University Governance and Management: Is it elitist and alienating students?

July 4, 2018, 10:13 pm 

 Continued From Yestrday

by Dr. Siri Gamage, Australia

to incorporate this element. However, such change requires extra commitments by the academic staff.

Important aspects of a university are the availability of qualified and inspiring teachers, course content and pedagogy suitable for the 21st century, administrators such as Vice Chancellors, Deans, Heads of Department who can provide a congenial environment for learning including infrastructure (e.g. hostels), library facilities, communication in a language that can be understood by students (without jargon), customer friendly internal bureaucracy, internet and lab facilities. The product of teaching and learning which is in this case the degree should also have contemporary relevance in the national and international contexts (To ensure this, universities in developed countries utilise a set of graduate attributes for each degree. Aims of courses, assessment methods and expected outcomes from teaching tally with these graduate attributes).

Funding for Individual Research vs Team Research

What about the research enterprise in universities? Do students get an opportunity to function as research assistants while studying? Does the current funding method of university research encourages team research, for example through the establishment of research networks or centres of excellence- so that the students get more opportunities for working as assistants or is the funding individually based? My understanding is that a research allowance is provided to each academic staff member along with the salary rather than providing competitive research grants to teams of researchers on a competitive basis. There is no harm in introducing some competition in this sphere with the aim of generating innovation and more opportunities for postgraduate students to work as paid research assistants or associates. In countries such as Australia, Canada, and the US when senior academics apply for team based research grants, they can include several post-doctoral positions. Competitive research grants are assessed annually by panels drawn from academia and industry operating within a National Research Council. This way, the government can be assured that the important research funds are spent on worthy projects with national relevance and a potential for innovation.

The point here is that if high performing students are absorbed into various formal roles in the teaching and research processes within universities, it can reduce the feelings of alienation generated by their generalised exclusion from the formal structures.

Significant innovations in research cannot be generated under the existing method of granting a research allowance to academic staff individually with no adequate monitoring mechanism in place. It is a highly inefficient method unless their research output is measured objectively annually. Instead, a method of funding ‘team research’ in identified areas of national priority has to be devised.

Higher Education as a Transformative process

University education has to be a transformative, empowering process for the students. Academics and students should collectively construct knowledge both from the books, journals and experiential knowledge. Students (and their parents) should have confidence in the value of the product they acquire at the end of university education if they are to place trust in the education process, who administers it, and the very process of learning as it is presented today with enormous public expenditure. Instead, what we witness is the lack of trust and lack of perceived value in the process as well as the product i.e. degree, as far as some disciplines are concerned.

Conclusion

This article shows that the existing university governance and management/administration structures and processes appear to exclude student representation creating a generalised feeling of alienation among students. Such alienation can lead to the development of anti-establishment attitudes, student indiscipline and agitation for just and fair decision making and inclusion. If this hypothesis is valid, it shows how our authorities have not learned the lessons from previous episodes of student unrest and activism that led to countrywide violence. Composition of University Governing Councils and Senates reflect the fact that Sri Lanka’s universities have not moved with the times to be inclusive bodies of governance. Instead, they seem to continue as elitist bodies deliberating on matters relating to university management/administration including academically important matters with no direct inputs from the students who are the most important element of a university. For that matter, there do not seem to be a gender balance either in representation, making such bodies highly patriarchal forums. Therefore, University governance and management can be open to charges of being hierarchically organised outfits rather than ones that demonstrate democratic, representative principles (so far as students are concerned) suitable for the 21st century.

Instead of examining the reasons for this situation via formal mechanisms such as a commission of enquiry appointed either by the universities themselves, the ministry of higher education, or formal research, there is a tendency to show who is right and who is wrong in specific matters that have become contentious. In doing so, governments have inclined to maintain the existing governance, management/administrative structures that are heavily biased toward senior professors (serving and retired) in positions of power rather than allocating democratic spaces within decision making processes and structures for students to express their opinions formally and to empower.

No wonder that students have come to the streets to express their opinions and even become politicised in the process given the disempowering nature of university governance and management/administration! As a result, higher education has become a ground for entrenched battles between students and authorities rather than a transformative process for creating better and informed human beings for a socially just society.

If we are to make universities functioning institutions again, recognition of ‘politically’ active students’ status beyond being Daruwo -who have surpassed the stage of childhood and become adults - can be helpful to university administration/management at various levels.

For universities to become places of learning in a harmonious environment, authorities need to treat students as adults who have distinctive identities, viewpoints, and experiences as well as something to contribute. Teaching pedagogy has to change to validate these rather than exclude. While great books from the West and USA are important, teaching has to rely on local intellectual traditions, knowledge and wisdom while doing so. Students who show skills need to be involved in teaching process by offering them formal roles and included in formal decision-making processes. Absorption of academically and professionally promising students to various teaching roles as teaching assistants and tutors in residential facilities is also necessary. Problem solving mechanisms within public institutions including management practices need to be reformed to cater to contemporary needs and aspirations of stake holders instead of disempowering them.

Such reforms have the potential to reduce the temperature within universities.

Providing more autonomy to universities from the political authority to determine their future directions can also contribute to innovation, competition and even diversification.

Concluded

Vijayakala overshadows NY Times revelation

 

2018-07-05

No sooner had the political debate generated by the New York Times article regarding campaign financing of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa died down than State Minister of Child Affairs Vijayakala Maheswaran threw a bombshell in Jaffna on Monday, that took the South by storm. 

At a function to mark ‘Janadipathi Nila Mehewara’ on Monday, State Minister Maheswaran, widow of former MP T. Maheswaran who was gunned down in Colombo a few years ago, remarked that the LTTE should be revived as a means to create an atmosphere in the North for people to live without fear. 

As a politician representing the UNP in Jaffna, it is hardly unlikely that she will make any extra gain from her inflammatory remarks either  

The State Minister, the only member elected to Parliament on the ticket of the United National Party (UNP) representing the Jaffna district, made such remarks ostensibly after being emotional over the recent killing of a schoolgirl in Manippai, Jaffna. The event was attended by two Cabinet Ministers - Vajira Abeywardane and Tilak Marapana. Alongside, Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran and TNA MP M. A. Sumanthiran were also present on the occasion.
 
It is quite common for Tamil politicians in the North and the East to eulogize the LTTE in their bid to woo Tamil voters. Some TNA parliamentarians such as S. Sritharan and M.K. Sivajilingam are notorious for such inflammatory speeches. Let alone, their behaviour yields in terms of political benefits for them in the northern and eastern constituencies primarily shaped by Tamil nationalist sentiments. 
Be that as it may, it is a different case for State Minister Vijayakala Maheswaran who represents a national party like the UNP in Jaffna.

The LTTE was a terrorist outfit that fought an unsuccessful war for 30 years till its decimation at the hands of the security forces on May 19, 2009 in a narrow strip of land called ‘Mullivaikkal’. There was so much bloodletting because of the war that ravaged the country. It still remains a banned outfit not only in Sri Lanka but also in countries such as the United States, India and European Union.
Anything, characteristic of the LTTE, is scornful in the South. So, for that matter, State Minister Maheswaran’s clarion call for the organization’s revival left her party in the lurch in politics. All hell broke loose after the media gave wide publicity to her speech. Politically speaking, the UNP was so inconvenienced that its own MPs rushed to demand action against her in Parliament. 

Anything, characteristic of the LTTE, is scornful in the South. So, for that matter, State Minister Maheswaran’s clarion call for the organization’s revival left her party in the lurch in politics. All hell broke loose after the media gave wide publicity to her speech

It is UNP MP S.M. Marikkar who raised the issue in Parliament first. The UNP MPs’ intention could be two-pronged in this instance. One could be the mitigation of political damage to the government in general and to the party in particular over the speech. The other one could be an attempt to prevent the opposition led by former Mahinda Rajapaksa from making any political gain by taking the government to task labelling it with the LTTE tag. 

It happened at a time when the government or the UNP for that matter was harping on the MR’s camp over the revelations made in the New York Times article alleging that MR’s. election campaign in 2015 was financed by China Harbour Engineering Corporation. It generated a heated political debate in the country with responses and counter-responses on the matter being featured prominently in the mainstream media. But, the debate was subdued somewhat by State Minister Maheswaran’s speech.
In fact, the UNP back-benchers even started questioning in jovial sense whether she had received some financial inducements from MR to make such a speech distracting public attention from the contentious issue being debated in political circles. 

Nonetheless, her speech, according to many in politics, is politically immature since it has ramifications for her party. Also, as a politician representing the UNP in Jaffna, it is hardly unlikely that she will make any extra gain from her inflammatory remarks either. 

16-member group finally merged with JO

The group of Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) MPs, who joined the opposition, was finally absorbed into the Joint Opposition led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. For the first time, these MPs participated in the parliamentary group meeting of the Joint Opposition chaired by MR on Monday evening. 

MP Lakshman Yapa Abyewardane had one particular request to be made in this instance. He asked the Joint Opposition not to call his group ‘the 16 member team’ any longer. The former President also agreed to work with these MPs as one entity here after. Now, the political party-led by MR is a 70-member group. The group, altogether, decided to renew its call for the opposition leader post in Parliament. 

In fact, this SLFP group merged with the Joint Opposition under political compulsion only. The initial thinking, they had when defecting from the government, was different. They believed the SLFP was relegated to a dismal third position at the local government election because the party aligned with the UNP in forming the unity government. As such, the anti-UNP vote base was grabbed en bloc by Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) as per their calculation. 

So, they tried to join the opposition and carve out their niche. In fact, they undertook a series of public meetings aimed at this. Yet, it proved to be a failure. The group found it extremely difficult to maintain a distinct identity independent of the Joint Opposition. So to speak, the circumstances led them to merge with the Joint Opposition rather than being a separate group. 

Like DMK in Tamil Nadu, Wiggy to form TMK in North 

It is now apparent that the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) is heading for a split ahead of the elections to the northern provincial council this year. Earlier, Northern Province Chief Minister C.V. Wigneswaran said he would be compelled to look at an alternative to contest the elections unless he was given nomination by the TNA. It is all clear now that the TNA will not consider him for the next time. There was certainty in this respect after TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran spelled out clearly that the nomination of Wigneswaran to the Chief Ministerial post last time was a failed project. 

Against the backdrop, political sources from the north said that Mr. Wigneswaran had decided to form a new party named ‘Tamil Makkal Koottani (TMK)’. He is reported to have chosen that name purposefully so that the abbreviation ‘TMK’ rhymes well with Tamil Nadu political party‘DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam)’.  If the party is formed, we will have TMK in the North and DMK in Tamil Nadu of India.

Also, TNA MP Mavai Senathirajah also harbours ambition to contest for the CM post this time. If he is fielded, the election is slated to be hotly contested in the north, a departure from single party domination enjoyed by the TNA on previous occasions. 

All in all, the revelation by the New York Times and State Minister Maheswaran’s speech occupied the centre-stage of news coverage last week, distracting public attention from other burning issues.   

Bana talk of Hitler:‘Nazi Nirvana’ in 2020?

 Tuesday, 3 July 2018


“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed”  – Adolf Hitler

Shine as they may, there are no kings, adorned with jewelry and pearls, that shine as does a man restrained, adorned with virtue’s ornament  – Visuddhimagga

The two quotes – one from Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ and the other from Buddhagosha’s ‘Visuddhimagga’ – path to purification demonstrate the dissonance of the ‘dhamma’ emanating from the Monastic order which holds hostage what is perceived as Sinhala Buddhist consciousness. A doctrine that was in its essence, a timeless message of ethical perfection has been reduced to a religio-nationalist ideology.

The Anunayaka of the Asgiriya Chapter Ven. Vendaruwe Upali thero has told us not to politicise or misinterpret his references to the words ‘Hitler’ and ‘military’ used in his 30-minute long ‘Anushasanwa’.

He has advised us to consider it in the correct context. The objective of this exercise is to place his references to ‘Hitler’ and ‘Military’ in the correct and appropriate context. Obviously, it must be the Sinhala Buddhist context.

The devotee and direct recipient of the advice and ‘Anushasana’ of the venerable Anunayaka Thero has also weighed in. The sermon including the reference to Hitler was advice tendered to him and he was puzzled by the excitement it has caused. According to him, the Buddha has advised the Sangha to preach only to the wise. Now that, dear reader, is Vintage Gotabaya Rajapakse doing what he knows best – bana talking – his specialty. A more learned label ‘would be fetishisation of Buddhism.



The presidential aspirant is missing the mark

The presidential aspirant is missing the mark. The ‘Maha Sangha’ as they like to be identified are considered to be the voice of public reason. ‘Pararthacharya’ – altruistic service to society was once the purpose of those who took refuge in the Sangha order.

It seems that they have now given ‘Parathachariya’ a new meaning and a new task. That of appropriating our history and retelling it to suit the politics of the Rajapaksa family. Behind their claim to be the custodians of the faith and heritage is the dark desire for self-aggrandizement – an objective pursued with a narcistic intransigence.  Hitler represents the essence of unprecedented evil. ‘Hitler’ invented the mechanics of tyrannical rule that obliterated all traditional elements of political and spiritual values known to mankind. The advice to be like Hitler is therefore a matter on which even ‘Devadatta’ would have second thoughts.

The reference therefore is a disturbingly unprecedented precedent.

For the record, I must state that I am Buddhist by being born into a Buddhist family. I am an imperfect Buddhist who expects the Sangha to be more perfect than me in the business of ‘renunciation’ – the purpose for which Prince Siddhartha left his palace.

Therefore, I will not be uncharitable and myopic to dismiss his reference to Hitler and Military rule as a spontaneous or involuntary observation in a post prandial homily delivered by a flatterer and a flunkey.

The personage involved is the second in command of an ancient monastic order that controls a vast network of wealthy temples holding vast tracts of land. The prelate in question is an archetypical representative of the upper-class Siam sect hierarchy. He represents a socio-political alliance and a process that perceives a Gotabaya Rajapakse presidency as one that offers continuity, stability and progress in that order. Poet Auden’s ‘Secret is out ‘springs to mind.

“Behind the corpse in the reservoir …. behind the attack of migraine and the sigh, there is always another story, there is more than meets the eye. “


The parallels are too close for comfort 

Hitler was a charismatic leader who personified unprecedented evil in human history. His absolute hold on Germans was a product of the terrible times that Germany experienced during its transition from Hohenzollern rule to the dysfunctional democracy under the Weimar republic.

The parallels are too close for comfort. We must tread cautiously in contextualizing the remarks of the venerable Anunayake Thero of the Asgiriya chapter who seems clearly disenchanted with current chaos and drift under the tottering ‘Yahapalanaya’ rule.

It is therefore necessary that we strive as best as we could to comprehend the rhythm of the thought behind this single cry for a Sinhala Buddhist Hitler.

All actions are political, and all social relations are about power. We overlook this Gramscian premise at our peril. To do so is to lose our way.

It is hoped that by placing the terms ‘Hitler’ and ‘Military’ in context, we may yet preserve what is left of our dysfunctional democracy.

It will also equip us to treat the aspirations and ideals of the most venerable prelate with the seriousness and due diligence we owe him. He is no ordinary monk. He represents a powerful semi feudal monastic landlordism.

He represents ‘tradition’. This notion of tradition has its inbuilt dynamics. The claims made by the Sangha fraternity as custodians of the faith and upholders of tradition have an authenticity and a moral appeal of their own. They – the Sangha – enjoy the prerogative of defining and shaping their own culture and conduct.


What goes around comes around

Competitive politics has made the Sinhala adjectives ‘Poojaniya ‘and the ‘Vandaneya’ [used often by our President] when referring to them, an acknowledgement of their omniscience on matters spiritual and temporal. Their remit seems to cover all subjects ranging from metaphysics and philosophy to constitutional law and urban planning.

All societies are engaged in constant conflict with the modern, struggling to replace the old traditional ways. Yet the political class for its convenience wants to have it both ways. The Sirisena-Wickremesinghe duumvirate is in a losing battle to be more Sinhala Buddhist than the Rajapakse tribe.

Sometime ago, the Prime Minister and the Minster of Education who are now the Leader and General Secretary of the UNP, disbursed Rs. 46 million from the Central Cultural Fund to 150 selected Buddhist temples. That was pure patrimonial politics intended to boost the piety image of the ruling party. What goes around comes around.

The two monastic establishments of Malwatte and Asgiriya in particular and the Sangha order in general for their comfort and convenience insist that modernity is a false god. They are great trapeze artists leaping from modernity to tradition and vice versa with supreme skill and flair. Shackled to myth and legend, their flock are lost in the land that is the foreordained repository of the faith.

We are furiously engaged in mapping the contemporary world unable to fathom the depth of the abyss that separates the ‘traditional’ and the ‘modern’.

Coming back to the Hitler incident, essentially and significantly, we must bear in mind that the occasion was the 69th birthday of Gotabaya Rajapakse. He is a devoted Buddhist. He is an avowed vegetarian. He rears sharks as a hobby. He may well be our next executive president.

The Asgiriya Anunayake Thero used the distinctive words ‘Hitler’ and ‘Military Rule’. It is no coincidence that his call for a ‘Buddhist Hitler’ was made in the same week that a robed ruffian was punished for decidedly uncouth behavior in court. There is more than meets the eye. Contained in this episode is another story.


How it all began

It begins on 19 May 2009. The great unifier of the land Mahinda Rajapakse began building the post-civil war patriotic triumphalist state. There were no longer minorities in the land. Only patriots and traitors. It was not stated explicitly. Yet, it was driven home implicitly. The Sinhala Buddhist state has finally gained mastery over all unnational deviants. It had no place or patience for outsiders, misfits and oddballs.

Mahinda Rajapaksa was awarded the title “Vi vak rti Sr Trisinhalal dh vara” by the Malvatta and Asgiriya chapters for uniting the island. By the grace of the two monastic authorities of Kandy, Mahinda was the titular overlord of the three regions Ruhunu, Pihiti and Maya rata.

The Sangha establishment made the Mahinda Rajapakse presidency in to a quasi-monarchy. The 18th Amendment that removed term limits of the presidency received the enthusiastic endorsement of the vast majority in the Sangha establishment with perhaps the solitary exception of venerable Maduluwawe Sobhitha Thero.

There were times when the Buddhist monk was an intermediary between the monarch and the subjects.

Throughout history, our Sangha have displayed a pliant disposition to seduction by autocratic rulers. Their attachment to spiritual and moral values have always remained proportionate to their institutional primacy and personal interests.

Mahinda Rajapakse gave the Buddhist Sangha far more than mere constitutional prominence accorded to Buddhism. He made them enforcers of a sovereign faith. They were granted corresponding privileges and access to materiel benefits.

He harnessed the entrepreneurial talent of the urban Buddhist monk who had captured the imagination of an indolent middle class with choreographed rituals and devotional extravaganzas.

He assembled a support base of an elite core of the Sangha. It remains committed to restore his rule. They need no persuasion to vouch for his devotion and piety.


Relationship between religiosity and prejudice

Now, we must contextualize ‘Hitler’ and ‘Military’ in what Antonio Gramsci the Italian cultural Marxist called ‘perpetual social ferment’ no pun intended. This is the perpetual ferment of the docile and ignorant mass that is irretrievably and naturally inclined to the so-called “idiocy of rural life” in the words of Karl Marx!

We must locate the Anunayaka Thero’s reference to ‘Hitler’ and ‘Military rule’ in the context of a definite and defined relationship between religiosity and prejudice.

The claim that the ‘Mahasangha’ have guided the governance of the land from primordial times according to Buddhist ethical dictates is thin, delicate and does not pass the test of practical reason.

A total of 194 monarchs have ruled this ‘Dharmadeepa’. Of them 175 were Sinhala kings and 19 were Tamils; 60 monarchs ascended the throne by killing the heir apparent or ‘yuwaraja’; 53 claimed the crown by fratricide – killing the brother; five kings claimed the realm by patricide – killing the father. The solitary Queen Anula ascended the throne by mariticide.

Sorry. We cannot oblige the venerable Anunayake Thero by standing between essential truth and unchangeable practices of an antiquated past.

The Anunayake Thero’s homily and the arrogant dismissal of its implications by the recipient of the Hitlerite advice has a narrative of its own. Both attempt to silence the past and to erase memory.

Time has arrived for us to reappraise the old cultural consensus. Those who evoke ‘Hitler’ are moral cowards who loudly proclaim how society should be run and how people should live. They fear change.

They fight to restore the old order, the patrimonial garrison state. That is the precise context in which Hitler was invoked.

Both, preacher and perceiver claim and actively canvass for the opportunity to shape our future. It is our business to stop this Hitlerian cooperate of saffron and khaki.

Vijayakala’s story which stirred up a hornet’s nest in the South – Full EnglishTranslation here

(Lanka e News 04.July.2018, 11.20PM)  The full text of the speech made by deputy  minister for women and children’s affairs Vijayakala Maheswaran at Veerasingham Hall Jaffna on  2018-07-02 which stirred up a hornet’s nest in the South is hereunder….

 ''The presence of home affairs minister Vajira Abeywardena at this event is highly appreciated  by me and I thank him on behalf of the Jaffna people. I wish to tell the two ministers who are here that we are most hurt over the dismal  situation prevailing here with no aid being provided.

The sufferings of a woman can be understood only by another woman and not by a man. A six years old girl was raped and killed.  Our girls who are receiving no support from anyone  have only one choice – commit suicide. What are we to do? Is it for this a president was  appointed  by us after  so much toil? The situation is so bad that our children cannot go to school and return  home  safely.

All of you know how our people lived before 2009-05-19.( I think the date on your version is wrong) When comparing with today’s situation , it seems the LTTE should be revived. If our children and women are to come home safely , an LTTE administration   is again necessary. What this government has done for the last three years is only returning the lands which were acquired. We thank the government for that.   But beyond that the government has done nothing.

The claim that the government carried out development activities in the north is a lie. We respect the leadership . I am also a  minister of the government . But when nothing is done for the people of the North , our patience has reached the limit.

Of course the war was concluded. But what has the government done to those who became  widows due to the war ? Nothing has been done  to the youths who completed their University studies . There are 30,000 widows in the north and   12000 LTTE cadres in the rehabilitation camps. What is the government doing for them ?

What has it given them ? The cabinet paper to help them was cast aside. Was it because they  aren’t humans?  They took up arms to fight for their rights. Is it because of that you say they are not humans? Today the drug scourge is on the rise in Jaffna. After  the war was over the political leaders are transporting drugs to Jaffna. That is why drug addiction has shot up in Jaffna.

The president must work like  a president .We worked for him. Yet ministry portfolios have been given to those who worked against him. Is that right? Is it fair? That is the same thing which   was done even to the North. I am ashamed to speak these out. In these areas the job vacancies have been filled by youths of the South.

Our people are selling goods at Polas and doing cement mixing .That is why they are forced to stage fasts. The previous government too did the same thing. Jobs shall be provided to our children. The war was confined to the North and east only. Hence a separate special development program shall be evolved for these two provinces. What has happened now is  , special development programs are being implemented for other provinces , but not for the north and east.

Minister John Seneviratne cast aside my request earlier on pertaining to Thennamarachi district secretariat . He helped those who took up arms in the north to do politics  on his behalf .If the Thennamarachi    district secretariat is separated and given , we could reap massive economic benefits .On February 23 rd 2016 too we made that request from our government , and now that the home affairs minister Vajira Abeywardena has arrived here. I request the minister to grant that request at least now.

Minister Thilak Marapone who was the minister of defense during the period 2001 -2004 is also here today. That period there was a conflict between the armed groups and the government forces .You know how the UNP government operated at that time.

There is going to be a presidential election in the future. Our leader fielded a common candidate at the last presidential elections in the best interests of the country. Yet nothing worthwhile has been  done by the national government.  At least now UNP as a party must go alone. Our party head   is a good intelligent  leader .The SLFP has only 23 whereas UNP has 98. 

At the next presidential elections we should field a UNP candidate. It is the UNP which had discussions  with Prabhakaran .In  the future too a decision can be arrived at after discussions on behalf of  a UNP government. It is only under a single government good governance can be established. Let us rally together  towards that.''

---------------------------
by     (2018-07-04 19:47:34)

Allegation as bad as proof

We need a clear and bold message and it is not coming from the Rajapaksas

Island of prosperity could easily become an island of shame and dishonesty  

People of pride and morality could easily end up as shameless rags of humanity 

 Politicians exploit weak susceptibilities of the average voter

---

 2018-07-04

“Arbitrary power is the natural object of temptation to a Prince, as wine and women to a young fellow, or a bribe to a judge, or avarice to old age...”~Jonathan Swift  
In the deep conclaves of libraries and reading houses philosophers and great thinkers exchange a vast array of ideas and thought, yet only a rare few of political leaders have come out as shining beacons studying the complex human condition and what cascades from that condition either to a benevolent or destructive effect on the future.   

While these great philosophers and thinkers are many and sometimes innumerable, those who chose politics as their profession or livelihood are a few and far in between. If the system of Government is democratic in structures and processes, the most cynical kind of these politicians travel to unthinkable distances to exploit the weak susceptibilities of the average voter, to gain advantage over them in order to mount the high echelons of power.  

If the system of Government is non-democratic, then the suppression of the people’s freewill and other fundamental freedoms are easy to play around with since the path to power is not through the people, as one would say.   

Yet, there is another system of Government that prevailed especially during the time when the notorious Rajapaksas were in that exalted position.   

That is an amalgam between a President and Parliament whose ascension to power was through the ballot of the voter yet the exercise of that power was absolutely dictatorial and autocratic.   

Owing to the inherent deficiencies in the Sri Lankan Presidential structure and organism, the concentration of enormous powers within the office of President did pave the way for easy exercise of arbitrary and draconian decisions and mean exploitation of a two-thirds majority in Parliament.   

Impeachment of the thenChief Justice is a clear example. Mahinda Rajapaksa, with his uncanny charm and maliciously intended role-playing, presented himself to the broad masses as a patriotic and sincere political leader. That message was very clear.  

However, if the message is clear and succinct on the surface, but if beneath that agreeable outer cover are concealed dangerous and unkind intentions of self-enrichment and immeasurable disregard for the common man, whom he most pitilessly condemned as irrelevant and exploited as pawns on a political chessboard, then the Rajapaksas and their cruel henchmen belong in Dante’s infamous ‘First Circle’ of hell.   

On the other hand, the people of Sri Lanka chose Mahinda Rajapaksa and his family as their rulers in two consecutive times. Third time was a ‘No’.   

Although Mahinda’s message was clear and bold, but what lay underneath was exposed beyond an iota of uncertainty. Mahinda Rajapaksa and his clan did not bargain for the resistance that was shown towards their unscrupulous regime during the last Presidential Election campaign; the anger and rejection shown by the civil organizations and a smorgasbord of academics, intelligentsia and commoners was manifestly visible.

Thus far and no further, the distance the people were willing to travel with the Rajapaksas, ultimately saw an end. The frustration and the feeling of being taken for a mammoth ride by a ruler who thought that his clear message and assumed-charm would sustain his corrupt and autocratic rule forever reached its peak during the 2015 Presidential Election campaign.   

A Cabinet that was equally corrupt and pathetic in its approach to complex political realities, a Cabinet that was happy and content with the bones that were thrown at them by the Rajapaksa siblings was taken by sheer surprise of an electoral victory for Maithripala Sirisena, a ‘commoner’ himself and also the General Secretary of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike’s machine for the empowerment of the ‘common man’, waited with their mouths open and minds closed. Bandaranaike’s ‘common man’ won the day, once again.

If the system of Government is non-democratic, then the suppression of the people’s freewill and other fundamental freedoms are easy to play around with since the path to power is not through the people, as one would say

Then what happened is another story to tell, or not to tell, depending on whom to tell. But the signs are no good. The utter lack of memory of the voter and the alacrity at which events unfolded and the idiotic errors of judgments committed by both President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe contributed hugely to the disdain on the part of the general public.   

The people are not blind nor are their loyalties beyond boundaries. Corruption whether it’s a part of the Rajapaksa’s ilk or associated is with the current administration, is corruption, period. 

Furthermore, for the members of the United National Party (UNP), being out of power for almost two-and-half-decades, does not give license to indulge in the same extremities, as those who preceded them.  

Being victims of the culture of corruption created over the last few decades, these politicos have chosen to play the same game to the same undignified rules. Barring the likes of Navin Dissanayake, Ruwan Wijewardene, Sajith Premadasa and a few more, this shameful badge of corruption, allurement to money from ‘perpetual corrupters’, belongs to most in the current Administration, so the rumor goes.   

Alleged corruption is as bad as being proven guilty of that corruption. That is the cruel side of being alleged of lack of financial integrity. The optics of the allegation is more than sufficient for those who read only the headlines and that consists the vast majority in the country.   

Social media accompanied with some nasty headlines and cartoons can destroy an image of a political leader. State Minister Sujeewa Senasinghe must be aware of this aspect of political image-building.   

Impeachment of the then Chief Justice is a clear example. Mahinda Rajapaksa, with his uncanny charm and maliciously intended role-playing, presented himself to the broad masses as a patriotic and sincere political leader

Years of good work can easily be erased and totally eliminated by a single stroke of an allegation of corrupt practice, whether financial or otherwise.

It is this hodgepodge of governance and politricks we are dealing with today.   

But the voter does not care a damn about the nuances. His wants and desires must be met, at least half way, and tangibly. A sincere attempt by the politician is seen by the voter immediately and his allegiance to such genuine characters in this not-so-genuine profession could last a longer time than to others who openly exploit the profession with shameless proficiency. Dudley Senanayake was a personification of such honesty and integrity.  

All these nuanced explanations might go unheard and unseen by the immediate cohorts of these politicians; yet the cryptic observations of the voter still matter. It should be a lesson for those in the UNP, who aspire for leadership in the future. Whether it’s Navin, Sajith or anyone else, these fundamentals of leadership and management of mass movements have not changed and they will not.  

In the current political environment in Sri Lanka, a clear and bold message with a craftily assembled organization would still be an unambiguous way to power.   

The UNP and the SLFP are running out of time. While the Rajapaksas and the ‘Pohottuwa’-gang have been slinging mud at the present regime in every occurrence possible, being engaged in the running of the country’s economy and its disentanglement from unbearable debt burden caused by the Rajapaksa regime and offering that as a reason or an excuse will not be accepted by the voter, common man or otherwise.  

The Rajapaksas devoured the country’s wealth and good name. Their extent of corruption, nepotism and autocratic rule is not easy to surpass. 

Their indulgences are beyond the pale. Their avarice had no reasonable border. In short, they were not good rulers for the country. But the people must not be left to choose between two bad choices. If the people are condemned to choose the lesser of evil, it’s extremely injurious to the fabric of society; such condemnation would result in the people settling down to a mundane mediocrity.   

As it was with a decadent Roman society in the long drawn out fall of its Empire, our people too would begin displaying sheer disregard for decency; they would show callous concern for honesty and what looked like the beginning of the fall may have gone away too far to contain. 

That is not an alluring prospect for an island nation that showed tremendous potential in the nineteen eighties. An island of potential prosperity could easily become an island of shame and dishonesty; a people of unmitigated pride and morality could easily end up as shameless rags of humanity, meandering in a desert of hope and barren inspirations. 

The writer can be contacted at vishwamithra1984@gmail.com

The killing of ‘the leopard’ and call for the return of ‘a Hitler’

Monday, 2 July 2018

Last week, the mainstream media as well as social media was abuzz with two explosive stories. 

Killing of the leopard

One was the brutal clubbing to death of a leopard which had accidentally wandered into a village in Kilinochchi by some of its inhabitants. The public anger was directed at them particularly for their euphoric posing for selfies with its carcass, while ridiculing it all the time. 

The killing of ‘the leopard’ and call for the return of ‘a Hitler’.docx by Thavam on Scribd

New York Times Exposé & UNP Duplicity

By Amrit Muttukumaru –JULY 3, 2018

Amrit Muttukumaru

The brazen duplicity of our politicians unleashed on the people of this country with impunity makes one wonder whether we even deserve a vote. Under no circumstances is the writer advocating even a little bit of totalitarianism. What is amazing is that most of our present day politicians better known for their brawn are doing this to us on a regular basis. What does this say of us?

An excellent current example of such duplicity is the reaction of the UNP led yahapalana government to the ‘New York Times’ exposé alleging that one of China’s prominent government owned entities – ‘China Harbor Engineering Company ‘(CHEC) had funded the 2015  re-election presidential campaign of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to the tune of “at least $7.6 million”. 

NYT Exposé 

1) UNP parliamentarian Ajith P Perera – State Minister of Power and Renewable Energy states:

“We have reason to believe that Mr. Rajapaksa’s election campaign was funded by the Chinese company” 

The company referred to is ‘China Harbor Engineering Company’ (CHEC). (‘Daily Mirror’ 3 July 2018)  

2) In the context of the article alleging “The payments were confirmed by documents and cash checks detailed in a government investigation seen by The New York Times” why did the government have to wait for the NYT exposé when it had the information necessary to go public? 

3) Why did UNP minister Ajith P Perera reportedly inform the ‘Daily Mirror’ that the authorities concerned “could not disclose information on their investigations to the public” when it is  obvious that the main source of the NYT article were government documents?

4) Despite having “reason to believe” that CHEC had at least partly funded the 2015 presidential campaign of Mahinda Rajapaksa, why did the yahapalana government continue to have CHEC as the source of funding and main partner in so-called flagship ‘development’ projects which include the Hambantota Port and ‘Colombo Port City’ now renamed ‘Colombo International Financial City’?

5) UNP minister Ajith P Perera is not the only person to have misgivings on the integrity of CHEC. 

6) Dr. Harsha De Silva – Deputy Minister, National Policies and Economic Affairs whose minister is no less a person than Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe when in opposition while describing the ‘Colombo Port City’ (now renamed) as “Colombo’s largest land scam” alleged that CHEC was “banned by the World Bank” from 2009 to 2017 “after being caught in a string of corruption scandals involving the Philippines, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Jamaica, Guyana, Papua New Guinea and Uganda.”

He is now a major proponent of the renamed ‘Colombo Port City’. Why is no one demanding that De Silva explain himself?  When an ‘educated’ person such as Dr. Harsha De Silva is on record on this matter, what can be expected from the majority of our politicians?

Dual Citizenship

An acid test to determine whether the people of this country – particularly its leaders – political, corporate, professional, NGO and media are serious about combating corruption is whether they will make a clarion call to forthwith stop the practice of issuing dual citizenship at least until the country reaches an acceptable level of equitable development. This must be applicable to those holding (i) all elected political office (ii) senior bureaucrats at least at Secretary & Deputy Secretary level (iii) Chairpersons & CEOs of Corporations & statutory bodies (iv) Chairpersons & CEOs of regulatory agencies (v) Heads of entities responsible for law & order (vi)Directors of quoted public companies (vii) Sri Lankan Diplomats. It must also include immediate family members of such persons. Any deviation will disqualify those concerned from holding office.

This writer believes that a fountainhead of egregious corruption are divided loyalties and ability to evade accountability. When Sri Lanka is the ONLY COUNTRY of which we can be citizens, would we not nurture the country with love? 

The writer will appreciate having the views of others in the larger interest of the country. Howls of protest and castigation from vested interests is anticipated! 

Conclusion

An issue that needs to be addressed is the whole gamut of campaign finance and accountability. For starters, will the authorities concerned in government forthwith release to the public domain the documents which allegedly were the source of the NYT exposé? 

For a plethora of reasons which include ‘insurance’ in the context of egregious corruption perpetrated by all sections of the political divide, it is obvious that successive governments will only make stifled noises now and then to give a veneer of hope for the people. For example, where is the opposition outrage in the aftermath of the egregious bond scam whose mastermind has still not been identified? Why is there no concerted demand to hold PM Ranil Wickremesinghe responsible for former CBSL Governor Arjuna Mahendran being able to leave the country and thus evade due process for his alleged role in the bond scam? Was it not the PM who hand-picked Arjuna Mahendran a foreign national to be CBSL Governor and was it not the PM despite the widespread demand not to give Mahendran a second term due to his perceived role in the bond scam who robustly endorsed him for a second term?

Read More

Sri Lanka's Media Minister condemns attacks on journalists contributed to New York Times report

Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 07:38 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.


July 04, Colombo: Sri Lanka's Media Minister on Wednesday condemned recent attacks on two Sri Lankan journalists who contributed to the New York Times report on massive financial misappropriation linked to the former regime.

Minister of Finance and Media Information Mangala Samaraweera in a statement said he was alarmed by recent attacks and vehemently condemned "such practices where journalists are attacked for doing their job."

Reiterating the government's commitment to ensure that all journalists are safe to do their work, "even when that means brooking scathing criticism against this administration by the media," the Minister said there must be an "immediate halt to these practices."

He called on the leadership of joint opposition's party SLPP to take full responsibility for these attacks and ensure that there is no repetition of this behavior.

Issuing a media statement yesterday titled Intimidation Campaign Against Sri Lankan Journalists International Editor of The New York Times Michael Slackman asked former president Mahinda Rajapaksa if he has an issue with Times reporting to contact senior editors at The New York Times rather than intimidating Sri Lankan journalists.

Mr. Slackman alleged that a group of Sri Lankan parliamentarians allied with the former president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, held a news conference to publicly criticize two journalists who contributed logistical assistance to a rigorously reported and accurate New York Times investigation into the Hambantota port, published on June 26.

Full statement made by Media Minister Mangala Samaraweera

I was alarmed by the recent attacks on two Sri Lankan journalists who contributed to the New York Times report on massive financial misappropriation linked to the former regime in Sri Lanka.

These allegations must be immediately investigated by the relevant authorities and action taken against perpetrators without fear or favour. But I am also disturbed with the virulent personal attacks by individuals linked to the JO and the SLPP in a bid to intimidate journalists who worked on the NYT report, attacking them for doing their job in reporting hugely questionable transactions amounting to billions of rupees that occurred under the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime.

As Media Minister, I vehemently condemn such practices where journalists are attacked for doing their job. There must be an immediate halt to these practices. Further, the SLPP leadership must take full responsibility for these attacks and ensure that there is no repetition of this behaviour.

This government came into power with the promise of media freedom and to break away from the violent tendencies of the previous government. The dark years of the Mahinda Rajapaksa presidency witnessed the highest number of journalists killed, disappeared, attacked and threatened and media houses attacked. We will not return to those dark years where individuals were targeted for unveiling the truth and reporting facts.

We now have a government that respects fundamental freedoms and civil liberties and upholds media freedom. This government reiterates its commitment to ensure that all journalists are safe to do their work, even when that means brooking scathing criticism against this administration by the media. Those who threaten our rights and freedoms must be condemned and held accountable for their actions.

** Related Story :: NY Times asks Sri Lanka opposition lawmakers not to intimidate journalists over the report on Hambantota harbor

Sri Lanka\'s Media Minister condemns attacks on journalists contributed to New York Times report

Chinese financing to MR: Govt should down play

  

2018-07-05

The recent story by New York Times that China Harbour Engineering Company financed the 2015 election campaign of ex-president Mahinda Rajapaksa has caused ripples in politics. That they are only ripples and not tidal waves may imply a degree of political maturity of the government, unseen when it came to power in 2015 and suspended most of Chinese funded projects. That the government has so far reined in its ranks from pouncing upon MR and more importantly China, the largest bilateral lender, is also a somewhat departure from the usual Sri Lankan politics where no stone is un-turned to sling mud at the opponent. 

According to the New York Times story by its South Asian correspondent Maria Abi-Habib, ‘at least $7.6 million was dispensed from China Harbour’s account at Standard Chartered Bank to affiliates of MR’s campaign, according to a document, seen by The Times, from an active internal government investigation.’ Abi-Habib alleges that the Chinese loans and inducements effectively created a debt trap and led Sri Lanka to handover the Hambantota port to Beijing on a 99-year lease. 

Both MR and the Chinese embassy in Colombo have denied the allegation. 

This story does not tell much, other than trying to substantiate the old story of growing Chinese tentacles in Sri Lanka, or for that matter in much of the developing world, via insidious means of predatory loans disguised as development assistance given to autocrats. 

---

• $ 7.6 mn dispensed from China Harbour A/c at SCB to affiliates of MR’s campaign 
• Abi-Habib alleges the Chinese loans, inducements created debt trap and led SL to handover H’tota port to Beijing on a 99-year lease
• MR and Chinese embassy in Colombo denied the allegation
• China’s economic presence, will sooner or later seek to influence domestic politics

---

That is however a subjective call with subjective geopolitical connotations. In fact, empirical studies of Chinese financing and those of other international lenders such as World Bank, Asian Development Bank and other regional institutions reveal that their main borrowers are the same countries. For instance, data compiled by Deborah Brautingam and Jyhjong Hwang revealed, three out of top five recipients of Chinese and Word Bank development aid to Africa during 2000-2014 were the same. Same applies in South Asia, where countries such as Bangladesh, which is heavily tilting towards China for infrastructure loans, still have more outstanding loans to Japan than to China. Same has been true for Pakistan until the influx of CPEC loans and Sri Lanka until the loss of access to concessionary loans due to its elevation to the lower middle income status. Other studies have revealed that the long term benefits of  China’s infrastructure loans and those by multilateral lenders in Africa were largely similar.
 
However, Abi-Habib’s story is important for one reason. She cites ‘an active internal government investigation,’ which allegedly details the disbursement of financing from China Harbor’s accountat Standard Chartered Bank to affiliates of MR’s campaign. Now if such a document exists, the government has a responsibility to reveal it. If it believes doing so would strain relations with China, which it probably will, leaking it to New York Times was not also the most sensible option. My hunch of this document is that its substance is no different from the earlier claims of billions of dollars of stolen funds that the government said it has found in the bank accounts in Dubai. Yes, there may be documents, but, as the past has proved those are an assortment of numbers concocted by a figment of imagination. They are nonetheless good enough to assail your political opponent, and take a swipe at MR as he is plotting to make a political comeback .

But, such gambles however have their own foreign policy cost as we know from the previous experience of the politically motivated suspension of development projects, and their immediate and still felt residual effect on the country’s economy. 

This narrative of implied sinister implication of China’s power has concocted a new terminology: sharp power, which are mechanizations adopted by authoritarian states to manipulate and intimidate political and social institutions by preying on the very democratic structures of these societies. Unlike soft power, i.e. the ability of states to affect others by attraction and persuasion rather than the hard power of coercion and payment, sharp power is a sinister form of power that, according to those at National Endowment for Democracy who coined the term, ‘pierces, penetrates, or perforates the political and information environments in the targeted countries.’ 

However, rather than the power sources that are being used-or even their intended objectives- it is the internal characteristics of the states that set apart sharp power from soft power. So when China allegedly bribes politicians, that is sharp power, when India does the same, that is perhaps , discursive power, when George Soros does it, it is something else. 

And then it lumps together, all potential civilian and non-coercive sources of power resources of these supposed authoritarian states into sharp power. 

Effectively,  Russia orchestrated fake news that swung elections, Chinese students in Australia, Chinese companies in the West, and probably Chinese scholarships given to government officials, all could well be termed as potential vehicles of sharp power. 

Of course, internal characteristics of states can influence their foreign policy as democratic peace theorists- those who claim democracies do not fight wars against each other, partly because their leaders are restrained by their societies and that they also have other means to resolve problems - have argued. 

However, sometimes, these broadsided narratives are also part of a strategy of de-legitimization of a rising power, and they fit the template of off- cited description of revisionist power that could be destabilizing for its neighbours and the world. 

We are indeed living in the same world. However, given our social economic conditions, we do have priorities different from those of Australians or Americans. Countries should conduct their foreign policy to advance, first and foremost, their self- interest. That would mean, in navigating those real and imagined claims of Chinese mechanizations, Sri Lanka has to assess the larger implications on overall national interest. 

We also need to be realistic. Given the scale of China’s economic presence, it will sooner or later seek to influence the domestic politics. On the other hand, China’s regime friendly relations with whoever in power also exposes it to the ire of the opposition parties. 

China is not the only country to vie for influence, others too do so through their own agencies, defence attaches and other influence peddling vehicles. There again, the problem here is the murky election financing in Sri Lanka, which needs to be regulated. 

However, mingling foreign policy with cut- throat domestic politics is a dangerous gamble.
This is good time to take a swipe at the Rajapaksas, but that could come at the expense of Sri Lanka’s ties with China, and by extension, our long term national imperatives. The government should desist its back-benchers from opening a can of worms. 

Follow @RangaJayasuriya on twitter