President Mahinda Rajapaksa:
Most outstanding stateSman of our time
Professor W.A. Wiswa Warnapala
President
Mahinda Rajapaksa, within a short period of four years, has successfully
carved out a permanent position in the pantheon of political leaders of
Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka produced a galaxy of political leaders in the
post-independent period and all of them, in some recognized way, made a
contribution to the modernization and development of Sri Lanka.
President Rajapaksa, through his commitment to the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of this small island nation, took a courageous and
bold initiative to eliminate terrorism from the political landscape of
Sri Lanka.
The demolition of the LTTE, in the eyes of defeatist politicians, was
invincible, and this was the greatest achievement of President
Rajapaksa’s leadership and his current regime; the victory over the most
sophisticated and brutal terrorist organization in the world was the
singular reason which made President Mahinda Rajapaksa the most
formidable political personality of Sri Lanka, and his position is
unassailable and unchallengeable in the given context of the
post-conflict political scenario and he has emerged as the Ruler
Imperative in this country which, as its history, both ancient and
modern, extends recognition to the charismatic quality of leadership.
With the total destruction of the LTTE which destabilized the country
for more than three decades, President Mahinda Rajapaksa has
consolidated his formidable position as well as the coalition parties to
which he provides effective and efficient political leadership.
In order to effectively achieve this process of consolidation of
power within a short period of four years, President Rajapaksa, as a
seasoned politician with his feet on the ground, adopted a large variety
of strategies based on both ancient traditions and symbols which, in
fact, are part and parcel of the political culture of the country.
No political leader in the past adopted such techniques and
approaches to aggregate power in our polity, part of which has been
nurtured by the traditional symbols and institutions of power.
The unique characteristics of the Sri Lankan political culture has
been articulated by President Rajapaksa who, in the course of his
presidential political career, made use of the techniques of political
mobilization which are very much typical of his own style of leadership.
Some of the techniques and strategies, though they are rooted in the
island’s political culture, are Nehruvian in orientation and character.
He, like great Jawarhalal Nehru of India, knew how to enthuse the
rural masses and he, with his immense understanding of the rural
political mind, penetrated the rural segments of the island’s population
which, historically, represented the arbiters of the electoral conflict
in Sri Lanka.
Therefore, President Rajapaksa, whoever the opponent, whether he is
Khaki-clad or not, is certain to carry the entire rural vote with him at
the next presidential poll. This is the political reality in the given
post-conflict political scenario in Sri Lanka.
President Rajapaksa is a skilful political actor who, through long
experience in politics and through his understanding of the rural
people, knew how to distinguish between overall approaches and
particular tactical actions in politics. He knows how to project his own
personality, organization and political circumstances; it is through a
combination of such varied factors that he made his fourth year in
office the year of achievement.
He, as a leader, effectively maintains a flexible, eclectic and
non-dogmatic approach to the main problems of the day, and the whole
political strategy of his in the last four years was based exclusively
on realistic pragmatism - the ability to adjust his political approaches
to the emerging situations.
It was this realistic approach which made security of the Sri Lankan
State the main item in his political agenda, and his commitment to the
preservation of the integrity of the Sri Lankan State became the major
national issue around, virtually the entire Sri Lankan population, was
mobilized from the point of view of the need to protect the security of
the State.
Max Weber saw the Modern State as a human community that claimed the
monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given
territory. Max Weber further emphasized that territory is one of the
most important characteristics of the Modern State and this Weberian
concept of the State, in my view, influenced the strategies of President
Rajapaksa who saw the immediate need to restore the security and
integrity of the Sri Lankan State.
Sri Lankan State, due to the nature of terrorism, which it
experienced for more than three decades, remained virtually bifurcated,
and the writ of the State did not touch and reach certain parts of the
Sri Lankan State territory. It was in this devastating scenario that he,
as a visionary of the common man, saw the necessity to restore the
security of the State which has been challenged by a terrorist group
with varied international links.
He, unlike all his predecessors in the last three decades, took very
bold initiatives to challenge the terrorist organization; he displayed
immense courage and bravery in tackling the most brutal and ruthless
terrorist organization in the world. He realized that terrorist violence
and various kinds of instability which it created were the major
obstacles to development and prosperity in Sri Lanka.
Francis Fukuyama, the famous Japanese writer, saw ‘The ends of
history’ with the collapse of Soviet Communism; it was his view that the
whole basis of conflict disappeared with the triumph of liberal
democracy. The developing world was seen as the major beneficiary, but
he never saw the devastating impact of ethnic cleavages, which for
instance threatened the very foundation of the Sri Lankan State and
strong measures were necessary to eliminate terrorism.
The re-definition of the concept of security is now necessary in the
post-conflict scenario where it is directly related to the issues of
development. New kinds of threats are likely to surface and they need to
be tackled in order to accelerate the process of economic development.
A genuine attempt has been made to accelerate the process of economic
and social development in the North-East through an effective process of
democratization and this kind of change cannot be effected within a
short period of time. President Rajapaksa, with a view to eliminating
the social and economic reasons which motivated the terrorists to launch
an armed offensive against the State, has taken a series of steps to
rehabilitate the region with a massive program of infrastructure
development.
It is through such a process that hearts and minds of the affected
minorities could be won and the Government led by President Rajapaksa is
quite aware of its dividend in building an united and stable Sri Lanka.
In the same way, rural re-construction programs have been launched in
all areas of the country and all public policies are being formulated
from the point of view of the needs of the rural people.
President Rajapaksa’s primary concern, as Mahinda Chintanaya amply
explains, is to eradicate poverty and to eliminate the social and
economic inequalities among the rural people in the country. President
Rajapaksa, through a wide variety of such programmes, has effectively
activated the formidable base of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party which still
derives immense inspiration from the ideology and aspirations of the
rural masses of the country.
The impact of this political strategy paid enough dividends at the
last Provincial Council Elections in the country. The results of the
elections which registered a polling rate of more than 60 per cent for
the Alliance led by President Rajapaksa, demonstrated that the electoral
dynamics have undergone a massive transformation.
It was primarily due to this style of leadership which President
Mahinda Rajapaksa displayed and mounted at these elections, which
offered him an opportunity to penetrate into the rural electorates and
it was through this kind of populist style of political leadership that
he successfully articulated the grievances and aspirations of the common
man in the village. Therefore his base in the rural Sri Lanka is very
solid and formidable, and this is largely the natural and traditional
base of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, which, throughout its history since
1951, stood for the rights and aspirations of the rural man, primarily
the rural poor.
It was the Sri Lanka Freedom Party which, in the years of power, took
those rural issues into consideration in formulating public policy. The
system of proportional representation which the United National Party
introduced to remain in power for ever has now undergone a change, and
the Sri Lankan polity experienced a plethora of political parties which,
instead of projecting a national agenda, specialized in narrow communal,
regional and parochial agendas; such political parties have introduced
an element of instability into the system which hitherto remained
stable. Kenneth Wheare, arguing against its introduction to the United
Kingdom, stated that such a system increases the number of political
parties.
He, opposing the multi-party system, argued such a system makes
stable government difficult or impossible and this is what Sri Lanka has
experienced. President Rajapaksa, with his style of penetrating into the
rural vote, has demolished the very thesis on which the proportional
representation system was constructed. He, through a mode of campaign
which was very much Nehruvian in character, changed the mood of the
electorate which, in fact, over-turned the very system of proportional
representation, which destroyed certain aspects of competitive
electoralism in Sri Lanka.
The Opposition which experienced the worst defeat in its history,
especially the United National Party, has now been reduced to a mere
name-board with its base eroding fast. Its failure to understand the
political culture of the island has been the fundamental reason for its
visible and steep decline, whereas President Rajapaksa came to terms
with the country’s political culture and successfully captured the
imagination of the entire national electorate.
In concluding this brief assessment of the role of the most
outstanding politician of our time, it would not be inappropriate to
refer to his foreign policy strategies and postures which he mounted
during the course of the humanitarian offensive against the LTTE. The
issues which arose during this particular period demanded proper
management of foreign policy issues, and he, unlike his predecessors in
high office, looked at them from the point of view of the national
interest, and he focused on it so much that he never vacillated from his
approach to the destruction of the most ruthless terrorist organization.
Eric Hobsbawn, the celebrated British Historian saw the LTTE as a
very ferocious organization capable of destroying the very foundation of
a State. In maintaining an offensive against it one has to adjust the
foreign policy as its tentacles have reached all corners of the Western
world. It was President Rajapaksa who understood that one cannot talk of
a future for Sri Lanka without eliminating the LTTE, and it was this
perception, despite the musings of the Western world, which guided him
to make the necessary adjustments in foreign policy to achieve his
objective.
He, as he managed power within the Sri Lankan State, which was under
threat from organized separatist ideology, managed the intricacies of
foreign policy to see that no nation, power or otherwise can be allowed
to interfere in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation. Sri Lanka’s
commendable achievements in the sphere of foreign policy and the
traditions associated with it, offered enough support to President
Rajapaksa to make the necessary choices in the vital area of foreign
policy.
In addition, he indulged in summit diplomacy to cultivate new friends
and to manage and control the noises of the traditional friends who saw
the process of destruction of the LTTE from a different angle.
He was interested only in managing foreign policy issues on the basis
of the fundamentals of security interest of the Sri Lankan State. In
this sphere too, specially in managing contentious issues in foreign
policy and all those pertaining to the neighbours, President Mahinda
Rajapaksa showed his capacity and statesmanship as the most outstanding
leader of our times.
The President’s
Words...
”We follow a pro-poor development strategy
with a focus on regionally balanced growth. Our objective is to
achieve overall development, while raising the income levels of
the poor through the empowerment of communities living at
grassroots level. In this connection Sri Lanka hopes that debt
forgiveness will continue to be expanded to encourage the
development of developing countries. It is only right that those
who reached the heights of development should pause to lend a
helping hand to those who have fallen behind due to
circumstances.”
- at the Sixty-First Session of the United
Nations General Assembly, 2006 |
|