President Chandrika Kumaratunga’s kite of a National Council for Peace and Reconciliation (NCPR) was brought down unceremoniously yesterday by the UNP in their declaration that the UNP would not take part in the deliberations of the NCPR.
The NCPR appeared to be a transparent political ploy of President Kumaratunga, which envisaged the participation of UNP leader Ranil Wickremasinghe, and Prime Minister Mahinda Rajepakse in the proceedings while she kept aloof like a constitutional monarch and would not be involved in the deliberations. Apparently, if Mr. Wickremasinghe agrees to proposals favourable to the LTTE, she could accused him of selling out to the terrorists and if he didn’t he could fall foul of the ‘international Community’ for sabotaging the ‘Peace Process’ It was a Catch-22 situation for both Messrs Wickremasinghe and Rajapakse, the latter although her prime minister being not among her favoured few.
The UNP has spotted the Chandrika ‘ Doosra’ at a distance and yesterday its spokesman Prof.G.L.Peiris said that the NCPR was a strategy to keep postponing negotiations with the LTTE.
Yesterday, in our editorial comments, we made the point that that the LTTE could not have expected even in their wildest dreams for any Sri Lanka government to accept their proposal for an Interim Self Governing Authority for it would be tantamount to the withering away of the unitary Sri Lankan state and the creation of a separate state. H.L.De Silva PC cogently argued this point in an address last week, which was published in The Island. We surmised that these proposals were obviously meant to cripple the Oslo Declaration of the problem being settled through a federal principles and democratic norms. This, of course, goes contrary to the racist fascist state, which Prabakaran wants, to head and thus he successfully stalled the peace process.
However, he has successfully turned tables on the government by declaring that he is willing to begin negotiations immediately-but on his terms. The group of nations that have banded together to call them themselves the ‘ international community’ and are calling the shots in Sri Lankan politics too wants the talks to commence now, for whatever reasons.
From these moves and counter moves of the LTTE, SLFP and UNP it is clear that ‘Peace’ which is considered sacred and sacrosanct by all parties involved is being kicked around for political purposes. This is not something new to us. That is why 20 years of negotiating peace intermittently between the fighting have produced no results.
Meanwhile, what behoves the ‘ international community’ to which both UNP and SLGP governments have surrendered the sovereignty of this country? Their pressures resulted in the Cease-fire and commencement of negotiations but they appear to have gone into hibernation.
Whatever the objectives of the LTTE may be, the people of this country expect their representatives to put national interests before their political fortunes. Let each party come out publicly with their proposals and then try to hammer out a common ground to present to the LTTE. Their failure to do so is pulling this country further down into the mire.
Towards a Presidential Debate
At the time of writing, the US presidential debate between the candidates is on and on it could depend the outcome of the presidential election.
In Sri Lanka, there have been proposals for such presidential debates but candidates have ducked the debates, in their own interests.
In this country we have not only graveyards of skeletons in cupboards but entire laundries of dirty linen to wash. The public knows most of it but to put it on TV screens and bring it to sitting rooms will be positively disadvantageous.
Instead of such debates we now have talk shows on TV which produce quite a lot of heat and fury but very little sense and sanity. Our favourite theme of political debating is: So what did you do in your time? This is obviously because both sides have done very little in their time and the people know it. It will be positively disadvantageous for the people to be reminded of all this on the eve of elections.
Instead, we suggest another theme: What are you going to do if you win? And how these objectives are to be achieved should be stated very clearly. That could be a much more positive contribution than the washing of dirty linen.
But cynics say that even such solemn pledges given to the public will not deter them from flouting it quite brazenly. Remember what was said about the ISGA proposals before April 2? ‘If those pledges are to be kept what is this entire hullabaloo now?’ they query.
Our audiences too should be blessed with some intelligence and memory not be just plain suckers.
