Confounding in the name of consensus
Government sources say that the ruling UPFA is engaged in the formation of a national advisory body that would facilitate kick-starting the peace process. One cannot reject this concept in the context of a national problem necessitating inputs from the various interest groups or parties for that matter. It is also true that the resolution of a national crisis should not be a unilateral matter.
The need therefore to have all actors in the play participating in such broad based discussion can be justified. But looking back into the pages of Sri Lankan history after independence, what have we to call as achievement, anything out of the various attempts to have such multilateral discussions? All Party Conference(APC), Parliamentary Select Committee(PSC) are two glaring efforts taken in the past which took us nowhere. Save the waste of time and resources the nation accrued no benefit whatsoever from these mechanisms. The proposals put forward for consideration of these entities ended up as mere waste paper. UPFA's current proposal, it appears will include ecclesiastics and heads of CBOs in the advisory body. That leaves the house open for inclusion of cross section representatives from all layers of the society. A nation that could not arrive at a consensus through smaller representative groups like the APC and the PSC, is ironically trying to reach consensus through a group much larger and without cohesion. Already we have, in the national question, many schools of thinking in the ruling coalition. The major partner, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) advocates devolution to the periphery with limitations of course. Paradoxically, its coalition partner the JVP rejects devolution. In addition we have the Jathika Hela Urumaya(JHU) which entered parliament professing to uphold Buddhist traditions, opposing not only the concept of devolution but also totally rejecting the peace process under the facilitation of Norway. In the backdrop of having Buddhist clergy as legislators opposed to devolution and the peace process too, by including them in the advisory group, one feels whether the government, instead of a search for consensus, is in fact looking for a ruse to procrastinate. If the government is seriously interested in the resolution of the national crisis, it must first of all have progressive thinking on its part. It must be resolute in making decisions with national interest. It must also consolidate the forces working for peace and win the confidence of the opposing elements. Inviting those who are vehemently opposed to the peace process to deliver 'advice' will only aggravate the situation. It is not intended to mean that a resolution should be arrived at without obtaining advice or without being transparent. What in fact the government should do now is to be firm in its commitment to peace and express unambiguously its policy stand and solicit support. Else 'leadership' becomes meaningless. Leadership in fact is to rid confusion and lead the nation. If the government's agenda is actually to dilly dally and delay the process, then the idea of the national advisory body has all the relevance to it. Courtesy: Editorial of Eezhanatham Tamil Daily
12 September 2004
|
Europe which has a total population of 800 million is made up of 45 language based nation states. South Asia which has a total population of one billion, (1000 million) is comprised of four states. Who is preventing and therefore benefiting by limiting new nation-states in South Asia?
Print this
Email this
more
