From the blue corner
We know who they were and what they did!
Those who made money during UNP regime and their
"Ambassador extra-ordinary"
By Paakshikaya
As I sit at my little desk, rereading Viruddha
Paaks-hikaya's snide comments of last week I can only be bamboozled with
the horrific thought that here is a member of the UNP — or at least a sympathiser
— justifying the unadulterated brand of crony capitalism that was ever
produced under the label of an open economy.
Viruddha Paakshikaya, however, gives a list of those that my party —
the Sri Lanka Freedom Party — helped in building their business ventures
and compares it with the list that I gave a fortnight ago.
And, to crown it all Viruddha Paakshikaya says "see how impressive
our list is - that the UNP made more capitalists than the SLFP did!"
Then, he cites the solitary example of Harry Jayawardena, and says the
UNP made him a millionaire as if it was some divine right they had over
the making of Harry Jayawardena. Harry is a self made man. He began exporting
tea after the UNP kicked him out of Consolexpo, the state-run export firm.
 Now
do you wonder why he is in the SLFP? Why don't you talk of his humiliating
dismissal from Consolexpo at the hands of the UNP?, merely because he was
a friend of the Bandaranaikes (mostly of Anura who is now with you). He
began his firm under his name and exported tea because the UNP sacked him.
So Viruddha Paakshikaya, I must agree with you - it was indeed the UNP
that made him a millionaire. But you would not expect him to be grateful
to your party, would you, for the courtesies you extended to him with a
boot.
His contacts were largely with Libya and Iraq — two West Asian countries
that had cordial relations with Sirima Bandaranaike, our revered leader
who was then chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement. (The chairmanship fell
on your lap though all the hard work was done by us.)
That was how Harry Jayawardena made his money. So I do not think, Viruddha
Paakshikaya, that he owes the UNP any gratitude.
Had you got half a chance, your party might have even given these export
orders to your friends of the time — the Rajahs whom you so solidly defended
last week, as if they were the greatest of entrepreneurs this side of the
Suez Canal.
You say we can only raise the 'Dutugemunu - Dutugemunu' cry. We are
not ashamed Mr. Viruddha Paakshikaya, that the men you put on your list
of SLFP favoured businessmen for 1970 to 1977 were indigenous folk. They
wore sarong and shirt, spoke only Sinhalese but they made money and provided
jobs for the people of this country.
You forget the vicissitudes some of these Sinhala Businessmen had to
face at the hands of your government. The commission of inquiry instituted
to plague U. K. Edmund and the cancellations of the governmental catering
contracts and even when you imply that the Mt. Lavina Hotel was favoured
with the BMICH catering contract which was won fair and square.
You refer to Gunadasa, better known as Dasa Mudalali. He started Dasa
Industries and provided jobs for our jobless youth. What industries were
begun by anyone of those commission agents "Komis Kaakkas" as
our President called them. They just pocketed the cash and sent the monies
to foreign bank accounts. That is why, during the so-called great economic
miracle of the UNP's 17 year rule, Sri Lanka remained the 18th poorest
country in the world.
I'll give you one example Mr. Viruddha Paakshikaya and I shall challenge
you with the last one rupee Premadasa commemorative coin I got, to refute
it.
During the time of one of your most dreaded Presidents, (it started
when he was Prime Minister) there was this one man who used to roam around
the plantations in the central highlands. He was a planter by profession
and was elevated to Board level of one of the nationalised estate development
boards at the time. He was said to be as straight as a cork- screw.
His job it was to identify old furniture that adorned the stately homes
of the plantation raj cupboards, almirahs, dressing tables, chairs, sofas,
settees, glassware cabinets, the whole array of antique furniture. Some
nearly a hundred years old, used and reused by the white planter and passed
down to generations of planters. These were items that were inventorised
to every minute detail with a copy at the Head Office in Colombo.
Then came nationalisation and the properties were vested with the state.
Then came our villain.
Lorry loads of these furniture were transported to Colombo. A furniture
business had begun expanding into the area of imitating antiques. They
became known as 'new antiques.'
The new antiques - replicas of the originals were sold to the nouveau
riche in Colombo while the genuine ones were sent abroad for princely sums.
Is this not plunder, to say the least?
New evidence is coming out about the do ings of
those close to the 'Palace' during the UNP's rule ransacking official bungalows
of its furniture, crockery, cutlery and even gemstones. As CID investigations
are on, I shall not say more except there is no smoke without fire and
given the example I have quoted above about what a reliable planter friend
of mine told me - about this new 'antique' business - one need not be too
surprised at what the CID I'm sure will unearth.
And Viruddha Paakshikaya in what must be a curious coincidence. I also
recall that during the 1990-1993 period there were reports that resident
monks and chief incumbents of some Buddhist Temples in the South were complaining
that hidden hands were behind moves to lift antique furniture pieces from
these temples as well.
And now Viruddha Paakshikaya, let us dwell again on the Rajahs. They
were virtually running the country by 1993 and in fairness to your D. B.
Wjetunga it was he who put a stop to the influence they wielded over the
affairs of Sri Lanka.
Viruddha Paakshikaya says when the UNP introduced their open economy
while the Sinhala businessmen were still tucking up their sarongs, these
wonderful entrepreneurs were already up and running. He does not say how
cleverly they could tilt a tender or clinch a deal in their favour.
I think Viruddha Paak shikaya, it is my duty here to educate you further
(and more importantly our readers) .
They began the prime deal in August 1977 through the intervention of
one who was a business associate of theirs and is now one of your MPs.
Their close proximity to the super secretary is very well known.
Then even though DBW placed an embargo on them they merrily passed all
their business through another.
Because we have stood firm they have now moved into your side using
a Charlie (who is not angel) and his son who sounds like our cricket captain.
I make no insinuations but perhaps you are too low in the hierarchy to
even know this, Viruddha Paakshikaya!
These people have mastered the art of winning friends. They did this
discreetly then and still do it discreetly while new arrivals like those
with Access are doing it in "Maradana" style.
Now, to substantiate my claims, let me summarise their progress:
1. The Rajahs had a stake in the Prima deal, which was a pioneering
privatization of the UNP.
2. The Rajahs enjoyed a monopoly of the local dairy industry which was
firmly anchored by the UNP. It is to the credit of our Government that
we finally bought Amul products from India to break this monopoly. Nestles
were here and they were too big to be edged out but anyone with similar
ideas could make no headway. Eventually the Indian Co-operative group will
give the Sri Lankan consumer a better deal, thanks to this regime.
3. The CEB did good business with the Rajahs and other than the first
deal by John Browns. Much of the subsequent supply of turbines was all
effected by them including the lucrative supply of spare parts.
4. One cellular network was able to link their calls with a licence
given to the Rajahs and they have now sold it to the Malaysians.
5. After 1989 the Rajahs moved into the Colombo Port and it was they
who did business in supplying port equipment.
6. I have already referred to the Royal Jordanian Airlines in which
they got the agency and all other rights including a joint collaboration
with AirLanka.
7. The first Airbus deal is now history but it was a 100% Rajahs deal
and we have referred to the manner in which the Eels were slammed through
the Lake House Group for even daring to submit an offer through Boeing.
This was their biggest deal.
8. When they started a Television station they were permitted to import
the antennas duty free courtesy your government.
9. They were the agents for Samanalwewa and this was during your Premadasa's
period. This was considered three times the size of the original plan for
the Victoria Dam.
10. Are there not wheat tenders which they regularly get in the Food
Ministry?
11. Balfour Beatty also represented by Rajahs, in addition to building
the Victoria Dam did a lot of road construction including a bulk of the
Colombo-Kandy road and the rehabilitation of Colombo roads.
The Rajahs had it good during your government and there is no gainsaying
it.
I would like to pose another question now on a different topic. How
did the super Secretary appoint a young man with family connections to
the Mercantile sector as an Ambassador to the United States of America
when there was already an accredited Ambassador to Washington DC, the much-respected
Dr. Ananda Guruge, the former ambassador to UNESCO?
Can the Secretary of a Ministry appoint an Ambassador? Ambassadors were
appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Minister of Foreign
Affairs and /or the Secretary of that Ministry - not another ministry!
The President at the time did not make the appointment. Probably, he was
not even aware of it!
Who paid for the expenses of this duplicate Ambassador? was it the Foreign
Ministry or the Finance Ministry? If it was the Foreign Ministry it is
bad, but if it was the Finance Ministry it is still worse.
The super Secretary was the one who was dealing with the IMF and the
World Bank at that time on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka. The de-jure
Finance Minister was Dingiri Banda Wijetunga who knew nothing and learnt
nothing about high finance. It was, therefore, this super Secretary who
was the de-facto Finance Minister. After all, the super Secretary was powerful
enough to tell the then powerful Deputy Defence Minister Ranjan Wijeratne
that he had no money to give him to prosecute the war!.
This super Secretary used his "Ambassador" as the conduit
to the IMF and the World Bank. This conduit had neither an office room
at the Sri Lankan Embassy in Washington nor an official car, but had the
plushest of apartments to live in - but at whose expense? Who was he? And
what was he doing? The campaign slogan of R. Premadasa was equally appropriate
to him.
Within the brief period he spent in the United
States this Ambassador-extraordinary was engaged in garment quota negotiations
with the US, on behalf of the government of Sri Lanka. During these negotiations
the USA insisted that garments from Sri Lanka be quality-tested because
there were complaints that garments exported from Sri Lanka were substandard.
So, our Ambassador-extraordinary happily agreed with the USA. And, no prizes
for guessing as to who is quality testing Sri Lankan garment exports to
the USA now.
This Ambassador got for his mercantile firm in Colombo the agency of
an American courier Company. They couriered most of the garment samples
to America. This is how he expanded his business by being our (or Your)
"Ambassador."
Now, as I can read Viruddha Paakshikaya's mind, I know he will be asking
- so, where is Ranil Wickremesinghe in all this and where are his Top Ten
Businessmen?
I can tell Viruddha Paakshikaya one thing for sure. Or two things, really.
One: The Rakjahs are certainly not in his Top Ten. Two: The Ambassador-extraordinary
certainly is.
The Rajahs, when ignored by D.B Wijetunga, threw their lot with our
leadership but no more.
The Ambassador-extraordinary not only wormed himself to the confidence
of our leadership by donating a computer (at a time when a computer was
"magic"), but also was firmly entrenched in the 1989 SLFP campaign
to defeat R. Premadasa. Eventually, business interests brought him to the
Super Secretary.
He then tried again to do a deal with one of our Ministers, recently
arranging trips and appointments for our Minister in Malaysia and when
our Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar complained to President Kumaratunga,
she had to pull him up for doing things without the Foreign Minister's
knowledge.
So, now I run out of space again. I have at least
listed - in great detail the antics of one of Ranil Wickremesinghe's Top
Ten. I might need ten more weeks to be done with his list and I haven't
finished with this Ambassador-Extraordinary either. He is most certainly
in Ranil Wickremesinghe's list.
But before I sign off I must also note, for lest I forget, Viruddha
Paakshikaya's stout defence of Chanaka de Silva.
You have given a clean certificate to Chanaka and referred to him as
one of the "finest captains of industry" - even God will forgive
your warped thinking. Because he is looking after the South for your leader
and financing all the activity in the South you want to give him a clean
certificate. He is one of the many hoping for you to come to power, so
that he could draw his IOUs.
So, Viruddha Paakshikaya taking in to consideration all what I have
stated above, don't you think that it is time to turn the searchlight inwards.
What you might see could shock you my friend. And that advice applies to
your leader too!.
Point of view
SAARC on a safe onward journey
By Saarkwallah
Nearly two weeks after the event, media comment
continues largely to be focused on such matters as seating arrangements
at the Inaugural, with little if any attention being paid to the substance
of the Summit, and to what it might hold for SAARC's future. An answer
to the question posed here would of course depend very much on one's view
of SAARC, and on one's expectations. My purpose here is to suggest one
view of matters, and to make a judgement based thereon.
At his pre-Summit press briefing, the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister had
stated that the Summit's broad purpose would be to forge a SAARC response
to the evolving global economic order. If so, then it was hard to discern
in the Summit's Declaration either a coherent 3rd World view of that global
economic order (for SAARC is quintessentially 3rd World), or a clearly
delineated developmental programme with which the 3rd World and SAARC could
best address it.
By contrast, pre-Summit media and public attention seemed to be focused
almost exclusively on the anticipated interaction off-stage between India
and Pakistan. Going by media reports, nothing much more seemed to have
come out of that exercise than a couple of expressive additions to the
lexicon of their bilateral dialogue: there was reference to 'neurotic'
behaviour, and to proposals which were pure 'fantasy'.
 The
SAARC Chairperson and Sri Lankan President, at her post-Summit press conference,
spoke of renewed commitment to economic targets already set, and of agreement
to broaden SAARC's horizons to take in social development, the empowerment
of women and children (no simile here, to acknowledge the irony of a woman
President, herself the daughter of a woman Prime Minister, making such
pledge), scientific and technological research and traditional medicine.
She also hoped that the SAARC Charter would open up gradually, to allow
inclusion of political discussion.
In terms of demonstrable growth and progress rather than aims and pledges,
or of signed, better still ratified agreements for implementation, not
much perhaps to write about, far less celebrate. Yet, I wish to suggest
that by quite different criteria, this 10th Summit could properly be termed
not just a success, but perhaps even a defining moment in SAARC's progress.
For there were two developments at Colombo which well illustrated what
I would call the two sides of the SAARC coin: two basic, complementary
facets of the SARC process which, taken together, represent the very essence
and spirit of the process (SARC) and the Association (SAARC).
One of these was India's announced tariff concessions which, as our
Trade Minister Kingsley Wickremaratne has already said in respect of Indo-Sri
Lankan trade, might almost make the difference between what for us is now
a huge deficit, and something near to balance. The other, was the firm
denial by India's smaller neighbours to Pakistan, of the opportunity the
latter sought to enmesh SAARC in its design to internationalize its disputes
with India.
The process of South Asian Regional Co-operation (SARC) does not rest,
as Pakistan sought to establish here, on peace and security in the region.
It rests and indeed cannot but do so, as the reality of the region's asym-metries
dictates, on that trust and confidence which begets the generosity of the
big and the genuine friendship of the small. On this occasion, India gave
generously, and reaped a return in the friendship of her smaller neighbours.
Together, they set themselves on course to sustain SAARC in the long term.
That was the core of what happened in Colombo: that was the measure of
the 10th Summit's success. However, there were alarms and excursions along
the way.
India's approach to this Summit was one of quiet insistence on the essentials
of SAARC - adherence to the letter and spirit of the Charter, and tangible
action to advance regional co-operation. That meant in practice, foreclosure
on any attempt to exploit SAARC for other ends, and meaningful accommodation
of prevailing disparities to mutual benefit. Pakistan, doubtless encouraged
by interested parties outside the region, sought to achieve twin-ends.
One, a waiver if not variation of the Charter provisions to allow it
to internationalize its disputes with India, and simultaneously, to have
endorsement from within the region itself for the agenda of those interested
parties outside, who seek to place Indo-Pakistani disputes at the heart
of South Asian interaction, at the expense of SARC/SAARC.
Available indications point to Sri Lanka's role having been one of some
ambivalence at the outset, followed by acquiescence with the majority view
at the end. Whether because the authorities here felt impelled to be even-handed
at all times between conflicting Indian and Pakistani positions, or whether
they were susceptible to persuasion by those interested outside parties,
Sri Lanka appeared at first to look for such flexibility in applying the
concept of informal political discussion as might open the way to Pakistan
to press its own agenda. The Sri Lankan Chair had then perforce to bend
to the will of the majority, and to deny Pakistan such an opportunity.
Neither Pakistan's attempt to bend the Charter to allow for open political
discussion, nor the concept of informal political discussion by which those
concerned here seemed to lay such store are new to the SARC process. The
late President Premadasa did, in his opening address at the Dhaka Summit
in April 1993, as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif did here, namely, advocate
the injection of bilateral disputes and contentious issues into formal
discussions: with as little success then, as now.
As for informal political discussion, the concept is as old as SARC
itself. Those charged with getting SARC off the ground faced a basic question
at the very outset: how, in a region beset with dispute, suspicion and
fear, to generate the political will necessary for meaningful economic
co-operation in core areas, where profit and loss could not possibly be
balanced due to the prevailing disparities of size, resource and development.
The answer they settled on was to provide for the earliest and fullest
opportunity for the Leaders of the region and their Ministers to get together,
talk informally and confidentially amongst themselves, and thus arrive
at that confidence-building meeting of minds which would generate political
will. Hence, the rapid progress of SARC to SAARC: hence too, the Charter
provision for Summits as frequently as desired, but not less frequently
than once a year.
However, that informal process of political discussion was clearly envisaged
at that time as being essentially one of spontaneity, and gradual evolution.
Since prevailing disputes, mistrust and fear related to bilateral relationships,
it went without saying that this informal process would, certainly at the
outset, be one of essentially bilateral nature. The process would evolve
to include three, four and more, sitting around a table, only when bilateral
disputes had dissipated. Therefore any attempt at force-feeding SAARC would
be counter-productive, and might even lead to break-up. It needs constantly
to be kept in mind that SARC got off the ground and evolved into SAARC
only because of the safe-guards of unanimity of decisions and the exclusion
of bilateral and contentious issues from proceedings. Any attempt to bend
either of those rules prematurely, namely before mutual trust and confidence
had been seen to subsist would lead to break-up because no member would
tolerate even an illusion of being forced by the others to take a position
for which it was not then ready.
At Colombo then, SAARC was shown to be alive and well. Its performance
here in respect of the essentials was correct, and pointed to a safe onward
journey. However, any attempt to forcefeed the association on an under-cooked
diet of excessive informal political discussion would certainly induce
ill-health along the way. Prophets of doom and purveyors of gloom are not
those who worry about SARC/SAARC, but those who are hell-bent on destroying
it.
|
