Thursday 11 April 2019

Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

11 April  2019

Natural Governance in Sri Lankan Post War Governance

The right pathway to  self governance through higher common structures is through belief based discrimination of  external knowledge. When our experiences are local – we need this external knowledge through which to participate at higher levels of governance.  Without  belief – external knowledge is hearsay knowledge and leads to frivolous and vexatious behavior. Belief is based on experience. Hearsay is based merely on outcomes/what happened. A vote based on experience has the support of absolute power. To the extent we vote as per our experience – we vote for ourselves. To that extent the apparent leader who carries our vote as status – is part of us and the leader’s ups and downs would be ours.  To the extent of that common faith – we would be self-governing and the structures of self-governance developed by us would support believers beyond time and place boundaries. We would then not be influenced by those who ‘show’ more outcomes than the ones we can see through the eye of our belief .

Some parts of the Tamil Diaspora is ‘seeing’ more outcomes from the global level actions against Sri Lanka’s former Defence Secretary Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa. The action has the support of Natural Governance only to the extent of the suffering of the victims that has become irredeemable / karma. Simply said – karmic effect is the right or  wrong that has not been recognized by custodians of power – because one side or the other has become an ‘outsider.

In the context of Sri Lankan war, Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was ‘appointed’ by the then President Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa. The appointment did not happen on merit basis. To the extent the Sri Lankan voters who voted for Mr Mahinda Rajapaksa failed to discipline Mr Rajapaksa for any known excesses during the war – their governance structure was lowered to hearsay level. Using local government election level to national level leads to such deterioration of national heritages. The fact that Mr Sirisena, the current president had to join forces with the opposition, to defeat and demote Mr Rajapaksa, confirms that majority did not believe that Mr Rajapaksa was wrong and also that a good proportion had no belief on the basis of war which was of hearsay value to majority within majority race.

Relatively speaking, the LTTE self-elected and therefore structurally/officially  elected members of the Tamil community are unaffected by their ups and downs – so long as they remain within the official structures. Official structures carry the divine powers of the architects of such structures and such divinity protects them from getting demoted to lower level operations. Those who use those structures without belief – but largely for benefits demote themselves.
In addition to their own hearsay structures, the Rajapaksas added LTTE’s eastern leader Karuna to their leadership and to that extent – Karuna punished Northern LTTE. In the official system this would be known as insubordination.  If  LTTE had submitted themselves to the discipline of more structured Sri Lankan Tamil leaders, they would have prevented the Karuna karma. Colluding with India  without belief – accumulated the Karuna karma.

The Rajapaksa  karma for acting in breach of the laws of the International community, returned to the Rajapaksa side through Field Marshal Fonseka. In the case of  LTTE – to the extent they killed unjustly and summarily on the claim of disloyalty – they got their own when Karuna became powerful. In belief – punishment is self-discipline / remorse. One who opposes / punishes without belief  is an enemy. Karuna became an enemy of LTTE. Likewise, Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa who ordered the killing of enemies through the power of the People. To the extent he acted outside the law – and did not have the mandate of the People’s belief  that – and to the extent the killing happened in the name of Sri Lanka – he became an enemy of Sri Lanka. Every Sinhalese only voter votes for a Sinhalese Nation. Likewise every Tamil only voter for Tamil Nation where there is a structure – such as the Provincial Council structure.

But where there is no structure – the Tamil only voter’s vote goes to the Sinhala only candidate as opposition. That was how Tamils who failed to participate  in the Presidential elections in 2005 and later in 2010 empowered the Rajapaksa but in 2015 they made that Rajapaksa side the Opposition within Sinhala Nation. The percentage of Tamil voters went up in 2015 relative to 2010 when many were under the influence of Tamil only syndrome and therefore did not have the mandate to vote in Sri Lankan elections. Belief based mandate is universal and works through any structure. Not so external knowledge based vote. The block was removed by 2015. In Jaffna for example the participation went up from 26% in 2010 to 66% in 2015. In Vanni it went up from 40%  to 72%.  Relatively speaking in Eastern  electorates of Batticaloa and Trincomalee the increase was not as dramatic. The Jaffna voter voting through the educated leader who thinks Sri Lankan,  contributes directly to Sri Lankan governance power. The Tamil only voter needs to find a true believer in self governance, participating in Sri Lankan elections. True belief merges naturally with any reliable structure. Sinhalese leaders who develop common structures in Tamil areas and/or merge minds with Tamil leaders who believe more in commonness than in local power only – are assured of being leaders of common Sri Lanka. By electing such leaders, Sri Lankans pass the test of self-governance at National level.

If Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa  is elected president – that would give the picture  that majority Sri Lankans who voted for the government that appointed Mr Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, killed LTTE for disturbing their peace. But that would also mean that they disconnect with opportunities in wider world where higher laws are regularly practiced to ensure that all genuine investors in self-governance would enjoy their returns.

Likewise, if Tamils who blame the Sri Lankan government for their war related pain, fail to have their say through the election process – they would remain Tamils only. If they vote as Tamils for a Tamil leader they believe in – but using the common Sri Lankan structure that Tamils have contributed to over time – they vote as Sri Lankans for Sri Lankans. Belief  structures itself as per the needs of the believer. Most reliable of all is the Sri Lankan who believes s/he is Sri Lankan and uses the Sri Lankan lawful structures  with respect  to cast her/his vote. In everyday life our belief  based approval or disapproval of an outcome – using such lawful structures is our vote. A self-governing person would exercise such vote without fear of losing.

No comments:

Post a Comment