Why cohabitation means so many things
Handing over a ceasefire is a dangerous business. It is not like handing over a war. Handing over a war is like handing over an exploding cracker to somebody. But handing over peace is like handing over a whole fireworks factory and saying if somebody keeps a match to it, it is close to exploding.

There is a new game being played about town. It is called "what will Ranil do next - and what will Chandrika do next and what will Ranil do in return.''

Both are from the post independence generation of Sri Lankan politicians. This means that apart from what America and India will tell them to do - - they are very hot-headed and stubborn. They will brook no nonsense from anybody, least of all from each other.

Chandrika Kumaratunga might return the ''ceasefire'' to Ranil Wickremesinghe. This is the borrow and return form of governance. For example, Ranil Wickremesinghe wants his Ministries returned to him. What's given can be returned -- so once the ceasefire is handed over to the President, it follows that it can also be returned. If Ministries can be returned, why can't wars and ceasefires be returned?

They also not only give and return - they insist that everything is done to a turn. Few months ago, we found Ranil Wickremesinghe addressing international forums while Chandrika stayed at home. She was almost like a housewife who minded home and hearth while the husband was gadding about.

Now it's different. It is Chandrika who is gadding about - and shopping till she is dropping -- while Ranil Wickremesinghe is minding the home and the hearth. Those days Ranil Wickremesinghe used to say ''home sweet home'' - he was so tired of flying, it was supposed. Now what is it that he may be saying? Home is where the harm is?

Perhaps it is all an illusion. In 2005, Ranil Wickremesinghe may be doing what Chandrika Kumaratunga is doing, and Chandrika Kumaratunga may end up as the Prime Minister. Is it constitutional you ask? Constitutional? In this country, it means a walk in the park.

But though Ranil Wickremesinghe was expected to takeover the Presidency in 2005 he never expected any mysterious turn. Now, the President says she took oaths secretly in 2000.

She also had had an election secretly with the people, which gave her party a massive majority - 5/6th, she says - and therefore it not only entitled her to the Ministry of Defence and the Media Ministry constitutionally, but entitled her to these Ministries by moral right. Who told me? That's secret.

But how did she have an election without you - a registered voter - knowing you ask? Why should you know? Every other voter knew about it she says, and so did the Elections Commissioner. Besides why do you think they call it the 'secret ballot'? And, if a secret ballot can be good for democracy, why can't a secret oath?

But there is more mystery in this by the hour. How did she who couldn't keep a single cabinet secret from appearing in the papers have a secret oath taking? Well, I don't know. Some people say it’s no secret that she swears. But wouldn't she then be hauled for contempt? This is a Chief Justice who would brook no contempt in his court, anyway. But these things are done to a turn.

The President says she swore in secret before the Chief Justice. What did she say? ---- the people? And what will Ranil Wickremesinghe say? That he signed in blood before Prabhakaran? I don't know. Between these, whom can you choose?

Back to Top

Back to Columns

Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers Ltd. All rights reserved.