No-faith motion:PM accedes to 10 demands to secure TNA’s support

Selvam

By Dinasena Ratugamage-April 5, 2018, 1:18 am 

Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Vanni District MP Selvam Addaikalanathan yesterday said that UNP leader and PM Ranil Wickremesinghe had accepted ten of its proposals in return for the group's backing for him to defeat the No Confidence Motion (NCM) moved by the Joint Opposition.

The TELO MP, representing the TNA, said that there had been a heated argument and tension when PM Wickremesinghe at the onset of the meeting between the UNP and the TNA turned down those proposals.

Addikalanathan said that they had been able to reach a consensus on ten proposals subsequently.

The following are the TNA proposals accepted by PM Wickremesinghe:

(1) providing a political solution to the North-East problem expeditiously

2) enactment of a new Constitution with a two-thirds majority in Parliament before the next national election

3) ensuring that the military vacates all property belonging to civilians

4) a general amnesty to all political prisoners

5) probing the wartime disappearances

6) protecting of rights of those living in the Northern and Eastern Provinces

7) employment for youth living in the Northern and Eastern provinces

8) ensuring that those who are not resident in the North and the East will not be employed in the two provinces at the expense of eligible candidates there

9) appointing Tamils as Divisional Secretaries of eight Northern and Eastern administrative districts and

10) taking into consideration views of members representing Northern and Eastern Provinces in respect of development projects as well as priority for projects undertaken by the Northern and Eastern Provincial Councils.

Confidence Vote In The PM & Its Intricacies

By Siri Gamage –APRIL 5, 2018

Dr. Siri Gamage

Results from the No confidence vote in the parliament on April 4th 2018 show that the no confidence motion (NCM) against the Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has been soundly defeated after a day of deliberations. 76 MPs voted for and 122 voted against. Prime Minister won the confidence of parliament by a majority of 46 votes. Contrary to reports that a group of UNP MPs will vote for the NCM, members of the UNP stuck together in the vote displaying party loyalty. Even Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe voted against the NCM. Minority parties except the JVP were firmly behind the PM. A section from the SLFP abstained.

Thus if the recent Local Government elections result was used by the Joint Opposition (JO) to show a popular growing trend among voters in the country toward its political platform, the country’s parliament has shown majority support for the PM and the United National Party that he leads. The two different results show a significant difference between the ground reality so far as the popular sentiment is concerned and the thinking among the legislators who were elected to parliament three years ago. No doubt in coming days and weeks this gap will necessitate the UNP and the minor parties supporting it to take measures including internal party reforms to address the evolving situation.

Results from the vote show that the majority of MPs in the parliament wishes to continue with the current government for the rest of its term with Mr Wickremesinghe at the helm. Though there were plenty of criticisms of the Prime Minister and his party policies including the recent budget prior to this vote, what this result does is to consolidate PM’s leadership. The PM is in a position to claim a mandate on his own to govern for the remaining term of government without being distracted by sideshows. How far he will use this mandate to carry on the promises made to people during the last national elections including chasing those who were corrupt during the former President Rajapaksa’s regime will be a litmus test. While the voting result consolidates the position of Wickremesinghe for the time being, it is not certain how far this will continue? Future support for him within the UNP and minority parties supporting him will depend on the steps his government takes to address the concerns among the UNP second tier leaders and minority parties with varying interests. For example, whether his government will accelerate the constitutional change process and further devolution, concrete reconciliation measures, measures to reduce the cost of living burdens can be crucial issues.

The voting outcome shows the extent to which the SLFP that the President Sirisena leads is split between those who supported the stance of the Joint Opposition and those who did not. Rather than showing internal divisions within the UNP, the fact that a group of SLFP MPs and ministers voted for the NCM submitted by the JO and another group abstained shows the internal divisions within the SLFP. It also shows where the loyalties of SLFP members of parliament lies. SLFP is not a united party today. Those who read between the lines had known all along that the SLFP has far more divisions compared to any divisions within the UNP. Both are in the national government yet after the results of Local Government elections in favour of the Joint Opposition, some SLFP ministers and MPs started to look to a future with the Joint Opposition and Podu Jana Peramuna (PJP) rather than sticking with the present national government. This trend has the potential to further undermine the authority and leadership of the President.

Whether the PM is able to get rid of SLFP ministers who voted for the NCM against him and install a cabinet of his liking for the rest of government’s term is a critical issue? Any such change requires the consent of the President. Theoretically at least, those ministers from the SLFP who voted against the PM have no moral right to remain in the cabinet. They should either resign or be removed. But such removal can only occur if the President agrees. Even if the PM and his party want such change, obtaining agreement from the President will not be an easy task. This shows the futility of continuing with the present arrangement for governance with a directly elected executive President and a Prime Minister elected through parliamentary elections. Sri Lanka has to choose between a Westminster style government with a President who has ceremonial functions only or a Presidential system where a directly elected President and his party rule the country. There are examples in Asia itself for the latter type but the dictatorial tendencies of such Presidents should counsel against such a move among those contemplating such a system.

The negotiations and horse trading occurred before the vote and media reports about which party or group of MPs will vote for which side shows how Sri Lanka’s polity is fragmented into smaller factions representing a range of interests including ethnic, religious and class. To garner a majority in the parliament, a leader has to negotiate with a multitude of smaller groups and factions. The vote of confidence in the PM shows that he enjoys the support among a multiethnic electorate whereas the vote for the Joint Opposition and its unofficial leader former President Rajapakse displays support from the Sinhala Buddhist community. This difference in voter bases and sources will be the deciding factor in future years/decades in Sri Lankan politics, especially during the forthcoming Presidential and Parliamentary elections scheduled in two years time.

Though Wickramasinghe won confidence of the large majority in the parliament and there is reason for his party to celebrate, this is no guarantee that this victory will ensure stable government for the rest of the term. Primarily this is due to the existence of two power centres under the existing system, lack of party reforms within the UNP, further agitations by the Joint Opposition, economic downturn, cost of living pressures and tax burdens on the people, and the need to satisfy diverse needs and demands of a multi ethnic constituency. Furthermore, governing on the basis of democratic principles and norms with free media etc. can become even harder if sectional demands cannot be reconciled and balanced with firm but fair decision-making. If Wickremesinghe is able to secure a cabinet of his choosing at least for the remainder of the government’s term in office, it will show his true colours in terms of whether he moves down from the Ivy League mentality and listen to the people more so than his close associates from the Royal College etc. A cosmopolitan government based on Sri Lankan national interest and a global orientation is desirable so long as the policies and programs implemented secure independence of the country and reduces dependence on everything foreign. The shockwaves sent through PM’s party’s spine as a result of no confidence proceedings would require him to reflect, rethink and revise his government’s economic and social policies. No doubt that the outcome of NCM vote weakens the hand of the President. This could be for better or worse for the UNP and the PM depending on how he decides to move forward rather than backward.

Read More

Clouds dispel and hope breathes

• After the No-Confidence Motion  

Divine rain

 Friday, 6 April 2018

It was like divine rain that ended a crippling and apocalyptic drought for Ranil Wickremesinghe and his United National Party. The initial gains of the Government under his leadership were soon forgotten and it seemed that he had lost all political will to go any further. The bravado and bluff politics of the former regime, now under the guise of the Pohottuwa, gave the illusion of heading for a ruthless re-emergence. Politics doesn’t tolerate perceived failure and Ranil’s terminal death seemed close at hand with even his own party men openly showing disgust. With the failure of the motion, Ranil Wickremasinghe, it appears again, seems to be politically unbreakable. But that, again, is another illusion.

Downward dive

Ranil’s image had been hurtling down at a rate especially since the results of the Local Government elections. Complaints were rife that he was indecisive and ambivalent with regard to “catching the thieves and murderers”. President Sirisena, his hitherto ally, had turned foe and he was out for Ranil’s blood. Rogue elements from the former regime – themselves facing serious charges – had been incorporated to the Government. These persons like Nimal Siripala, Susil Premajayanth, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa, S.B. Dissanayake, and Dilan Perera had won the ears of the President and they, aided by Ranil haters Sri Lal Lankatilleka and Maithri Gunaratne, managed to poison the latter.

Sirisena had lost his sense of historical role in the Yahapalanaya revolution. Sirisena had even all but forgotten how he got to possess the crown. He began trying to redefine himself in an unsustainable and self-delusionary fashion as the one entrusted to bring in a SLFP Government sans corruption. Like King Leo, Maithripala Sirisena went mad and began behaving erratically.


All seemed set for the return of the dark age of Mahinda Rajapaksa where we witnessed the dismemberment of the law and justice system, the launching of brutal hit squads reportedly under his powerful brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa, serious accusations of corruption, and the smudging and strangling of our economy with unpayable Chinese loans.

Poor judgment

Right at this point of strength for Pohottuwa, came down a crushing head blow on the latter. It was poor political savviness on the part of the Joint Opposition and its unofficial leader Mahinda Rajapaksa to bring up the no confidence motion against the Prime Minister. Firstly, the Joint Opposition failed to garner the votes and lost with a big margin with many of its numbers abstaining. Second, and worse, was the bad exposure the leaders of the JO got in Parliament.

The channels of Sirasa were set to transmit the entire session in Parliament out to overseas diaspora persons like me and inside to all Sri Lankans in towns and villages, who were watching aghast. I believe that had been Kili Maharaja’s blunder in judgment as he thought it was going to mark his enemy Ranil Wickremesinghe’s night of shame ending the latter’s long career in Parliamentary politics. But Ranil’s stars are better positioned. He could not be vanquished even during a whole decade by the once-powerful authoritarian ruler, Mahinda Rajapaksa.

The sessions

Here, in my Australian home, I was watching most of the sessions until the end. I did miss a few good moments, unfortunately, but what I saw and listened to was most entertaining. What would befall those who hurl stones from glass houses befell the Joint Opposition Pohottuwa guys. Basil Rajapaksa, Susil Premajayanth, Anura P. Yapa, Wimal Weerawansa, Dayasiri Jayasekera, Nimal Siripala, Gotabaya, Mahinda himself and so many of the former JO bigwigs got it tight as all charges against them were spelled out. While Susil was addressing I could hear cries of “thell (petrol) hora!” Susil could merely keep jumping up and down like a jack-in-the box.

Mangala proved excellent in his exposures and so many others from the UNP and Muslim congress side. However, Anura Dissanayake, the JVP Leader, was best. Anura lashed Ranil as his party voted for the motion; yet, his detailed listing of charges against the former Government were more thorough and effective. It was abundantly clear that the JO was drowned in a holocaust of Parliamentary argument and invective.

TNA Leader Sampanthan in his characteristic sober manner questioned the very validity of the contents of the motion. He pointed out that none of the charges could be specific to the Prime Minister’s doings or misdoings. For instance, the failure to act fast enough during the recent Kandy riots cannot be specifically aimed on the PM as the President also shares that blame. The same with the bond issue, where the Prime Minister was not faulted by the commission. There were many stakeholders who had to share the blame.

President Maithripala Sirisena got a heavy load of attack from the JVP, while the UNP wisely kept silent on that. I cannot remember any past President heaping attack on himself in Parliament as Sirisena did last night. President Sirisena has to be aware and rectify himself soon since he has definitely gone bonkers and out of role during the recent days. While his office demands a level of dignity and distance from sectarian strife the President has transgressed that requirement. He is open for impeachment.

Ranil’s imperatives

Okay, all the above was right. On the other hand, the most important lessons of this episode have to be learnt by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe because this is his last lifeboat. First, he must quicken the court proceedings against those accused. The proposed judicature laws will have to be re-tailored to meet the requirements of the Judiciary. Second, he must stand firm against having those Minsters in Government who voted for the resolution. These characters must be belted out. They are a despicable lot. This is not negotiable.

Third, Ranil must have a genuine change of heart and listen to his party and its backbenchers. He must keep tuned-in to the latter always and avoid charges that he is tied to his pals and Royal College elite. Fourth, Ranil must immediately make changes in the party that satisfies all and makes room for the next tier of leaders. I see Rosy Senanayake as solid potential. Finally, Ranil must be decisive in all the above and other decisions.

The Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe must recognise the historical role cast upon him as harbinger of the new order of Yahapalanaya. This includes ensuring that all citizens – the lowly and the powerful – are equal before the law; ensuring that liberty and freedom of expression is enthroned; that respect for human life and human rights are activated; that the State apparatus is secular; that firm steps for re-conciliation with our Tamil brethren are in place; that those still in prison camps in the north are quickly dealt with and released. Ranil is now focused a lot on our economy. This must be continued so that structural reforms to the economy are set in motion leaving the door open for growth and increase in national wealth.

To achieve these onerous tasks, the Government must be reorganised into self-propelling units driven by their own steam and power and headed by Ministers. The size of the Cabinet must come down to the legal 30, responsibilities clearly fixed and a system of feedback in operation. I must say his Economic Committee was no good and Sirisena was right there. To each such ministerial unit must be attached a few relevant technical consultants. This is what Lee Kuan Yew did when he was Prime Minister.

(The writer can be reached via sjturaus@optusnet.com.au.)

Now that the Diyawanna Reality Show is over…

As Rajapaksa said, they did strengthen their hold in politics, further weakening President Sirisena, who now remains pushed to the wall

There is a strong demand within the UNP Parliamentary group, to remove all SLFP Ministers, who voted for the NCM and against the PM

The Constitution now says the “head of government is the PM” and Wickremesinghe has come out stronger than he was before the NCM

2018-04-06

The Diyawanna Reality Show came to a happy ending for UNP and PM Wickremesinghe two days ago on the night of Wednesday 04 April 2018. The No Confidence Motion (NCM) was voted out with 122 MPs saying they have confidence in PM Wickremesinghe. The Joint Opposition (JO) mooted NCM against PM Wickremesinghe was voted for by 76 MPs that included the JVP too.

Though without Mahinda Rajapaksa playing a lead role, the JO was able to reduce the SLFP bloc that President Sirisena was holding on to.

They increased from 51 out of the 55 that signed the NCM to 71 without the JVP votes.

The JO would now have a strong bid for the Leader of the Opposition post to oust TNA leader R. Sampanthan.

As Rajapaksa said, they did strengthen their hold in politics, further weakening President Sirisena, who now remains pushed to the wall.

Sirisena cannot “demand” but could only “plead” with Wickremesinghe who came out of the NCM consolidating his position within the UNP and in Government. The LG elections that proved Sirisena has no ground support, cannot now say he runs the SLFP as its leader, reduced to 24 MPs, who absented from voting and would hereafter decide politics on their own. Backdoor dealings will thus begin in how the Government would constitute with a new Cabinet, despite PM Wickremesinghe promising to continue with the ‘Unity’ Government to honour the January 8 mandate given by the people.

There is a strong demand within the UNP parliamentary group, to remove all SLFP Ministers, who voted for the NCM and against the PM.

There are also efforts by this group of SLFP Ministers to hold on to their ministerial portfolios on the argument, feeble though, it is the President who would decide their positions as “head of government”. The Constitution now says the “head of government is the PM” and Wickremesinghe has come out stronger than he was before the NCM.

Sirisena is thus left weak with two formidable opponents in Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa.

PM Wickremesinghe now stands firm, not because he was adamant and smart, but because MR was in no hurry to form a Government within this Parliament, as I wrote after the LG elections and before this NCM (DM article March 30) that MR, was on a different agenda, gunning for a Parliamentary election. That would now be decided between Wickremesinghe and Rajapaksa; both unable to go for a Presidential poll for two different reasons.

Many would now have other interpretations of the outcome of the NCM. All interpretations and explanations would be on the fate of this Government, the fate of President Sirisena and how the President and PM would continue in partnership hereafter. Most would want to say the defeat of the NCM signals the fall of the JO as well. Within all such talk, there are questions that have not been asked and answered with due seriousness.

Why did the JO bring this NCM in such haste immediately after the LG polls? Was it because this Government failed in carrying out its mandate given by the people in January 2015? Was it because the Government continues with all Chinese projects including the Colombo Port city that it promised to immediately stop? Was it because this government has all this time failed to solve the SAITM issue? Was it because this government has failed to properly and independently investigate all corruption of the previous Rajapaksa government and punish the guilty? Was it because this government does not honour the UNHRC Resolution 30/1 it co-sponsored? None of those issues held any worthy importance in the NCM.

The NCM was all about the Bond Scam and PM Wickremesinghe’s complicity in it. Of 14 listed reasons for no confidence, 11 were on the Bond Scam, two on holding onto subjects that violated the Fiscal Law and one on Digana Violence.

The whole debate (sic) on the NCM was on “corruption” with the JVP accusing PM, the UNP leadership in Government and the President for going lenient on Rajapaksas.

On the flip side, why didn’t PM Wickremesinghe resign under so much pressure? Was it because he wanted to continue serving the people? Was it because the people wanted him to continue serving them? He and the UNP stood firm on the argument they hold a majority and the UNP leadership is decided by them and no one else.

The question is, was all that public money spent for Parliamentary activity in having this 11-hour debate, worth it?

This NCM had a glaring omission. It was not about people. Was not about issues that burden people, and have to be provided with stable and positive answers. It was all about usurping and continuing in power.

The promise to continue with the January 2015 mandate holds no water. Samasamajist in the UNP, talking about the Government having to correct its course, is simply a joke. Despite what people wanted from this ‘Yahapalana’ Government, despite what Colombo ‘pundits’ said about “reforms and democracy”, this was no alliance that could deliver on any of those promises.

It was common sense, a breakaway group from Rajapaksa that was complicit in all corruption, in all Sinhala Buddhist extremism and bending of the law, forming a Government with a long starving UNP with plenty of backing by the “filthy rich” would not be a Government that can deliver what was promised to gain votes.
It was insane for anyone to have believed, this unholy, unprincipled alliance between two groups of corrupt politicians that knows nothing about democracy and good governance would behave as honest leaders in a Government, simply because they were labelled “Yahapalanaya”.

There is absolutely no purpose in wasting time with this Government that is not capable and is not willed to meet the challenges faced by this society.

Let us be open about these political parties and their existence in electoral politics. None has a vision for the country and have a membership with democratic participation in deciding their political programme.

They are all corrupt groups funded by equally corrupt business dealers who run political parties that are registered with the Election Commission to qualify to contest elections.

Whom people elect is whom these political parties offer as candidates and requests for right and honest candidates to be voted has no validity within this system.
No more proof is necessary than checking how many Attorneys at Law, Financial Experts, Professionals and Academics are there in the present Parliament.
It is worth asking the difference there was between Professors and Mervyns in politics. It makes no sense in waiting for another year and a half to see if they would deliver. They simply will not and cannot serve the people.

Neither the vast majority in the South and those in the North-East.

The ITAK leaders still sticking with this Wickremesinghe Government expecting their demands would be met, is betraying those men and women demanding answers for their immediate issues; their land, their family members held without charges, their missing persons and the security forces encroaching into their livelihood and civil life.

The new Constitution the ITAK leaders think they can smuggle through with this Government is dreaming in daylight. The Colombo pundits who think this Government can leave Rajapaksa out of politics are fake democrats. Their belief that Rajapaksa can be defeated with this coalition, is dumb to all the Sinhala Buddhist extremism this Government is touting around with. They provide Rajapaksa more legitimacy to ride his Sinhala racist caravan.

Thus it is now time to ask this Government, what’s its answer to reforming education that is fast declining? Where’s its programme to develop the health sector? How will it develop the rural economy and agriculture? Where is comfortable and efficient public commuting in this horrible traffic jams, that waste hours of productive time on roads?

How would it create the political environment in defeating Sinhala Buddhist extremism and answer political and social issues of the Tamil and Muslim people?

It is time these issues are taken up seriously in society, instead of giving ear to all the petty issues the Government and the JO create for their survival.

It is time the mainstream media become more socially responsible in taking up issues that have to be found answers for.

It is time too for society to demand development programmes for education, health, public transport, rural economy and housing. We are lacking that social dialogue trapped in petty issues wanting this “yahapalanaya” to correct its course that can never happen.

We are too late in realising that “name and face” changes in politics have failed us all along our electoral history. We keep choosing people instead of a seriously discussed “National Programme” for development. We got to change before we think of changing Governments.

After the NCM: Thinking about positive possibilities

Photo courtesy South China Morning Post

PROF. JAYADEVA UYANGODA-04/06/2018

The outcome of the voting at the conclusion of parliamentary debate yesterday on the No Confidence Motion in the Prime Minister has three immediate and readily visible political consequences. Firstly, it strengthened the position of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and the UNP within the coalition government. Secondly, the voting also both strengthened and weakened the Joint Opposition (JO). While managing to split the SLFP led by President Sirisena and thereby gaining political advantage over the President and the SLFP, the JO failed to sustain its winning momentum gained at the recently held local government elections.

The third outcome is no less significant. It broke the unity of President Sirisena’s SLFP and helped form two camps – those who voted for the NCM, and those, the majority, who abstained from voting, indirectly supporting the PM. This also ended the President’s not so hidden campaign to oust from office Ranil Wickremasinghe as the Prime Minister and decisively weaken the UNP’s position within the coalition government.

New Equation

Thus, the first phase of the power struggle between Wickremesinghe-led UNP, Sirisena-led SLFP, and Rajapaksa-led JO has come to an end with an interesting re-configuration of power relations in the country.  Contrary to expectations of both the JO and President Sirisena, the UNP has emerged stronger, pushing the JO and President Sirisena to the second and third positions respectively. 
 Ministers who voted for the NCM and abstained from voting represent two distinct political trends within the SLFP, with the potential to develop itself into a source of a new split.  Thus, the task of preventing another major rupture within the SLFP would be added to the busy workload of President Sirisena.

Meanwhile, the new equation, that was crystalised last night, also has the potential to provide incentives for the reinvention and re-building of the coalition government, led by President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe in discordance for the past several months. The time has indeed come for both leaders to have a sober introspection into what went wrong so far in their handling of the coalition government since January 2015.

For a Cooperative Coalition

A key lesson awaiting their attention is the following: if the coalition government were to function effectively till the end of 2019, the two camps will have to chalk out a new strategy of cooperative coalition governance.

This puts separate demands on each of the two leaders. On President Sirisena’s part, he needs to realize that his intention of removing Ranil Wickremasinghe as the PM and finding a docile replacement has effectively come to an end. He has to now learn to work in collaboration with a PM who he may personally dislike.  It is a strange law in politics that one cannot always choose people with whom one enjoys working.  India’s top leadership of the BJP government is an example. Leaders who are known to personally dislike each other have learnt to work politically in a spirit of compromise.

President Sirisena also needs to critically review his ambition of obtaining a second term in office in 2020. Last night’s configuration of forces shows that the minority parties and minority voters are not likely to trust President Sirisena over Prime Minister Wickremasinghe or his UNP. With a candidate from the Rajapaksa camp, President Sirisena might not find it easy to become even a credible presidential candidate.

Thus, and as things stand at present, President Sirisena’s political future is still bound with the dynamics of the yahapalanaya coalition. If it is revived, with a return to its original mandate of January 2015 and cementing the coalition with the UNP and other parties, President Sirisena might be able to chart out a graceful next phase in his political career.

The prospects for the UNP and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe are also similar in terms of the depth of the challenges they have to confront.  Threats to Wickremesinghe’s position as the UNP leader are an old story. If we turn to other issues, they too are formidable. In the short run, the UNP should not think it possible to go it alone, without the SLFP or President Sirisena, in the form of a minority government. Mr. Sirisena holds a great deal of constitutional authority in his capacity as the President of the Republic under the 19^thAmendment. The UNP also needs the solid support of the SLFP if it were to implement any new policy initiatives meant to serve their unfulfilled promises.

New Approach

This is where a new framework of cooperative coalition governance needs be invented without delay. Political management of the coalition government requires an entirely new approach, very different from the casual approach the PM Wickremasinghe has been following since the beginning of the present government and the combative approach that President Sirisena adopted of late.

Similarly, the UNP leaders should not take for granted the support extended to them last night by the Tamil and Muslim parties. The latter have legitimate expectations that their grievances and concerns will be addressed soon, turning words into deeds and tangible action. The effective cementing and further consolidation of the understanding between the UNP and the minority parities is essential for Sri Lanka’s democracy. This is particularly crucial in the light of the reported warning by President Sirisena that the UNP leadership should not depend on the TNA’s support to win against the NCM.  At a time when some Sinhalese leaders still see the minorities as untouchables in times of political crisis, the UNP, as demonstrated last night, is the only mainstream party that considers political cooperation with minority parties legitimate, and perhaps, more than instrumentalist.

Finally, political conflicts have their own dynamics. The conflict between president Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe slowly evolved over a period of two years and suddenly escalated late last year, exploding in the open during the past two months. What we saw is a culmination of the conflict with some surprising outcomes and unforeseen consequences. What is unusual about the last night’s political drama is that no party won a decisive victory. No party suffered a decisive defeat either. The outcomes are actually provisional. They thus offer a new opportunity for President Sirisena and his SLFP and PM Wickremesinghe and his UNP to also realize that they will be better off politically if they (a) begin to think about a new framework of cooperation, and (b) jointly retrieve the 2015 reform agenda.

That requires a new dialogue, not open-war or confrontation, between the two main partners of the coalition government.

Ranil’s honesty is the best policy wins by a majority of 46 votes – venomous serpents thrust into garbage bin.!

(Lanka-e-News - 05.April.2018, 2.20PM)  Prime minister Ranil Wickremesinghe emerged dazzlingly triumphant by a majority of 46 votes  in the no confidence motion brought  against him and the good governance government  . Even if the votes that were not cast by the absentees and those of the  opponents are added together , the P.M. has still won by a majority of 21 votes !

The final results following a full 12 hour debate are as follows:
Votes in favor of no confidence motion -76
Votes against no confidence motion- 122
Absentees at the time of voting -  26

The JVP and some members of president  Gamarala group voted in favor of the no confidence motion brought forward by the Joint Opposition.  

What was most rudely shocking was , deputy minister Nishantha Muthuhettigama and Cader Mastan themselves who signed the no confidence motion against the P.M. keeping away at the time of voting.   

It is significant to note , not a single UNF member voted for the no confidence motion , proving there are no mentally deranged members in the UNF , as Akila Viraj pointed out earlier on. 

The only UNF member ( national list) who spoke against the P.M. during the debate was Athureliya Rathane , but he too kept away at the time of voting. 

Range Bandara who was bragging unrelentingly that there were 20 members with  him of the UNP  to vote against the P.M.   sprung  a surprise by voting against the no confidence motion. Vasantha Senanayake too voted against the no confidence motion. Ex minister of justice Wijedasa Rajapakse who is critical of the government also voted against the motion.

Machiavellian father Mahinda Rajapakse and crooked son Namal Rajapakse who did not make speeches during the debate cast the votes in favor of the motion and did the vanishing trick immediately afterwards  even without waiting for the final result. 

The Pallewatte Gamarala’s SLFP /UPFA group showed clear signs of breaking up into three  with a majority of the group abstaining from voting. Among those who did not vote were : Duminda Dissanayake, Mahinda Amaraweera, Fowzie, Sarath Amunugama, Nimal Siripala, Faizer Mustafa, Mahinda Samarasinghe, Ranjith Siyambalapitya ,Vijith Vijayamuni, Mahanlal Grero, Piyasena Gamage, Lasantha Alagiyawanna, Manusha Nanayakkara, Werakumara Dissanayake, Malith Jayatileke , Sriyani Abeywickrema, Hisbullah, Bharathi Dushmantha, and Lakshman Seneviratne. 

Arumugam Thondaman and Muthu Sivalingam who are with the UPFA were absent , and Douglas Devananda voted against the no confidence motion. 

Susil Premajayantha , Anura Yapa, S.B. Dissanayake Chandima Weerakody , Thilanga Sumathipala , T.B.Ekanayake , Lakshman Yapa  and Dilan Perera who are holding ministerial portfolios in the consensual government voted against the P.M.

The public gallery of the parliament was brimming over with visitors as never before. School children were not allowed today ,and the M.P’s were issued three passes each . Because violent conspirators may enter the public gallery , security was beefed up to prevent any untoward activities.

This no confidence motion was the consummation of a series of conspiracies hatched by a group of the Alliance led by president Gamarala after  the local government elections to chase out the P.M. who was a pain in the neck of all the crooks, corrupt and wheeler dealers clustered around Gamarala.

Ranil who steered clear of foul and filthy politics and conducted himself honestly from the beginning won with an overwhelming majority , while Machiavellian Mahinda Rajapakse through his strategies was able to build  his own Alliance group .Finally , it is  the political turncoat and opportunistic  president Pallewatte Gamarala alias Sillysena who suffered  abysmally after forming a ‘kitchen cabinet’ joining hands from the very beginning with mahajara wheeler dealer Kili Maharaja, and discarded scoundrels like Shiral Lakthileke (NGO crook) , Gota the yankee doodle do , and Rathane the ‘any diddle will do’ robed monk.  Sillysena making silly and surreptitious moves  drove himself into the worst despair ,after  betraying those who put him on the presidential throne ,while also  ruthlessly trampling the sublime people’s mandate of 2015-01-08 .

Owing to his cheap arrogance and utter unconcern for the country he dilly dallied for months plunging the country into economic doom . The economic loss thereby engendered to the country  by president Gamarala is immeasurable.  In order to cover up all those sins and villainy , the sordid media culture he created and the media coolies now in plenty in this country (thanks to Gamarala) who pandered to his sinister aims and agendas also added to the woes of the country. 

Today , the people were also able to witness clearly the hypocritical and self seeking antics of the JVP  who claim and proclaim to the world that they are against the crooks and the corrupt . Their masks were removed and the bogus theories they advance in support of their sly and scheming designs were exposed.  

---------------------------
by     (2018-04-05 09:27:10)

Govt. should reboot and focus on running the administration

Friday, 6 April 2018

The Prime Minister won the vote of no-confidence comfortably brought against him by the Joint Opposition (JO) last night.

A total of 78 MPs supported the motion while 122 voted against it. Twenty-six MPs were not present at the time the vote was taken. The Prime Minister pointed out that the No-Confidence Motion was fought not to protect an individual but to protect the Government and to protect the victory of the people. Although both the JO and the UNP had claimed that victory was assured for the respective parties, uncertainty prevailed throughout the last two weeks and even after the debate on the motion commenced at 10.00 last morning. This is despite the President giving an assurance on Tuesday night that he would not rock the boat. He had told a group of MPs that he wanted the Government to continue. However, on Tuesday morning the SLFP had requested Wickremesinghe to step down as Prime Minister so that the Government could move on. The UNP ministers had told Minister Nimal Siripala that the SLFP had no right to ask the Prime Minister to step down.

However, the President’s sudden move on Tuesday night to abstain, forced several of the SLFP Ministers on the fence to reconsider their decision. Analysts say that when the Tamil National Alliance position became clear that they would support the Prime Minister, the President and those SLFP MPs who wanted the Government to continue opted to stay away from voting for the motion.

On Wednesday morning when the outcome became apparent Palitha Range Bandara and Vasantha Senanayake of the UNP who had declared that they would vote for it at the start and Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe (who was not happy with the party leadership) were also left with no option other than to vote against the motion or to stay away at the time of the voting.

On the other hand, the JVP, one of the most vocal supporters of the Yahapalana movement, finally broke ranks by voting with the Joint Opposition. SLFP ministers who were strong advocates of the motion like Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena, S.B. Dissanayake, Dayasiri Jayasekera, Thilanga Sumathipala, Anura Priyadarshana, Susil Premajayantha and Susantha Punchinilame voted for the motion and now are very likely to be booted out of the Government.

The current political crisis was largely triggered after the defeat of the UNP and the President’s SLFP faction at the Local Government polls resulting in a blame game on the two sides and Prime Minister becoming the main target for the SLFP critics. President Sirisena also contributed to the crisis by criticising the Prime Minister’s handling of the economy.

The 8 January mandate

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe after the victory expressed his gratitude to all the parliamentarians who helped to defeat the motion of No-Confidence which was brought against him and the Government. He went on to say that the Government has a duty to fulfill the responsibilities expected by the country on 8 January 2015. Therefore we now have to start a new journey.

The PM added that the United National Party (UNP) also needed to undergo a complete change and that they needed to bring new teams forward. The United National Front needed to be strengthened, he said, adding that they would look to win the support of the majority of the country and move forward. Prime Minister Wickremesinghe now has his task cut out. Firstly, he needs to win the confidence of the public. And secondly, he has to heal the cracks in the coalition. The Government position has been weakened by the rift at the highest levels of the current ruling coalition between the UNP and the SLFP.

President Sirisena stripped Wickremesinghe unfairly of two key financial institutions from his command including the Central Bank and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Party reforms for Wickremesinghe are also now a must. He has been the leader of the UNP for 24 years and is today the longest serving leader in the history of the party. He therefore needs to re-energise the party by injecting new blood into its veins and cleaning up his administration by getting rid of all the non-performing and corrupt bureaucrats and giving key portfolios to parliamentarians based only on their capabilities.

Way forward

Going forward many are now urging Wickremesinghe to break free from President Sirisena and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) so that the UNP has the freedom to implement its economic policies. However, a better option in order to protect the 8 January mandate would be to get the President to give the UNP power to implement a transparent economic program unfettered so that they both have an opportunity to go before the people with a less cluttered and confusing track-record.

The new tax structure implemented on the 1 April also needs to be revisited and deferred where possible. Taxes that hurt the poor needs to be revisited immediately. Many ministers in the current Government don’t really know what is going on in the villages. Rural infrastructure needs urgent repair in many districts, especially after two disasters last year. Therefore the Government certainly needs tone down its pro-Western and cosmopolitan outlook if they are win the hearts of the rural poor.

Confronting Westophobia

By Ameer Ali –APRIL 5, 2018

Dr. Ameer Ali

One of the criticisms I receive against most of my writings on Islam and Muslims is that my thoughts are influenced by the West, that I read too many books and articles written by Western authors, that I write from a Western country and from a Western perspective, and, in short, that I am a Westophile. This blanket criticism by the guardians of Islamic orthodoxy against writings and voices of many secular Muslim scholars living and working in the West is part of a Westophobia that is growing in response to a new wave of Islamophobia that emerged since the American invasion of Iraq in 2001. I have listened to this criticism even in international conferences sponsored by Muslim countries and Islamic institutions. The time has come to confront not only Islamophobia but also Westophobia.     

I have traced the historical development of these two phobias in another context (“From Islamophobiato Westophobia: The Long Road to Radical Islamism”, in Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, 3:1, April 2016). If only the Islamophobes from the West care to look at the civilizational side of Islam, which they have arrogantly belittled and ignored, and likewise, if the Westophobes among Muslims could look at the rational side of Western civilization which they reject as godless, both groups will realise that their mutual animosity is built upon fluid foundations. While the Islamophobes are happy to welcome the financial investment, natural resources and markets from the world of Islam, they do not want to concede the historical fact that it was through the Islamic world that Europe at first and West later received the inspiration and resources for its enlightenment, which in turn caused its ‘culture of growth’. Likewise, while Muslim Westophobes have no qualms in borrowing, accepting and paying any price for the technological and scientific inventions from the West and modernise their societies on Western mimicry, they are unwilling to welcome and encourage the growth of the spirit of inquiry and secular critical thought that generated those inventions. It is the study of the resilience of this intellectual dichotomy between the two groups, the search for a way to break this resilience to enable the adversaries to realise their common fallacy and reform themselves that, in essence, forms the subject matter of Muslim scholarship in social sciences in the Western world.

In this progressive enterprise, questioning and critiquing received wisdom, its history, traditions and sources is unavoidable. Muslim intellectuals have studied the art of critiquing and questioning from the secular intellectual disciplines that they have learned from Western educational institutions. Some of them like the renowned sociologist Fazlur Rahman Ansari, went back, after his studies, to his home country, Pakistan, to develop this kind of research. Orthodoxy hunted him down and even threatened his life. His only choice was to emigrate to the U.S. Likewise, Bassam Tibi, an Islamologist, had to flee his motherland, Syria, and sought asylum in Germany to continue with his research; Akbar S. Ahmad, a Pakistani, writes and publishes from U.K.; the late Algerian scholar, Muhammad Arkoun, did all his critical research on Islam and published them from France; and so is Khaled Abou El-Fadl, an Egyptian, but works in the US, and Abdalwahab Meddeb, a Tunisian, writing from France. I do not want to prolong with an endless list of émigré Muslim intellectuals. When critical scholarship finds organised hostility in its home ground there is no alternative but for it to emigrate. This is the sad story behind the flight of Muslim intellectuals. 

This does not mean that critical thought is solely the product of the West. In fact, it was the Muslims between the 9th and 11th centuries who pioneered this field of knowledge production. To be more accurate, the Muslims resurrected the ancient Greek critical thought, which Europe lost and forgot, and developed it before handing it back to Europe in the 15th century. Those who blindly attack Muslim critical scholarship as West oriented should study the history of the Mu’tazilites, the pioneers of rationalism, during the Abbasid Caliphate. Inspired by Caliph Al-Mamun’s translation movement and patronised by his Bayt al-Hikma or House of Wisdom, which was an academy of scholars, Muslim savants travelled in all directions of the earth in search of existing knowledge, brought them back to Baghdad and translated it into Arabic. Baghdad, under their influence, became the world repository of rare sources of knowledge. Not only did they collect and store existing knowledge, but through research and debates produced new and added to the stock, and more importantly, they secularised knowledge. This was the revolution that they initiated. They even went to the extent of questioning the origins of Islam’s Holiest of texts, the Quran. Such Muslim intellectual giants as Ali Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd, Al-Kindi, Al-Qwarizmi, Al-Biruni and hundreds of other philosophers, mathematicians, astronomers, scientists, and so on were the product of secularised Mu’tazilism. Even the great Al-Ghazzali started as a Mu’tazilite, went on to embrace Sufism, before becoming ultimately the unchallenged champion of religious orthodoxy.  The fourteenth century Muslim sociologist and historian, Ibn Khaldun, was also a product of Mu’tazilite rationalism. This is the proud history of Islam, which Muslim orthodoxy hides and Western history skips. When religious orthodoxy dethroned rationalism and enthroned itself on the seat of knowledge production, with political support of course, the intellectual lustre and dimension of Islamic civilization began to fade until Europe, after the fifteenth century, came to dominate knowledge production.  The rise of the West and the hostility of Islamic orthodoxy towards secular oriented and objective analysis of received spiritual wisdom combined to make Muslims stagnate and become eventually colonisable by the Wet. 

Today’s Muslim scholarship in the West is a reaction to this closure of Muslim mind and its colonization by the West. Muslim scholars who are now researching, writing and publishing analytical works on Islam, Islamic history and Muslims are not simply Western influenced or Western products, but more than that. They are the intellectual progenies of a proud rational Islamic parenthood. They are continuing from where the Mu’tazilites left. The Western rationalist tradition undoubtedly came through the Islamic door.

The traditional pedagogy in the Muslim world was more concerned in promoting the art of memorising rather than analysing the religious texts, and as a result, there was no net increase in knowledge production in the Muslim world for over a millennium. Muslims excelled in narrow textual indoctrination rather than in broad analytical education. In this technological age, in which information and texts can be preserved in several ways, memorising anything has lost its preservative value. Yet, although technology can preserve accumulated knowledge impeccably only an analytical mind can add to the stock of knowledge. That is why modern secular education, in which the West is leading, develops the analytical power of the brain. Such an analytical mind is notorious for raising uncomfortable questions. Those questions challenge orthodoxy, provoke rebellious answers, which in turn provoke new questions. This process of questioning, answering and counter-questioning generates debates and discussions which ultimately enriches the knowledge stock. This was how knowledge was produced by the Mu’tazilites, and the West is in debt to these pioneer rationalists.

The Arabic word for knowledge is ilm, and is the most frequently mentioned word in the Quran, second only to the name Allah. However, the Quran does not distinguish between religious knowledge and secular knowledge. It is orthodoxy that separated the two, elevated the former and devalued the latter. Knowledge is knowledge whether it comes from the West, East or anywhere else. Didn’t the Prophet of Islam urge his followers to seek knowledge even in China? What knowledge did he mean? Religious or secular? What knowledge did the Arabs bring from China? They brought the knowledge about producing silk, paper, gun powder, pottery, ceramics and several other material products.

Blind Muslim Westophobia reject the analytical minds and the art of creating knowledge on a false premise that training such minds is a conspiracy by the West to destroy Islam. Therefore, to the Westophobes, Muslim scholars in the West are all intellectual mercenaries hired by Western conspirators. Nothing can be further from the truth. I do not deny that there are comprador Muslim intellectuals, who serve as native informers to Western powers. Hamid Dabashi, an Iranian scholar from Columbia University, has even identified a few of them (Hamid Dabashi, Brown Skin White Masks, Pluto Press: 2011, pp. 38-64). To put all Muslim intellectuals however, who question the tenets of orthodoxy and demand radical changes into the comprador basket, is grossly unfair and only reinforces the Westophobia of critics.

Read More

How Israel weaponizes education in occupied Golan Heights

Druze residents of the Ioccupied Syrian Golan Heights gather to contact relatives in Syria.

Ammar AwadReuters

Matt Broomfield-4 April 2018

Since the outbreak of the Syrian civil war, classrooms in the Israeli-occupied Syrian Golan Heights have become a target for concerted Zionist propaganda and Israeli military recruitment efforts.

The 26,000 Syrian Druze residents of the Heights have long resisted assimilationist overtures from Tel Aviv. Prior to the 2011 unrest in Syria, less than 10 percent accepted the offer of Israeli citizenship, first made when the Golan was formally annexed in 1981.

However, the war that imperils Druze communities a few yards over the boundary has spurred newly intensified Israeli efforts to entice Druze youth deeper into Israeli life, according to a new report by the Al-Marsad Arab Human Rights Centre, exclusively seen by The Electronic Intifada.

Syria’s conflict has provoked a rise in Israeli citizenship applications among the Golan Druze, from an average of just 11 a year to more than 100 in 2015 and then to nearly 200 in 2016 – a significant increase, though still a modest number.

And Israel has sought to exploit this unease through extracurricular entities like the Israel Druze Boy and Girl Scout Association and the General Federation of Working and Studying Youth, or No’al. Both funnel graduates to the Israeli military, and both have expanded in the Golan as the Syrian conflict has spread to the United Nations buffer zone between the Israeli-occupied territory and Syria. A 2015 report on the No’al website touts its first Druze group, but also evinces dismay at the lack of Druze participation in Zionist youth activities, vowing to correct this.

Decades of deceit

Wael Tarabieh, 50, first experienced the Israeli-dominated Golan education system as a student and the son of a Druze schoolmaster in the fraught 1970s and 1980s. Now he has two children going through the system.

“It’s ridiculous [for] Syrian kids to be Zionist within their own homeland,” Tarabieh told The Electronic Intifada. He and other parents on school committees have spent the last two years lobbying through meetings with teachers, in public debates and the local media to keep No’al and the Scouts out of the Golan educational system.

The school committees have succeeded in blocking the two organizations from launching programs during school hours, Tarabieh says.

But from a promotional campaign which filmed Druze youth reading a script describing themselves as “living in the north of Israel,” through propagandizing trips to the occupied West Bank under the misnomer of “the desert of Judea and Samaria,” to a visit to a Druze holy place in the Galilee where a cleric spouted anti-Sunni rhetoric, young children like Tarabieh’s are now regularly experiencing fresh propaganda efforts.

Another link to Arab heritage was severed with the outbreak of war. Previously, hundreds of Golan Druze students were permitted to cross the boundary each year for government-funded study in Damascus.

With war raging now, Druze students are turning in increasing numbers to foreign universities. Israeli university tuition fees are often forbidding not least since Syrian Druze do not benefit from grants or scholarships offered to those who have served in the Israeli military. But the vast majority of Golan Druze who refuse to relinquish their Syrian identity hold only a laissez-passer reading “citizenship: undefined,” also posing an obstacle to studying abroad.

“Some EU states, such as Ukraine, are demanding an Israeli passport,” Tarabieh said. “And in all cases if you have Israeli citizenship it’s much easier, because [now] we have this travel document which is [seen as] suspicious all around the world.”

A history of propaganda

The attempts to militarize and assimilate Druze youth have precedents. Tarabieh told The Electronic Intifada that when he was “in primary school we even celebrated Israeli Independence Day.”

That celebration is synonymous across the Arab world with the day marking the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” in 1948 with the displacement of more than 750,000 Palestinians from their homes and lands and the massacres of thousands of civilians as the Israeli state burst violently into life.

The image of Arab children encouraged to cheerlead the exodus of their kin gives a picture of the last 50 years of what Al-Marsad calls the “Forgotten Occupation” of the Golan, the title of a new report examining “discriminatory Israeli policies” aimed at the full economic, cultural and political annexation of the Golan to Israel.

For many Syrian families, the expulsion of some 130,000 people from the Golan in the 1967 War was an equally catastrophic event. Thereafter only the mostly Druze inhabitants of five villages in the far north of the Golan remained, today numbering about 26,000.

Israel swiftly seized control of the classroom, according to Al-Marsad. Head teachers were fired and replaced by stooges directly appointed by and answerable to the military occupation, with ties to the Israeli security apparatus.

“Two Israeli soldiers taught me English and Hebrew,” Tarabieh recalled. “Both were Druze soldiers [on active] service, from Galilee villages in the north of Israel.”

This uniformed presence in the classroom was only the most obvious manifestation of a subtle attempt to divorce the Syrian Druze here from their Arab heritage. From 1975 onward, control of the education system was handed to a separate Druze authority.

Ever since, the Israeli authorities have ensured students in the Golan focus on Druze authors and historical figures, sit for Arabic examinations with Druze students separate from other Arabic language speakers, and go on exchange programs only with Druze- and Jewish-Israeli schools (as opposed to those for Palestinian citizens of Israel).

“It’s not a direct pressure on teachers,” Tarabieh said. “The curriculum is built to portray the Israeli narrative of history. Palestine is not mentioned here, [nor] the wars this century between Israel and the Arab states.”

Severing of Arab identity

As Tarabieh pointed out, a focus on Druze heritage is actually intended to “separate us from our roots, from our Arab citizenship.” Israeli educators align Druze in the Golan with their brethren across northern Israel. Druze men are required to serve in the military and some 60 percent do or have.

“It’s a narrative that you, as Druze, are different. You are not Arab, you are not Syrian, because we have Druze friends that serve in the army,” Tarabieh said.

Tarabieh recalled “embarrassment” in the classroom as teachers glossed over the region’s actual history, while he said of his own father that “there was a sense of fear … [Teachers] had to act by the book in order to keep their jobs.”

During the 1980s, Al-Marsad finds, members of the Golan Academic Association, a group comprising academics and those interested in politics, were even detained, interrogated and imprisoned for organizing summer camps and extracurricular educational programs that painted a fuller picture of Druze identity and regional geopolitics.

More often, as Druze mother Fadwa Abujabel Shoufi told Al-Marsad, it is “left to the parents” to explain Syrian heritage to their children. But the forcible displacement of Golan Heights Syrians who, along with their descendants, now number up to 500,000 – and the imposition of viciously restrictive blockades on travel between Israel and Syria – has broken up families and made it more difficult for older generations to pass on this knowledge.

Tarabieh compared Israel to both the Islamic State, for fostering sectarianism among Druze youth, and Bashar al-Assad, Syria’s president, for “using the fears of minorities [to] pretend they are their defender in this conflict.”

What is certain is that the Druze of the occupied Golan have a foothold in a pivotal region, and have long learned that even friendly overtures can mask an intention to absorb and thus eradicate their identity.

Matt Broomfield is a freelance journalist. He reports for VICE, the New Statesman and the New Arab, as well as publishing poetry and fiction. Twitter: @hashtagbroom. Website: mattbroomfield.contently.com