By Vipula Wanigasekera –

Dr. Vipula Wanigasekera

As the Sri Lankan presidential elections draw near, the political landscape is becoming increasingly convoluted. Recent crossovers among politicians are baffling to many observers, highlighting a phenomenon that can be termed “political slavery.” This term encapsulates the loyalty of politicians and some voters to traditional power structures, despite a history of governance failures.

The right to vote is a fundamental aspect of democracy, and Sri Lankans are free to choose their leaders. Yet, the rational choice for many would be between Sajith Premadasa of the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) and Anura Dissanayake of the National People’s Power (NPP). These two candidates have not had the opportunity to rule the country as leaders for an extended period, making them relatively untainted by the long-term political mismanagement that has plagued Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka’s political elite, who have governed the country for over seventy years since independence, bear significant responsibility for its current economic woes. Following the end of the civil war in 2009, the country had a golden opportunity to rebuild and progress. However, allegations of corruption and mismanagement led to the defeat of Mahinda Rajapaksa in the 2015 elections.

The subsequent presidency of Maithripala Sirisena, although initially promising reform, quickly faltered as his administration, led by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, faced its own corruption allegations. Sirisena’s attempt to bring back the Rajapaksas in 2018 was thwarted by the Supreme Court, leading to political stagnation.

In 2019, the public seemed to forget why the Rajapaksas were ousted, electing Gotabaya Rajapaksa with a significant majority, largely supported by Sinhala Buddhist votes. However, within two years, the new administration’s failures and corruption allegations became evident, culminating in massive protests and the resignation of both Gotabaya and Mahinda Rajapaksa.

Despite this history, many politicians and citizens continue to support Ranil Wickremesinghe and the Rajapaksas (who are yet to nominate a presidential candidate – Dhammika Perera is a potential nominee). This ongoing support can be partially attributed to personal favors, such as jobs and business opportunities provided by these political figures. However, this group likely numbers only in the thousands.

Another segment of the population, expressing gratitude for Mahinda Rajapaksa’s role in ending the civil war, also continues to support him, though their numbers were insufficient to prevent his loss in the 2015 election.

A more concerning group comprises those who view the Rajapaksas and their allies as saviors of the Sinhala Buddhist identity. Despite the hardships experienced by the population, this faction’s loyalty is perplexing. The absurdity of this allegiance was highlighted by a former minister’s claim in parliament recently that the Buddha employed artificial intelligence techniques, a statement met with humor but indicative of the populist rhetoric that sways some voters.

Recent gatherings for rallies organized by Ranil and the Rajapaksas suggest that many attendees might be incentivized to participate, as evidenced by the coordinated waving of flags when cameras are present. Additionally, figures like a prominent “Pohottuwa” minister, with a dubious past involving the theft of valuables from commuter trains, attempt to rehabilitate their images through extravagant displays of events.

This phenomenon of unwavering loyalty despite a lack of tangible benefits, often referred to as “political slavery,” suggests that many are swayed by small handouts like a bottle of arrack or a packet of rice. This type of influence, though not easily measured by formal or informal research, underscores the deep-seated issues in Sri Lankan political culture.

Moreover, the intertwining of politics to religion influences further complicates the landscape, but this topic warrants a separate discussion. As the elections approach, the challenge remains to break free from this cycle of political slavery and to move towards leaders who can genuinely steer the country towards progress and stability.

But is Sri Lanka ready for change? There are no quick fixes to macro issues. Which leader is willing to shift from leadership to statesmanship, a role Ranil could have displayed in the last few months, even if it meant getting ousted with a no-confidence vote in parliament? That would have been handy in the election rhetoric. Ranil missed the bus! Unless political slavery becomes a key determinant in the coming weeks, with stupidity and thuggery surrounding him from crossovers.

*Writer is a former Diplomat, Head of Tourism Authority, Lecturer for ECU – Perth and Meditation teacher / Reiki Healer