By Vishwamithra –

“Unlike a drop of water which loses its identity when it joins the ocean, man does not lose his being in society in which he lives. Man’s life is independent. He is born not for the development of society alone, but for the development of his self.”  ~ B R Ambedkar

Anura Kumara Dissanayake‘s approach to politics is multifaceted. Its unceasing flow is almost flawless. His public display of interacting with ordinary men, women and children speaks volumes of empathy, understanding and honesty. But the question remains whether that approach to politics could be applied to governance also. A superlative exhibition of deliberately crafted public relations might win you votes; its very substance and delivery may win the hearts and minds of a potential elector and make him your lifelong disciple; but would it also deliver the crucial resolution of acute issues of the nation?

Voter-intensity during a period of elections should not be misunderstood nor misinterpreted as permanent allegiance to a cause or a leader; the leader’s intrinsic charisma could be a temporary veneer that cloaks his irredeemable flaws and lack of profound character. AKD’s empathy oozes from his persona; his understanding of any subject is quick and deep. Yet, the government he leads, the Cabinet which is the main administrative arm of the machinery of governance and his parliamentary colleagues have failed to display the same commitment and devotion to the cause of the electorate.

AKD must realize, to paraphrase Richard Harris in the 1970 movie, ‘Cromwell’: ‘Sri Lanka is not AKD and AKD is not Sri Lanka’. Such a powerful enunciation of the deep sentiments of suppressed and deceived subjects cannot be matched; its delivery and latent substance echo through the ages. In the same vein, one must say that AKD is not Oliver Cromwell and Oliver Cromwell is not AKD.

I have repeatedly written on this subject: ‘one man show’ as was so powerfully dramatized by the late President R Premadasa, a ‘one-man show’ cannot be sustained for a long time, especially in a democracy. However, Premadasa’s populist agenda and the way in which he implemented the various elements of that agenda were not only authoritarian, sometimes it was frightening and fear-generating. AKD is the total opposite of that. Albeit the fact that AKD was originally a close disciple of Marxism and an activist under Rohana Wijeweera, he campaigned on a transformative platform of anti-corruption, his early governance style suggests a pragmatic evolution away from orthodox Marxist-Leninism towards a more technocratic, social-democratic model.

However, the differences between the two Premadasas, father and son, and AKD are fundamental. Not only in the very approach to achieving the goals of each one’s agenda, in the sphere of the very execution and review of action, the differences are, in fact, more than fundamental in that the upbringing of both may have occurred at, more or less, the same time-frame, immediate environment in which they grew up, the secondary and post- graduate education, the social milieu of each individual couldn’t have been more vastly different. In the sphere of family circumstances, the  senior Premadasa had more similarities with AKD than the Junior. Senior Premadasa also started from very humble beginnings and, from near zero, he reached the pinnacle of power through sheer guts and effort.

Junior Premadasa, as some may say, has become a joker in politics today; he has shown some modicum of brightness but nowhere near what AKD has displayed to-date in the country’s politics. When comparing the two, people tend to evaluate both AKD and Sajith with the same yardstick but arrive at two diametrically opposed results. That is what the role ‘honesty’ and ’empathy’ plays in politics. People, when evaluating their choices, may come to distinctly disparate conclusions; when offered in contextually relevant circumstances, their choice, more often than not, becomes a binary one: ‘them’ or ‘us’. Whoever is identified with ‘us’ wins the day. AKD and the NPP succeeded in this polarizing battle: framing any party outside the NPP as ‘them’ and the other, NPP, ‘us’. That was a brilliant piece of campaigning at election time. But the question the people ask now is totally divorced from the election platform. It is governance and affordable living that the NPP directly or vicariously promised to the people.

A superlative PR campaign would not solve the country’s micro economic problems. Their roots, attendant corruption at all levels, from the highest politician to the Government Agent down to the ordinary peon coupled with stubborn decisions on macro-economical malignancies, unbridled spending and total oblivion to the suffering of the masses must be eradicated, if not to the fullest at least to a visible extent so that the people’s perception of the total context of the issues at hand are understandable. In other words, the people must see that the government is on their side. Electioneering and governance are as far apart from each other as the earth and the skies are.

Having lost badly at the PR front, Sajith Premadasa is now engaged in a campaign to safeguard his position as the voice of the Opposition. That in itself is a losing premise. The UNP leaders, except R Premadasa, Sajith’s father, and Ranil Wickremesinghe did not have to fight that ugly battle. Senior Premadasa’s fight was with Gamini Dissanayake and Lalith Athulathmudali while Ranil had to fight Karu Jayasuriya at first and then Sajith Premadasa. Sajith is now engaged in somewhat a fake PR campaign; his problem is deeper than the ones that his father and Ranil had to grapple with.

AKD has changed the macro-context of all issues. Aragalaya-22 and its first child, Anura Kumara Dissanayake have established a novel paradigm and the old systems with which all other political leaders, including the Tamils up North, are being sidelined as part and parcel of the old, traditional and the dying status quo. Even though AKD and his government are pursuing economic policies that are more oriented towards market-friendly and pragmatic governing principles, they are nor being diagnosed as corrupt-capitalistic and reactionary. That alone is a massive relief, both to AKD and his more Marxian-oriented comrades in his own JVP.

But as  a performing artist, AKD also could be categorized as another politician whose one single aim is, after coming to power once, to win the next term. He needs to maintain his own independent identity; his own party’s ‘brand’ and yet attain the multiple goals that he set for his party and the country at the very beginning of his first term as President. Sajith Premadasa too may have set his goals for the next four to five years and is he successful in setting his agenda in order to reach his own aims?             

As a performing artist, I see that while both leaders may share similar economic goals on paper, the fundamental difference lies in their performance of power. AKD represents a break with the old, an authentic, grassroots-driven change, whereas Premadasa represents a continuation of the same, albeit with different actors. Their difference is not only in style; it is a fundamental choice between reforming the old system or breaking it to build a new one.

As a country, ever since the Aragalaya-22 set its own sociopolitical goals, we are advancing towards a fresh horizon. If not tangibly, at least perceptibly, we seem to have shed the ethnic garb and its corrosive ornaments from our everyday living. The young, the Gen-Z seems to be much ahead of our old generation which did not act before profiling the artists who played even a minute role in the traditional political drama. AKD, on the other hand is on a PR blitzkrieg; traveling from the Northern arid planes to the hill country and its cooling tea estates, he is displaying some remarkable PR spectacles. Whether these are genuine or most painstakingly crafted items of a choreography of public relation platitudes, one would not know. But his PR campaign is effective. Having watched these celluloid marvels, I have received from overseas some very complementary comments about AKD and his grand sense of empathy.

But an effective PR campaign will not solve our problems. They require scrutiny and probing of the roots of the cause; its eradication is not easy and when a solution is imminent, there may well be some powerful quarters whose very survival may depend upon the the government’s proposed solution. The multifaceted nature of the issue that confront the country could be nauseating and an ugly to behold and understand. But AKD simply cannot lose the common touch he shows that he possesses.

The courseness of a tea-plucker’s hands, a sad and grief-stricken countenance of a Northern widow, tearless silence of a youth who is yet to secure employment, hundreds of thousands of families whose property and livelihoods were destroyed by cyclone Ditwah are still waiting for affordable living. Hundreds of PR campaigns cannot resolve these issues. They run deeper than one can see.

When darkness embraces the evening—when the farmer returns from a day of scorching toil, the village girl comes home from her lessons, and the mother prepares the family meal—that PR campaign has had no manifest impact on their lives; it has not earned an invitation to their table. Real solutions for real problems cannot be left for someone else to deliver. AKD and his government alone must find them and without any delay.

*The writer can be reached at vishwamithra1984@gmail.com