‘Should we be eternally subservient?’ – A reply

The transparency of Dr Upul Wijayawardhana (UW), residing in England and writing under his own name, is appreciated. He should be grateful to his country of adoption for giving him the freedom to write as he pleases without fear; even to write adversely about that country. I am sure he knows that the people in Sri Lanka don’t enjoy that freedom to the extent it is present in England. I need not labour this point as it is well known. It may be for this reason that “Interested Woman” did not wish to disclose her name.

Perhaps, he can write on this subject also and urge the powers in Sri Lanka to give greater freedom to people to air their views as freely and without fear as in England. Furthermore, on his own admission, he is a long-standing supporter of the party that keeps the President propped up. The day this prop is removed, the President falls. UW says he feels strongly for the country of his birth. He would be rendering a great service to the people of the country of his birth if were to use his influence and restore that freedom to us.

Sovereignty belongs to ALL the people of Sri Lanka all the time irrespective of what race or religion they belong to. The agent chosen to handle the sovereign powers of the people is called the government. That agent government is chosen by the sovereign people at an election. In a multi-racial multi- religious country, the government so elected must reflect this fact. A government elected by the people living in a particular geographical area of the country to the exclusion of people living in other parts of the country, is not a true agent fit to hold the sovereign powers of the people. Or, to be precise, in a multi-racial and multi-religious country, a government elected by a single community, cannot be recognized as a true agent of all the sovereign people of that country. This has in fact happened in Sri Lanka today.

Clearly there is a defect in the rules and procedure governing elections and a change is desired to correct this defect that makes it possible for one ethnic group to take control of the state to the detriment of the other communities living in the country. These changes once made, will enable Sri Lankan elections to be more reflective of the sovereignty of all people of the country.

UW says that, “during Yahapalanaya, Mangala and Ranil committed two vital blunders that had very severe adverse effects on Sri Lanka, internationally and economically.” One of them was co-sponsoring the UNHRC resolution against Sri Lanka… “

Was this resolution against Sri Lanka? Or was the resolution against the government of Sri Lanka for discriminatory treatment towards a section of its sovereign people creating conditions that compelled them to leave the country for their safety? The UNHRC is speaking for the sovereign people or some of them to whom an injustice has been caused by their agent, the government. The relationship between the government and the sovereign people is a relationship between principle and agent. Sovereign people are the principle, and the government is the agent. The two are not synonymous. A mistake commonly made. Furthermore, the UNHRC has been recognized by Sri Lanka. It has every right to point out to the agent the government that the agent has committed a breach of the social contract it made with the sovereign people. It never attempted to impose its solution on Sri Lanka. The conduct of UNHRC does not constitute an interference in the internal affairs of the country. Therefore, Mangala and Ranil were justified in cosponsoring the UNHRC resolution in question.

UW says the C4 documentary is “more fiction than fact.” How did he arrive at this conclusion? When there is a conflict of opinion between two parties, the elementary rule universally applied is to refer the matter to a third person, an arbiter or a judge. For well over ten years now, we have been dismissing these allegations saying they are “unsubstantiated,” “fiction” and so on causing immense harm to the wellbeing and progress of the sovereign Sri Lankan people; and now the country has ended up at the rock bottom, bankrupt. People like UW should use their influential powers to persuade the current rulers to hold an impartial inquiry and end this once and for all. It’d be a practical application of the “strong feeling” he has for the land of his birth.

UW’s interpretation of the learned lady’s comparison of R’s interview with Mody’s is his own. Other interpretations are possible. When those responsible and accountable for mismanaging SL and SL ending bankrupt, are seen strutting the world stage offering solutions to global problems, when they should be devoting their time at home, they only excite the derision of leaders who are achievers. Only the desire to be diplomatic and kind, prevents them from saying openly: “Thank you for your solutions for global problems. Go back and find solutions to your problems at home.”

Singapore is a tiny country much smaller than SL. Her founder the late Lee Kuan Yew was “probably one of the only two world statesmen who, after leaving office, found an open door to every head of state and government anywhere in the world.” The other is Dr Henry Kissinger. Lee Kuan Yew was an achiever.

Brigadier (Rtd) Ranjan de Silva

rpcdesilva@gmail.com