Mr. NOTA and understanding the Presidential Election
India gives voters a ‘None Of The Above’ box. Victor Ivan proposes Sri Lanka field Mr. NOTA as a candidate in his own right — a vote for a new constitution rather than for any of the men on the ballot.
The presidency and the dilemma of the Presidential Election
J.R. Jayewardene built the presidency to make himself a king; the 19th Amendment hollowed it out but left the crown on. Victor Ivan reads the 2019 field — Gotabaya, the UNP’s impasse, the JVP — against that comedy.
Failure of the Left Movement
From the Old Left’s Marxist head on a liberal trunk to the JVP after two insurrections, Victor Ivan asks why the Left has failed — and what the JVP should do with the presidential election in front of it.
Anarchy and the collapse of the State
The Executive and the Legislature have disintegrated; the Judiciary may yet find its orders ignored. Victor Ivan reads the state as a machine whose faults were visible, and whose remaining life could have been predicted, long ago.
මෛත්රීපාලගේ භූමිකාව
Using a chess metaphor, Ivan describes Maithripala Sirisena’s defection from the government to become the common opposition candidate as a move the Rajapaksa camp never expected. He assesses the MPs who crossed with him and the split in the SLFP, the roles of Chandrika Kumaratunga and Ranil Wickremesinghe in the anti-Mahinda alliance, and the JVP’s stance. He urges the challengers to avoid lies and communal appeals, credits Mahinda Rajapaksa with defeating Prabhakaran, but argues that his rule has done great harm, including its pro-China policy.
විරුද්ධ පක්ෂ ව්යාපාර අරාජිකත්වයේ සෙවණැලි
Ivan warns that full anarchy, the end state of a system without civility, is frightening, and that the coming election is a historic chance to defeat the Rajapaksa regime. Comparing the JVP’s support for Mahinda in 2005 with today, he assesses the roles of the Venerable Sobitha’s movement for a just society, Karu Jayasuriya, the UNP, the JVP and the Jathika Hela Urumaya, and argues frankly that Ranil Wickremesinghe, who has never won an election and lacks Mahinda’s charisma, should not be the challenger.
ජවිපෙ ප්රහාරයට පිළිතුරක් (ලංකා පුවත්පතේ පළවූ විවේචන දෙකට පිළිතුරකි.)
Ivan answers two attacks in the JVP paper Lanka by a writer calling himself ‘Kasakaraya’ (the flogger), who branded him a fraud and accused him of preparing the ground for Ranil Wickremesinghe as he had for Chandrika Kumaratunga in 1994. Calmly, he replies that he began writing books in prison after 1971, recalls Ravaya’s 25th anniversary, explains that the Kaha Pati campaign arose from the violent North Western provincial election of 1999, and states that his aim is not to install any leader but to win a framework for changing the political system.
ජාතියේ අන්ධකාරය
Starting from Gandhi’s view of struggle, Ivan examines the militarisation of Sri Lanka since 1971: by global indices it is among the most militarised countries in South Asia, and the forces grew hugely for the final war. He asks who is responsible for the rebellions, citing Bertrand Russell on the state, argues that the nation owes a debt to all who suffered, and warns that five years after the war the army has not been reduced and the national mood, driven by secret political movements, has turned against human rights.
ජාතිය ගොඩනැගීම
Ivan argues that Sri Lanka failed to meet two historical conditions for building a nation. The Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim leaders of the independence era were limited in outlook; liberal ideas came mainly through educated Burghers, while revivalists such as Migettuwatte Gunananda took another path. The left movement and the Jaffna Youth Congress briefly stood for a united nation. India, with its pluralist attitudes, built a nation and a democracy; Sri Lanka, by comparison, is in an ugly state.
වරද කාගේද අපේද? මහින්දගේද?
Ivan argues that once the country turned to violence, both rebels and the state came to rule through fear and to believe only their own convictions. The state crushed the Sinhala youth rebellion, then the Tamil one, and in the process the South killed Wijeweera and many of its own. The tragedy, he writes, is that after these victories the country learned nothing: there was no Emperor Asoka turning from war to righteousness, only a triumphalism that left the nation where it started. Blame lies with society as well as with Mahinda Rajapaksa.