Fonseka-TNA Understanding is Not Inclusive

“ What’s more interesting is constituents, especially the UNP and the JVP, vehemently denying even the existence of an agreement. Expecting them to work together according to such an agreement is unthinkable.”
...............................................................

By Thomas Johnpulle

(January 16, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) I was bemused to read an article titled “Sarath Fonseka and the Nation” which asserted that the understanding between Sarath Fonseka and TNA would lead to the dismantling of tribal divisions and towards an era of national unity. Going by the notion of calling a spade a spade, and for truth to be told, the exact opposite of this assertion is true. The understanding that has transpired between Sarath Fonseka and the TNA is indeed tribal.

Why is it tribal?

A number of political parties including the UNP, JVP, SLMC are supporting Sarath Fonseka at the election. Did Hon Hauf Hakeem make any tribal or communal demands in order to join in? No. Did Hon Mano Ganesan make any tribal or racial demands to join in? No. Was there any communal demands for Hon Yogarajan to join? No. Did Hon Wickramasinghe, Hon Samaraweera or Mr Amarasinghe make any communal demand to join in? The answer is ‘no’ once again.

But the same cannot be said about the TNA. According to available news reports in Tamil media, TNA supports Sarath Fonseka based on a number of demands that are mostly ‘tribal’. There is nothing or very little in it for the nation or the people at large. Almost all the demands are about a section of Tamils in the North and the East. In fact if the alleged demand of merging the North and the East was ever entertained, that goes further in creating a clash of communal aspirations and national aspirations as well.

Bypassing the people

General Fonseka and Mahinda Rajapaksha don’t need middlemen if they are genuine to reach out to the people including the Tamil people. However, in the case of TNA support for Sarath Fonseka, he is going through an unnecessary middleman and the demands he has promised to grant are only the demands of the middleman. There was absolutely no power granted by the people to the TNA in relation to the conditions TNA agreed with Fonseka. TNA has hardly met its constituents in the first place.

Why has TNA done it? Tamils are now discussing the relevance of communal political parties in the post-LTTE era. Parties that dominated Tamil votes in the North and the East since 1947 including the Tamil Congress, Tamil Arasuk Kadchi, Tamil United Liberation Front, Tamil Elam Liberation Organization, Tamil National Alliance and even the Tamil Tigers were all communal not only by name but also by demands.

TNA’s attempt is to remain relevant in the post-LTTE era. In doing so TNA has blocked people from reaching out to Fonseka directly. If that happens, people would bring their true demands which are not communal demands to Fonseka and Rajapaksha. That will make TNA redundant and even irrelevant. That is why it bypassed the people.

Moderate Tamil politicians like Anandasangaree has always maintained a different approach although he may be under enormous pressure to join in with the TNA.

No continuity of the understanding

The understanding is purely an election consensus. It has no continuity whatsoever due to two reasons under two scenarios. In case Fonseka wins, there is no guarantee he will do any of those. According to the Constitution the President cannot be taken to courts or otherwise pressurised for not doing what he promised. No agreement can be enforced upon him.

At no time a President of Sri Lanka had come to or honoured a personal agreement or contract with another. In fact it is not legally enforceable either.

The second reason is Sarath Fonseka has no reputed political party. An agreement between two parties is enforceable. If one party fails to honour its obligations it will suffer credibility loss. In future other parties will be reluctant to join in. Shipping a consignment to Nestle, Switzerland is not the same as shipping it to Mr Smith in Switzerland due to credibility issues.

In the second scenario, if Fonseka loses the election, it is unfavourable for both parties to continue with the agreement. While TNA would not want to contest the General Election under a party headed by Fonseka or anyone else, Fonseka would find it easier to get more voters by contesting separately.

What’s more interesting is constituents, especially the UNP and the JVP, vehemently denying even the existence of an agreement. Expecting them to work together according to such an agreement is unthinkable.

The second reason in the second scenario is TNA will have to come to a compromise with the winner. TNA cannot and will not stick to its agreement with Fonseka and not talk to the winner because there is the risk of people directly reaching the president bypassing the TNA.

What should happen?

Election manifesto of Sarath Fonseka does not talk about the TNA understanding. Election manifesto is the moral bondage between the President and the people. Understandings reached bypassing the people therefore have no moral obligation when failed to make it to the manifesto.

Rajapaksha manifesto has a little bit more towards a political solution.

However, what should happen is neither because without a lasting consensus between these two giants or rather between the SLFP and the UNP no solution is possible. This is especially so in the post-LTTE era. Even if a solution is given it can be reversed with the same ease or difficulty. Importance of a sustainable solution cannot be emphasised enough. For such a solution, people must bypass tribal political parties. Only then can a lasting solution be found.

Whenever people wanted to get a big project carried out in the former Soviet Union or East Germany which was dubiously called the German Democratic Republic, the village party official had to co-ordinate it. Every deal took place through him. It was unthinkable to bypass him. But it changed in 1990 when people bypassed these parties and reached out to each other! After all people don’t change at election time.