Managing Expectations

By Ranga Kalansooriya -January 9, 2015

Dr Ranga Kalansooriya

A historic election and a historic victory. But why is it so historic..?

Not one, but there are several reasons for it to be significant among other Presidential Polls held in the country. The first is its national outreach. In fact Maithri could be proud of being the first President to be elected through a true national election. The participation of North – West – East and South as one electorate was unique in its own dynamics. Probably this could be the first ever indication of national reconciliation in post-conflict Sri Lanka.

“For the first time since 1982, Tamils in the North are voting free,” journalist Parameswaram told me on Thursday when I inquired about polling patterns in the north. Polls were free and fair in every part of the country, too, but North and East were noteworthy as it was a different case for the past three decades.

No argument that there was a clear division in the votes for the two main candidates. Mahinda championed in the Sinhala Buddhist platform while Maithri performed well in both minority as well as majority community areas. But one could easily argue that Maithree’s victory was mainly due to the minority vote.

Fair enough but what does it mean? Minorities in large numbers preferred Mairthri against Mahinda. The reasons behind this phenomenon do not demand post-mortems as they were pretty obvious. Thus, shall look at the future based on this verdict of the people.

Any poll would be described as a reflection of hopes of the people and that rationale is relatively strong in this particular case of Thursday’s elections. What were the hopes behind the voting pattern this time?

For majority those were about democracy, good governance, anti-corruption – so on and so forth irrespective of ethnicity. But for the ethnic minorities there were specific hopes, I assume. For Tamils in post-conflict areas it was predominantly freedom. They demanded freedom to speak, freedom to gather, freedom to move around and may be even freedom to think. Of course this could be a matter for further deliberation mainly on radicalization point of view but Northerners were certainly prayed for freedom from the clutches of LTTE as well as military authoritarianism. But this does not, at any cost, mean the stereotype argument on the recent political platforms of withdrawing military from the north or any such demilitarizing move.

The Muslims had their own hopes – mainly resolving their identity issue which ultimately led to their own safety. The creation of Sinhala Buddhist extremist elements under state patronage threatened the identity of Muslims in Sri Lanka. Thus, Muslims expect their safety and dignity under a new regime led by another strong Sinhala Buddhist leader – Maithri. In fact post conflict Sri Lanka is yet to recognize its own pluralism and this was clearly evident during the electioneering process. The inclusion of Muslims and Tamils within the Miathri camp was a move to divide the country as claimed by Mahinda camp, a clear undermining of the statehood of minorities in this country.

“But irrespective of ethnicity, we all have one aspiration, as far as I see it – the return of democracy and protecting basic human rights that will ultimately meet the expectations of all Sri Lankans,” said Imtiaz Bakeer Markar.

Nonetheless, the high voter turnout indicates the level of expectations from the new regime. The Maithri –Ranil camp has to manage these high hopes of the people while managing the conflicting political agendas of its own coalition members which will be the biggest challenge. If failed to deliver as promised, their popularity will diminish faster than that of Mahinda. And those who helped them to reach pinnacle of power would be the same people who would pulled the first trigger against them. That was exactly what happened to Mahinda, and Maithri-Ranil should learn the bitter lesson before even they start the drama.

For a fresh beginning in Sri Lanka

JAYADEVA UYANGODA-January 10, 2015

A peaceful transfer of power without post-election violence, after a relatively peaceful campaign, is testimony to the resilience of Sri Lanka’s democracy after experiencing civil war and semi-authoritarianism

Other than among the diehard supporters of the outgoing Sri Lankan President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, there was no doubt about the victory of Maithripala Sirisena, the common Opposition candidate in the country’s Presidential election held on January 8. Yet, what surprised Mr. Rajapaksa’s supporters and opponents alike was his decision to concede defeat and leave the official residence early morning of the day after, hours before even a third of the official election results were out. A peaceful transfer of power without post-election violence, after a relatively peaceful election campaign, is testimony to the resilience of Sri Lanka’s democracy after three decades of civil war and half-a-decade of semi-authoritarianism.

Revival of democracy

Based on political calculations as well as astrological advice, Mr. Rajapaksa called for fresh presidential elections in November 2014, two years before the constitutionally scheduled time. He sought an unprecedented third term, a facility he created for himself by altering Sri Lanka’s Constitution. A third term would have secured the continuity of his family’s grip over the Sri Lankan state, backed by an alliance with political loyalists and the new business class which he and his family had created. However, many observers feared, and not without good reason, that a third term for Mr. Rajapaksa would have robbed Sri Lanka’s democracy of whatever little vigour was left in it. Further closure of the democratic space through populist authoritarianism would have enabled him to further consolidate his model of a developmentalist-national security state. The democratic will of the Sri Lankan voters has now stalled those possibilities.

How will Mr. Sirisena, the new President, fulfil his electoral promises?

The main idea that animated the Sri Lankan voter has been his promise of “regime change for good governance.” It is amazing that a concept which is a part of the neo-liberal political discourse has been appropriated in the vernacular, democratic political imagination for the revival of democratic politics. Mr. Sirisena’s election campaign stressed democratic and corruption-free governance, the end to family rule and cronyism, and reviving the autonomy of key institutions of governance, specifically the legislature and the judiciary. This is a kind of home-grown democratic reform agenda evolved primarily against the five years of Mr. Rajapaksa’s semi-authoritarian and family-centric style of governance.

The support base

In his political agenda, Mr. Sirisena and his New Democratic Front (NDF) emphasised two types of political reforms, state reform and governance reform. The state reform agenda focussed on a redemocratisation of the Sri Lankan state through constitutional reform. Reforming the executive presidential system and the abolition of the 18th Amendment, which made the office of the President enormously powerful and imperious, were its two key elements. Unlike in the previous elections, devolution and the political rights of the ethnic minorities were not elements in the state reform agenda this time round. The ethnic conflict was present in the NDF policy manifesto only in its absence. Quite surprisingly, Tamil and Muslim parties who backed Mr. Sirisena, and even ensuring his victory on January 8, did not bargain for any commitment to devolution. They supported him primarily on his promise of regime change and democratic state reform. That in a way reflected the urgency felt by most of Sri Lanka’s political stakeholders for a fresh political beginning in a post-Rajapaksa era.

A fresh beginning is perhaps the phrase that best captures the political space opened up by the victory of Maithripala Sirisena in this Presidential election. The challenges and obstacles awaiting him would be both daunting and complex. The election result shows some of these complexities. A preliminary glance at the electoral statistics highlights a few salient patterns and dimensions. First, it is the Tamil and Muslim minority vote which gave Mr. Sirisena the edge over Mr. Rajapaksa. The support he received from the Northern and Eastern provinces and electoral divisions where Tamils and Muslims are a significant minority was overwhelming, in many instance even reaching over 65 per cent of the votes cast. In the same vein, Mr. Sirisena failed to secure majorities in most of the electorates which are predominantly Sinhalese. In many such districts, Mr. Rajapaksa emerged the clear winner indicating that his rural Sinhalese vote base has not seriously eroded, although it has diminished. Third, Mr. Rajapaksa’s United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) still has a clear majority, over 135 seats in the 225-member Parliament, although there have been some key defections to the NDF during the election campaign.

Consolidating power

The immediate challenge that confronts Mr. Sirisena is in consolidating power for his newly formed coalition. The NDF is an eclectic coalition of political and ideological forces of a somewhat inchoate nature. They have a common programme prepared for the election a few weeks ago, because they all wanted to end the rule and the style of politics introduced by Mr. Rajapaksa. The return of Ranil Wickramasinghe, the leader of the United National Party, as the Prime Minister, and as Mr. Sirisena’s chief lieutenant, would be a major stabilising factor. Mr. Wickramasinghe is known for his vast experience in government as well as for political shrewdness. His pro-western political profile would help the new President to chart a new version of non-alignment in Sri Lanka’s foreign policy — not hostile to the West, not so dependent on China, and quite at ease with India.

“Surprisingly, Tamil and Muslim parties who backed Maithripala Sirisena, and even ensuring his electoral victory, did not bargain for any commitment to devolution”

Fulfilling his promise of political reform within the deadline of a 100 days would certainly be a huge challenge for the President and his coalition government. The 100-day reform deadline is easier promised at elections than really met, as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would easily agree. The key reform promise with a time limit of a 100 days is the constitutional amendment that would reform the executive presidential system and abolish the 18th Amendment. Both these reform measures require the support of two-thirds of Members of Parliament: a minimum of 150 of them.

The option Mr. Sirisena has is to appeal to the goodwill of the UPFA’s Members of Parliament. That will also require the support and cooperation of the Rajapaksa brothers who lead the UPFA. This scenario ideally calls for some form of government-opposition political accommodation for national unity. It also effectively rules out the efficacy of any confrontational response to the UPFA by Mr. Sirisena and his NDF strategists. If that happens, that will also help create a style of governance which is not overtly hostile to the Opposition, and therefore be moderate in its style and spirit of governance.

Development agenda

During the election campaign, there were fears expressed by some that an NDF government under Mr. Sirisena would roll back the development agenda of Mr. Rajapaksa. That fear was also a major campaign theme of Mr. Rajapaksa. All indications are that the new NDF regime will continue to carry out the present development agenda with some modifications. Excessive reliance on China for economic assistance and loans for development, which has political consequences too, is most likely to be reviewed. Close economic cooperation with the West is a policy with which Ranil Wickramasinghe is identified. He is also known for his economic pragmatism. When he was the Prime Minister, in 2002-2003 he devised a policy of closer economic integration between Sri Lanka and the southern States of India.

As it happens at crucial moments of political change, new leaders and new governments emerge with a great deal of promise for change. The greater the promise, the greater can also be the disappointment, once the euphoria of the newness declines and the promises meet the political realities. One such challenging prospect which the new President is likely to face is in balancing the interests of the Sinhalese majority community and the ethnic minorities in the next parliamentary election. Tamils and Muslims voted for him on January 8 practically en masse on the promise of a return to democracy. At the next parliamentary election, which has to be held before 2016, the dynamics of the political sentiments of Tamil and Muslim minorities might not be confined to macro democratic reforms. Devolution and reconciliation will some day return to the political agenda. Managing that challenge in a manner different from how Mr. Rajapaksa did through the strategy of cooptation, intimidation and development largesse would require a great deal of political skills as well as the capacity for democratic accommodation of diverse political agendas.

(Jayadeva Uyangoda is Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science and Public Policy, University of Colombo.)

Rajapaksa has lost, the transfer of power must be peaceful

09/01/2015

Multiple credible news sources are reporting that President Mahinda Rajapaska has conceded defeat in Sri Lanka's presidential elections. At the time of going to press provisional results had common opposition candidate, Maithripala Sirisena, in the lead by 52% to 47%. This ends the authoritarian reign of South Asia’s longest-serving ruler.

The bitterly contested election was marred by violence, abuses of state power and fraud – hallmarks of the Rajapaksa regime. In the lead-up to the vote, the Campaign for Free and Fair Election received over 1,200 complaints of election law violations. The Centre for Monitoring Election Violence documented over 400 incidents - including armed attacks. The Commonwealth Observer Group reported concerns about military intimidation, particularly in the north of the country. Opposition supporters were harassed and human rights activists threatened. The severed heads of dogs were nailed to the homes of two campaigners.

Now that the elections are over there is a very real risk of reprisals against journalists, human rights activists, and Sirisena supporters. The result has done nothing to reduce this risk. The international community must make it very clear to Rajapaksa and his supporters that any such reprisals will have severe consequences for Sri Lanka’s foreign relations – and for them personally if they have assets abroad or wish to travel there.

Above all, the will of the people must be respected. Thankfully initial reports suggest President Rajapaksa has acceded to the will of the people, but he and his Brother Gotabaya have dug their claws deep into the apparatus of the Sri Lankan state, co-opting the judiciary, the civil service and, above all, the army. Gotabaya in particular has created a comprehensive state-within-a-state with the backing of large sections of the military and extremist groups such as the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS).

Gotabaya may well be tempted to somehow attempt to cling on to power. But he must understand that doing so would be disastrous for both Sri Lanka’s interests and his own. It would mean immediate expulsion from the Commonwealth, which Sri Lanka currently chairs and which represents all its largest trading partners, as well as probable sanctions from some of Sri Lanka’s most influential partners, both within the Commonwealth and beyond. (It would also, surely, oblige the Pope to cancel his visit next week.)

Rajapaksa may have drawn comforting conclusions from the international community’s mixed response to allegations of war crimes. But the suspension of democracy would be viewed very differently throughout the world, and even thus far largely supportive actors such as India, Japan and the world’s major financial institutions would be forced to react. If the Rajapaksa family does not go peacefully, and immediately, Sri Lanka will become a pariah state with few international friends or trading partners. That story could have no happy ending for Mahinda or Gotabaya, or any of their many relatives currently enjoying positions of power and profit.

Meanwhile Sirisena has promised to lead a “compassionate” and inclusive government. He has pledged to crack down on corruption and nepotism, abolish the executive presidency, restore the independence of the judiciary, respect human rights and democracy and safeguard the media.

Many are rightly sceptical. In some ways, he is a more authentic version of Rajapaksa’s populist nationalist persona. He was Defence Minister during the final stages of Sri Lanka’s civil war, and thus must bear at least some share of responsibility for the war crimes committed then. He has ruled out more autonomy for Tamils and said that “no international power will be allowed to ill-treat or touch a single citizen of this country on account of the campaign to defeat terrorism”.

Yet a democratic mandate for him cannot be any more a mandate for impunity than was the previous election victory of Rajapaksa. Only if he makes a firm commitment to dealing with war crimes allegations – with the support of the international community – can he hope to secure a just and lasting peace in Sri Lanka. He would do well to look at the example of the Cote D’Ivoire, among other places, and realise that working with the international community on the question of accountability is the only way to achieve this – perhaps even the only way to ensure that the Rajapaksas do not somehow orchestrate an undemocratic return to power.

The Sri Lanka Campaign calls on world leaders to help Sri Lanka correct its course. This must include strong action at the UN this March, as well as bilateral policies geared towards accountability and human rights.

We must do our utmost to support Sri Lankan activists who have worked tirelessly, and at great risk, in pursuit of truth and justice. We must stand with the people of Sri Lanka who have voted and now must be heard.

Sirisena has been given a mandate to build a sustainable peace. He must recognise that this depends on justice and accountability.

Full results will be available via the electoral commission website: http://www.slelections.gov.lk/

President Rajapaksa Deserves Respectful Farewell

| by N.S.Venkataraman

Views expressed in this article by author own 

( January 9, 2015, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) 1To the surprise of many political analysts, President Rajapaksa has lost the election in Sri Lanka.

Many in Sri Lanka and outside were left to guess as to why Mr. Rajapaksa opted for Presidential poll much before the expiry of his term. As no credible explanation was given by Mr. Rajapaksa for his decision, many speculations were floating. Some people thought that it could have been due to his over confidence. Apart from several other explanations, there were even rumours that his astrologer could have suggested that this was the propitious time for him to seek re-election !

One hopes that President Rajapaksa will maintain his dignity as an opposition leader and conduct his party with decorum, to ensure that the democracy in Sri Lanka would thrive.

Now, that Mr. Rajapaksa has lost the election, there is bound to be huge debate as to why people dislodged him. Some would say that his defeat was due to his administration becoming a family rule and he tended to become authoritarian. Whatever may be the reason, history is bound to recognise President Rajapaksa for his successful efforts in keeping Sri Lanka united as one nation.

There have been number of instances in the past in other countries too when a leader with some acclaimed performance have lost the elections. Winston Churchill lost the election in Britain after successfully leading the country to victory in World War II . Mr. Vajpayee lost the election in India when he sought to prepone the election, even though he was acclaimed then and now as one of the best Prime Ministers that India ever had. Therefore, President Rajapaksa can get sort of consolation by recalling such instances.

While Mr. Sirisena received 51.28% of the votes cast, Mr. Rajapaksa was supported by 47.58% of the voters. Therefore , it should be kept in mind that it was not a humiliating defeat for Mr. Rajapaksa and it was not an overwhelming victory for Mr. SiriSena. It was graceful on the part of Mr. Rajapaksa to concede his defeat, even as the counting was in progress and assuring the opposition leaders that the transition of power would be smooth. Obviously, the elections have been conducted in Sri Lanka in a fair manner with healthy debate and it was largely incident free. Certainly, Mr. Rajapaksa’s administration can take credit for setting Sri Lanka’s electoral democracy on a firm footing.

Any political leader who has been in power for such a long time is bound to invite criticism for his acts of commissions and omissions. People would always judge the performance of the long time leader and government on the basis of cost benefit analysis. Obviously, Mr. Rajapaksa has failed to convince the majority of the people of Sri Lanka that the benefits that happened to Sri Lanka by his administration out weighed the cost. Further, in a healthy democratic society , citizens are rarely willing to allow a person to continue to be in power for as long as ten years and they would like to see a change. These facts appear to be the basic reasons that have led to Mr. Rajapaksa being voted out.

Mr. Rajapaksa by his strong actions during the civil war made many enemies both in Sri Lanka and outside. The criticism against his administration on the human rights violation issue was sustained by his critics and some governments in western countries. At the same time, many around the world thought that Mr. Rajapaksa had really no alternative other than waging the war against the rebels . In the process, it was inevitable that some innocents could have suffered. People who take such view also point out the fact that western countries like USA and Britain have not hesitated to send the troops to other countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan , where several innocent people were killed by the troops from the western countries. Countries like USA and Britain criticised Mr. Rajapaksa for human rights violations, which is like pot calling the kettle black.

One hopes that President Rajapaksa will maintain his dignity as an opposition leader and conduct his party with decorum, to ensure that the democracy in Sri Lanka would thrive.

History is certainly bound to recognise him for ensuring the integrity of Sri Lanka , which is of great significance for the future of the country.

Finally, it is time that the world should salute the citizens of Sri Lanka for participating in the electoral process with dignity and maturity, thus proving the fact that Sri Lanka is a vibrant and matured democracy.

Sri Lanka votes out Rajapaksa

Sri Lanka's Mahinda Rajapaksa, a man accused of presiding over multiple war crimes, has lost his bid for a third term as Sri Lanka's president.

FRIDAY 09 JANUARY 2015

Mr Rajapaksa conceded defeat to Maithripala Sirisena, his one time close ally, on Friday morning and is reported to have promised a smooth transition of power.

Seen by many as a hero after his government crushed terror group the LTTE at the end of Sri Lanka's civil war, Mr Rajapaksa had confidently called the election two years early.

However, he had not counted on Mr Sirisena to defect to Sri Lanka's opposition - a move which united opposition parties against Rajapaksa and rallied parts of the population against perceived nepotism and corruption.

Mahinda Rajapaksa        ✔ @PresRajapaksa

Follow

I value and respect our democratic process and the people’s verdict, and look forward to the peaceful transition of power. -MR

1:03 AM - 9 Jan 2015

Rajapaksa had held power since 2005, and in 2009 oversaw the defeat of the LTTE, also known as the Tamil Tigers. The Tamil Tigers were a brutal terrorist group who employed child soldiers and pioneered the use of suicide bombers.

In that victory, and shown in footage first aired by Channel 4 News, the army is accused of shelling and bombing civilians and other atrocities. The UN has estimated that 40,000 civilians died in the final weeks of the war.

Since then there have been continuing allegations of human rights abuses against the Rajapaksa government such as enforced disappearances.

However, it was not the government's human rights record - which is being investigated by the UN - that is the main reason for Rajapaksa's defeat.

The main plank of Mr Sirisena's (pictured, above) election campaign was an end to corruption and nepotism in the government. He had vowed to remove the Rajapaksa family from office - Rajapaksa and his three brothers all hold positions in government and it is thought his son was being groomed for power.

Rajapaksa had altered Sri Lanka's constitution, allowing him to be elected to a third term and keeping him immune from prosecution - a move that new President Sirisena has vowed to reverse.

Tamil vote

The close run election saw Mr Rajapaksa maintain his popularity with the country's majority Sinhala population but lose out to a wave of support for his opponent from minority groups, especially the oppressed Tamil population focused on the country's north. Mr Sirisena was declared the victor after securing 51.3 per cent of the vote, compared with 47.0 per cent for Mr Rajapaksa.

Tamil voters, many of whom had declined to vote in the previous election because of no viable candidate, turned out in high numbers to vote Mr Rajapaksa out.

However, Mr Sirisena is not predicted to bring any great changes to improve the lives of Tamils. He, like his defeated opponent, rejects the UN investigation into war crimes allegations, has pledged that senior commanders accused of such war crimes will not face legal action, and will not reduce the military presence in northern Sri Lanka.

He was also acting defence minister at the end of Sri Lanka's civil war.

US Secretary of State John Kerry was quick to welcome the successful election and commended Rajapaksa for accepting the verdict of the nation's 15 million voters.

"I look forward to working with President-elect Maithripala Sirisena as his new government works to implement its campaign platform of a Sri Lanka that is peaceful, inclusive, democratic, and prosperous," he said in a statement.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi called Sirisena to congratulate the new leader of "a close friend and neighbour".

Mr Sirisena is expected to be sworn in at 6pm local time (12:30pm GMT) in Colombo's Independence Square.

MS Has To Address Urgently Many Grave Issues Including National Question: TNA

January 9, 2015

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) extends its warmest congratulations to President-Elect Mr Maithripala Sirisena, says R. Sampanthan, the Leader, Tamil National Alliance.

Issuing a statement the TNA leader said; “The TNA extends to the people of Sri Lanka – in particular to the people of the North-East – its sincere thanks for extending their overwhelming support to President-Elect Mr Maithripala Sirisena in accordance with the advice of the TNA.

“The new President Mr Maithripala Sirisena has to address urgently many grave issues the country faces, including an honourable resolution of the national question so as to enable the Tamil speaking people of Sri Lanka to be true beneficiaries of democracy.”

Baird Congratulates Sri Lankans on Successful Presidential Election

January 9, 2015 - Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird today released the following statement regarding the presidential elections in Sri Lanka:

“Canada congratulates the millions of Sri Lankans who went to the polls and peacefully exercised their democratic right to vote. We welcome Maithripala Sirisena as president of Sri Lanka.

“We wish to recognize the key role played by Sri Lankan civil society during the election process, noting that this was the first time that domestic observers were granted access to the counting centres.

“Canada also commends the critical role played by Sri Lanka’s Election Commissioner in creating the conditions for Sri Lankans to freely express their will.

“It is our hope that President Sirisena seizes his mandate from the people of Sri Lanka to foster a transparent, responsive and pluralistic government. It will also be an important opportunity to resolve concerns regarding the devolution of power, accountability and genuine reconciliation.

“Canada looks forward to this new chapter in Sri Lanka’s history, one of prosperity and unity.”

- 30 -

For further information, media representatives may contact:
Media Relations Office
Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada
343-203-7700
media@international.gc.ca
Follow us on Twitter: @CanadaFP
Like us on Facebook: Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada-DFATD

Sri Lanka presidential vote a ‘symbol of hope’, says Obama

 9 January 2015
US President Barack Obama praised Friday Sri Lanka’s “successful and peaceful” presidential elections and congratulated the outgoing administration on a “swift and orderly transfer of power.”
"Beyond the significance of this election to Sri Lanka, it is also a symbol of hope for those who support democracy all around the world," the president said in a statement.
President Mahinda Rajapakse, Asia’s longest-serving leader, conceded defeat in Sri Lanka on Friday, after a bitter campaign in which he faced allegations of corruption and a failure to bring about post-war reconciliation.

+1

US President Barack Obama, seen here on January 8, 2015, praised the peaceful Sri Lankan election which was monitored by international and domestic observers ©Saul Loeb (AFP)

"I congratulate the people of Sri Lanka on the successful and peaceful conclusion of Sri Lanka’s presidential election and incoming President Maithripala Sirisena on his victory," Obama said.
"I also commend the outgoing administration of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa for facilitating a swift and orderly transition of power."
The US leader highlighted the relatively violence-free voting process, which was monitored by international and domestic observers.
"Sri Lankans from all segments of society cast their ballots peacefully, and the voice of the people was respected.
"At this moment of hope, the United States looks forward to deepening its partnership with the people and government of Sri Lanka and to working with President Sirisena to advance peace, democracy, and prosperity for all Sri Lankans."
Despite sporadic campaign violence including the death of one opposition party worker, the vote passed off largely peacefully.

Share or comment on this article

Maithripala Prez, Ranil Premier

Ranil appointed PM of National Unity Govt.

by Zacki Jabbar-January 9, 2015

Naitonal Democratic Front (NDF) leader Maithripala Sirisena was sworn in as President and UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister at Independence Square yesterday evening.

Deviating from established tradition of elected Presidents being sworn in before the Chief Justice, it was the Senior most judge of the Supreme Court K. Sripavan, who performed the task in place of the incumbent Mohan Peiris, whose position has been contested by the impeached former Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake.

In a brief ceremony with minimum of fanfare, a composed and modest looking Sirisena devoid of the Modi like jacket he had donned throughout his campaign spoke in a measured tone reflecting every word of his manifesto which pledged to end the culture of violent and revengeful politics, rampant corruption and crime that was a feature of the Rajapaksa government, restore democracy, good governance , rule of law and last but least, not to seek re-election.

"I will not come before you seeking a second term", he emphasised, adding that his 100-day work programme would get off the ground almost immediately and with a focus on meeting the deadline with the precision that had been promised.

Adopting a reconciliatory tone and referring to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa as my "Dear Friend", Sirisena complimented Rajapaksa for ensuring a smooth transition of power within about six hours of the results being announced by Elections Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya .

Paying tribute to the father of the nation D.S. Senanayake and S. W. R. D. Bandaranayake, the first Prime Minster produced by the SLFP, the new President pledged to protect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country and create a peaceful and prosperous nation for the benefit of not only the living but also for generations yet to be born. He emphasised that hatred would not cease by hatred, but only through love.

Recalling the threats and attacks that he and his supporters had faced in the run-up to the presidential election which left many injured, one dead and his offices and stages set on fire, President Sirisena regretted that the state media had carried on an unprecedented mud slinging campaign of deceit and blatant lies that was nauseating and disgusting to the core.

The new President pledged to deviate from the confrontational approach that the Rajapaksa regime had adopted against the international community. "I will build bridges aimed at developing friendly relations with the world base on a non aligned agenda."

Thanking the voters and the 46 political parties and organizations that ensured his election as President, Sirisena made special mention of the contribution made by the UNP led by Ranil Wickremesinghe, Democratic Party headed by former Army Commander Sarath Fonseka, the Jathika Hela Urumaya, All Ceylon Makkal Congress , Muslim Congress,the Tamil National Alliance, Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and former President Chandrika Kuamratunga in that order.

French officials: Hostage-takers killed at twin standoffs

Gunshots were heard at printing plant northeast of Paris where two brothers suspected of killing 12 people in an Islamist attack on French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo held one person hostage. (AP)
By Anthony Faiola, Griff Witte and Brian Murphy January 9 at 3:05 PM
DAMMARTIN-EN-GOELE, France — Security forces launched coordinated assaults at twin hostage standoffs Friday, freeing most captives and killing three gunmen, including brothers suspected in France’s worst terrorist attack in generations.

The raids — which also left at least four hostages dead — capped days of bloodshed and tensions that put the country on its highest security footing and exposed apparent connections between the attackers and al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen.

The attack on the offices of satirical French newspaper Charlie Hebdo is the deadliest in recent history. Here are some of the major terror attacks in France in the last two decades. (Davin Coburn and Jorge Ribas/The Washington Post)

French Officials Hostage-takers Killed at Twin Standoffs by Thavam Ratna

Can any security service stop terror attacks?

FRIDAY 09 JANUARY 2015

Australia, Britain and France have been hit by terrorists previously known to the authorities. Are the security services letting us down, or do we have unrealistic expectations of what they can do?
Can Any Security Service Stop Terror Attacks by Thavam Ratna

The Long, Slow Fuse of Jihad in France

The attacks on "Charlie Hebdo" were the culmination of two men’s decade-long quest to wage holy war.

BY KATE BRANNEN-GOPAL RATNAM-JANUARY 8, 2015

Cherif Kouachi, one of the alleged suspects in the shooting massacre of 10 journalists at a French satirical weekly in Paris, was a would-be foreign fighter long before the phrase became popular due to the Islamic State’s recruitment of foot soldiers from all over the world. And his older brother, Said Kouachi, who is also suspected in the deadly shooting, has terrorist ties that go back to at least 2011.
The Long, Slow Fuse of Jihad in France by Thavam Ratna