“Why can’t we admit our mistakes?”

by Dr Vickramabahu Karunaratne

(January 09, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) According to one newspaper report last week, a certain senior minister has said “I asked one minister where his office was, he said it was in the sky. What is this? There should be a plan before anything is done. Otherwise, the people will lose faith in the government”. He has said further, that people might wonder how a government that could not even do such small things be able to do bigger things. Then he has added that the faith the people had in the government was fading due to this kind of action. Hence, he has emphasized, that the government should bring relief to the people. Finally he has blasted “ ...we have to admit our mistakes before the people. We must practice self criticism. When we go wrong, we must admit it. If we go on without admitting our mistakes, we will not win the people’s trust. Even here, we made a mistake. We did it without a plan. ...These are good lessons. We must ensure nothing like this happens again. That is our duty. Why can’t we humbly admit our mistakes? All have their self respect, regardless of whether they are poor or rich, learned or illiterate.” This senior minister was a loyal supporter of the SLFP even at the time of the populist victory in 1956. I can remember as students then we used to read his speeches eagerly.

Another report said “Health Minister Maithripala Sirisena hit out recently at the below par performance of the external affairs ministry and Sri Lankan diplomats abroad some of whom he said were incompetent, lazy and useless.”


Poor performance

According to that report Minister Sirisena has charged “It is because of the poor performance of our foreign diplomats that Sri Lanka has failed to exploit the victory against terrorism and gain the plaudits of the world community even after more than one and half years. ...,” Further Minister Sirisena has said that not only the diplomats but their staff including cooks and drivers were paid high salaries, given top class accommodation and medical assistance from public funds. He has added “But most of them are not interested in their national duty. They are more interested in sending their children to prestigious universities, getting their wives to follow courses in beauty therapy, cookery or Montessori and in some instances to provide in-vitro fertility therapy for their wives who are barren ...They are only interested in having a jolly good life at the expense of public funds, it is as simple as that.” Again it is necessary to remind that minister Sirisena is the general secretary of the SLFP and a long standing follower of populist politics. Clearly they are criticizing the top leadership of the government. In fact they are attacking the president for lack of planning and allowing high level of corruption!


Clear indications


These are clear indications that the Mahinda regime has lost its monolithic nature. There is a minor rebellion of the old guard as they cannot go along with the monstrous concentration of power and corruption. In addition to the loss of face in the international arena, Mahinda is facing the anger of those who are supposed to be closest to him. I can remember how he used to relate to us about the internal dissatisfaction that helped to destroy the image of Chandrika. But what is happening today could be ten times worse. If the closest lose faith in a leader, then the end is near. However, Mahinda cannot be under estimated. He is ingenious when it comes to winning the confidence of a dissident. Mahinda may not have a political theory. In addition he may dismiss bourgeoisie ethics and may use the ‘end justifies the means’ rule in its crudest form; but he has the ability to be close to the village poor. Is he still capable of winning the heart of the rural masses? Looking at the gains made by Sajith Premadasa one should not be too hasty in answering in the affirmative to such questions. Suffering peasants, fishermen and rural workers have given a push to the Premadasa campaign. Many who attended the UNP conference assert that Sajith is developing as a new Mahinda to replace the dissipated old Mahinda! However, nobody could estimate the degree of dissatisfaction among urban and estate workers. The situation is so politicised that the conscious layer of the proletariat hesitate to take action without a political way out. Unless there is at least a shadow of an alternative that could be advantageous to the workers, hesitation among the shop stewards will continue.