By Jude L. Fernando –

Jude L. Fernando

The 2024 Presidential Election in Sri Lanka is not just another ballot; it marks a critical juncture shaping the nation’s future and influencing its political and developmental trajectory. Amidst an existential crisis, Sri Lanka—rich in human and natural resources—faces formidable challenges: starvation, death, and the creeping colonization of its resources under the shadow of eroding sovereignty. The positive gains from social policies, which once earned Sri Lanka a reputation as a successful development model, are rapidly vanishing—arguably beyond recovery—as the country has transformed from a developing nation to a bankrupt one.

Against this dire backdrop, an atmosphere of anxiety, hopelessness, and distrust permeates society. Yet, amidst this uncertainty, a current of unwavering resolve persists among the populace, fueled by the belief in the possibility of positive change. This determination to cast aspirational ballots, a testament to their optimism, underscores the indomitable spirit of Sri Lanka’s citizenry as they bravely face adversity. The context in which we cast our ballots and the choices presented is unlike any previous election; the potential pathways for transformative change that the National People’s Power (NPP) offers have never been more promising, nor have the risks of dire consequences from the wrong choice been more perilous.

A vote for the NPP recognizes a political landscape shaped by the enduring efforts of diverse groups—from students and farmers to teachers and Tamil mothers fighting against disappearances. The NPP has positioned itself within this landscape, reviving the possibilities for these movements to advance, thereby driving transformative change. Its approach to formulating and implementing policies, which fosters a vibrant environment for informed policymaking with robust citizen engagement, is a testament to its commitment to democracy. Such active participation is crucial for an inclusive democracy, offering a unique opportunity to hold the political landscape accountable and create space for meaningful change. The prospects for fostering a proactive citizenry are far greater under the NPP than with its opponents—Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), People’s Alliance (PA), and United National Party (UNP)—which form a de facto alliance committed to preserving the status quo. This unholy alliance perpetuates a legacy of recycling political figures and redistributing them among its members. It is notorious for co-opting, suppressing, and exploiting movements for change, stifling any potential for positive transformation.

During the Aragalaya—an unprecedented uprising in which citizens sought to change the oppressive regime—people demonstrated their ability to challenge entrenched political forces. Despite public opposition, Ranil Wickremesinghe(RW), a figure consistently rejected at the polls and implicated in authoritarian regimes with severe human rights abuse allegations from the 1989 insurgencies and Tamil struggles, maneuvered to usurp power.

The UNP regime laid the foundations for Sinhala and Tamil militancy, orchestrated state violence against ethnic minorities, blamed the opposition for this violence, and employed legal and extrajudicial means to suppress dissent, driving the youth to organize outside the law. The devastating impact of state violence is evident in mass graves, extrajudicial killings, bodies floating in rivers, and pervasive fear. Conversely, the actions of militants, though extensive—some of which were arguably counterproductive to their resistance goals and cannot be condoned—were not caused by the militants alone but by the conditions that shaped their evolution. Promising a genuine path for change means addressing those underlying causes.

Current narratives on the militant legacies of resistance often confuse violence with resistance, misinterpret the contexts in which they emerge, and conflate cause with effect, state abuse of power with societal violence, and societal resistance against such abuse with the means available to them. These narratives are used by an unholy alliance to excuse decades of failure by the ruling classes. As the NPP, which has evolved from the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), poses a formidable challenge, fear-mongering narratives of resistance, especially around elections, are employed by its opponents to justify these failures, suppress opposition, and distract from this significant transformation. The JVP has critically reflected on its past, made a public expression of remorse, and reorganized its political agenda to address the causes of resistance through democratic means, paving the way for transformative change that their opponents are determined to thwart. Focusing solely on the JVP’s past without acknowledging its transformation into the NPP risks misrepresenting and misusing history. Such views fail to recognize the opportunities the present movement offers and will likely serve the interests of the opposition’s unholy alliance.

Since RW’s  rise following the Aragalaya—enabled by the Rajapaksa clan due to his proven ability to keep their regime afloat—we have witnessed relentless suppression of dissent, manipulation of democratic institutions, and the wholesale selling of national assets, all while being subservient to international powers. This epitomizes the very political culture the Aragalaya sought to change. Despite repeated electoral defeats, RW’s continued presence in politics exemplifies a curious case of political masochism, seemingly taking perverse delight in his losses, supported by a cult-like following that paradoxically venerates his persistence. His career, marked not by resilience but by a brazen shamelessness in the face of repeated rejection by the electorate, including his own, shows his willingness to use all dubious means to cling to power. Less a statesman and more a curator of calamities, he eagerly welcomes even the least savory into his fold—a clear case of failing upwards with gusto! This culture of political self-flagellation aligns comfortably with undesirable economic and geopolitical forces and privileged classes, who resist the very notion of change, viewing it as unpalatable and akin to bitter medicine—tolerated only when absolutely necessary, and even then, merely as a deceptive means to restore the status quo.

Lacking empathy for the populace, yet flanked by cult-like followers, RW and his inner circle have mastered the art of deceiving the masses with the supposed success of his policies. These policies, which involve selling off the country’s assets and delaying loan repayments, shifts the burden of his reforms from elites to the masses without improving production bases or altering the entrenched corrupt political culture. RW’s tenure has led to deindustrialization, the exit of companies from the country, the collapse of small businesses and local subsistence systems, a decline in public services, a significant drain of human resources, and rapid dispossession of the nation’s resources, rendering the country increasingly incapable of tackling critical issues.

The NPP aims to engage with the global economy from a position of strength by first improving the local economy, rather than following RW’s approach of weakening the local economy and state powers at the behest of the IMF and other global powers whom he uncritically serves. RW seems to think the best strategy is to tear things down and then promise to magically transform Sri Lanka into another Singapore—a claim no one, not even Singapore, would take seriously! It’s as if he’s betting on a fantasy that only he seems to believe in, showcasing just how out of touch he really is. Such ignorance underlies his narcissism and deception of the electorate. His art of deception has crafted an unchallenged false image of intelligence among his supporters despite his glaring failures and lack of insight into sustainable economic policies. Ironically, he is no different, perhaps even worse, than his predecessor Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who appointed him as President—a truly ‘stellar’ choice.

“Sajith Premadasa, the leader of the SJB, emerges not merely from the flaws of the PA and UNP but is entirely constituted by them. His speeches, often brimming with extravagant self-adulation and revisionist history that suppresses the violent legacy of his father, the late President Ranasinghe Premadasa, inadvertently reveal his lack of depth and public decorum. The elites who support him do not fully accept him into their ‘royal club,’ fostering an inferiority complex that they instill in him. Ironically, rather than embracing his own identity and leading the party with authenticity, Sajith overcompensates by adopting the values and practices of the elite, desperately seeking their approval. This, in turn, makes him a figure of ridicule, further exposing him to manipulation by the very class that will never truly accept him as an equal—because, in truth, they cannot win an election without him and the support of his followers.

This irony deepens in the ranks of the SJB, where a class of individuals, despite their reputation for being uncorrupt, efficient, and pious, align ideologically with the UNP and PA. Yet, they do not challenge the SJB’s practice of embracing undesirable politicians or employing corrupt and deceptive methods to mobilize votes, undermining the ‘puritan’ credentials that purportedly set them apart. They support Sajith Premadasa, driven more by their disillusionment with Ranil’s excessive narcissism and conduct than by any virtue in Sajith himself. Their steadfast support signifies their integration into a political culture entrenched in elitism and resistance to change—a culture that is visibly uncomfortable with the prospect of shifting power. As desperation grows, they even advocate for an alliance between the SJB and the UNP to ‘save’ their interests, masquerading as a move to save the country. Unsurprisingly, they have become complicit with absurd and intellectually dishonest propaganda against the NPP—a truly ‘enlightened’ and morally responsible stance, masquerading as pragmatism with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.

These ‘enlightened’ gentlemen and their elite networks, while ostensibly supporting Sajith as a boon, will perpetuate chaos and instability should the SJB win the election. Their backing, rooted in isolation from the broader masses, hinges on Sajith’s ability to maintain their grip on power. They fear the transfer of control to perceived outsiders like the NPP, whom they cannot manipulate. The irony is stark: those who instilled a sense of inferiority in Sajith are the ones who, feeling socially uncomfortable with the shift in power dynamics, paradoxically ensure his leadership remains bound to and manipulated by traditional power structures. For those outside of RW’s circle and still likely to vote for him regardless of legacy, the situation ludicrously recalls Shakespeare’s insight from The Tempest: ‘Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows.’ In this theater of the absurd, it’s clear that this unholy alliance, while bizarre, is not fated to last—especially if one genuinely engages with the positive transformative possibilities the NPP offers at this juncture.

Opting not to vote for the NPP, or not voting at all, at this critical juncture equates to ignoring the tumultuous histories of the NPP’s opponents and what the NPP offers. Casting a ballot for any entity within the unholy alliance or abstaining altogether implicitly supports the prevailing conditions. Such decisions signify tacit approval of the status quo, showing indifference to the collective aspirations and welfare of the populace, who are ready to support the NPP’s agenda for positive change. A government formed by any member of this unholy alliance will likely drain the nation’s resources further, accelerate the depletion of human and natural assets, erode sovereignty, perpetuate our vulnerability to domestic and international influences, and violently suppress all forms of dissent. These constraints would severely limit the scope for meaningful reforms and potentially lead to a resurgence of political suppression reminiscent of the repressive periods under Presidents JR Jayewardene, Premadasa, and the Rajapaksa regimes. During these historical periods, we have witnessed the rise of resistance by Sinhala and Tamil youth, which morphed into the Aragalaya, powerful enough to depose a populist president with Sinhala Nationalist Patriotic credentials who had access to the security apparatus of the state.

Your decision to support the NPP should go beyond the simplistic, seductive assertions often made by right-wing factions globally that there are no viable alternatives to the status quo. In our case, the claim that the NPP’s promise to combat corruption is sufficient overlooks the substantial role its mission of positive transformation plays. The years of the populace’s struggles—including those of Tamil mothers, teachers, farmers, and various other groups—crystallized in the Aragalaya, fostering conditions for the NPP to evolve as a movement. The NPP and the unholy alliance have evolved in response to these conditions, yet their paths have diverged radically. Despite the complex history of the JVP’s occasional alignments with its adversaries, it has morphed into the NPP, promising to steer the country on a different path toward changing the status quo.

In a notable shift in Sri Lanka’s political landscape, the NPP has emerged as a formidable contender against the ‘unholy alliance,’ a scenario scarcely conceivable a few years ago. The NPP marks a significant milestone in the country’s progressive political narrative, having evolved from intense introspection within the JVP and its relative insularity from the forces that sustained the unholy alliance. This transformation has resonated widely, with the party’s support surging from a modest 3% in previous elections to nearly 50%, according to an average of all polls. The NPP’s support base is broad, diverse, and transnational, including those severely impacted by previous policies that resulted in shortages and exacerbated the debt crisis and individuals seeking substantive, enduring reforms rather than mere short-term fixes. Notably, many supporters are not socialized in the traditional JVP culture; instead, they share a common vision for the future and confidence in the party’s new direction, as the NPP,

The NPP’s policy agenda prioritizes protecting national resources and sovereignty, enhancing local production, and strengthening international negotiations, marking a strategic departure from the status quo. Its policies aim to expand the country’s production base, tackling economic issues like IMF conditions, foreign exchange volatility, and debt challenges, rather than adopting the stopgap and shortsighted measures of the unholy alliance. The NPP’s commitment to transparency, accountability, and inclusive policymaking distinguishes it from traditional approaches, boosting its credibility and potentially enhancing its global bargaining power. With leadership dedicated to integrity and actively distancing itself from the ‘unholy alliance,’ the NPP is not just seeking state power but is shaping Sri Lanka’s path toward a sustainable and inclusive future.

In contrast, the evolutionary trajectories of the SJB, PA, and UNP, which function as a de facto alliance in response to the political spaces created by the people’s struggles for change, seem only to entrench the status quo. These parties consist of individuals redistributed from the same political groups—most obviously from the People’s Alliance, who could later join together and form a single party/coalition to claim the majority in the Parliament under the leadership of Namal Rajapaksa. They represent a cadre of socially undesirable, irascible figures, repeatedly discarded by the electorate, who migrate from one party to another, driven by selfish motives and a desperation to survive. These include politicians who have voluntarily joined or been enticed by promises of lucrative deals and who bear significant responsibility for the country’s predicaments. The de facto alliance relies on outdated ideas, cronyism, and the erosion of sovereignty, perpetuating the corrupt political culture they embody. This is precisely why they resort to deceiving the masses and fail to engage meaningfully with the public or mobilize votes effectively. Expecting meaningful change from them is like expecting a house built on sand to stand firm when the tide comes in—structurally doomed to collapse from within.

The NPP, under wise and moral leadership that has emerged from decades of popular struggles, has skillfully harnessed this momentum to create pathways for positive transformative change. Positioned as perhaps the most capable force to tackle the systemic problems perpetuated by its political adversaries, the party’s effectiveness hinges on its ability to navigate its agenda amid the formidable power of neoliberalism—a system that moves forward, as David Harvey refers to as “accumulation by dispossession,” manifesting in Sri Lanka with its brand of racist nationalist political culture. These realities, which no governing party can avoid, are deepened by the continuing erosion of state autonomy and the depletion of national resources—a legacy of past regimes entrenched in undesirable foreign interests. For the NPP, successfully navigating these challenges will depend on how it negotiates with its adversaries, manages the inevitable dissent and resistance intrinsic to any transformative process, and shapes how Sri Lanka’s political landscape and its capability to address its problems evolves.

The NPP does not represent the ‘end of history,’ as Francis Fukuyama once suggested; instead, it marks a critical phase in the evolution of Sri Lanka’s progressive politics—because, surprise, history didn’t clock out early for a permanent vacation, leaving us with a neatly packaged political landscape. We must view the current movement as another essential phase of transformation, with history unfolding rapidly before our eyes—a moment filled with potential that demands immediate, decisive action. History is not a distant force acting upon us; it lives in the present, shaping our choices and future. If the past has brought us to this current predicament, our selection of the next President is how we choose to respond to the demands of history in the present. At this pivotal moment, it calls for those—skeptical or not—who desire to be on the ‘front lines’ of change with alternative ideas to vote for NPP. Failing to seize this opportunity might doom them to a future of unprecedented suppression of dissent under the unholy alliance. Overcoming this scenario to pursue their noble agendas would entail significant sacrifices—expecting anything less would be akin to hoping for spontaneous applause in a deserted theater.

Arguments against voting for the NPP, citing doubts about its capabilities, should be weighed against the dire outcomes of a government formed by its opponents that they cannot avoid. Claims of the NPP’s inexperience are unfounded, especially when considered against the so-called expertise of these globally connected, English-speaking members of the alliance, whose impressive resumes have led us to the country’s current precarious situation and elevated the NPP to its current prominence.

Fears and uncertainties about the NPP and the change it promises must be judged through an honest examination of its evolution and commitment to positive change, as shown by its vote mobilization strategies, policy documents, and inclusive processes. How we interpret these means reflects our moral and political values, the society we aspire to build, and our willingness to move beyond unfounded propaganda against the NPP. Pessimism about change, not always founded upon careful study of these means in the present context, which prevents voting for the NPP, reflects an unwillingness to seize this moment’s opportunities and a refusal to acknowledge humanity’s ability to transcend its past missteps and wrongdoings.

Deceptive Incentives to Attract Voters

Consider the contrast between the hollow promises routinely made by members of the unholy alliance, and that of the NPP, reinforcing the argument that the alliance cannot break free from the status quo. These promises by the alliance, aimed solely at attracting voters, are notorious for being unfulfilled, leaving the public disillusioned and skeptical. Moreover, these parties often make contradictory pledges, such as promising wage hikes and tax cuts, despite previously opposing wage increases due to fiscal constraints. Such practices highlight their deep entrenchment in a corrupt political system, where tax evasion sustains politicians, making it impossible for them to implement effective tax policies. As elections approach, the alliance speaks against corruption while harboring corrupt politicians and their financial backers.

While the unholy alliance makes grand promises, institutions like the IMF remain silent, knowing that once in power, these parties will likely yield to pressure, raise taxes, transfer the country’s resources to transnational capital, and cut public expenditure. Global institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO were not established to develop the Global South but to ensure it continues serving powerful countries’ economic and political interests in collaboration with their local allies. Debt culture arises in response to the growth needs of these interest groups rather than the developmental needs of these countries, functioning as a mechanism to extend control over the Global South.

While declaring the country bankrupt, these parties paradoxically mobilized millions of rupees for election campaigns, distributed rice packets and alcohol, and even paid for rally attendance to secure votes. These giveaways are often laced with subtle threats or promises. They exploit voters’ fears and suggest that failing to vote a certain way could jeopardize subsidies, pensions, or their children’s job prospects. After the election, the public pays the price, history repeats itself, and they wait for the next cycle, trapped in the same pattern.

Over 5,000 local organizations nationwide, including autonomous women’s groups, voluntarily participate in policy discussions and canvassing for the NPP—a phenomenon not seen in the SJB, PA, or UNP. These parties often rely on a top-down approach, offering contradictory promises and deceptive incentives rather than engaging in positive transformative processes. In stark contrast, the NPP communicates clearly that it does not trade political favors for votes. Instead, it insists that progress must arise from the electorate’s active participation in driving productive economic change—a bold counter to the opposition’s vote-mobilizing tactics.

While other parties engage in election bribes often laced with subtle threats or promises, the NPP focuses on fostering public ownership and responsibility in its campaign—something absent in other parties. The NPP’s voluntary, community-driven approach to mobilizing resources gives its campaign a unique character, creating accountability and a sense of ownership not seen elsewhere. This commitment positions the NPP as a genuine alternative, resonating with voters tired of empty promises and disillusionment while challenging the cycle of deceitful incentives its opponents offer.

Transformative Policies

The NPP’s policymaking process starkly contrasts that of Viyathmaga, which helped elevate Gotabaya Rajapaksa to power. Viyath Maga, a group of intellectuals who celebrated the war’s end without addressing justice, often overlooked the harmful effects of Gotabaya’s policies on vulnerable minorities. While promoting a superficial rhetoric of unity for all Sri Lankans, it masked the racial politics underpinned his power, securing a 2/3 majority for him. Since then, fishermen and farmers in the north and east have continued to suffer from land grabs and the racialization of archaeological history, favoring Sinhala Buddhist narratives under the guise of national security and environmental conservation. Development efforts have largely ignored their struggles, swept away in the euphoria of war victory.

NPP’s policy discussion has shown its commitment to inclusivity and sensitivity to how its policies will impact the country’s ethnic and geographical diversity, laying the foundation for equitable policymaking. Despite efforts to paint Anura Kumara Dissanayake, NPP’s presidential candidate, as a racist—a view amplified by Ranil Wickremesinghe’s demand for an apology to the Tamil community—I believe NPP’s current openness offers a better path for minorities than its opponents. Historical betrayals by previous administrations have understandably left minorities skeptical, a reality the NPP acknowledges with public apologies. The real test of NPP’s demonstrated sincerity must be found in the specific solutions it offers to minorities and its response to the now-dormant racist dissent against them.

Social conditions, particularly after Aragalaya stood against racist nationalism—regardless of whether such rejection was merely instrumental in legitimizing protests against food and gas shortages and the need to overthrow Gotabaya Rajapaksa or, more likely driven by genuine anti-racism—have created a conducive environment for the NPP to carry out its inclusive policies. Time will reveal their outcomes, but the NPP’s current openness offers a promising path for minorities to struggle for their rights, especially those who prefer to remain in or cannot leave the country.

Critical reflections on the failures of the Viyathmaga approach catalyzed the NPP’s unique policymaking process. The NPP’s leadership has prudently mobilized the right people, knowing when to seek advice from relevant experts—like consulting agriculture specialists for organic farming instead of medical doctors. They understand that soil doesn’t turn organic as fast as a soldier can be commanded to shoot, as if a quick ‘left, right, left’ could magically enrich the land. Gotabaya’s rushed attempt to turn the country organic overnight only led to starvation, set off a domino effect of disaster, and, ironically, steered his downfall—paving the way for the rise of the NPP.

The NPP Manifesto is the culmination of nearly 20 sector-specific, geographically integrated policy documents, reflecting years of deliberation and a democratic process that continues to evolve. These documents are not just paperwork but are a testament to the unity between process and output, representing a shift in how policy can drive national development. With a focus on efficiency, equity, sustainability, and ethics, the NPP expands opportunities for equality across racial and geographic lines, underscoring its commitment to inclusivity.

Unlike other parties that rely on consultants or PR firms, the NPP’s policymaking is voluntary, involving ongoing, in-depth discussions. Weekly meetings have brought together interdisciplinary experts, professionals, and citizens from diverse backgrounds for three years, emphasizing ethical considerations and fostering true participatory governance—a clear departure from traditional politics. NPP’s high-ranking politicians were absent from these discussions, underscoring the party’s effort to minimize political interference and empower those knowledgeable about the subject. The finalized policies, presented in transparent ceremonies, were then opened to the public for further deliberation, ensuring ongoing transparency and community involvement in shaping the nation’s future.

The NPP’s open and collaborative approach has successfully engaged expatriates, fostering partnerships with locals and helping to sustainably reverse the brain drain. This method has cultivated a global spirit of collaboration, moving beyond the defensive and xenophobic nationalism that previously hindered cooperation. Unlike the insular approaches of other parties, which remain vulnerable to external exploitation, the NPP’s policies balance avoiding extreme localism and unchecked internationalism, promoting inclusivity across geographic and demographic lines.

For instance, the NPP’s digital policies aim to position Sri Lanka as a leader in the global digital market by enhancing access for all demographics and bridging the rural-urban digital divide. In addition to making Sri Lanka a leader in digital technologies, all local sectors will be digitized and integrated with national systems, and Gramasevakas, healthcare workers, and teachers will receive training under these initiatives, ensuring efficient access to essential services like ID cards, passports, and bill payments. These programs aim to promote equity while saving time and money for everyone, including those without internet access, and reducing costs and waste. The development of applications and technologies across sectors aims to increase production and provide freedom from exploitative labor conditions. Furthermore, the NPP’s digital policies will empower local economies by fostering innovation, increasing job opportunities, and improving overall efficiency.

The NPP’s aspirational governance model promises to empower experts and the public in policy implementation, insulating them from undesirable political influences while maintaining accountability. It invites the public to act as watchdogs over these promises and to demand necessary changes. This collaboration between the government and the people is something the unholy alliance—a political force that has eroded our political landscape for decades—can never offer. The NPP’s approach is not about making empty promises of pay hikes to government workers, as other parties have done, yet are known not to fulfill them, or cutting back the state sector solely in response to the demands of international agencies, which would harm the economy and the well-being of the people. Instead, the NPP emphasizes reforms that follow a different logic and strategy based on inclusion, social equity, and positive transformative change.

By voting for the NPP, you’re not just choosing a party but endorsing a movement for change created by the people’s struggles. In this election, let’s choose a path that empowers people beyond the confines of Diyawannawa, where power is typically imposed on them. VOTE NPP