25 September, 2020

Blog

Is Maithri A Personification Of Authenticity?

By Vishwamithra1984

Authenticity is the alignment of head, mouth, heart, and feet – thinking, saying, feeling, and doing the same thing – consistently. This builds trust, and followers love leaders they can trust.” ~Lance Secretan

Leadership in politics has been a subject many psychologists and social scientists have attempted to analyze, dissect and write about over and over again. These analysts and writers have ascribed strong leadership in politics to many a politician and history alone stands as the sole judge as to the validity and legitimacy of those claims. However, when leadership is challenged, when it is questioned and probed, those who come out as deserving and great are those who have taken unparalleled risks under most trying conditions and come out on top to the wonder and amazement of many pessimists and skeptics.

Maithripala newFurthermore, one must guard oneself against reading too much into the simplicity of a persona of a leader, for more often than not, simplicity could be a shield, or a false façade against a more complex and sinister character that a leader tries to conceal. Yet a majority of people fall for that outer veneer and take that as the authentic nature of a leader whom they long to emulate and look up to as a messiah of sort.

But there is one sure way of judging that authenticity, that profound sense of honesty and simplicity- and that is to see if the particular leader is making one gesture after another, one political gaffe after another in order to express his or her own judgments and inner feelings irrespective of the extremely unfriendly consequences those judgments and feelings may entail.

Authenticity is not a calculated notion or a premeditated phenomenon. Yet on the other hand, a calculated and premeditated move by a political leader could be seen as an authentic response from him and that trait of calculating and the premeditated persona is time and time again associated with his past courses of action and thought.

If the critics of the current President Maithripala Sirisena take few moments to look into such details of political analysis- whether scientific or not- they would invariably find in Sirisena a man who is not in conflict with himself and who is not in disagreement with his inner conscience in the implementation and execution of duties as the leader of a most difficult political coalition to manage and steer well out of crisis points. His authenticity is not yet questioned by his closest bedfellows- Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his UNP Cabinet colleagues. In fact that shade of suspicion and uncertainty seems to spring from the President’s former Cabinet colleagues of a defeated UPFA Government. A set of politicos whose mindset was entrenched in a corrupt system of nepotism and cronyism are finding hard to stomach, firstly the electoral defeat they suffered at the hands of their former Cabinet colleague- Maithripala Sirisena and secondly, resigning themselves to a stewardship of state by a person they consider quite ‘junior’ in the ranks of the political echelon of the time.

They are still wallowing in their bottomless pit of self-pity, trying hard to make two plus two four- instead they find themselves planning and plotting to make hay while sun shines by resorting and clinging to their pastime of deal-making and deal-breaking. That they inherited and learnt from their former Master who at present is literally enmeshed in a web of accusations, allegations and even maybe, in near future, indictments.

Against such a complex backdrop of political and social uncertainties, the country at large is experiencing an economic stagnation along with crashing stock market prices and repeatedly amended budget proposals. Vagaries of coalition-politics seem to claim their pound of flesh, so to speak. A marriage between the United National Party (UNP), which I still consider the only party that represents the ‘reasonable’ socio-political thinking of a majority of Sri Lankan voters, and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) whose nationalist luster seemed to have turned into a vibrant racist-populist political thought, especially among a vast majority of Sinhalese Buddhists, is always a very difficult one. Navigating in such cruel waters of political antipathies and contradictions is indeed a task by itself and Maithripala Sirisena as at now stands unscathed and undaunted. That, I dare ascribe to his authenticity.

The former regime of the Rajapaksas employed a sinister mode of propaganda in order to tap into the fears of Sinhalese Buddhist in the country to gain short-term electoral gains but failed eventually with the departure of Maithripala Sirisena, the then General Secretary of the SLFP from its ranks. In that context it is apt to quote Howard Fineman, global editorial director of Huffington Post who describes what’s taking shape currently in American Primaries: “Trump deploys fame for fame’s sake; taps into populist expressions of fear, hatred and resentment and shows a knack for picking fights and a braggart’s focus on the horse race. All of which allow him to play into — and exploit — every media weakness and bad habit in a chase for audience and numbers.

It is almost redundant to beat a beaten horse now. Yet considering what President Sirisena inherited from the Rajapaksa regime- a corrupt and decadent set of socio-economic principles- the methods and means of propagating populist political notions still holds good with a gullible and semi-educated populace.

Showing remarkable poise and craft, President Sirisena very cleverly has palmed off the economic headaches to Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe so that in the event of failure to deliver on the ‘economic promises’ made at the hustings it would be not his but Ranil’s head that would roll. However, Ranil’s inner Cabinet, (if he has one) most likely comprises Malik Samarawickrama, Mangala Samaraweera, Kabir Hashim, Ravi Karunanayake, Eran Wickremaratne, and maybe Sagala Ratnayake and Harsha de Silva. One redeeming feature of this ‘inner Cabinet’ is that they seem to be believing in neo-liberal economics and wedded to the fundamentals of post-21st Century Capitalism. Post-21st Century Capitalism is being portrayed as one that is being practiced and advanced in Western Europe and Obama’s America with a more sympathetic approach to humanizing one-time dreaded ‘Capitalism’, especially in the third world countries.

In a fast-disappearing world of Socialist Communist economic theories, resulting from the dramatic collapse of the Soviet Union and its satellite countries in Eastern Europe, adoption of more Capitalistic economics seems acceptable to the people at large if such adoption is associated with ‘authenticity’. President Sirisena’s challenge is to sustain that ‘authenticity’ over a long period of time. Among the current leaders in Sri Lanka one who has all the credentials and wherewithal to sustain such a trying assignment is Maithripala Sirisena. He would be best advised to maintain that image of ‘authenticity’, for the loss of such would mean loss of trust and confidence the people placed in him when electing him in January 2015.

The balancing act which the President is engaging in so precariously with the ‘old’ SLFP on the one hand and a more forward-looking UNP on the other, must be sapping energy so much, strategic state-craft might be just slipping away into the hands of the officialdom of the day. Therein lies the real problem. The absence of experienced hands at that level is alarming. With all due respect to the current crop of officials at the highest levels, the lethargy and lack of creative and fresh thinking, coupled with the tendency to find shortcuts and pleasing politicians at all costs have characterized their daily chores. That is the legacy left behind by the Rajapaksas and their cronies. Whether President likes it or not, he has to reconcile himself to these cruel realities.

This burdensome task of navigating the ship of state in these turbulent waters is fairly and squarely his and his alone. Even though the powers of Executive Presidency are fundamentally curbed via the Nineteenth Amendment and as the ‘headmaster’ and not the ‘first among equals’ of the state, he still wields a fair amount of clout and if that clout is used decisively and with unmitigated equanimity, the gains are going to outweigh the losses and he could look forward to a worthy legacy to leave behind- one of ‘personification of authenticity’.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 2
    0

    “He would be best advised to maintain that image of ‘authenticity’, for the loss of such would mean loss of trust and confidence the people placed in him when electing him in January 2015.”

    I’m afraid “that image of ‘authenticity’” is fast fading along with the “loss of trust and confidence the people placed in him when electing him in January 2015.”

    Your statement that “simplicity could be a shield, or a false façade against a more complex and sinister character that a leader tries to conceal”, may be a good description of the man!

  • 0
    2

    Special Groups expected MY3 to be their Puppet. It did not work exactly the way they expected.

  • 4
    0

    An interesting analysis. My take is that his persona as a president is yet evolving. He is not a natural leader and is at the present time trying to be all things to all people. We do not know the real President Sirisena yet. The Presidency he has gained is also transitional. It is not what it was originally designed to be nor is it what it was made to be MR. It is in the works to be made a largely ceremonial office. We also do not know what to expect of a presidency in transition that is his now. The media projects him to be the supreme leader which MR tried to be , which he is not. We also expect him to be an all powerful supreme leader, which he cannot be.

    The Prime Minister apparently prefers to stay in the shadows, despite the powers bestowed on him by the 19th amendment, in order to make the UNP – SLFP marriage work until his objectives are achieved. President Sirisena wants to be a man with each leg in a different boat and steers a marriage of convenience. He can be also likened to man bedded with two women and finding it difficult to consummate the marriage with the prettier one, because the uglier one is an impediment!

    It is a difficult period in our history and we are also somewhat lost in terms of the direction we are heading. What many of us expected is not happening fast enough and the path seems more tortuous than we expected. We are neither here nor there. We have had a glimpse of the light at the end of the tunnel, but yet are much closer to the dark end!

    Dr.Rajasingham Narendran

  • 3
    1

    Without complicating matters, let’s have a simple test that anyone can understand.
    Does the person put the interests of himself/family/cronies ahead of the interests of the state?

    MR? – Bad failing cade.

    MS? – inserted son in official UN delegation. Undermines status of Dr. Rohan Perera as a credible ambassador with other ambassadors in the UN. Son put ahead of the interests of the country.
    – other than the dictatorial Belarus guy who took his son, MS made SL a laughing stock by taking his son. Even the worst African dictators haven’t done this.

    – inserted hardly qualified brother to head SL Telecom. State interests of having an efficient CEO put behind family interests.

    So let’s not waste time by whitewashing this crude yokel as some sort of simplistic Gandhi!

  • 2
    0

    Hitler had authenticity and leadership for his followers
    Osama Bin Laden had authenticity or leadership for his followers
    VP had authenticity and leadership for his followers
    Ganasara has authenticity and leadership for his followers
    Mahinda Rajapakse had authenticity leadership for his followers

    but they all failed in the end as they lack the mass appeal or the universal authenticity

    Gandhi by his genuine simplicity mesmerised the whole of India and British rulers.

    Leaving aside the economic issue faced by Sri Lanka, My3 took the platform as the common candidate to unite the country Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim.

    It is not the simplicity that his failing him but lack of will, including the lack of will in the people of the country.

    Where are they when is comes to protesting against BBS
    where are they to stand up and demand a reconciliation accountability process. They are not to be seen. They are invisible

    Sri Lankans are only visible and heard at the cricket matches.

    • 2
      0

      Rajash,

      Thanks for raising the issue of leadership in terms of quality. Pearl S. Buck, the Nobel laureate wrote a wonderful essay on the subject, comparing Adolf Hitler and Mahatma Gandhi, two contemporary leaders, who had mass following. Hitler was elected, while Gandhi was not. Gandhi delivered for India, while Hitler ruined Fermany. The link to Pearl
      Buck’ s essay is below:

      http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/1853

      Dr,RN

      • 0
        0

        DR.R.N Thanks for the link
        very interesting article

  • 0
    0

    I doubt his nack to make good decisions because all I see him doing is deal with minor issues and promote nepotism, corruption etc. Really disappointed with his behaviour. But then again as Sri lankan’s we did something right, we took ginger after giving away mirris.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.