By Kumar David –

Prof. Kumar David

Ms Power is a formidable power (sic!) in foreign policy and her visit a fortnight ago signals support for Ranil Wickremesinghe (RW). Power is the chief of USAID (Agency for International Development) an “independent agency” of the government that administers “civilian” foreign aid and development programmes with a budget of $27 billion. It is perhaps the largest aid agency in the world and accounts for over half of U.S. foreign hand-outs —it is the largest in the world in money terms. Her visit backed by a team of officials is of political significance. It won’t be a surprise if the donkeys in RW’s administration and the asses in the opposition miss the import of one of Obama’s four women (Michelle, Hilary and Susan Rice were the other three) visiting the Island at this moment. Forget these jackasses, the US has put Sri Lanka on its radar screen and that will matter.

First a few words about Ms Power. She is a recognised intellectual, director of a Human Rights outfit at Harvard’s Kennedy School and afterwards a Professor at Harvard who joined Senator Barack Obama but had to resign in March 2008 after she called Hillary Clinton a monster – she thought she was talking off the record. Nevertheless, President Obama took her back into the State Department transition team just eight months later where she played several roles. Obama chose her to Chair the Atrocities Prevention Board in 2012 and then as America’s U.N. Ambassador. Power’s office focused on women’s rights, LGBT rights, religious freedom, human rights, and democracy. She was tough on Sri Lankan human and democratic rights violations.  Unfortunately, she is also a supporter of military intervention and was a key figure in persuading Obama to undertake his foolish and ill-fated intervention in Libya.

Ms Power was born in London to Irish parents and schooled in Ireland till age nine and then emigrated to America with her mother. She graduated in history from Yale and obtained a doctorate from Harvard Law School. As a young woman she wrote three books and significant papers on human rights. Some trace the ‘The Right to Protect’ (R2P) concept to Samantha’s youthful writings. This visit signals a decision by the US to intervene in Sri Lanka’s policy directions. This is no trial canary in an experimental mine shaft, it’s the real McCoy. Money will be made available for stabilising a Western oriented regime but at the same time there will be a no-nonsense approach to human and democratic rights. 

She announced a $60 million aid package – $40 million for fertiliser and $20 million for humanitarian assistance and declared “I have come to convey that the US stands with you during this unparalleled crisis.” Power also told RW that political and economic agendas go hand in hand and added that the US is trying to engage the US business community to look for opportunities here. She added “You have an incredible private sector and entrepreneurship, but the government, over so many years has largely stood in the way of unlocking its potential. The government has no business running business. If what has been done in the telecoms sector is done in other sectors it would be incredible”. True enough, but to quote Anura Kumara’s remark at the Koloma Foundation Institute “the private sector has no obligations except to its shareholders, the government is answerable to the people”.

For months I have been saying that the West will bail out Sri Lanka (any government) that took a pro-capitalist policy (in these times nothing matters more than money), respected democracy and supported American led foreign policy. It is now clear that I was too cautious; it’s not an option, it is an instruction. Do it (the road laid out by Ms Power) or starve and clearly the West (America-IMF-Europe) will do just that.  No one else has the gilt or the gumption to bail us out, certainly not China. I suppose it is settled that for the next three to five years this country will be on the capitalist and hopefully democratic road. The US Ambassador in Colombo has so far handled the JVP with kid gloves, it will be interesting to watch if Ms Power has instructed Ms Julie Chung to change course.

The democracy thing, that is the political side, is rather complicated. It is not that the militarists or the fascists in the defence establishment have a ghost of a chance of throwing their weight around. An uprising in the streets and a naval blockade will finish them off. The threat is from Sinhala-Buddhist extremism. A democratic settlement, a new constitution, winding up of the Executive Presidency and a new electoral system are contentious but the most volatile arethe damnable Demalas and Thumbiyas. The first fires will be stoked by Paksa cutthroats and saffron-clad brigades, but there are deeper conflicts. You see the Tamils, if not the Muslims will demand their pound of flesh – having been political vegans for close upon 70 years they are hungry for a morsel of raw flesh. Tamil leaders cannot settle for less than devolution, Sinhala-Buddhist extremists will not permit devolution. 

If Ms Power is still the hard-nut she was in the Libya intervention and if she is still as tough as she was about human rights in Sri Lanka as she was when pushing UNHRC resolutions, the Paksa-clan and the saffron lot are in for a hard knock. If it comes to a showdown, some of the Paksa-mob and the saffron-clad extremists may start pushing up daisies in some corner of kanatte. Are liberals prepared to shield rogues who embezzled billions from retroactive punishment? Alternatively, will they agree to jeopardise established legal safeguards? Opinion among liberals will be divided.

This brings us face to face with what I may with your permission call the contradictions of democracy. The poser is universal, but first Lanka. Every serious conversation on politics in Lanka ends in the following conundrum. “Yes, we want democracy-freedom etc, yes we are prepared to die for it. Parliamentarians, ministers, prime ministers and presidents are corrupt and power-hungry, seeking rewards for themselves and their kinsmen”. The rib-tickling point is that these blackguards (all but a few dozen parliamentarians) were chosen and put in place by none other than ourselves, the people themselves. 

Except in naked dictatorships like Burma the way out is not to dump democracy and launch out on an insurrection a la 1971. The aragalaya that drove out Gotha is unique and cannot be repeated to remove a constitutional government. Unique means unique! Gotha’s regime was constitutional but its removal cannot be repeated again against a constitutional government; public opinion will not stand for it because it fears the anarchy of 1971. The Front-Line Socialists (FSP) are suffering from delusions.

Nevertheless, things cannot go on the way they are, drastic changes are essential, but must be done by legitimate processes. Tactical and strategic details will change and depend on the needs of the moment but the basics can be spelt out clearly. The Executive Presidency must be abolished, the right to recall elected representatives inserted in the constitution, proportional representation ended not for a simple Westminster model which is unsuitable for Lanka but replaced by a scheme which includes a large number of multimember constituencies to prevent absurd landslides (1956, 1970, 1977) and achieve ethno-religious balance (remember Colombo Central, Balangoda, Kadugannawa, Colombo South). Overall, a new constitution has to enacted by democratic processes (FSP please note).

To underline the point that salvaging democracy requires different paths in different places I will make a few comments about the USA. Is American democracy under threat and if so by what forces? The answer to the first question is yes but not fatal, and the most palpable threat is from right-wing extremism. Right-extremism is not only the loonies ranged behind Trump and his MAGA (Make America Great Again) shrill, it also includes a number of nasties (Aryan Nations, Posse Comitatus, Covenant, Arm of the Lord, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and adherents of QAnon theory). Though they do pose a threat of domestic terrorism the deep hazard to democracy is the divide between the mainstream Republican and Democratic Parties. Take for example abortion and women’s rights which are tearing the country apart. California, New York and Michigan States are the sites of the largest pro-abortion and women’s rights activities in their history. Conversely Texas and a few other Neanderthal states have legislated that abortion from the moment of conception even in the case of rape or incest is illegal and that anyone who assists is liable for 99 years of imprisonment; conflict is unavoidable. On abortion the Word of God and Onward Christian Soldiers who underwrite these battles are tearing the country apart.  

It’s the same with gun legislation, energy policy (promoting green energy is illegal in Texas; can you believe it!), gerrymandering electoral boundaries and overreach of legislation beyond state boundaries. Republican hopefuls for election will not challenge Trump because they will be denied nomination (getting nominated, not getting elected is the problem). This is not a thesis; so, I have to be brief. The point is not that the US is on the brink of another civil war, it is not. The point is that the protection of democracy is substantially different country by country; Germany, Italy, UK, US and so on. China and Russia are non-capitalist states, nor democratic in the ordinary sense. The aragalaya in these two will be petri dishes carving out their own paths. For sure Socialists desire transition from democratic-capitalism to social-democracy and Marxists understand that the materialism immanent in historical authenticity is inexorable. Therefore, every instance must be placed in its own context.