Bridging between conflict resolution and economic growth

Lionel Wijesiri

Sri Lanka is an inspirational example of transformation to peace and stability after over 30 years of terrorist violence. The major developments surrounding the ending of paramilitary violence have deservedly received publicity on a global scale.

Yet, sustained peace and economic development will require the efforts of every part of society to promote a shared and better future for everyone. There can be little doubt that the future of our country depends upon the development of cooperative rather than conflictual inter-communal relations. We are a multi-communal society, and it is inconceivable that this will change in the foreseeable future.

Unified country

In recognition of its great importance, some intellectuals designate inter-communal tolerance as one of the three pillars of national reconciliation. The other two pillars are support for a political tolerance, and the extension of legitimacy to the institutions of the new political dispensation in the country.

Maintaining and promoting Sri Lanka as a unified entity has emerged as a central plank in the agenda of most, if not all, major national political parties. Indeed, each of the major parties perceives its perspective as the only one laying the foundation of reconciliation and unity of the country. However, looked at closely, the issue is more complex than it seems, i.e. not just a black and white characterization.

With the defeat of the LTTE almost three years ago, opportunity opened up for open and serious discussions of the core issues that gave rise to the conflict. The government also understood it and initiate talks with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), with a view to reaching a solution to this nonplussed problem. The LLRC report which was released recently also stressed the importance of addressing the causes of the issue and finding a political solution.

Latest reports reveal that talks between the government and the TNA have been deadlocked on few main issues such as the granting of police and land powers to Provincial Councils and the North-East merger.

Economic development

To breakthrough this stalemate, we must realize that the key to the solution is the understanding of the real issue.

Viewing economic development and communal conflict as linked problems requires reassessment of two widely accepted schools of thought about the relationship between these phenomena. One school, prevalent in the 50s and 60s held that economic development would inevitably reduce the potential for violent conflict, since growth would be rapid and the resulting benefits diffused through all levels of society.

A second school held that economic development policies and those relevant to 'maintaining political stability' could be formulated in separate compartments.

Political changes from the late 1970s through the first eleven years of 2000s proved both views wrong. Even in developing nations that did really well economically, economic benefits did not diffuse to all segments of society. Today, policy-makers are acknowledging that economic development and conflict management policies cannot be separated.

Formula

When economic development strategies are drafted we must acknowledge the realities of communal diversity and the economically disruptive potential of sustained communal conflict. Thus minimizing communal tensions may be as important factor to economic growth as diversifying a nation's industrial and agro base or promoting exports. Economic development and conflict management strategies must be balanced to provide reasonable economic benefits, with a reasonable degree of equity across communal groups.

History tells us that there are no simple formulas for designing policies to balance economic performance and inter-communal equity. Yet there are few common-sense strategies. I can visualize three.

We must attempt to reduce disparities in regional investment allocations.

Economically deprived regions often provide fertile soil for militancy. Fortunately, the present government has understood this phenomenon very well. The government has already initiated fully-fledged development ventures with the assistance of UN agencies and international non-government agencies. A massive Joint Action Plan of assistance to Northern Province has come into effect.

??The government leaders must be sensitized to minority community concerns. That means there should be communal pluralism in economic policy-making. Employment and promotion practices in both the public and private sectors should provide opportunities for the ‘best and the brightest’ among minority group members to become participants in the system rather than turning them into alienated revolutionary leaders. Interestingly, the government has understood the gravity of this issue as well and continued to appoint Tamils to some high offices in state sector. Recently, 1,000 Tamil applicants were attached to the Police force in Northern District.

• Substantial devolution of power for Provincial Councils is another strategy. What is meant by devolution is not federalism but the empowerment of a local body by the lawful power to attend to a defined number of specific tasks. Both power and accountability is transferred in an ‘appropriated’ quantity (to be agreed upon) to the elected body with the central government losing neither authority nor accountability. There are pitfalls that have made our political leaders reluctant to voluntarily embrace federalism. For example, USA type of federalism did not avert a civil war in the mid-19th century.

Responsible leaders

India’s form of federalism with ethno-linguistic territorial units provides useful lessons. Some state leaders have been discreet about seeking additional autonomy. Some groups, such as the Assamese, went as far as demanding the right to conduct their own ‘foreign relations’. Muslim Kashmiris and the Punjabi-speaking Sikhs have supported violent separatist movements.

The political leaders also have a big role to play. First, they must educate their supporters about the realities of economic development and community conflict. Second, they must avoid promises that raise unrealistic expectations. Third, when inevitable disruptions and dislocations occur, they must resist the temptation to blame rival communal groups.

Responsible leaders can boldly tell the public (as Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva said recently) that it is not just about offering a solution but also about convincing the minorities into accepting it and the process involves major compromises on both parties, if the final solution is to be accepted by the people of the South as well as the North.

Realistically assessing the causes and costs of protracted communal conflict may begin to convince development planners that programmes which significantly increase the risks of communal conflict are not economically justifiable. Such an assessment may alert present national leaders to a harsh reality: the short term benefits from communally divisive political strategies do not justify the long term social, economic and political costs.

Reconciliation

Today the world economy is going through major realignments. Since we live in the world of faltering economies we can become a victim of negativism or work together towards it. Both optimism and pessimism have infectious qualities. Therefore, we need today a set of responsible politicians who look at the future of the country first. They have to strike a difficult balance between maintaining political positions while cooperating to share a long term national agenda. It is their collective responsibility to reverse the mood of negativism today.

The political fraternity, no matter whether they represent the government or the Opposition, must find a way that enables us to foster the diversity inherent in us as it exists today without upholding our alienation from each other. By exploring the concept of unity in diversity as an expression of unity, we must offer a resolution to many of the concerns felt by those who fear that awareness of differences can lead to greater intolerance. This is all the more important because political unity is the forerunner for the national unity.

Reconciliation requires that all Sri Lankans accept all their fellow citizens as equals, extending dignity and respect to them. The diminution of communal animosity implies that the communities get along better with each other, that people come to interact with each other more, communicate more, perhaps ultimately leading to greater understanding and even acceptance. This would eventually result in the appreciation of the value of communal diversity. Thus, an elemental component of reconciliation is mutual respect, and a fundamental ingredient in mutual respect is the willingness to judge people as individuals, and not to brand them with group stereotypes. To the extent that Sri Lankans do not respect and understand the various communal groups making up the country, are fearful of them, and subscribe to negative communal stereotypes, inter-communal reconciliation will never be achieved.