By Dayan Jayatilleka – 

Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka

The latest lame argument, advanced (pseudonymously) in defence of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake is that he is neither Right nor Left, but instead, is Rational.

That argument is neither relevant nor correct. It is a case of apples and oranges. Right, Left, Center, Center-Right and Center-Left are classifications along a spectrum, regarding orientation in politics, economics, ideology, values etc.

Rationality and irrationality are something else altogether, not transcending Right and Left but cutting across them or subdividing them.

To simplify, there can be rational Rightists and irrational Rightists, rational leftists and irrational leftists etc. Examples may help. George Bush Sr. was a Rightist but a rational rightist. Donald Trump is Rightist but an irrational Rightist. Ho Chi Minh was a rational leftist, Pol Pot was an irrational Leftist.

My contention that AKD has shifted rightwards and is occupying a policy position that enables him to be classified as Right, not Left or center-Left, cannot be countered by saying he is neither Right nor Left but is rational.

Rational and irrational are not positions on a political spectrum. If Anura is neither Right nor Left, then he must be in the Center or the Center-Right or Center-Left. The question of rationality and irrationality is a separate one. Simply because he is said to be rational – even if I grant that argument for the moment—it doesn’t mean he is ‘neither Right nor Left’.

He can be on the right and rational, on the left and rational, in the center and rational, on the center-right and rational or on the center-left and rational.

Similarly, he can be on the right, left, center, center-right or center-left and irrational.

My argument was and remains that he has shifted right and has positioned himself mainly on the right on the most important or ‘axial’ issues.

This does not in anyway mean that I concede that he is rational though he has shifted to the right. Though, I must emphasize that he could have shifted Right but been rational—which I argue he is not.

Now that the flag of ‘rationality’ has been raised in Anura’s defence, I will say firstly, that such an assertion leaves intact the question of whether he is to be classified on the Right, Left or Center.  Secondly, I wish to say that the main problem with AKD is not only that he has occupied a policy position on the Right, but that he is not even on the rational Right. Anura’s policy shifts make him not only classifiable as Right, but worse still as irrational.

To state it more plainly, Anura has shifted Right but not to the rational Right. His position is of the irrational right. The scariest thing about Anura is the irrationality of his policy posture rather than its rightwing character, though it is indeed rightwing.

If one has shifted Right, it is far better to be on the rational Right than the irrational Right. Indeed, it is far better to be on the rational Right than on the irrational Left. Deng Xiaoping was to the right of the Gang of Four, and that was a real advancement because the Gang of Four belonged to the irrational ultraleft.         

* AKD declined to attend the BRICS Plus Summit despite an invitation from Putin, and didn’t send his PM or Foreign Minister there. He is now asking Modi and Putin to get Sri Lanka admission to the BRICS. How rational is that?

* AKD has given India a bigger footprint in Sri Lanka’s North-East, including in the strategically vital Trincomalee than any previous Sri Lankan leader. How is that rational?

* AKD has given China a larger footprint in the island’s Deep South than has any previous Sri Lankan leader. How is that rational?

* AKD has given both India and China larger footprints on Sri Lankan territory at a time when India is competing with China in Asia and is also acting as a member of the Quad which is the US ally in the sharpening global contestation between the West and China—thereby making Sri Lanka (at best) caught up in the tug of war between the competing sides and (at worst) a target of both. How can that conceivably be rational?

* AKD has signed-off on the debt repayment deal agreed upon in principle by Ranil Wickremesinghe. According to Amali Wedagedera:

“According to the Governor of the Central Bank, Sri Lanka has to service between $ 4 to 5 billion of debt in 2025. As a result, debt servicing as a share of Government revenue exceeds expenses on social security, public services and investments in the productive economy. A study comparing the debt service obligations of 145 countries in 2024 ranked Sri Lanka 2nd in terms of countries with the highest debt service to revenue ratios in the world (Resolving the Worst Ever Global Debt Crisis: Time for a Nordic Initiative? 2024). Total debt service as a share of Government revenue in Sri Lanka is 202%.”

AKD didn’t even attempt to gather around Sri Lanka’s best economic minds and the renowned international economists who have signed petitions criticizing the creditors and solidarizing with Sri Lanka on the issue of debt (e.g. Martin Guzman, Jayati Ghosh) and fight for revision of the terms so they would be less lopsidedly against us. How is that rational?

Anura has not merely shifted to the Right. he has not shifted to a rational Right. He is both Rightist and irrational in his policy, with the latter being worse than the former.