Thoughts from London

Lessons to ponder with two days to go 

But what really brought her to London was to see daughter Yasodara back to Cambridge University where the term started last Monday. She also admitted her son to Bristol University where he will study veterinary science.

Like boarding school back in Sri Lanka when we all arrived bag and baggage (actually they were tin trunks that we took to the boarding in those days), the undergraduates turned up at Cambridge last Sunday, some with their parents tagging along.

President Kumaratunga probably made use of her presence here to have a medical check too for the severe damage to her sight following the Tamil Tiger assassination bid.

She was only spending a few days here and is now back in Colombo for the elections. After all there is no real reason for her to stay away even if her government loses.

A new government might well clip her wings, but even shorn of much of her powers Chandrika Kumaratunga is de jure head of state until appropriate constitutional changes are made.

What concerns most Western governments and organisations committed to good and honest governance is whether this election will be cleaner and fairer than some recent elections in the country. Admittedly, this must be of greater concern to the Sri Lankan people, especially the voters, who constitutionally have only such an opportunity to change governments. Some politicians and myth-makers in the media- and I don't mean only in Sri Lanka- like to parade before the world community the holding of regular elections as the litmus test that determines the existence of democracy in a country.

If holding elections is a sign of the existence of democracy then Yugoslavia under President Milosevic is as much a democracy as most nations in western Europe.

If this is the criterion, why, everybody from Joe Stalin to Indonesia's Suharto who held elections - of sorts - in their countries, would find a permanent place in the pantheon of 20th century democrats.

If holding elections established a government's democratic credentials, then the Wayamba provincial council polls would have firmed the Peoples Alliance government's reputation as a democratic ideal.

Unfortunately there is more to holding elections and confirming a government's publicly avowed commitment to democracy and democratic traditions than those in power would have us believe.

If elections are held, they must be to truly test the will of the people. If that is not permitted, if those in power use their privileged and special position to distort or deny the true expression of the people's will and thereby deprive them of the opportunity to truly decide who should lead them, then it is a perversity that should not be tolerated.

That is what Slobodan Milosevic is guilty of and the People's Alliance government would be equally guilty of, if it tries to steal from the people their most sacred right- the right to choose their rulers.

The West and especially NATO would want the world to believe that they were right when they tried to bomb Belgrade back to the stone age. Some Western nations seem to think that every sovereign nation must mirror-image their political systems and their style of governance.

They tried to bomb Iraq back into pre-history and so eliminate Saddam Hussain. The Iraqi leader is still around and he is not short of the good things in life. It is the Iraqi people who are deprived of essentials. So is it with Slobodan Milosevic after NATO's aerial barrage failed to dislodge him.

No, if Saddam Hussain and Slobodan Milosevic are to be condemned, it is not because the West think they were defiant, but because they hold their people in a vice, denying them the democratic rights they are entitled to.

The public outcry against Milosevic following the election is because he wanted to distort the peoples' verdict and deny them their democratic choice. The rising tide of dissent in Yugoslavia is reminiscent of what happened in the former Soviet bloc countries in the late 1980s.

Milosovic refused to draw the correct lessons from the collapse of communism in eastern and central Europe. His mistakenly thought that Stalinist-style dictatorship was still possible in a Europe where the yearning to shed dictatorial rule has taken root.

There was a day and age when such authoritarian rule-whether of the left or right was possible- in Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America. The time when dictatorships were a dime a dozen has passed into history. Admittedly, there are authoritarian regimes still around- from China through Singapore to Sierra Leone. But even the leaders in Beijing and the Lion State are learning that political repression cannot continue indefinitely, that political relaxation has to come, however gradually.

It then behoves those governments that call themselves democratic to prove their credentials. The problem is that those elected to govern delude themselves into believing their tenure at governance is for an eternity, that once elected they must not leave the seats of power until removed to the hereafter. Leaders like Milosevic and before that Rumania's Nicolae Ceaucescu and several others, thought so too. They were not the chosen people- chosen for life that is- they thought they were.

It is because they refused to accept the verdict of the people that they had to face the wrath of their own people.

If leaders wish to avoid facing such ignominious ejection by the people, they must know to respect and accept the verdict of the people. They must not interfere and undermine the choice of the people.

Let our leaders learn these lessons as they ponder the elections in two days time. Otherwise they will go the same way as their desperate and despised peers.

More Plus

Return to Plus Contents