By Krishna Kalaichelvan –
“Until the Day of Judgement, the Augustinian teaching on the two kingdoms will have to face the two fold open question: Quis judicabit? Quis interpretabitur? [‘Who will decide? Who will interpret?’]…This is the big question posed by Thomas Hobbes.” – Carl Schmitt in Political Theology II: The myth of the closure of any political theology.
The recently concluded Northern Provincial Council (NPC) election has elicited a flurry of interpretations and analyses by various observers, in order to find out the ‘truth’ behind the electoral behaviour of Tamil people on the 21st of September. Not surprisingly, many of those interpretations are tinged with the ideology of those interpreters. In this piece of writing, I would like to address two major issues; firstly, the ahistorical reading of the 2013 election results as Tamil people’s “defiance” by denying the fact that the Tamils have always been voting with defiance, since 1950s onwards. Secondly, The Social Architects’ (TSA) ludicrous analysis  of the NPC election must be critiqued in order to address some of TSA’s dangerously misleading interpretations and politically loaded statements.
Understanding the Tamil electoral behaviour
Even a superficial glance would reveal a particular form of Tamil electoral behaviour since 1956 general election: overwhelmingly they have been voting a Tamil political party with a principled message regarding Sinhala – Tamil ethnic conflict. This principled message is not a fixed content since 1956, rather it is identified at every election on the basis of which political party takes a dignified political position – regarding the ethnic question – vis-à-vis other Tamil political party positions.
There is one election that defies this description; it is the general election of 2000. That was the worst Tamil electoral performance in post-independent Sri Lanka; not a single Tamil representative was elected from Trincomalee district, the EPDP topped in Jaffna district and the first time UNP gained a seat in Jaffna district since 1952. This electoral outcome was due to mainly three factors, the TULF’s catastrophic cozying up to the Chandrika Kumaratunga government, during her ‘war for peace’ reign; secondly, after the killing of Kumar Ponnambalam, the ACTC emerged as a significant political force (only in Jaffna) in addition to the existing political parties, hence the Tamil political landscape looked fractured and the Tamil votes were divided among many parties; thirdly, then as a politician Douglas Devananda was allowed to function with more self-respect and dignity than now. It must be noted that these are not equally weighted factors, the first one is more weighted and the third one is least weighted. In fact this electoral disaster triggered the formation of the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) in 2001. (The Federal Party (FP) faced an electoral reversal at the 1970 parliamentary election following its equally disastrous experiment of forming a coalition government with the UNP during 1965 – 1970 period. This reversal was in the form of quality than in quantity; Tamil voters’ rejection of FP stalwarts Amirthalingam and E M V Naganathan was a clear message of refuting that experiment.)
That doesn’t mean Tamil voters had failed to express their position regarding Chandrika Kumaratunga government’s handling of ethnic question. In fact they clearly rejected the government’s approach of ‘war for peace’ at the 1999 presidential election, this time it was the Tamil voters from Vanni and Batticaloa, who disproportionately helped to uphold the notion of Tamil defiance. In the North and East, Chandrika Kumaratunga was ‘defeated’ by Ranil Wickremesinghe by 35,560 votes. Thus the people of Vanni and Batticaloa made sure that the North and East remain a distinct entity in the Sri Lankan electoral map, which is a salient feature since 1956.
The FP was dominating at the elections conducted from 1956 to 1970; the TULF dominated the 1977 general election; the EROS backed independent group dominated the 1989 general election; the TULF dominated the 1994 parliamentary election (That was only in the East, because Jaffna was under the LTTE control, hence the EPDP gained 9 seats with its few thousands votes from Jaffna islets); the TNA dominated the parliamentary elections held in 2001, 2004 and 2010. Therefore this ahistorical analysis that the Tamils have voted defiantly in 2013 is erroneous and reflects the authors’ intention to use the NPC election results for their ideological agenda.
As a corollary of this ahistorical, Tamil defiance argument, we are told that the Tamils’ vote at the NPC election was not for the TNA rather it was a vote for the “Tamil political aspirations”. Everywhere in this world, at elections people choose a political party that reflects their aspirations, that is the very basis of liberal parliamentarism and multi-party elections. Hence this argument is merely a nitpicking exercise, has no analytical relevance.
Therefore we can conclude that the Tamil voters have consistently maintained a political stance with a clear identification of a lowest parameter that is compatible with a dignified Tamil life in the island. On the other hand, one could ask, is there any upper limit to this political stance? Or simply the sky is the limit, as suggested by the LTTE inspired Tamil nationalists. We should look at the 2005 presidential election for the answer.
The LTTE had consistently maintained that any electoral process under the Sri Lankan constitution is not acceptable and Sri Lanka’s electoral process has no relevance to its struggle. This was the stated position up until the 2004 general election, at that election LTTE changed its stance and mobilised its infrastructure to increase the voter turnout and delivered a record high performance for the TNA. This policy shift was largely influenced by the fact that the LTTE needed an electoral legitimacy to ease the international pressure.
“Accepting LTTE’s leadership as the national leadership of the Tamil Eelam Tamils and the Liberation Tigers as the sole and authentic representatives of the Tamil people, let us devote our full cooperation for the ideals of the Liberation Tigers’ struggle with honesty and steadfastness.”
The above-mentioned words of the TNA’s 2004 manifesto amply explain, how badly the LTTE was in need of an electoral legitimacy.
However, at the 2005 presidential election, the LTTE’s tactical usage of 2004 parliamentary electoral process had come back to haunt them, because an overwhelming Tamil voter support for Ranil Wickremesinghe would have been interpreted as a negative verdict on the LTTE’s handling of the Norwegian facilitated peace process. By 2005, the LTTE was backtracking from its 2002 Oslo commitment to “explore a solution founded on the principle of internal self-determination in areas of historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking peoples, based on a federal structure within a united Sri Lanka”,  since an overwhelming Tamil endorsement of Ranil Wickremesinghe would have legitimized the 2003 Oslo Communiqué, the LTTE had no options other than to enforce an election boycott.
There was a far more important interpretation can be made from a putative Tamil endorsement of Ranil Wickremesinghe that the Tamil people do have an upper limit for their political stance; this interpretation will invariably destroy the LTTE’s foundational myth based on the Vaddukoddai Resolution and the 1977 electoral legitimacy. One could justifiably argue that the 1977 popular mandate for the Vaddukoddai Resolution could be interpreted that the Tamil voters didn’t impose an upper limit on Tamil political stance that includes secession. The missing point here is that the Tamils voted at the 1977 general election behind the ‘veil of ignorance’ in Rawlsian sense: Tamil people didn’t know what was waiting for them after the vote. But in 2005, with the experience of two decades of war and destruction and with the understanding of geostrategic deadlock, where nothing could be done beyond India’s wishes, Tamil people were willing to commit and explore a political settlement as per Oslo agreement.
Therefore, it is very clear that the Tamil people have consistently been maintaining a principled moderate position regarding the ethnic question in Sri Lanka. On the 21st of September, they have merely reaffirmed this position with a popular verdict.
TSA’s politically loaded analysis of the NPC election results
In their first analysis, “Tamils take control in provincial election landslide”,  TSA has stated;
“The people of the North have sent a clear message to the UPFA: “No amount of development can equate to living in dignity”…The NPC election results are a big victory for TNA. However, they are also a reflection of how dissatisfied people are with the present administration’s policies – meaning that the outcome of this election is a much a referendum on UPFA as it is an outright victory for TNA. More than four years after the war’s tragic ending, it looks like the Tamil community has voted with both its head and its heart.”
Elections are generally zero sum games, when one party loses the other one wins, elaborating this fact in a convoluted a manner won’t make it an intelligible analysis. It is the responsibility of the analyst to provide a tangible analysis of an election outcome.
What is discernible from TSA’s analysis is that they seem to be hesitant to concede a positive role played by the TNA and its leadership in reviving the democratic praxis at the civic level and culminating into a landslide electoral victory. TSA’s second analysis has taken a very hostile and patronizing tone without any pretense of impartiality, endorsing the views of TNPF and its ‘Tamil civil society’ allies. One could argue that they never claimed of any impartiality, fair enough, but they haven’t explained their mission or vision in a substantial manner. Based on their twitter profile, I would incline to assume that they are not ideologically entrenched in the Sinhala-Tamil conflict. Hence there is a mismatch between the stated objective of TSA and its actions. Even though they claim to provide “thoughtful analysis on Sri Lankan issues”, they didn’t say a word about the elections held on the same day for the Central Provincial Council and the North Western Provincial Council; this informs us that their primary focus is North and East. I am intended to provide further commentary on TSA, therefore I cease the discussion on TSA and move onto the critique of TSA analysis.
In their second analysis, TSA is attempting to trash Niran Anketell’s excellent analysis, which correctly points out that the increased voter turnout has greatly influenced the electoral outcome. In their attempt to find “more nuance” explanation to the NPC elections, they have come to a set of conclusions that doesn’t make any sense. TSA is trying to discredit Anketell’s analysis purely on technical grounds, when describing the voter turnout he explained in percentages not in numbers, by rightly questioning the validity of the stated number of registered voters in Jaffna district from 2009 to 2011, TSA analysis attempts to dismiss the fact that 81,127 more Jaffna voters had decided to cast their ballots on the 21st of September. This margin goes up further when comparing with the 2010 parliamentary election, 116,563 more Jaffna voters had decided to cast their votes at the NPC election. It is well clear Anketell’s argument on voter turnout remains robust, despite TSA’s “further scrutiny” by making an issue on the calculation of voter turnout percentages.
Regrettably for TSA these numbers seem to be negligible, hence TSA makes this preposterous claim, “While TNA has undoubtedly inspired some people to vote for it through political campaigning and messaging”. For TSA, 81,127 extra Jaffna voters who had decided to vote at the NPC election seems to be “some people”, whilst TSA emphasizes;
“Readers should also pay attention to the bulk of people – approximately 10,000 UPFA supporters – who voted for UPFA in both parliamentary and local authorities elections, yet didn’t go to the polls on the 21st of September or voted for TNA. What does that show? It reveals a clear dissatisfaction with the government and their current policies.”
Honestly I am laughing at this statement, since TSA believes that 81,127 Jaffna voters “inspired” by the TNA is not a significant finding, instead TSA is inclined to believe that the desertion of “approximately 10,000 UPFA supporters” at the NPC election is analytically important.
The following is the most amusing part of TSA analysis,
“More importantly, an increase in voter turnout is not the principle reason behind TNA’s recent victory, not even close. What choice did Tamil people have? They didn’t want to vote for UPFA, nor do they consider UNP a viable option. Maybe if TNPF had contested things might have been little different. If EPDP had contested alone, perhaps they would have picked up a couple extra seats.”
By applying TSA’s logic, one could argue that at any election held in any part of the world, voters didn’t have much choice except the parties and groups, which have filed nominations to contest the election. Instead of analyzing the concrete situation of NPC election results, TSA is pondering about the probable electoral outcomes in hypothetical situations; what would have been the outcome, had the TNPF decided to contest the NPC election or had the EPDP decided to contest under Veenai symbol?
In addition to this flawed analysis, TSA commentay is sprinkled with political statements masquerading as analysis. What is concerning me most here is TSA’s judgmental and partisan approach to the TNA affairs. And many of these comments are similar to the views expressed by the TNPF and its ‘Tamil civil society’ allies. Since TSA thinks that it has the political acumen to advise the people like Sampanthan, Senathirajah, Sumanthiran, Suresh Premachandran, Selvam Adaikkalanathan, Sri Kantha, Aanantha Sangaree, Siddharthan, Sivasakthi Aananthan and Selvarasa on Tamil politics, the TNA and its supporters should treat TSA as a political opponent not an impartial actor. I hope TSA learns the ‘nuances’ of Tamil politics before pontificating on what should be done.
*You can follow the writer via his twitter @anapayan
Amma / October 8, 2013
This is my favorite sentence of Mr. Krishna’s article:
Even though they claim to provide “thoughtful analysis on Sri Lankan issues”, they didn’t say a word about the elections held on the same day for the Central Provincial Council and the North Western Provincial Council; this informs us that their primary focus is North and East.
Where would we be without Mr. Krishna and his brilliant analysis?
Saraswathi / October 9, 2013
TSA made some good points on the fact that TNA needs to be INCLUSIVE of women and underrepresented caste groups and not CASTE-IST.
The fact is that the LTTE would not have grown to be the MONSTER that it became if Tamil society and politics was not DEEPLY DIVIDED on caste lines with the elite Tamil political parties being Vellala and dominated by lawyers who had no understanding of social realities and problems and discrimination against lower castes in Tamil society.
IN short, the LTTE fought 2 wars to become the MONSTER that it was – 1. an internal anti-Vellala Caste war and
2. an external war against the Sinhala racists state.
The first CASTE war was a shadow and REPRESSED intra-Tamil community war that was rarely directly discussed by LTTE or Tamil intellectuals who rather made the racist Sinhala state its whipping boy. But CASTE DISCRIMINATION BY TAMILS AGAINST TAMILS is why the LTTE became such an ugly and repressive beast that was INTERNALLY DESTRUCTIVE TO TAMIL SOCIETY and was one of the ROOT CAUSES the 30 year war in Sri Lanka.
Now that TNA is in control of North, the ROOT CAUSES of this shadow intra-Tamil CASTE WAR and its fault lines must be addressed for peace in Tamil society and in Sri Lanka in general to be SUSTAINABLE. It is hence up to the TNA to ensure that it does not revert to being an ELITIST AND CASTE-IST party that is only interested in grandstanding about Tamil rights in Colombo. Space and voice MUST be given to the depressed castes and women and underrepresented groups as TSA tries to point out – albeit without a proper analysis.
Nirosh / October 9, 2013
Gosh, such arrogant writing by Krishna. Krishna seems to think the TNA going about things perfect and that couldn’t do any improvements. I can’t agree with most of Krishna take, but maybe silliest thing about his article is he says he’s deconstructing the politics of The Social Architects.
I’m don’t agree with everything TSA has written, definitely not. But their group has written a lot of writings for maybe two years. Krishna looks very arrogant/narrow-minded to announce he’s deconstructing TSA politics by criticizing two of their article and then writing a short article it.
Jim softy / October 8, 2013
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy
Dinuk / October 8, 2013
Thanks for you analysis here, Krishna!
I quite agree with you critique of the TSA outfit’s dodgy outputs which are pseudo socio-political analysis and really quite TRASHY – shallow, politically motivated and lacking any empirical base..
These TSA guys should study some social theory and methodology before aspiring to be social architects!
They should also read Max Weber’s classic essay “Objectivity in the Social Sciences” and Science as a Vocation”.
Dr Dayan Jayatilleka / October 8, 2013
Man, this guy is really smart.
Don Stanley / October 8, 2013
Good analysis here!
Hope that the disingenuous absentee landlord of Tamil politics, Gajendra Kumar Ponanmbalam and his troop of morons and all those who are protesting oath taking at the Presidents house within the TNA, learns from TNA having turned up its nose at contesting the Eastern province in 2009..
Had the TNA contested in the East back in 2009 and won – so much could have been done for minority rights and devolution – if TNA had actually contested in the east!
Instead the corrupt clowns Piliyan and Karuna filled the void were allowed to run the show in the East all these years with even more corrupt Muslim politicians..
Now TNA must work with non-corrupt Muslims in the east as well and make an an alliance for devolution of power..!
Dr. N. Satchi / October 8, 2013
\\ Since TSA thinks that it has the political acumen to advise the people like Sampanthan, Senathirajah, Sumanthiran, Suresh Premachandran, Selvam Adaikkalanathan, Sri Kantha, Aanantha Sangaree, Siddharthan, Sivasakthi Aananthan and Selvarasa on Tamil politics, //
This is an excellent analysis, but the telling point is what is quoted above and I have met two of them, with a hint of pedigree and a vacations mind with an inherent inability to command a political platform, still want to pray on the emotions of those committed men and women who were wantonly misled. The TNA has a herculean task to keep the flock together and construct bridges that can deliver peace. Let us work on it.
Dr. N. Satchi UK
kali / October 11, 2013
Why dont you offer your services to MR it will be warmly received and your name might also be on his New Years Honours list.
Men & Women who were wantonly misled.
Who are these people please and who misled them to their slaughter house
and the answer might reveal who you really are.
Shanti / October 8, 2013
Re. TSA there is a saying from a poem –
a little knowledge is a dangerous thing,
drink deep or taste not of that pirean spring..”
Social architects need to learn social analysis!
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / October 8, 2013
The best analysis I have read on the recent NPC elections. You have also demolished the rather biased TSA analysis quite brilliantly, while underlining the fact that people vote for the best among those standing in the election. This is a fact and in most instances the choice is not the best of the best, but for the best among the worst. In this instance the voters had a clear choice and the incentive to turn out to vote in large numbers. The four plus years after the war and the degree of societal recovery since, have also paved the way for this vote. This fact also cannot be denied despite the cacophony of those who take perverse joy in denying obvious facts.
You are right when you say that ‘ most Tamils’ have always voted for moderation, However, the vote of ‘most Tamils’ has been always interpreted by ‘other Tamils’ with vested interests as supporting extreme positions on the basis of slogans slipped into mostly unread manifestoes. This is also true of the Sinhala-South.
We have also not heard from the so-called ‘ Civic Society’ group since the NPC pole! I wonder why?
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / October 8, 2013
Correction: Should read Dr.Kalaichelvan.
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / October 8, 2013
The synergy was always there, but was latent. Given the right environment and the right catalysts, it becomes tangible. Such a synergy manifested after the Tsunami and soon after t19th May’ 2009. Unfortunately, these were not nurtured. I told my friends after the Tsunami that an annual Tsunami, will bring all the peoples of Sri Lanka together, as very few other things could!
Dr.Rajasingham Narendran / October 8, 2013
The above comment is related to the post on synergy.
From the Northern Province / October 8, 2013
To me it looks like the person who wrote this article is doing more pontificating that TSA did. This writer seems more concerned with sucking up to TNA and making anyone who criticizes TNA seem like they’re inherently evil, crazy or working with TNPF.
Kalaichelvan can keep his glorification of TNA going, but I’m not sure how many people will take this sort of writing seriously.
kali / October 10, 2013
I didnt want to be too critical about your Article. But when I looked at the following complement by Dayan ( Dr Removed ) ” Man, this guy is really smart.” I had to analyse it critcally because the Dog normally doesnt wag the tail for nothing.
Psephology: The statistical and sociological study of elections.
Deconstructing:To break down into components; dismantle.
1)I would like to address two major issues; firstly, the ahistorical reading of the 2013 election results as Tamil people’s “defiance” by denying the fact that the Tamils have always been voting with defiance, since 1950s onwards.
*** If I pick up the above I am not sure what makes you think the Tamils have been voting in defiance since 1950. At least in the early part what have they been trying to defy. Was it the forec of nature the Gravity.
2)Secondly, The Social Architects’ (TSA) ludicrous analysis  of the NPC election must be critiqued in order to address some of TSA’s dangerously misleading interpretations and politically loaded statements.
*** If I pick you up on the second why was it it politically Loaded. I have read the answers to the following Questions:
a)Can you describe what the root causes of the Sri Lankan civil war were?
b)What are the stumbling blocks for reconciliation in post-war Sri Lanka?What are the stumbling blocks for reconciliation in post-war Sri Lanka?
c)Has the international community done enough to press the issue of resettlement, return and addressing a political solution?
d)Moving forward, what do you wish to see happen in Sri Lanka?
e)Do you envision another bloody civil war down the road?
I have read the answers and they are not ludicurous, misleading or dangerous. That is your version and that suits the Sinhalese agenda and I am not surprised that Dayan has taken a liking to you.
**** I can go on dismantling your Article bit by bit but I DONT WANT TO WASTE my time.
But I want adrdress the following
“In addition to this flawed analysis, TSA commentay is sprinkled with political statements masquerading as analysis. What is concerning me most here is TSA’s judgmental and partisan approach to the TNA affairs.”
TSAs partisan approach of TNA affairs is frankly relecting peoples mood and verdict so please lay off.