A Gadarene rush into wilderness

RALLY: One does not need a basin of water to fill a thimble to overflowing. The organisers of the newly formed “National Congress”, which as yet to prove its national credentials, apart from the dubious credit of being led by the United National Party, must have been well aware of this when they chose Hyde Park in Colombo, one of the smallest greens in the country, to hold what they claim to be a massive rally of 500,000 people, opposed to the Government and its policies, and particularly to President Mahinda Rajapaksa.

There has been a great deal of hype about this rally and related demonstration by its organisers, who even went on to lull the public into complacency about threats of terrorist violence by the LTTE, in claiming that the IGP’s warning that two LTTE suicide bomb vehicles having entered Colombo was only a ploy to drive fear into the people who would come for the demonstration of protest.

Those with a greater degree of social responsibility, than the propagandists of the National Congress, could better assess whether it is in the larger interests of the public good to dismiss such warnings, with contemptuous mischief. Yet, in that piece of hype one saw the political bankruptcy of this new incarnation of saviours of the nation.

“Rata ivarai, Perata varev” (The country is finished; come forward) the slogan seen on many a hoarding calling people for this protest, is an apt demonstration of both the political bankruptcy of the leaders of the so-called National Congress, and their outdated attitudes towards the people.

“Varev” is no invitation, it is not a friendly call. Rather, it is an expression that has more than a touch of the feudal and aristocratic, which is in fact an order given to a person who is lower in the social ladder.

That the National Congress had forgotten to make a warm appeal such as “varella”, but opted for the feudal “varev”, shows the contempt they have for the people, on whose shoulders they would like to gain the seats of power.

Kollupitiya Chinthana

This is the clear manifestation of the Kollupitiya Chinthana that is now driving both the UNP and the “SLFP (M)” in what appears to be a Gadarene rush to political wilderness, unless they pause to correct their course and strategy.

There is more than a touch of the ironic in the UNP stating that last Thursday’s protest is a move to call for an early Presidential Election, by which they hope Ranil Wickremesinghe will be elected Executive President.

This is no new tactic for the UNP. In 2005 they carried out their own version of a Long March from the South to Colombo, to pressure the Elections Commissioner to advance the date of the Presidential Election, from the expected December 2006 to December 2005.

In the event, although the Commissioner of Elections was not moved by the UNP’s people pressure, and the various carnival antics on the way from Devundara to Colombo, the election was in fact advanced by one year, thanks to the Ven. Omaple Sobitha Thera who petitioned the Supreme Court on the matter.

The result of that advance in the date of election was not a victory for Ranil Wickremesinghe, but for Mahinda Rajapaksa and the UPFA.

Both the green-eyed UNP and National Congress will certainly have to spend much more time in Opposition and also demonstrate their credentials to lead the people to better effect, before the people rally behind them, not just to pack tiny Hyde Park to overflowing, but to really bring about a political environment in which a presidential election is thought necessary before the due date.

What matters today is not the size of a crowd that is too large for Hyde Park to hold, and whose numbers can be exaggerated by the precautionary road closures imposed by the Police; but the actuality of the policies that those who manoeuvre and manipulate such crowds can place before the people.

What is the qualitative difference in policy, which augurs better for the people of Sri Lanka, that the leaders and propagandists of the UNP or National Congress can offer the country? Searching for regime change through empty slogans that are not based on policy that has been thought out, cannot be the answer to the many problems faced by Sri Lanka today.

What measures do these new saviours offer to compel the LTTE to give up its commitment to arms and separation? Does the past record of these re-emergent champions of people’s rights give us any indication that they would perform better than they have done in the past?

Is it to such a motley collection of power grabbers that this country should risk handing over the reigns of power even in the years ahead? These are the questions that will need to be answered to those who are not mesmerised by manipulated crowds and the paid advertisements on radio and TV.

Tigers Down Under

The Australian Government’s high-handed action in canceling a visa earlier issued to Dr. Mohamed Haneef, the Indian doctor charged with alleged complicity in the recent terrorist attempts in the UK, has come in for well deserved criticism.

This action raises a very important issue of the quality and character of justice in Australia as it applies to those of South Asian origin, for Mohammed Haneef’s visa was cancelled, placing him in solitary detention, no sooner the Court had granted him bail on the charge involving alleged support for suspected terrorists in the UK.

One does not wish any harm to come to the Indian doctor, but double standards in this Aussie action was made even more manifest when while Mohammed Haneef had his visa cancelled after being enlarged on bail, the Aussie authorities did nothing to restrain three Tamils of Sri Lanka origin who had also been enlarged on bail, after being duly indicted before court by the Australian Federal Police for their role in funding an international terrorist organization, namely the LTTE, by diverting funds collected for tsunami relief in Sri Lanka to the coffers of the terrorist outfit.

It is important to note that the three fund raisers for the LTTE had been charged by the police after a prolonged inquiry, and not in haste as happened in Mohammed Haneef’s case.

The message seems to be that support for terrorism in Sri Lanka is not as bad as assistance for it in the UK. Is it a case of the British roots of the White Aussies having sway?

This is what “The Hindu” of India had to say on this glaring double standard in its editorial of July 21, 07. “But the problem is also flagrant double standards.

A few days ago three Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) operatives, Arumugam Rajeevan, Aruran Vinayagamoorthy, and Sivarajah Yathavan, charged with supporting and raising funds for the Sri Lankan terrorist group, were given bail by Australian courts.

The LTTE is the quintessential terrorist organisation - one of the world’s most powerful in the use of terror tactics against both the State and innocent civilians. It has been banned or designated as terrorist in India, Malaysia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union.

The Sri Lankan Foreign Ministry estimates that up to 30 per cent of funds the LTTE collects from the Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora comes from Australia. Canberra might regard the estimate as exaggerated but it cannot deny that major material support comes to the LTTE from Down Under.

“It is strange that while Australia treats the LTTE as a terrorist organisation along with 25 others for asset freezing purposes in compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1371 of 2001, it has not thought it fit to proscribe the organisation under the country’s domestic laws.

A comparison with the actions unleashed to deny Dr. Haneef his liberty - on the basis of a suspicion that he is a ‘terrorist’ and must be treated as such unless he is able to prove the opposite, essentially for giving his unexpired British SIM card to a distant relative who has been charged with involvement in terrorism - highlights double standards of a shocking kind.”