The dilemma of independence

February 3, 2002
Publication:
More than five decades have passed since independence, and the fifty-fourth anniversary has to be marked with sadness rather than pleasure. What the country has done with its freedom, measured against the neighbours who started level with it, is the subject.

More than five decades have passed since independence, but we have to commemorate the 54th anniversary not with pleasure but with sadness.

Most countries shed blood to win freedom. This gives an added value and meaning to the word, and a set of social attitudes and a political system that enable people to live without shedding blood. However, Sri Lanka gained its independence without shedding a drop of blood and we have been unable to evolve social attitudes in a political system required for the completion of that independence. As a result we have become a country of unending bloodshed.

From the British we also received the constitution. Although the constitution contains extremely modern ideas that a constitution should contain what it did not include was a framework that would bring together divided ethnic communities. The first framework of the Indian constitution was brought into existence in prison. It was made considering other modern constitutions and problems that could arise in the future. India proceeds with that constitution. However, we have not only abandoned the Soulbury Constitution but have also abolished the republican constitution of 1972 framed by Colvin R. de Silva and now we have come to a position in which we are thinking of yet another constitution. As a country we are still moving in the dark.

At the time of independence Sri Lanka was ahead of all other countries in south Asia. However, now we are far behind all those countries.

Sri Lanka’s per capita annual income for the year 2001 was 2,500 dollars. In Singapore it was 26,300 dollars. In Thailand it was 16,500 dollars. In Malaysia it was 10,300 dollars. Until the beginning of the 1960’s Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore dreamt about making Singapore a Sri Lanka. However the leaders of Sri Lanka have now to dream of how to make Sri Lanka a Singapore.

Today Sri Lanka’s rate of economic growth is minus 0.6. Sri Lanka recorded the highest rate of inflation for the year 2001 which is 15%. In India it was 4.3%. In Singapore it was 1.2%. In Thailand it was 1.7%. Interest rates paid by Sri Lanka annually for loans obtained from foreign sources have come to equal the sum received from foreign sources as loans and aid and the amount of interest equals the amount of interest paid annually for loans received from foreign sources.

The expenditure incurred for the war by the government alone has been estimated to be about Rupees 5000 billion. In 2001 the expenditure was 1000 billion. The population of the country is less than 20 million. The number of those killed due to the war and rebellions in the South may be about 100,000. Those who were made destitute are more than a million.

We, the Sri Lankans like to boast that we are in par with the most developed countries so far as literacy is concerned. However, our social attitudes and conduct do not suit our social literacy. Although there are countries which find it difficult to rise up due to natural disasters that cannot be overcome easily, we have turned minor matters into major problems.

Sri Lankans would prefer to spend their time in pleasure rather than in fruitful work. When there are cricket matches the pattern of life in offices too change. Sri Lanka has the highest number of holidays. Sri Lanka may be the country where the employees take the most number of no pay leave in addition to the leave available officially. After the Sinhala New Year, the shops in Colombo close for several weeks.

However, the life and conduct of a Sri Lankan going abroad change in a revolutionary manner. He becomes a person who respects the rights of the others, works tirelessly, observes the laws and regulations well and becomes an efficient and productive person. So far as competence is concerned, too, he shows his abilities.

Such contradictions are observed in politics too. There is almost no country in the world in which the people are so sensitive as those in Sri Lanka. However, what prevails in the country is a backward and lowly political culture.

We in Sri Lanka gave up feudalism not because we wanted to give it up but because the whites wanted to give it up. We got our freedom not because we wanted to get it but because the whites wanted to give it. Consequently, what flows in our veins is blood of feudalism although we want to appear capitalist and democratic.

We are still not disciplined enough to respect the rights of other communities while protecting the rights of our own community.

Although more than five decades have passed since independence, the country has not been able to get a set of political leaders who are respected beyond their narrow ethnic limits. The leaders D.S. Senanayake, Dudley Senanayake, S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike, Sirima Bandaranaike, J.R. Jayewardene, R. Premadasa were leaders respected by the Sinhala people, but they were not leaders respected by the Tamil or Muslim people.

Leaders like G.G. Ponnambalam, S.J.V. Chelvanayagam and A. Amirthalingam may be considered leaders respected by the Tamil people, but they cannot be considered leaders respected by the Sinhala or Muslim people. Even persons like Rohana Wijeweera and Prabhakaran who chose a revolutionary path won the confidence of either the Sinhala or the Tamil youth, but were not leaders who had the confidence of the Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim communities.

The future of Sri Lanka depends on our ability or inability to overcome the fundamental problem relating to human relationships.