Abstract
Sri Lanka is going through a 'transitionary' phase in terms of negotiations for the rights of Tamil people. Despite the rosy picture painted by the previous government, the country's economy is badly battered. The US-British led 'anti-terrorist' campaign and international pressure have precipitated a truce between the government and the LTTE and preparations for peace talks. The government is attempting to revive the economy by inviting investments and by more privatisations. The PA is vacillating on the truce and opposes lifting the LTTE ban. The JVP has not only taken an extreme Sinhala nationalist line but has deviated from its left policy platform. It has renounced the right to self-determination of peoples as obsolete, praised the continuation of operations of the security forces in the north-east, opposed the lifting of ban on the LTTE, advocated its extermination and developed a close working relationship with Sinhala nationalist groups. The NSSP and other left groupings are supportive of the cease-fire though certain reservations have been expressed. The traditional left (LSSP and CP) has taken a cautious approach towards the truce. Would the current truce lead to a period of conflict transformation in the minds of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims, thus bringing back the emphasis on real economic issues that are devastating all Sri Lankan working people?
Sri Lanka: Neo-liberalism, National Question (the
Tamil struggle) and
The Realignment of Politics
Lionel Bopage
Introduction
Today, the economic crisis and the national question are the key issues affecting Sri Lanka. The failure to resolve the national question has led to an escalation of violence and terror in all parts of the island over the past two decades. In a way, these problems are not mutually exclusive. The situation has been further aggravated by the growing influence of capitalist globalisation, which is based on the ideology of neo-liberalism, the universalisation of capitalism with prescriptions of the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). All these factors have had profound impact on the current political dynamics of Sri Lanka. Given that, how can the people of Sri Lanka confront the economic crisis, national question and terror? First I will explain how the international situation has influenced the crisis of Sri Lanka.
In early 1980s, with Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Helmut Kohl leading the capitalist world, there was growing consensus that free trade, free investment, deregulation, and privatization marked the best route to economic growth. At that time, most developing countries favoured a stronger role played by the national state. These countries were wary of the disadvantageous consequences that unfettered markets in a world of unequal nations could generate. Yet, by late 1970s, due to rapidly rising external debts to banks of the developed world, many developing countries lost control over their economic destiny[1].
The USA, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, and other advanced capitalist countries pressed developing countries into the free market paradigm[2]. The IMF became the global police officer enforcing free market policies and the WB imposed structural reforms through its new policy-oriented structural adjustment loans. As a result, the 1990 decade witnessed most developing countries liberalising their trade and investment policies. The weakening of socialist camp and the incapability of the opportunistic left further allowed this process to gather momentum. A large land-mass of the world thus came under the tentacles of capitalist globalisation.
The United States has emphasised on its neo-liberalist agenda by reiterating that the string attached for providing foreign aid to developing countries is their commitment to free trade, political liberty and human rights. The same United States recently imposed tariff against steel imports, thus violating the free trade principles they themselves preach that the developing world should follow. In the past the US has used conspiratorial strategies, coup d’etats and counter-revolutionary measures to defend neo-liberalist agenda. Utilising nationalism of peoples whose national aspirations have not been realised to the advantage the neo-liberalist forces spread dissent in any country that does not come within their fold. Unrealised national aspirations were utilised to foment separatist tendencies and the ultimate destruction of the former socialist camp. It was a great shortcoming on the part of the socialist camp that it did not sufficiently address the problems associated with unrealised national aspirations of the peoples of their countries.
Sri Lanka commenced its first loan assistance deals with the World Bank after the Korean War, in the 1950s. From mid 1950s to late 1977, state capitalism was gradually consolidated and expanded[3]. Many state industries set up with the assistance of the socialist camp became its industrial base. At the same time corruption, red tape, scarcity of commodities and black markets became endemic. Provision of official language status to Sinhala only, special status to Buddhism only and introduction of standardisation of university entrance, political cronyism, nepotism, chit system (instead of merit) for recruiting employees and other discriminatory practices also took place during the same period. In fact, socialism became a detested word in Sri Lanka. This was an ideal situation for introducing neo-liberalist agenda.
Open economy and trade liberalisation was introduced in Sri Lanka in 1977. For ruling classes in backward capitalist countries, which had gone from crisis to crisis, neo-liberalism became a ‘mantra’ for curing all socio-economic ills. Introducing neo-liberalism required curtailing democratic rights of people. Apologists of "open economy and free trade" advocated that consumers and workers everywhere would gain from liberalization of trade and investment because it will unite all people through economic, technological, cultural and political ties. On the contrary, global capitalism has debased everything in Sri Lanka to a commodity and every human relationship to a market relationship.
The policies of neo-liberalism implemented elsewhere in the world are the same. Instructions of the US-led global financial controllers to all developing countries are very clear:
- privatise state assets;
- do not regulate financial institutions;
- no controls on capital flows across borders;
- float currency exchange rates;
- weaken laws relating to labour rights or environmental standards;
- cut down welfare spending;
- cut taxes on private enterprise and the super-rich; and
- no pensions and superannuation to the workers and
- establish user pay models for all services.
What this analysis indicates is that neo-liberalism means nothing else but opening up the whole world for the monopoly capital of Trans National Corporations (TNCs), free of any barrier. When rates of return fluctuate foreign investment capital should be able to be freely moved in or out of any country at the wish of its owners.
Effects of economic crisis and neo-liberalism In Sri Lanka
1977 - 1994
The UNP government in 1977 laid foundation for open economy with the promise of delivering economic prosperity and higher living standards through the establishment of “Dharmista” (fair, just and tolerant) society. Sri Lanka has enjoyed so-called fruits of open economy based on neo-liberalism for the past 25 years. The gap between the rich and the poor in Sri Lanka has widened significantly during this period. The WB and IMF have taken over almost total financial control of the island. With the superimposition of capitalism on the island’s economy, especially after the introduction of neo-liberalist structural reforms in 1977, the collective value system which had been based on the Asiatic mode of production has broken down replacing it with ‘competition’ amongst each other for income generation and consumption.
In 1978, the government replaced the existing constitution with another unitary form of constitution, further entrenching discriminatory practices and paving the way for executive presidency. The Parliament became a secondary institution. The pro-government trade union confederation (the Jathika Sevaka Sangamaya - JSS) was made the most powerful trade union. Labour laws of the country did not apply to the newly established two special economic zones (free trade zones). Investments in free trade zones were provided with extraordinary tax concessions and benefits. With the establishment of Board of Investment (BOI) the whole island fell into the clutches of neo-liberalism.
Sri Lankan Rupee, floated against the US Dollar became devalued by 46%. Complete politicisation of all government institutions began[4]. Introduction of repressive legislation (eg. Prevention of Terrorism Act and Freedom from Responsibility Act) was instrumental for the security of open economy and the creation of right-wing para-military forces. Massive borrowing was made to establish infrastructure required for foreign investments. For example, the Mahaweli scheme, a 30 year plan for agricultural development was transformed into an electricity supply scheme and completed within 6 years with massive loan assistance. With the increase of land ownership ceiling to 100 acres, there were large scale of sale of estate plantation lands and privatisation of state enterprises at marginal prices[5]. The plantation economy, the major foreign exchange revenue source of the 1950s, was out-staged by an economy based on tourism, foreign employment and garment industry. By early 1990s neo-liberalism had firmly established its roots in Sri Lanka.
1994-2002
The Peoples Alliance (PA) government of 1994 which pledged a “humane” but free economy continued along the same path till December 2001. Between 1994 and year 2000, 41 enterprises including SL Telecom and Air Lanka were privatised. As a result the private sector component of industry has grown to 94% while the state sector diminished to 6%.
During the year 2000, diesel price was increased by 108%, following IMF instructions to float the fuel price. Cost of Living Index went up from 2829.2 in April 2001 to 2912.7 by June 2001. During the same period rate of inflation went up from 10.3% to 11.5%. As a result remaining local industrial and agricultural production heavily suffered. In the year 2000 alone about 350 businesses had to close down. The Sri Lankan government signed a loan agreement for USD 253m with the IMF to keep up foreign exchange reserve levels and in turn agreed to re-structure and privatise banking, postal, electricity, water distribution, railway and insurance services. In addition, to be implemented were a user-pay system for education, health and water and a sale of the irrigation system, agricultural land and rain forests.
The current UNF government, which was elected last December, has pledged to continue along the path of capitalist liberalisation. In its year 2002 budget, the new government has pledged to liberalise importation and distribution of petroleum thus inviting multinational petroleum companies to re-invest in Sri Lanka. Introduction of Value Added Tax incorporating GST and National Security Levy (NSL) would lead to price increases of all the essential commodities. Almost all hydroelectric power generation projects are to be privatised and with it perhaps associated catchment reservoirs. Such a privatisation may also lead to water "management" as recommended by the IMF. The budget has increased the tax burden on the working people and the unemployed while providing tax concessions to the business community.
The situation with regard to agriculture is even worse. The WB has advised that the production of rice is inefficient and consumes more water and has recommended instead introduction of export cash crops which need less water[6]. This process has converted peasants in several districts into slaves of TNCs. Due to strong opposition of peasants, TNCs are planning to fully appropriate land and water reservoirs. And in pipeline is a user pay system for consumption of water. State owned agricultural research institutions have been privatised. The process of liberalisation of agriculture will be complete with the monopolisation of land, potable water, propagation seeds, agro-research and agro-chemicals industry. Central Bank reports indicate drastic reductions in agricultural production. American and Japanese companies have already usurped patent rights for some local plant varieties.
The peasant community in Sri Lanka, which constitutes 72 percent of the population, has been neglected. Price of rice has risen to Rs 35 per kilo but a peasant gets only Rs 3.50. Nearly 80 per cent of the peasants are recipients of the Poverty Alleviation Program. Since the introduction of the free economy in the 70s, main foreign exchange earnings to the country have been from the garment industry making value-added products and the house-maid labour market in the Middle East. There is no doubt about the tremendous contributions to the economy made by the garment industry workers and Middle-Eastern housemaids under very difficult working conditions. These garment factories could be closed down when the capital investments are withdrawn to a country with better exploitative arrangements and the labour market in the Middle East can shrink. However, the peasants of Sri Lanka do not receive the emphasis and the attention received by the garment industry and housemaid market.
On the positive side, free trade has increased the participation of female labour force in wage-labour, however, this phenomenon has not improved the socio-economic status of women but relegated women to low-paid employment. In general, many rural women leave for Middle-Eastern countries as housemaids who in turn face sexual harassment and violence.
Neo-liberalist capitalism created an unsustainable but substantially imaginary wealth through speculation. The grip of the IMF, World Bank and the WTO over the developing countries has tightened more than ever. By manipulating currency exchange rates open economy has made it impossible for local business to compete with TNCs. Sri Lanka's currency is been annually devalued, with the explanation that focal new export industries need support through the realignment of currency exchange rate. The U.S. dollar which was exchanged at Rs 3.50 in 1950 is now exchanged at close to Rs100.00. Business in Sri Lanka began to sputter and slip and needed more loans. Obviously to pay interest on loans more borrowing is needed[7].
On a global scale markets of developing countries have become open to developed countries but not vice versa. While distributing world-wide the achievements of information revolution, science and technology, advanced production techniques and modern management tools capitalist globalisation will strengthen economic development world-wide, it was said. But in reality what we have ended up with is the globalisation of poverty, unemployment, indebtedness, diseases, malnutrition, hunger, militarisation and terror.
Implementation of neo-liberal policies in Sri Lanka have:
- aggravated major problems such as poverty, unemployment, hunger, suicide, disease and lack of medical facilities;
- increased illiteracy levels, lack of appropriate educational and training facilities, exploitation of children through child labour, prostitution; consumption of drugs and alcohol, money laundering;
- caused the lack of drinking water, the scarcity of housing, power and communications facilities; and
- precipitated the intensification of the national question.
Liberalisation policies also have negatively impacted on the aspirations of all peoples for sustainable development. These policies have caused merciless destruction of the environment, nature and the social fabric. For example:
- war, deforestation, soil and sea erosion, and pollution of water and the atmosphere;
- extinction of local flora and fauna including traditional plants and medicinal herbs; and
- plagues such as malaria, dengue fever and AIDS,
Capitalism in its neo-liberal phase has more than demonstrated its incapability of solving basic problems of the people. In its aggressive search for massive profits, capitalism is dehumanising the global civilisation and continues to destroy the ecological balance. The information revolution and other scientific and technological achievements sufficient for providing decent living standards for the entire world population have been used to strengthen the grip of capitalism over the developing world. The consequence of the neo-liberal offensive has been a ferocious intensification of the exploitation of working people of Sri Lanka. Unemployment rate and the gap between the rich and the poor have been on the increase. The working people are subject to growing unemployment, social alienation, deprivation and rapidly declining living standards.
The terror attacks on the USA on September 11 2001 and the war launched by the US led imperialistic forces have farreaching implications. While US imperialism is seeking to utilise the situation to further strengthen its neo-liberalist agenda, right wing chauvinist forces in Sri Lanka have attempted to use it to suppress dissent against family bandyism, nepotism, war, corruption and wastage that doomed Sri Lanka to negative growth last year. In particular, the economy severely suffered, after the attack on the Katunayake airport in July 2001. Neo-liberal forces are capitalising on this situation imposing conditions to intensify their exploitation which would further erode the sovereignty, independence and unity of Sri Lanka.
Neo-liberal forces under the US leadership are seeking to create a divide in the world between those countries who support its so-called war against terrorism and all others. It links all aspects of globalisation with the fight against terrorism. Repressive laws are enacted both internationally and within individual countries to suppress dissent and opposition to imperialism. Possibility of using the strategically important Trincomalee harbour, in the north-east of Sri Lanka, with its oil tank facilities as a US naval base is considered in this light. The US Assistant Secretary of State, Christina Rocca has mentioned that the current cease-fire agreement between the government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE would help speeding up privatisation and bringing more foreign investment into Sri Lanka.
United Nations studies indicate that the implementation of neo-liberalist agenda has mostly accompanied with growing inequality.[8]. Growing inequality is a direct consequence of the widening power gap between neo-liberalist institutions and the working people. The growing imbalance is also a reflection of the ability of the neo-liberalist institutions to threaten and shift operations in Sri Lanka to locations with lower wages and/or environmental standards such as Kampuchea and Vietnam. This threat has allowed these institutions to bargain down wages and working conditions, thus exacerbating income inequality. The emphasis on exports oriented economy has in practice translated into deforestation, overfishing, depletion of precious stones and artefacts and excessive use of agrochemicals. The long-term cost of this devastation is not considered when discussing successes of liberalisation. Next generations will have to deal with soil and sea erosion, depleted fishing banks, and increasingly unproductive soil due to accelerated plunder of Sri Lanka's natural resources.
National Question
Prior to European colonisation, Sri Lanka had a number of decentralised kingdoms. With the superimposition of capitalism, British colonialists imposed on the island a centralised administration with English as the administrative language. Pro-colonial, English speaking natives of all nationalities became part of the administration who after 1948 became the ruling capitalist class of Sri Lanka. Because of the staunch anti-colonial resistance of the Sinhalese, the British imported plantation labour from India. Sinhala speaking Buddhists and Tamil speaking Hindus were disempowered. Sinhala and Tamil national aspirations grew with time overlapping with the growing anti-colonial forces.
Since 1948 Sri Lanka has remained a British dominion with a unitary centralised constitution imposed on all its nationalities. National aspirations of Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims continued to be kept unrealised since 1948 and this led to the growth of extreme forms of nationalism. Without addressing the issues of national aspirations, capitalist governments made use of these issues to divert attention of the peoples from burning economic issues. Repression was increasingly used against any dissent.
When people are oppressed socially, economically or politically, it is quite natural for them to react against the oppression demanding solutions to their issues. When governments adhere to a policy of taking repressive measures, it is tantamount to taking away their democratic and human rights of its own peoples. Socio-economic crisis thus grows into a political crisis. There are many instances where socio-economic crises in Sri Lanka did grow into political crises. Governments made use of such situations to furthermore usurp peoples' rights. Conflicts have been used to earn profits from arms and logistics purchases. Sri Lanka lost its many bourgeois democratic characteristics with the introduction of the Executive Presidential System, Prevention of Terrorism Act, Emergency Laws, Freedom from Responsibility Act, politicisation of the Judiciary, mechanisms for election malpractices and conspiracies to repress dissent and peoples’ movements.
Increasing discriminatory practices [9] led the Tamil struggle through several phases signified by demands for addressing grievances, equality, federalism and separation. Unrealised national aspirations of Tamils gradually led to the current conflict. The previous People’s Alliance (PA) government came to power in 1994 promising peace through negotiations with the LTTE. After the failure of talks the government launched a so-called war for peace which included terrorising Tamil people. The security forces and its para-military groups, the LTTE and anti-LTTE militant groups used terror tactics to gain upper hand. This situation led to unimaginable hardships to all peoples of Sri Lanka, in particular, Tamil people of the North and East. Displaced people in millions, long term economic embargo on the North and East, lack of medical facilities, permission to travel between the government administered and the LTTE administered areas and so on. This war was unwinnable by either side.
The effects of war have badly traumatised the whole society. What the society has witnessed are massive crimes, mass killings, illegal businesses, underground death squads, suicides, drug abuse and rape of women. The "war for peace" added up extensive misery to the lives of people in war zones, millions of displaced people, devastation of property and families of combatants and generated extensive corruption, use of deserters for political reprisals. The brutal use of military might in the war has subjected women and children to unmitigated human rights abuses, sexual slavery and prostitution. Women and children fleeing from the ravages of war, compelled by economic dislocation and repressive armed groups have fallen prey to many abuses. More than 60,000 people of all communities have been sacrificed to maintain the war for recapturing the land held by the LTTE. While all forms of terror used by the parties to the conflict have to be unreservedly condemned, whipping up war hysteria as has been done many a time during the last 20 years has not assisted finding solutions to the causes of the war.
In December 2001 the UNF government came to power, promising peace through negotiations with the LTTE. The US-British led 'anti-terror' terror campaign and international pressure have precipitated a truce between the government and the LTTE. The truce negotiated with the Norwegian assistance has kindled fresh hopes that negotiations for the settlement of the conflict would commence soon. The JVP and Sinhala extremist groups continue to agitate demanding total military elimination of the LTTE. Truce is still holding, in spite of the protests of the JVP and the Sinhala nationalist groups against the truce and against peaceful negotiations with the LTTE. The results of the local government elections held on 20 March, which were mainly fought on the issue of negotiations with the LTTE, have overwhelmingly approved the peace process. The vote bank of the JVP has come down from about 10% to 6%. It remains to be seen whether or not the government and the LTTE will have the wisdom and determination to come to a deal that would satisfy aspirations of peoples of Sri Lanka in general and peoples of the North-East in particular.
Promotion of an exclusive Sinhala and Tamil nationalist consciousness since 1948 is the basis of the war in Sri Lanka. Without assuring the Tamil people of recognising their identity and fulfilment of their democratic aspirations within a united Sri Lanka, the separatist and fundamentalist forces cannot be countered. The two regions, Sinhala and Tamil should be provided with regional autonomy within a composite Sri Lankan state with equitable distribution of resources. Instead of opposing negotiations for such redistribution of power and resources, all progressive forces should demand provision of maximum autonomy to the peoples of the North and East. Irrespective of whatever other measures taken, the quest of the Tamil people for a distinctive identity in an environment where they can live with dignity and honour continues. Their national aspirations can only be addressed by accepting their right to self-determination. If the current truce leads to a period of conflict transformation in the minds of all people including Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims, it may bring back the focus of working people on real neo-liberal economic issues.
Realignment of Politics and Situation of the Left
Growing numbers have challenged the assertions of neo-liberalism but from quite diverse vantagepoints. Being supportive of neo-liberalist agenda all bourgeois parties have in fact implemented neo-liberalist policies imposed by the WB, IMF and the WTO. The LTTE’s viewpoint with regard to neo-liberalism is not very clear, but the general feeling is that they will unhesitatingly follow the neo-liberalist agenda. The Tamil National Alliance, though not currently in the government, is a bourgeois alignment and will willingly follow the dictates of neo-liberalist agenda. Leading Muslim organisations also have similar characteristics. The capitalist class has become aware that the Tamil national militancy is leading the capitalist social equilibrium into a crisis. Therefore to avoid an explosive social situation due to continuously growing system instability the capitalist class also had only one alternative to choose, ie, to declare at least a temporary truce.
The Sinhala nationalist movement with its ideology based on 'Jathika Chinthanaya' of the 1980s is a manifestation of political and cultural response to contemporary globalisation of the local capitalist class. Main characteristics of this movement were its emphasis on anti-modernism, mistrust of everything "western", fervent "Sinhala-Buddhist" nationalism and anti-Tamil and Muslim militancy that follow with it. In summary, "Jathika Chinthanaya" has become a Sri Lankan variety of National Socialism. They are completely against the truce and any peaceful negotiations with the LTTE.
To different extents the traditional left parties have been collaborative with the governments of the day in their efforts to liberalise the economy but have taken a cautious approach towards the truce. In contrast, the New Left Front including the NSSP, the Democratic Left Alliance, the United Socialist Party and other left groups are supportive of the cease-fire with certain expressed reservations. Generally, they are against the neo-liberal agenda but do so with different interpretations of capitalist globalisation.
The JVP, which opposed neo-liberalist agenda in August 2001, has apparently adopted a new policy at its October 2001 party congress. Its policy is stated as follows: "We shall adhere to a foreign policy aimed at creating and developing of globalisation and a new world order that ensures social justice, equality, democracy and environment protection." This policy has to be understood in the broader context of the JVP policy platform which states that the JVP shall absorb what is best from the East, West and North, South and discard the garbage. Accordingly, we shall learn good deeds from China, India, United States of America, Malaysia and Europe. We shall learn from China about economic reforms and about how China became the world fastest growing economy by increasing investments nationally and internationally. From the United States, we will learn how the rule of law and accountability can be applied to investments so that corruption can be eliminated. We shall learn from India and the United States America, how the elected representatives be Responsible and accountable to the people. I do not need to further elaborate.
The JVP agitates claiming that Sri Lanka's territorial integrity, unitary state, national independence and sovereignty are in grave danger. They want to defeat separatism and stop division of the country militarily and ideologically. They oppose negotiations with separatist organisations unless they drop the demand for separation and become unarmed, politically equivalent to a complete surrender of the LTTE. They praise the terror campaigns conducted by the security forces as patriotic and emphasise that there are favourable conditions worldwide to eradicate terrorism. What is implied is that Sri Lankan government should invite US-led terror coalition to eradicate the LTTE. While rejecting any racism or communalism and guaranteeing equality and democracy to all, the JVP opposes in the same vein any decentralisation of power. Rejecting "right to self-determination" as an invalid principle for the world today they claim that after the 1917 Russian revolution, even Lenin discarded this concept. Worst is their statement that there was and is no ethnic problem in Sri Lanka!!
The JVP's negation of the principle of right to self-determination is of concern to the progressive forces. When coupled with their policy assertions it could be concluded that the JVP has altogether moved away from the left policy platform. Looking at the Soviet Constitutions during the time of Lenin and afterwards is more than sufficient to remind and convince anybody that the right of self-determination was and is a living principle practised universally. What currently happens in the world objectively supports the assertion that right to self-determination is alive and well. Rejection of the right to self-determination is strongly compatible with the agenda of Neo-liberalism and National Socialism.
For contemporary economic and political requirements, neo-liberalists are preparing plans and designs for exploiting valuable natural and human resources of Sri Lanka. There are valuable assets such as marine resources, forests, water and Trincomalee harbour with its oil tank facilities. However, neo-liberalists will have easy access to these resources if invited to militarily interfere in the domestic conflict. Isn’t this what the JVP is inviting for? Who are helping neo-liberalist forces in these circumstances? They are the warmongers of Sinhala chauvinism, including the JVP, who invite US military interference and oppose a fair and just solution to the national question of Sri Lanka based upon the recognition of peoples’ right to determine their own political destiny thus allowing all peoples to live in dignity and peace.
Conclusion
Capitalist globalisation is a response to the crisis of capitalism and an attempt to curtail peoples’ rights. Progressive forces need not look at international trade as an anathema and advocate economic protectionism. The issues that should be looked at are the power of capital dictating the price of labour and the erosion of democratic and human rights of the working people. Countering neo-liberalist agenda needs the collaboration of workers, peasants, consumers, environmentalists and all those who are oppressed by that agenda.
Since 1948 the bourgeois governments of Sri Lanka have made a continuous assault on the secular principle of the State. Sinhala Buddhist nationalism has increasingly penetrated the Constitution and State apparatus. Since 1977 the same governments have had an accelerated pursuit of the economic policies of liberalisation and privatisation, which has increased exploitation of the people and social inequalities. These governments followed a foreign policy directed at making Sri Lanka an appendage of the neo-liberalist forces and curtailed democratic and human rights of all peoples. Sri Lanka is no more an independent, sovereign and united nation. It is no more independent because it has been made a slave of the neo-liberalist agenda. It is not sovereign because socio-economic and political decisions are imposed on its people from without. It is not united because in reality and in concrete terms it is divided into two separate territories: viz. government administered and LTTE administered.
With fresh negotiations to address the aspirations of Tamil people imminent, a new agenda of pushing forward neo-liberalism will arise. Progressive and democratic forces will have to rally together to counter this fresh wave of neo-liberalist agenda. Any counter-agenda to make Sri Lanka an independent, sovereign and united country has to put forward a socio-economic and political program and policy framework which would develop mechanisms to educate, organise and lead peoples away from the neo-liberalist agenda. This counter-agenda should advocate decentralisation of economic and political power and sharing of resources equitably.
The problem of the left forces is that their sectarian positions have led them to political passivity. Some left ideologues state that there is no alternative to neo-liberal globalisation[10]. If left forces fatalistically accept that there is no alternative to neo-liberal globalisation then there will be disempowering political consequences to the left. The TNCs playing one country against another by threatening to move investment capital will not be as successful or as easy as they state. Investment capital may relocate in labour-intensive industries such as the garment industry, but in capital-intensive industries, such decision-making will not be easy[11]. Neo-liberalist globalisation has to be seen as the continuous struggle between capital and labour and its current phase as a response to the end of the post-war economic boom.
Neo-liberalist globalisation has become the main challenge and threat to the socialist movement and the sovereignty of small nations like Sri Lanka. It is making social protest and rebellion a criminal offence and can be tried with anti-terrorism laws. Sri Lankan left needs to unite all those who are adversely affected by neo-liberal agenda under one banner, i.e., ‘people before profits’. The left has to continue to lead and support national liberation movements and democracy not only in Sri Lanka but throughout the world. The left in Sri Lanka need to initiate a process to include diverse progressive views into a coherent strategy and a minimum program of social change. The important task of the left is to continuously develop dynamic, living alternative systems to existing global neo-liberalist system. The dominant forces in Sri Lankan society will determine the direction of change to take, ie, towards socialist globalisation, which will control foreign capital investments for the benefit of people, define alternate processes that are sustainable economically, socially and ecologically and lead to a social system embodying the characteristics of peoples' control, participation and ownership.
[1] Because of historically high interest rates and high oil prices.
[2] A condition for providing new loans and ensuring continuous payment of previous debts.
[3] Traditional left interpreted all activities of state capitalism as socialist policies of nationalisation.
[4] This included top brass of the security forces, the judiciary and the Attorney General’s department.
[5] By 1998 about eighty state industries and service enterprises had been privatised for an income of Rs 49,213.5m to the state.
[6] Crops such as tobacco, gherkin, baby corn, sugarcane.
[7] World Bank and the IMF have provided loan assistance to Sri Lanka, of course, with free economic advice, which has led the country to depend on further and further borrowing, not to maintain the economy but for servicing current debts. Agreement Article 8 of Sri Lanka with the IMF, and recent loan agreement for USD 253m are examples for this situation. By year 2000 unpaid state loans amounted to 97.1% (Rs 1,218,700m) of the gross domestic product (In year 1975 it was only 54.8%). However, recommendations are still to increase prices of commodities, take away all subsidies, increase taxes, sell state enterprises and expand the private sector.
[8] In 1981, the Third World's foreign debt servicing absorbed US$ 44.2 billion; by 2000 the figure had climbed to US$347.4 billion; The number of undernourished people rose from 570 million in 1981 to 800 million in 2000; In 1960 the income of the wealthiest 20% was 30 times that of the poorest 20% of the world’s population; by 1997 that gap had widened 74 times; At the end of the 1990s there were 1.3 billion people, one out of every three, living in poverty in the developing world. The World Bank's latest report on poverty predicts that this figure could climb to 1.5 billion by the end of year 2001; The global income share of the countries that now constitute the developing world has diminished to 15% of world income from 59% that was 150 years ago.
[9] Practices such as disenfranchisement of Indian Tamil workers, language issues of 1950s and associated repressive measures against Tamils, unilateral abolition of Bandaranaike – Chelvanayagam and Dudley – Chelvanayagam pacts (The JVP states that these pacts were signed not to address the aspirations of the Tamil people at the time but for bourgeois parties to get the support of Tamil leaders to form governments!), standardisation of university entrance, colonisation schemes, provision of special status in the constitutions, enactment of new repressive legislation.
[10] Probably borrowing Margaret Thatcher's famous TINA principle.
[11] This decision-making process involves wide range of factors such as skills base, proximity to market and production synergies.
No comments:
Post a Comment