| OPPOSITION Leader Mahinda
Rajapakse says he sees no solution to the political crisis
in Sri Lanka other than the two leaders of the main parties
coming to a working arrangement. He says both leaders must
be able to get together for the sake of the country.
"This is the only formula that I could think of in
order to solve the crisis," he told The Sunday Leader
in an interview. He also said the JVP's claim that it is
the third major force is due to the weaknesses of the two
major political forces in the country. He said as the two
main parties are unable to come to an understanding on certain
specific issues that pose a great threat to the country,
"The JVP's claim of being the third force may be true.
But we, the national parties should not let down the people
and give them the impression that we cannot deliver the
goods," he explained.
Following are excerpts;
By Wilson Gnanadass
Q: THE present political deadlock continues. What is
the compromise formula you intend to offer?
A: The best formula I have in mind as a solution to this
problem is 'togetherness' or 'oneness.' This means both
leaders and subsequently both major political parties in
this country getting together for the sake of finding a
solution. Now the question is whether this has happened
in our country? I feel this type of togetherness is yet
to happen in Sri Lanka. When we think of togetherness or
entering into an agreement to sort out a specific issue
the country is saddled with, one party either the ruling
or the opposition must learn to take one step back. Now
in my view this is called proper understanding. I am afraid
the two major parties may not be willing to take this step.
I feel this is vital in the exercise of finding a solution.
To start off both leaders must be willing to sit together
and try to bring the two parties together. Leaders must
take the first step and when this happens, the others will
follow them.
Q: How do you view the conciliatory approach both the
President and the Prime Minister have taken to hold face
to face talks?
A: Highly commendable. I think if we go on in this direction
the foundation for the peace process already laid could
be further strengthened. This is vital for any conflict
resolution exercise. I appreciate both leaders for what
they are doing at present for the sake of salvaging the
country from the bondage of terrorism and other problems.
Q: President Kumaratunga is insisting on keeping the
defence portfolio. Do you think it is possible for the Prime
Minister to handle the peace process without this?
A: Who is holding what becomes immaterial if both leaders
and subsequently both parties enter into a working arrangement
as soon as possible. The Supreme Court clearly gave the
ruling that the defence portfolio cannot be given to a third
party. From a constitutional point of view also the defence
portfolio should be held by the head of state. So if we
go to find out who should hold what the problem cannot be
solved. This is a crucial stage in the history of Sri Lanka.
We should not be pointing fingers at each other but instead
try to find out how best the problem can be solved. Don't
you think after a marriage who should hold the key to the
almirah becomes immaterial? It obviously becomes the collective
responsibility of both the husband and the wife. So this
is something similar to that.
Q: In this context is it reasonable to ask the Prime
Minister to assume responsibility for the peace process
if he has no control over defence?
A: No. Nobody could be held responsible unless and until
both leaders realise the dire need of the country and join
together. Once this happens, then both would be held responsible
if something goes wrong.
Q: President Kumaratunga took over three ministries
stating that the government was compromising national security.
But after assuming control of these ministries no big changes
have been made. Manirasakulam camp is still in place. The
MoU has not been amended, and President Kumaratunga goes
on to the extent of saying that the LTTE proposals can be
the basis for negotiation between the LTTE and the government.
Does this not bring into question the President's bone fides
in sacking the three ministers?
A: I guess the President is cautious. She does not want
to upset the peace process. She is the person who started
the whole peace process and she would never want to see
it collapsing. So though she took over these ministries
for a worthy cause, she in my view is not going to act fast,
as to upset the peace process. This is like a transition
period. One cannot expect any major changes overnight. I
think gradually she may introduce some changes that would
not hamper the peace process.
She was compelled to take over these ministries because
there was a need. For instance the security situation in
the east was deteriorating faster than ever before. Muslims
were constantly being put to hardship. The police were harassing
innocent people. The crime rate was soaring and was going
out of control. The underworld started raising its ugly
head that led to society being terrorised. So all these
forced the President to take over these ministries.
Q: Yes, but after taking these over nothing has happened?
A: Wait and see. It is too early to see any major changes.
Q: There are reports that the LTTE has put up fresh
bunkers. Will President Kumaratunga direct the security
forces to remove them?
A: When she heard of one specific incident of this nature,
she immediately directed the army to talk to the LTTE. And
after the talks were held, LTTE very gracefully removed
the camp. So in the future too I don't think the President
is going to turn a blind eye to these issues. Yes, of course,
she will go to the extent of ordering the security forces
to remove them if there are any.
Q: Do you think a national government is the answer
to today's crisis?
A: No. We do not support a national government. But we
certainly say yes to a government of national reconciliation.
How can we form a national government with a party that
has different policies? For instance we may be willing to
enter into a working arrangement with the UNP to find a
solution to the ethnic question, but we certainly do not
agree to the UNP's economic policies. So how to join the
UNP and work as a national government?
That type of arrangement will never work out. Firstly, I
must say that the people have not given a mandate to do
so. Secondly I must say that a healthy democracy of a country
depends on a healthy opposition. But in the formation of
a national government, there is no room for an opposition.
Then how are we going to function? Can we accept a dictatorial
type of governance? So, this is out.
Q: The JVP has revealed its 'chaos theory.' How do you
view the strategy of the JVP?
A: You see such Marxist parties thrive on situations like
these. It is no surprise to learn that the JVP has told
the public about the present situation and how best they
could live on this. The JVP feels that it is the third major
political force in the country and it also feels that it
is emerging as a powerful political party. The public knows
the answer to this and I do not want to delve on it too
much. But the blame lies on both major political parties
for failing to deliver the goods to the people. When the
major parties fail in their duties, a third party like the
JVP thinks they could take advantage of the situation and
become more powerful. This is a very common theory adopted
by any Marxist party. The more mistakes we make, the more
mileage the JVP would gain. This should be kept in mind.
Q: While President Kumaratunga is talking to the UNP,
there is also speculation that a deal with the JVP is imminent.
Isn't there a contradiction in this situation?
A: No contradiction. You see the people of this country
have not been told about these things clearly. Joining hands
with the JVP and entering into a working arrangement with
the UNP are two different issues. The Sri Lanka Freedom
Party (SLFP) from the inception has adopted a principle
that it should entertain as many parties as possible to
form the grandest possible alliance in order to defeat any
ruling party. Bandaranaike did it, Sirimavo did it, Chandrika
did it in 1994 and now also she is trying to do this. This
is a long term strategy to defeat political parties. We
rally round other anti UNP political parties to get their
support to defeat the UNP. It is just simple as that. But
entering into a working arrangement with the UNP has a very
specific goal. This is to solve the ethnic crisis. And we
are doing it. Joining with the JVP is a long term strategy
and mind you we are not sacrificing our interests or policies
for the sake of joining hands with the JVP or any other
party. We will not compromise our principles.
Q: The JVP has said if it enters into an agreement with
the PA, the LTTE's administrative proposals cannot be a
basis for negotiation. Will the PA at this juncture change
its position as the President has stated in an interview
to FrontLine?
A: To my knowledge the JVP has expressed its willingness
to agree to the majority view on these issues. So if the
majority feels there should be substantial devolution or
the current LTTE proposals should be kept as a basis for
negotiation, I believe the JVP would also agree to it. The
JVP has said that it would honour the majority view of the
party.
Q: There are reports in the media that President Kumaratunga
will hold the provincial council elections first and then
hold general elections six months later. Is there a firm
decision on this?
A: I am not sure how firm this decision is, but to my knowledge
the provincial council election would be held before the
general election and the PA is ready for it. This is why
we are signing the MoU with the JVP.
Q: We are almost into 2004. In 2005 the next presidential
election is due. For this a candidate has not only got to
prepare his policy framework but has also to appoint a team
to raise necessary funds for the campaign. It is obvious
the UNP candidate is going to be Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe.
Is not the PA going to get affected by delaying the naming
of its next candidate?
A: As a party we still stand for the abolition of the executive
presidency. Until the last minute we will be trying to abolish
this. So with this in mind, the party as a whole has not
taken a decision on it right now. But it does not mean the
party will not do so at the correct time. We won't delay
anything. Certainly this has nothing to do with decisions
of individuals but decisions of the party.
|