Columns

• Low turnout feared due to voter fatigue while major political parties face cash crunch
• Division within division in north; UK-based entrepreneur forms new party, while breakaway groups form collective with smaller parties
• US envoy’s clarification on travel advisory draws flak; severe criticism over double standards and diplomatic duplicity

By Our Political Editor

The unusual political hype ahead of the September 21 presidential election appears to have evaporated markedly with just eleven days to go for the parliamentary elections.

United States Ambassador Julie Chung

There is some suspense over the date—November 14—after a rights group petitioned the Supreme Court. It argued that November 14, announced first by President Anura Kumara Dissanayake, was not within the law specified for elections. The group claimed it would have to be between 52 and 66 days.  It was being held on the 51st day. The SC is due to rule on the matter.

This is the 12th general election since the week-long one held for the State Council in June 1931. A total of 8879 candidates from political parties and independent groups are contesting in 22 districts.

Election campaigns or who said what is no longer the talking point among ordinary citizens except those active in political parties or groups. The result may be a feared low poll. The reasons are many. Most important among them is a second national election after the first one on September 21. The major political parties are hit by a cash crunch. For both the Samagi Jana Balavegaya (SJB), the main contender, and the New Democratic Party (NDP), the sources have virtually dried up. Moreover, the new campaign financing laws have also become a deterrent to those who donate. The recipients are required to apprise the Election Commission of such donations.

The resources came mostly from the corporate sector and wealthy businessmen. With Anura Kumara Dissanayake as President and strong indications of a victory for the National People’s Power (NPP) becoming a certainty, influence buying has either ended or shifted. Amidst these are reports from some well-wishers that their fat donations, received in the name of their candidates, have been pocketed by the do-goaders. Stories of how funds collected for one leading group went into the pockets of a Gampaha district politician have been the talking point. The man is said to have purchased a prime property in Battaramulla. Another in a hill country area, a onetime minister embroiled in many a controversy, complained that he had been forced to put out his personal funds to campaign.

The case of the NPP is quite different. Its rallies, particularly those attended by its leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, are drawing large crowds. The organizational ability that saw the party spread out activity in the villages remains. The absence of this element by the NPP’s rivals denied them votes during the presidential election. Most candidates from opposition parties and independent groups have, for the first time in large numbers, resorted to the distribution of printed leaflets, newspaper advertisements and even the facebook to get their messages across.

It is against this backdrop that some likely ministers are spelling out their own plans, while some pre-presidential election promises remain yet to be fulfilled. One such instance involves former Kalutara district parliamentarian, the NPP team leader, Dr Nalinda Jayatissa. He has already revealed in the media his ambitious plans to generate US$ 8.5 billion (about 2.5 trillion rupees) from the tourism sector. That will surpass revenue from all other exports and portends itself to be the single largest revenue earner for the country if the proposal bears fruit. Tourism industry professionals say though the goal is not impossible it would still entail years and years of hard work. That goes beyond the lifespan of both the presidency and the impending government. This would, they said, call for an increase in the number of tourist hotels to enhance room capacity, streamlining visa procedures, modern transport facilities, aggressive marketing and development of other infrastructure. Would this mean that the NPP government’s development agenda will now expand to newer areas? He has also declared that “quality medicines” would be provided to all state-run hospitals. The implication is that they do not receive quality medicines. Moreover, President Dissanayake’s pledge to withdraw the Value Added Tax (VAT) from medicine is yet to be enforced. Since January, arrivals in Sri Lanka have been around a million tourists. The figure would have to increase manifold. Last year, the tourism industry in Thailand, which is flourishing, recorded 28 million foreign visitors generating a revenue of US$ 35 billion.

Former President Ranil Wickremesinghe addressing the Kandy meeting of the National Democratic Party which is contesting the general election under the gas cylinder symbol

NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake is campaigning for a two-thirds majority for his party. Whilst there remains little doubt he would win a comfortable majority, unless there is a sensational upset, there are doubts whether he could achieve this benchmark. He was swept to power 43 days ago with a 42 percent vote and more importantly tremendous public enthusiasm. It would be wrong to say they have all vaporized. Yet, some unexpected challenges have come as more than irritants. They are in the form of controversies and the absence of a continuing dialogue between the government and the people. The only interaction at present is the weekly post-cabinet news briefing by Foreign Minister Vijitha Herath. It lasts more than two hours. There are no official statements from the government setting out its position on key issues. Perhaps this could end when a fuller cabinet is in place, but the absence is telling.

Divided northern votes

On the electoral front in the north, ideological and other considerations have split the Tamil political parties more than ever before. In this midst, a wealthy Tamil entrepreneur from the United Kingdom has also formed his own political grouping in the belief that he could fill in the vacuum. It was the Ilankai Thamil Arasu Katchi (ITAK) that held sway in the years past. The crisis within the party came even before the demise of its popular leader, Rajavarothayam Sampanthan, on June 30. Former Jaffna district parliamentarian S. Shritharan was elected as the leader. However, his election was challenged in the Trimcomalee courts, and the judgement is pending. At the same election, Abraham Sumanthiran was elected as Deputy Leader. He is also the spokesperson of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA)–a collective of Tamil parties. Both Shritharan and Sumanthiran are contesting the parliamentary elections from the Jaffna district.

However, former militant outfits in the collective—like the Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF), the People’s Liberation Organisation of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE) and the Tamil Eelam Liberation Organisation (TELO)— have teamed up with smaller political groups and are calling themselves the Democratic Tamil National Alliance (DTNA). They are projecting themselves as a counter to the ITAK. They have fielded candidates, and their eight-point election manifesto will raise eyebrows. In a proposed new constitution, they say they want the Tamil-speaking people recognised as a national race entitled to their own sovereignty and self-determination. In other words, they are seeking a separate state and have worded their demand in a different way. Among the other demands include international accountability for wartime acts, protection of natural resources in the north, amelioration of conditions of the northern fishing community and creating a climate for Tamil diaspora to invest in the development of the Northern and Eastern provinces.

Confident of a victory, President and NPP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake addressing a public rally in Matara this week

Former parliamentarian Abraham Sumanthiran said yesterday that the ITAK’s position remained unchanged, and it would not subscribe to the views of its rivals. He is facing serious challenges over his re-election. “We have consistently maintained that we stand for a federal solution in an undivided Sri Lanka,” he declared. Both Shritharan and  Eelam People’s Democratic Party (EPDP) leader Douglas Devananda have had talks with President Dissanayake. Devananda was the fisheries minister in President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s cabinet. President Dissanayake hinted about support from Tamil political parties but did not elaborate. A comfortable victory may obviate this need and the induction into the cabinet of ministers of any of their representatives. This is despite the yearning of the Tamil party representatives to serve both to remain in a powerful position and serve their electors better.

Addressing a news conference at the Jaffna Press Club, Sumanthiran said the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) would collaborate with the government towards reaching a political settlement to Tamil issues. At many party meetings, the TNA view was that no portfolios offered to its members should be accepted. However, it was the TNA’s view that such an offer, if made by the government, should be considered.

Elpitiya poll results

The outcome of the much-awaited elections to the Elpitiya Pradeshiya Sabha on October 5, is akin to the Sinhala adage of blind men feeling an elephant. The one who felt the stomach described the pachyderm as a wall. Another who felt the leg thought it was a tree and yet another who felt the tail said it was a rope and so on. Similarly the outcome of the polls is being interpreted in many ways. Nevertheless, claims notwithstanding, it certainly does not have a direct bearing on the parliamentary elections. It was essentially a localised affair where the connections of the candidates played a key role. The voting this time was for 30 seats, half of them picked on a first-past-the-post basis and the rest on proportional representation. The NPP secured 15 seats, the SIB 6, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) 3, the People’s Alliance 2 seats, Independent group 2, the People’s United Freedom Alliance (PUFA) 1 and the National People’s Party 1 . However, the PUFA which is led by former President Ranil Wickremesinghe does not contest the parliamentary elections on the ticket of that party. Instead it fielded candidates under the National Democratic Party (NDP) with the gas cylinder as their symbol.

The NPP’s vote base dropped to 47.64% at the Elpiitya local council election eight days ago, the SJB claimed. The NPP was quick to counter the claim by pointing out that the Pradeshiya Sabha encompassed only a part of the entire Bentara-Elpitiya electorate. Moreover, at the presidential election, they said that the NPP had polled 49.37. This is whilst the SIB had polled only 27.35% of the votes at the presidential election. Also at the Elpitiya PS election, the SJB polled 21.83 % of the votes.  Significant enough, none of the leaders of the major political parties addressed any rallies in the Elpitiya Pradeshiya Sabha area ahead of the election.

A noteworthy feature has been the ongoing exchange of barbs between Ranil Wickremesinghe and Prime Minister Harini Amarasuriya. This was after the former President declared that he was willing to teach her the Constitution if she was ignorant of its provisions. The issue was over Premier Amarasuriya’s remarks that she required to consult officials even after the cabinet of ministers (during his administration) had decided to increase the salaries of state sector employees. Wickremesinghe raised issue over what had happened to the NPP trade unions that have remained silent over the issue though they had fought for years for a pay rise. Addressing an election rally, Premier Amarasuriya said she would not like to learn the Constitution from a politician who had been rejected by the people 17 times. The government had to follow proper procedures when making decisions, she said. In this instance, Wickremesinghe made a strong case. When the cabinet of ministers makes a policy decision, there is no role for officials except to enforce them.

US envoy on security alert

As the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) continued investigations into the alleged plot to attack a synagogue in Arugam Bay attended by Israelis, United States Ambassador Julie Chung claimed that the “United States has not issued a travel ban on Sri Lanka and that the security alert issued recently was only for Americans to avoid the Arugam Bay area until further notice.”  Known for being the US envoy who often exceeded her diplomatic brief, in July 2022, during the aragalaya or protests, it is now known that she even chose to suggest who should take over the reins of government in place of then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.  This time she told a Colombo meeting last Monday that “there is no travel ban from the United States” and expected the natives of Sri Lanka, as she perhaps perceives, to believe the remarks hook, line and sinker. After all, it had a made in America flavour.

First, more of what she said. Ambassador Chung remarked that she was proud of the United States Embassy’s ongoing collaboration with the Sri Lanka government to respond to a security threat. That has resulted in the US embassy security alert. She vowed to continue working together to support the safety and prosperity of the country’s citizens and visitors alike. She declared that the world over, the United States diplomatic missions operate on “a duty to warn, if we become aware of a credible, specific security threat.” She explained that they are mandated to share that information with their (Embassy) staff, US citizens and the host government. She claimed that this approach was standard practice worldwide. When the US mission became aware of a specific threat in the Arugam Bay area, Ambassador Chung said, they shared these known details with the Sri Lankan authorities. They responded quickly.

Ambassador Chung added that their embassy was co-ordinating with Sri Lanka’s leadership and security officials. She declared that her government valued their commitment to safety and transparency. The reason she declared there was no “travel ban” was to “correct some information being spread.” She added that the US advisories were like the ones that applied to the Maldives, France and Italy and pointed out that it “remains at Level 2.”

There are at least four important takeaways from the remarks Ambassador Chung has made. Here are they:

=  She says that the United States has not issued a travel ban and adds that she wanted to “correct some misinformation.” None of the national media or the known social media outlets report of such a travel ban. Firstly, a travel advisory (which remains in the US Embassy website as well as that of the four allies – the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand) speaks of a specific security threat. It is meant to warn their Embassy staff and US nationals from travelling to Arugam Bay. When five leading countries issue such an advisory, does it not amount to a warning to their citizens not to travel to Arugam Bay. Are her remarks, insensitive to say the least, come after the tourist industry in Colombo received queries after their fears were roused by their foreign principals. It would be pertinent to ask her “who was responsible for misinformation?”

= She says, “when we became aware of a specific threat in the Arugam Bay area we shared these known details with Sri Lankan authorities.” Herein lies an issue. Both US intelligence and those from the Israelis have spoken about what Ambassador Chung calls the “threat that has resulted” in their recent security alert. The remarks seem to be at variance with the reported government position that the plot to attack was motivated by reasons of crime and was not related to terrorism. However, investigations are continuing, and the question remains whether there would be a breakthrough. Yet, as reported in these columns last week, the intelligence capabilities of both the United States and Israel cannot be underestimated. Hence, any claim for a call to withdraw the advisory would have to be backed by sufficient proof from the local authorities or the credibility of the state would come into serious question.

=  Ambassador Chung said that “globally, all round the world our US Embassies operate under “a duty to warn. If we become aware of a credible, specific security threat, we are required to share that information with our staff, US citizens and the host government.” How true. It is, however, pertinent to ask whether the US has ever imposed travel bans per se on any country. Would that be enforceable if their troops were not around?

= Ambassador Chung asserts that “safety and stability are essential for a thriving tourism sector which we support absolutely. We are committed to fully supporting Sri Lanka’s efforts to create that secure welcoming environment for all.” These concluding remarks are laughable. On the one hand, she claims of a “duty to warn” and on the other she wants to secure a welcoming environment.” Double standards speak for themselves.

Ambassador Chung’s remarks also were criticised by Sri Lanka Guardian editorial headlined Twisting Tongue: American Double Standards and Diplomatic Hypocrisy. Here are excerpts:

“…..In her latest statement, in Colombo, U.S. Ambassador Julie Chung epitomises the contradictions embedded in American foreign policy rhetoric—a tale that extends beyond Sri Lanka and strikes at the very heart of international relations. This episode began with a supposed security threat to Americans in Arugam Bay, prompting the U.S. Embassy to issue a security alert. While technically not a “travel ban,” the language was vague enough to breed confusion and unease among travellers.

“………The nuanced advisory leaves Sri Lankan authorities scrambling to respond, fitting into a well-worn pattern of American diplomatic maneuvering. By denying that a “travel ban” exists while issuing cautionary advisories, the U.S. wields a subtle form of power, sending a message of distrust cloaked in concern. Thomas Jefferson warned that “the most sacred duty of government is to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens,” yet U.S. actions consistently prioritize American interests above the peace and harmony of host countries.

Consider the U.S.’s approach in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where similar warnings were issued under the guise of “protection” for American citizens but often acted as covert tools of influence, shifting local politics to America’s favour. The same story played out in Venezuela, where routine advisories cast a shadow over the country’s stability, subtly advancing U.S. ideological interests. Here in Sri Lanka, the strategic timing of “safety alerts” implies a thinly veiled critique of Sri Lankan security forces, as if the U.S. Embassy possesses insights superior to Sri Lanka’s own leadership. Ambassador Chung’s statement that Sri Lanka’s “commitment to transparency is exceptional” feels more like a diplomatic slight than genuine praise.

The question remains: who benefits from these “precautionary” measures? Certainly not Sri Lanka, whose tourism and global reputation take the hit from these repeated warnings. If Sri Lanka’s advisory level is truly on par with the Maldives, Italy, and France—as Chung asserts—why is the language so markedly different? Here lies the contradiction: ambiguous phrasing in a Level 2 “advisory” edges dangerously close to a de facto “travel ban,” subtly deterring potential visitors without crossing diplomatic lines….

“The attempt to justify these advisories by comparing Sri Lanka to countries with vastly different security dynamics highlights a glaring American double standard. France and Italy, for example, may face their own security issues but remain free from similarly loaded public advisories. In Sri Lanka’s case, carefully chosen words create a perception of imminent danger, undermining a tourism-driven economy…… This tactic, perfected over decades, allows the U.S. to pose as a concerned ally while subtly destabilizing nations within its influence. In a world increasingly aware of such duplicities, America’s claims of impartiality look less convincing, exposing the selective sensitivities and disregard for local contexts.

“…The bottom line: these ambiguous advisories directed at Sri Lanka by the U.S. are not mere gestures of caution—they are calculated moves that influence perception. This ambiguity, whether by design or through bureaucratic inertia, embodies a troubling double standard in U.S. diplomacy, eroding the very principles of transparency it claims to uphold and calling into question the essence of fair international relations.”

It is pertinent to note that Foreign Minister, Vijitha Herath, also repeated Chung’s assertions at his weekly post-cabinet news briefing last Tuesday. However, he made no comment other than that.

Even though the results of the parliamentary elections are anyone’s guess, a victory for the National People’s Power is certain. However, the question that lingers is over how many seats the NPP will gain. For its main rival, a key issue would be to take stock of its failures at the presidential election and the drawbacks thereafter. These no doubt would pose a serious challenge for the leadership of Sajith Premadasa. He is already maintaining a low profile.

The end of the elections will see the birth of a 25-member cabinet and an equal number of deputies. President Anura Kumara Dissanayake will have to navigate over the issues he is now facing and honour the promises he has made.