Self-destructive scorpions of UNP
Prof Rajeeva Wijesinha, MP
There is an old folk tale about a scorpion that asked a frog to give
him a lift across a river. The frog was naturally frightened that the
scorpion would sting him, but the scorpion promised he would not, and
pointed out that, was he to sting the frog while they were en route,
they would both drown. The frog was reassured and took the scorpion on
his back but, when they were half way across the river, the scorpion
stung him.
Opposition utterances
*Trying to undermine country
*Self -defeating, bizarre
*Trying to score cheap debating points
*Borders on vulgarity
*Lacks dignity, undemocratic
*Tragic and laughable |
|
Prof
Rajeeva Wijesinha, MP |
As they were both sinking, with his last breath the frog asked the
scorpion why he had destroyed them both. ‘I can’t help it,’ said the
scorpion ruefully. ‘I am a scorpion. My nature will not change, whatever
the problems it might cause.’ I was reminded of that story in reading
Ranil Wickremesinghe’s comments at the Opening Session of the
Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Regional Conference. He had
performed his usual number about the deficiencies of the government and
the wonderful altruistic approach of the Opposition.
Economic development
He had certainly chosen a strange audience for his plaint. Years ago
he used to be egged on in his efforts to undermine the government by
that gaggle of sanctimonious diplomats, Juergen Werth and Angela Bogdan
and Dominic Chilcott and Julian Wilson and that preposterous Dutchman
whose name I cannot remember. But all but one of them were replaced by
less manipulative characters and the short term memory of Camelot (Ranil
as King Arthur, President Kumaratunga as Guinevere, Mangala Samaraweera
as Sir Lancelot, Bradman Weerakioon playing Merlin) faded and serving
diplomats no longer thought their main duty was to wake the sleepers in
their caves and restore the old regime.
India and Pakistan and our neighbours however were always very
different, committed to working with a democratically elected
government. And India in particular, which has always taken Sri Lanka
seriously, had a long-term memory too and remembered Ranil’s role in
creating the current problems. Of course he man have reformed, and when
he was Prime Minister they worked with him positively but they would not
have forgotten his speech in Chennai in 2003, when he claimed that
democracy could be suspended for the sake of economic development. His
current assertion then that ‘establishing a Constitutional dictatorship,
supposedly for the purpose of furthering economic development and
prosperity is also unacceptable’ would have sounded to them then like
someone engaging in self-criticism.
Permanent victory
Ranil’s latest effusion is the more bizarre and more scorpion-like in
that it occurs at a time when many in government think his continuation
as Leader of the Opposition would be more convenient in that it would
ensure permanent victory at elections for the government. I think this
view is wrong, not because the alternative would not be more popular
electorally, but because the constant undermining of government does
more damage to the country as well as the government than effective
internal opposition, which might also help to keep government on its
toes.
Indeed in that regard I have also pointed out that the assassination
by the LTTE of Gamini Dissanayake was as much a tragedy for President
Kumaratunga as for the UNP and the country, in that it allowed her to
relapse into indolence, knowing that Ranil would find it difficult to
defeat her electorally. The result, as one intelligent diplomat put it
in 2001, was that we had slid backward more quickly than he had seen in
any other country. He cited, as a simple example, the failure to move on
Norochcholai and Upper Kotmale, matters which Ranil too ignored, until
President Rajapaksa ensured effective action as son as he came into
office.
Dark period
I hope then that Ranil’s latest barb will convince the government
that he really should not be shored up in office. And I have to say that
my old idea, that Karu, Jayasuriya would make a good interim leader, has
also been destroyed by his own imitation of his leader, in relentlessly
idiotic attacks on the government as well as everyone else.
His latest pronouncement is that what happened in Egypt has lessons
for Sri Lanka. He ignores the fact that in Sri Lanka there have always
been elections, except for the dark period between 1983 and 1989, when
however he was not one of those Members of Parliament who voted to
postpone elections. But what is saddest is that he also thinks it fit to
score cheap debating points about President Mubarak, noting that he is
‘Eighty two years old and still sporting jet black hair’. He imagines, I
suppose, that his sophisticated listeners will all think how clever he
is at thus obliquely mocking the Sri Lankan President.
Ballot boxes
This is vulgarity of a sort that I had not thought Karu capable of. I
remember Tarzie Vittachi writing many years ago that the Sri Lankan
trait, when advised that you should not kick a man when he is down, was
to respond, ‘What better time to kick him?” I had thought that an
exaggeration, but to find it practised by someone I thought a pillar of
decency is most disillusioning.
I believe all politicians should as a matter of principle never say
about someone when they are out of power what they failed to say when
they were in. I know sometimes it is difficult to criticize people when
they are in power, and it is also inappropriate to be nasty about
leaders of countries with which one has good relations - but to take
advantage of them losing office is disgusting and I had expected better
from someone I used to think of as a dignified old gentleman.
Sadly, in now affirming his loyalty to his current leader, he seems
to have picked up the most unpleasant of his traits. Amongst these is
forgetfulness. His own record was not bad I believe during the horrors
of the eighties, the attacks on Tamils, the blatant stuffing of ballot
boxes when individuals such as Duncan Fernando walked the streets with
goons and guns on election days.
That is why I hoped he would bring a breath of fresh air to the UNP.
But he certainly said nothing then, and continued to enjoy the fruits of
office. He is better equipped therefore to talk about the positive
features of democracy than his leader, but to put himself in the class
of a freedom fighter on the lines of those who ‘risk life and limb
demanding freedom for Burma and Tunisia’ would be laughable if it were
not also so tragic.
|