The phenomenon of Mahinda Rajapaksa

• The memories of men are too frail a thread to hang history from –John Still, The Jungle Tide

Deciding whether politicians are nice or nasty is neither here nor there. To understand politicians, we must attempt to understand the activity of politics. The epochal change of 8 January has taught us a lesson. When people remember together, they recall less than what they would remember individually. 

An overpowering sense of hopelessness envelopes our construction of and deductions from recent events. The Central Bank bond scam, failure of transparency advocates to declare their professional fees, winner of the commonwealth rule of law award in his new incarnation being sued for alleged land grabbing and the selection of obscure party loyalists as the country’s new envoys are not propitious signs of good governance. In fact they make a significant impact on our collaborative inhibitions. It reaffirms the conventional wisdom that “few things are more destructive than political dreams of perfection”.

Seen through this fragmented looking glass, it seems that we have exchanged a despotic President Tweedledee for a condescending Tweedledum as Prime Minister. 

Sharply compartmentalised presidency

The presidency of Mahinda Rajapaksa was sharply compartmentalised between the formal and the informal. The formal governance was through the bureaucracy of handpicked apparatchiks. They were nominally accountable to the legislature but effectively insulated by the overarching mastery of the executive presidency. 

The informal and therefore the more decisive control was through the family politburo consisting of the brotherhood and their brood.

The brotherhood and the brood had their own priorities. They outsourced the day to day operations to a new class of entrepreneurs who excelled in turning indigenous knowledge and customs in to a tradable commodity. Their creative genius made them near extra-terrestrial to the entrenched business class cocooned in their elite chambers of humdrum commerce. 

Their cosmopolitan complacency made them hibernate in their own hubris. They missed out in the post war stampede to catch up with progress. In contrast, the new entrepreneurial class plunged in to serious business and morphed in to a peripheral plutocracy and an integral component of the Mahinda machine.

While the hidebound business class sought relief in exchange for servility, the new class demanded quid pro quo for services rendered. They reached lyrical excellence, making the heavenly sky kiss mother earth, making their patrons into larger than life patriots. It was a public relations triumph that propelled the regime for a near decade. 

The archetypal team player

Mahinda is the archetypal team player. In sharp contrast to all his predecessors who preferred to keep their own counsel, he relied on a ‘caucus at the top’. The curious phrase ‘caucus at the top’ was first used by the founder of the SLFP S.W.R.D. Bandaranayake to describe the UNP. 

The genius of Mahinda is that he packaged and marketed neo liberal economics in militant socialist rhetoric. His sincerity was never in doubt. He honestly did not know the difference. It seems that comrade Vasu did not know it either. 

As Hannah Arndt points out so elliptically power is proportionate to the human ability not just to act but to act in concert. “Power is never the property of an individual; it belongs to a group and remains in existence only so long as the group keeps together.” 

Team players are also good tribal leaders. It is this allure of Mahinda that enabled him to manipulate the evenly-balanced Legislature he inherited in 2005. He deftly introduced a new political ploy. Strengthening the hands of the redeemer became a patriotic imperative. Significantly, he did not call a general election until his triumph over the other tribal leader Velupillai Prabhakaran. He deftly introduced a novel political ploy. Strengthening the hands of the redeemer was a patriotic imperative. 

Rivals often differ in nuances but agree on substance. Both Prabhakaran and Mahinda are warrior leaders who used personal relations as instruments of exercising power. The provincial councillor threatening to execute investigators by stoning relies on the same strategic logic of the suicide bomber – the demonstrative destruction of life. 

Medamulana patriotic movement

Just as the Velvetethurai terrorist movement it vanquished, the Medamulana patriotic movement developed an authentic code of loyalty, honour and discipline. The closely knit power hierarchy remained constantly alert against intruders. As common to all tribes it found it necessary to be constantly at war with those who did not belong. 

Mahinda Rajapaksa encouraged the organisational independence of the individual members of Parliament and reduced party affiliation to a mere formality to be observed during elections. Allegiance to the leader replaced party loyalty. It explains Mahinda’s sway over his ‘herd’ in contrast to Maithri’s hesitant steps to bring his ‘flock’ to pasture.

Mahinda did not undermine the rule of law. Instead, he made his own rules. He translated complex legalese in to easy-peasy irrelevancies. He made laws that intimidated him user friendly. It made him relax. 

He infused his management style with a moral content. He assiduously promoted a monastic nationalism. He developed a trust network of monks and temples. Today he has demonstrated his ability to activate the saffron rhetoric of this network in any corner of the island except the north. 

Charles Tilley in his seminal work on trust networks explains how they work. “How will we recognise a trust network when we encounter or enter one? First, we will notice a number of people who are connected, directly or indirectly, by similar ties; they form a network. Second, we will see that the sheer existence of such a tie gives one member significant claims on the attention or aid of another; the network consists of strong ties. Third, we will discover that members of the network are collectively carrying on major long-term enterprises.” 

When Udaya Gammanpila claimed that ‘Abayaramaya’ is the temporary sanctuary of the exiled ‘King,’ he was claiming proprietary rights of that network. The substitution of the sublime cry of ‘Sadhu’ with the more militant ‘Jayawewa’ is a natural product of the new insurgency in the urban temple. 

Sirisena at a vital fork in his journey

President Maithripala Sirisena has arrived at a vital fork in his journey. His choice of turn will lead him to either fame or failure. He cannot hold the UPFA together. He can only hope to retrieve what is left of the SLFP. It is incumbent upon him to lead a credible alternative to the UNP that introduced the executive presidency, conducted the fraudulent referendum and set the country ablaze in the north and the south. 

The UNP did help in the presidential stakes. Ranil Wickremesinghe did not forswear the presidency. He opted for the only feasible alternative to escape the Cyclops’s cave. The UNP has seized the post 8 January narrative. That is natural. Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunters.

(Sarath De Alwis is a former journalist and a retired professional in leisure and aviation industries.)