Harsha says that the government will do what Harshala says. There is no principled disagreement in this case. That is the main issue between the opposition and the government. Since there is no disagreement, no matter who emerges from these two or three, no matter who takes over power, the path remains the same.
The same path. The same principle. The same medicine. The same recipe. The same remedy. The same doctor. Yet the patient will not get better. We need a way out of this remedy.
Now Harsha says, “You are going entirely as we said.” “This is not what you said before. However, you are now following the path we prescribed. Now we are happy. We congratulate you.”
That is Harsha’s prideful line. When you say that, there is no need for an opposition party. Let them do it as it is. If they were following the path Ranil took, they should have allowed Ranil to do it. That is what it appears to be.
Then no one will think, “Even if these people are wrong, and we send them away, there is no point in bringing others here if all are doing the same thing.”
We need a camp that presents a different political programme…
The best prideful line heard from a politician after Anura became president was delivered by Wimal.
Today, the opposition in Sri Lanka is divided into three parts. The main opposition is the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB). Next is Namal’s Podujana Peramuna (SLPP). Finally, there is the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the United National Party (UNP). Among these, the SJB and the UNP have a story to tell about what the government is doing.
If education reforms are introduced, the SJB and the UNP are likely to say:
“These are the reforms that Ranil brought 40 years ago. The JVP opposed them then. Today, they support them. This is our victory. The reforms we introduced are what they are implementing today. We wish them well…”
This is the story the UNP and the SJB would tell about Harini’s education reforms.
This is the story the SJB and the UNP are telling about fulfilling IMF conditions:
“We were the first to advocate going to the IMF. The JVP has always opposed the IMF. We congratulate the JVP for following our path…”
This is the SJB and the UNP’s narrative regarding Minister Nalinda’s statement that postal workers should place their fingerprints:
“We also proposed the same thing. We support it. When we suggested it, the JVP went on strike. We are pleased that the JVP accepted our policies…”
Anura has been president for almost a year now. The people are fed up with hearing the same old speeches from the opposition. The country does not need an opposition that merely says, “The government is following our path, so we are happy.”
It should be an opposition that declares: “The government is going in the wrong direction. We are going the right way.”
The country needs an opposition like this. Surprisingly, the SLPP does not criticise the government’s IMF policy, education reforms, or strike policy. Mahinda has always been a leader who opposed the IMF. The SLFP, including Mahinda, was previously an opposition that took to the streets against Ranil’s white paper.
The SLFP and SLPP were once the opposition defending strikes. Today, they are not standing up for their policies because they were co-opted after joining Ranil’s government. They, too, went around endorsing Ranil.
There is no need for an opposition to say that the government is right. The JVP today asserts that it performed the role of the opposition when in opposition, and it will perform the role of the government after coming to power. The JVP’s argument is valid.
J.R. once told a remarkable story: to gain power, as the Bible says, a party must change its body, just as a camel must change its shape to pass through the eye of a needle.
When Bandaranaike signed the Bandaranaike-Chelvanayakam pact, he did not say, “This is what we said. Today, the government is following our path. We are very happy…” J.R., dressed in white and carrying a flower vase on his head, marched to the Temple of the Tooth, demonstrating that he was a better Sinhala Buddhist than Bandaranaike.
In 2000, when Chandrika presented the package as a political solution to the war, that was what J.R. did after introducing the 1987 Provincial Councils. Ranil did not even acknowledge that he was following J.R.’s path. Instead, he burned the package in Parliament.
In 2002, when Ranil became Prime Minister and called a ceasefire with the LTTE and proposed an interim administration for the North, I also sought Norway’s intervention. That ceasefire was my concept. When I introduced the package, the UNP opposed it. Today, Chandrika does not say that the UNP is pleased to follow my approach. She stirred the entire country by claiming that Ranil was betraying it. In fact, she and Foreign Minister Kadirgamar created the basic framework of the ceasefire agreement.
Even Kadirgamar, who presented himself as a diplomat in power, called Norway’s intervention and the ceasefire a betrayal of the country.
In the 1988 presidential election, Premadasa, feeling that J.R. was a threat, personally requested that J.R. not attend his meetings. Before that request, at Premadasa’s last meeting, J.R. predicted that if the SLFP candidate won, she would succeed in her own way, but would not prevail.
However, in 1994, her daughter Chandrika won following J.R.’s approach. J.R. was pleased and ridiculed Chandrika, as he had retired. Similarly, if Ranil retires today and says that Anura is following his path, it does not matter. By repeating this story from the beginning of politics, he invalidates both his politics and the politics of his followers. By echoing Ranil’s story, they undermine their own political credibility.
“We are not ready to comply with IMF directives. The IMF is not the only solution to Sri Lanka’s economic problems. We have a separate programme.”
“Ranil’s education reforms are unsuitable for the country today. What the country needs are reforms developed by committees of education experts, not the committees formed by Ranil and Gota.”
“Sri Lanka needs a new opposition that engages with trade unions. Trade unions are necessary to protect workers’ rights.”
The country needs an opposition capable of standing up and saying these things.
“Who will create that opposition? He will be the next president.”
