Columns
Shifting alignments in domestic and regional politics; the fallout
View(s):
As the parliamentary election to be held at the end of the ’100-days programme’ draws nearer, the question in many people’s minds is ‘who will represent the Opposition’ — seeing that loyalties are now divided between those who support President Maithripala Sirisena and those whose support does not extend beyond the 100-day programme. Those in the UPFA coalition who did not cross sides and who now see themselves as the Opposition, lack a charismatic leadership figure to turn to after Mahinda Rajapaksa exited the equation.
While the position adopted by the SLFP may to a great extent determine how the dividing lines will be drawn, here again there seems to be a conundrum. That’s because President Sirisena has now taken over the reins of the SLFP leadership, and this automatically makes him the leader of the UPFA as well, it appears. But Sirisena is beholden to the UNP for his recent victory. Notwithstanding the talk of a ‘unity government,’ voters cannot be blamed for feeling somewhat conflicted. Political and social scientists see the present political landscape as being extremely fluid, and are unable to predict how things will pan out over the next few months.
A unique situation
Asked whether the present situation is confusing to voters, UPFA General Secretary Susil Premajayantha admits that a unique situation prevails. The UNP has only 48 MPs in parliament, of whom 41 are in the cabinet (as ministers, state ministers or deputies). The UPFA has 140 MPs, out of whom 124 are from the SLFP. “But we are in the Opposition!” he exclaimed. “It must be the first time in the world that there is such a situation.” The UPFA coalition ‘still exists,’ it has 14 registered political parties and they will contest the parliamentary election under the betel leaf symbol, he asserted.
According to a senior social science academic associated with the SLFP, who did not want to be named, in the short term the lines of fissure in the SLFP would be based on pragmatic divisions. Those who fear legal action “will group around Sirisena in the hope of striking a bargain” he said. “The next six months will be submerged by purely pragmatic considerations.” At a deeper level however he sees cleavages that are structural, based on different constituencies. These divisions would manifest in the longer term. They would be seen in the contours dividing the UNP and JHU, or the JHU and the TNA. These constituencies “represent totally different interests” he noted. “They only got together to defeat the Rajapaksas.” The cleavages between constituencies represented by the JHU and TNA for instance (corresponding to Sinhalese-Buddhists and Tamils) have deep historical roots said this analyst.
Short term prospect
Elaborating on the short-term picture, he pointed out that right now the constitutional changes to be brought about in the 100-day programme — the extent to which the president’s executive powers will be pruned for example — are not known precisely. The SLFP led by Nimal Siripala de Silva could argue that ‘without us you don’t have the numbers (to change the constitution), and in exchange for our votes we want a strong president who can save us from our troubles.’
Asked if anyone would emerge from the SLFP to give leadership to the party as a prime ministerial candidate in the upcoming election, he said he saw no such possibility. The rallying point will be Maithripala Sirisena, who won the presidential contest under very difficult circumstances, and who will still be seen as the ‘leader’ and not as a ‘lame duck,’ he said. De Silva has already announced that Sirisena will lead the SLFP campaign.
Shifting regional alignments
If you call a general election one week after the constitutional changes, the impact of the transfer of power from president to prime minister won’t be felt by the electorate, he explained. “The old model is still in their minds.” But this is only ‘Round One.’ By the time the provincial council elections come around things could be different. “Maithripala might lead them to success at the general election. After that, does he exude that energy, to catch the imagination of the country?” he asked.
As in the case of Sri Lanka’s domestic politics, regionally too, power alignments are shifting. India’s growing ‘strategic partnership’ with the US was on display during US President Barack Obama’s recent visit to Delhi. The US would like to see the world’s largest democracy as a partner in its ‘pivot to Asia’ strategy as it draws down its forces in the Middle East. The plan involves moving 60 per cent of its naval assets to the Asia Pacific by 2020 with a view to countering the rise of China.
India aligning with the US?
Without directly mentioning China, Obama in his remarks encouraged India to assert itself in the region saying, “The US welcomes a greater role for India in the Asia Pacific where the freedom of navigation must be upheld …” etc. Obama further said “India can play a role in helping countries forge a better future, from Burma to Sri Lanka, where today there’s new hope for democracy. With your experience in elections you can help other countries with theirs.”
It is ironic that these remarks come in the wake of controversy over the Indian spy agency RAW’s alleged role in the recent Sri Lankan presidential election. On Wednesday when Cabinet Spokesman Rajitha Senaratna met Colombo-based foreign correspondents and was asked about Reuters reports that claimed RAW had been instrumental in persuading Sirisena to defect and Ranil Wickremesinghe to stand aside as presidential candidate, he smilingly said “Reuters is not wrong usually.”
Is India moving away from Non-alignment as it seeks closer ties with the US? Sri Lanka’s new government is yet to articulate clearly its stance on Non-alignment, long considered the linchpin of foreign policy in the Third World bloc. Its new leaders will need to exercise great skill in navigating the highly fluid landscape that unfolds, guarding against being caught up in the cross currents of global power play.