognition of Tamil as an official language. Some parties, including the Muslim parties, are officially in favor of expanding the devolution of authority envisioned in the 13th amendment, Keenan said, but the president is likely to seek to have it repealed despite earlier promises to build on it. “The way Sri Lankan politics has worked over the last few years is the president gets what he wants,” Keenan said.
At the same time, even the 13th amendment does not go far enough for those in favor of more devolution of power. The powers it does grant to provincial councils are extremely limited, and have “never really satisfied the underlying aspirations and demands and grievances of the Tamils,” Keenan explained.
Keenan emphasized that the example of former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who preceded Rajapaksa in office, demonstrated that a president who truly believes in the problem of marginalization and the power of autonomy can convince even the majority Sinhalese that devolution of power to the provinces is acceptable. Rajapaksa, said Keenan, appears by contrast to be moving away from political accommodation of the Tamil minority.
Change will require pressure by outside actors, argued Keenan. But, he said, neither Sri Lanka’s closest neighbor, India, nor the rest of the international community had done much.
Though, according to Keenan, India is “by all accounts extremely unhappy with the Sri Lankan government,” New Delhi is unlikely to provide an outside force for change. India has a major stake in the future of its southern neighbor, not only because of its proximity, but also because of the significant Tamil population in southeastern India. But Keenan cited a belief within India “that if you push too hard on the Rajapaksas, that will only drive them further into the arms of the Chinese.”
He acknowledged that India does face that risk to some extent, but added that progress in Sri Lanka required both the broader international community and India to pressure the government “to not just make positive moves on the question of power sharing and devolution of power and equal treatment of Tamils but also the larger questions of human rights, rule of law, separation of powers and basics of democratic governance, which have been . . . virtually destroyed over the past couple of years.”
“The international community has consistently been behind the curve when it comes to Sri Lanka,” Keenan said. Just as it took outside powers “a long time to wake up to just how serious the problem was” during the civil war, he explained, as long as the international community does not pressure the Rajapaksas to change course, “the situation in Sri Lanka is likely to continue to deteriorate.”
* Editor's note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly indentified the three Rajapska brothers who have recently commented on devolution; Mahinda Rajapaksa has, but Chamal Rajapaksa has not. WPR regrets the error.
While the president had previously promised to delegate authority to the provinces, as required by the constitution, while also broadening dialogue with the Tamils, he said in a speech for Sri Lankan Independence Day on Monday that it would not be practical for the island country “to have different administrations based on ethnicity.”
Alan Keenan, project director and senior analyst for Sri Lanka at the International Crisis Group, told Trend Lines that the remarks were the latest reflection of the true feelings of the president and his powerful brothers, all of whom hold high office. He explained that Mahinda Rajapaksa’s brothers Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the defense secretary, and Basil Rajapaksa, the minister of economic development, had said similar things in the past.
“All three Rajapaksa brothers had made statements indicating that rather than expanding devolution, or devolving more power to the Tamil areas, they actually intend to reduce or eliminate those powers given to provincial councils,” he said, adding that Chamal Rajapaksa, speaker of the parliament, had not made recent comments on devolution.*
Keenan said the intentions of the Rajapaksa brothers, including the president, “run absolutely counter” to past promises they have made to the United Nations, India, the United States and others.
Keenan said that the Rajapaksa government has embraced a formerly marginal posture of Sinhala Buddhist nationalism that has alienated minorities such as Tamils and Muslims andis damaging the prospects for peace in a country that concluded a bloody civil war only four years ago. And Keenan said ethnic tensions are only increasing.
The current government, he said, “has cultivated the mindset that Sri Lanka is a Sinhalese and Buddhist country and Muslims and Tamils are here through the generosity of the Sinhalese people and are not really equal members” of society. While Tamils have the same formal rights as everyone else, the Rajapaksa brothers promote the view that Tamils “are just guests” in Sri Lanka, Keenan explained.
Officially, however, the 13th amendment of the Sri Lankan constitution requires the establishment of provincial councils and the recognition of Tamil as an official language. Some parties, including the Muslim parties, are officially in favor of expanding the devolution of authority envisioned in the 13th amendment, Keenan said, but the president is likely to seek to have it repealed despite earlier promises to build on it. “The way Sri Lankan politics has worked over the last few years is the president gets what he wants,” Keenan said.
At the same time, even the 13th amendment does not go far enough for those in favor of more devolution of power. The powers it does grant to provincial councils are extremely limited, and have “never really satisfied the underlying aspirations and demands and grievances of the Tamils,” Keenan explained.
Keenan emphasized that the example of former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga, who preceded Rajapaksa in office, demonstrated that a president who truly believes in the problem of marginalization and the power of autonomy can convince even the majority Sinhalese that devolution of power to the provinces is acceptable. Rajapaksa, said Keenan, appears by contrast to be moving away from political accommodation of the Tamil minority.
Change will require pressure by outside actors, argued Keenan. But, he said, neither Sri Lanka’s closest neighbor, India, nor the rest of the international community had done much.
Though, according to Keenan, India is “by all accounts extremely unhappy with the Sri Lankan government,” New Delhi is unlikely to provide an outside force for change. India has a major stake in the future of its southern neighbor, not only because of its proximity, but also because of the significant Tamil population in southeastern India. But Keenan cited a belief within India “that if you push too hard on the Rajapaksas, that will only drive them further into the arms of the Chinese.”
He acknowledged that India does face that risk to some extent, but added that progress in Sri Lanka required both the broader international community and India to pressure the government “to not just make positive moves on the question of power sharing and devolution of power and equal treatment of Tamils but also the larger questions of human rights, rule of law, separation of powers and basics of democratic governance, which have been . . . virtually destroyed over the past couple of years.”
“The international community has consistently been behind the curve when it comes to Sri Lanka,” Keenan said. Just as it took outside powers “a long time to wake up to just how serious the problem was” during the civil war, he explained, as long as the international community does not pressure the Rajapaksas to change course, “the situation in Sri Lanka is likely to continue to deteriorate.”
* Editor's note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly indentified the three Rajapska brothers who have recently commented on devolution; Mahinda Rajapaksa has, but Chamal Rajapaksa has not. WPR regrets the error.
