International Viewpoint Archive

The Fourth International’s English-language review, from 1982

Asia: Sri Lanka: New Growth in Worker Resistance

· International Viewpoint No. 264, March 1995 · pp 16-18 · 1,985 words

South and Southeast Asia Repression and political prisoners

New growth in worker

For the third time in thirty years, sections of the left have joined a 'national alliance' government as junior partners. But as our Colombo correspondent Vickramabahu ('Bahu') Karunaratne argues, the possibilities of these junior partners to introduce reforms are even more limited than in 1964 and

An explosion of popular unrest can therefore be expected sooner or later. One factor stoping the government using its cross-class credentials to calm the situation is the Trotskyist New Sama Samaja

Party. The NSSP is trying to combine mass action outside parliament with regrouping of those left deputies who recognise the dead-end of the current government's programme. But as the NSSP argued in the August 1994 elections, any left regrouping must be based on a rejection of privatisation, and opposition to the conditions imposed on the island by the World Bank and IMF.

"Bahu" Karunaratne is a leading member of the New Sama Samaja Party (NSSP)

International Viewpoint #264 MARCH 1995

President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga heads a 'People's Alliance' government, which swept to power in 1994 after 17 years of right wing rule by the United National Party (UNP).

Of course, the UNP only won the 1977 election because of popular rejection of a coalition government dominated by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), That government was led by Mrs. Sirima Bandaranaike, Prime Minister in the new government and mother of the current President. The Lanka Sama Samaja Party (LSSP) and the Sri Lankan Communist Party (CP) held several portfolios in the cabinet, and claimed to be politically directing the coalition. In reality, they were junior partners, invited in to protect the regime from attacks from the workers. They took a leading role in the repression of the 1971 insurrection of the educated element of rural Sinhala youth, led by the People's Liberation Front (JVP).

soon as they resisted government attempts to compromise with multinationals and institutional lenders, Sirima threw them out of the government. In new elections in 1977, the LSSP and CP could not present a credible and viable alternative to the right wing United National Party campaign. Having been capitalist strike breakers for over five years, LSSP and CP leaders had lost the trust of the working class.

The UNP campaigned on the need to "go beyond Marxism" and build "democratic socialism." Once elected, they reversed most of the radical reforms initiated by the previous 16

HE SRI LANKA B government They gave foreign "robber barons" a free hand to set up in Sri Lanka and make massive profits.

The first national resistance to this reactionary path came with the general strike of 1980. Unfortunately, the NSSP was the only left party to appreciate the political implications of this strike. The JVP openly disassociated themselves from the strike, which they labelled "opportunist-led".

The UNP government used this situation to smash the worker's movement. Trade Union leaders were arrested under emergency powers, and union offices closed. Over 100,000 workers were sacked, across the public and private sectors. The government retook the initiative. In 1989, J.R Jayawardhane profited from the rise of petty bourgeois chauvinism to proscribe the NSSP, JVP and CP. Merciless repression was launched in the North and South of the country.

The moderate left opposition was not inactive during this period. Ms. Chandrika, with her left wing history, was able to refurbish the image of the SLFP, and rebuild its image in the eyes of the left-leaning masses. She hoped to put her party at the centre of a broad left coalition, as her mother had done years earler.

But things were different than in 1970. The New Sama Samaja Party (Sri Lankan Section of the Fourth International) now stood in the way. We were always prepared to participate in common struggles and campaigns with the SLFP against the reactionary UNP regime, but we refused to formalise a political alliance, and we contested all elections separately, putting forward our own political positions. We called for the creation of a block of workers' parties, with a left programme, as an alternative to the capitalist parties.

Of course, this is not incompatible with the creation of strong bonds between rank and file militants of the NSSP and SLFP. Everybody could see that those comrades who were arrested for leading mass struggles came from both parties.

So the only way to form a coalition was to vilify the leadership of the NSSP. The pro SLFP weekend papers Yukthiya and Ravaya were a regular outlet for this systematic campaign. While Chandrika failed to drag the NSSP into a coalition, she did win over a part of the party, under the leadership of Vasudeva Nanayakkara (*Vasu'), who agreed to form a "People's Alliance" coalition with the SLFP. LSSP and CP.

District level elections in Sri Lanka are contested on the basis of proportional representation, with extra seats in parliament for the party wining most district seats. The Peoples Alliance claimed that this made it necessary to stand a single opposition candidate in each district, to ensure that the left majority on the district level translated into a national majority even if the UNP was the largest single party. In fact, this argument was only employed against leftist candidates outside the Peoples Alliance. A number of right wing or national minority groups also stood independently, but National Alliance leaders claimed this was a positive means to break votes from the UNP and the main nationalist parties.

International Viewpoint #264 MARCH 1995

In fact, the People's Alliance was more than a coalition. From the moment of its inception it had a separate political identity and its own programme and leadership. Sirima

Bandaranaike was appointed Alliance leader, with a notorious Sinhala chauvinist MP from the SLFP to act as coordinating secretary. The programme presented by the Peoples Alliancewas so right wing that the UNP seriously accused the Bandaranaikes of having stolen a draft of the UNP programme and printed it more quickly!

It seems that the masses were itching for a chance to unite in a campaign against the UNP. The new generation was relatively unaware of the debacle of the 'left' coalition of 1970 And older workers were swayed by the pro-Chandrika positions of the LSSP, CP and the Vasa group. "Chandrika can be trusted to be uncompromising with the UNP," many left-wing activists argued. would mean a real change."

The wave of popular support for Chandrika started in the urban working class, and quickly spread to the Sinhalaspeaking rural areas, but not so much to the estate areas or among members of ethnic and religious minorities.

While Chandrika Bandaranaike did not make as many promises as her mother Sirimao in 1970, her campaign has left a lot of promises that she will not be inclined to keep. Ordinary people war, by giving substantial autonomy to Tamils in the North and East

* restore civil and human rights

* call a constituent assembly and replace the presidential system with a democratic parliamentary constitution

* clean the state apparatus of the of torture, murder, "disappearances' and bribery

* control the process of privatisation

* regulate the activities of the transnational corporations, and imperialist agents like the Voice of America radio station.

The minority of workers who did not expect Chandrika to go this far put their efforts into building mass organisations that could continue agitation even after the elections. As a result, the expressions of unrest after the elections were so strong that even curfews and intimidations could not stop them.

In the run-up to the elections, the NSSP proposed to regroup independent left tendencies across Sri Lanka in an electoral front. We argued for a common basic programme rejecting privatisation, opposing the conditions put on the country by the IMF and World Bank, and opposing the authoritarian presidential constitution.

Any lett bloc, we argued, must propose autonomy for a Tamil homeland in the North East of the island. Unfortunately, even the JVP was not interested in our proposal. In fact they hoped to gain more power by campaiging alone, and intended to make a bid for legality. As a result, separate lists of candidates were presented by the NSSP, JVP, and a number of independent left groups, including the Up Country People's

The NSSP presented candidates in Columbo and Vavuriya constituencies. In several more places, we supported SVP comrades who had a chance to be elected. Where the independent left did not put forward a viable alternative, we campaigned for the election of left candidates from the PA list.

The election showed the potential for independent left representation: the SVP and the Up Country People's Front both gained one seat in parliament.

The assassination of UNP candidate Gamini Dissanayake by Tamil separatists transformed the presidential

The 'Tamil Tigers' presumably hoped to provoke Sinhala chauvinist attacks, which would push Tamils in the Sinhala areas to support the separatist cause. If so, they were let down. The assassination destroyed the Sinhala chauvinist project, increased pressure for a viable solution to the Tamil question.

The capitalist class knew that they had no alternative to a Chandrika victory. Hence, all their efforts were directed towards consolidating the right wing within the PA. This right wing sought to place themselves in all important ministries. The two left parties in the coalition, the LSSP and CP, hold much less important positions than they did in the 1964 and 1970 coalition governments. On both those occasions, they pushed through radical reforms, and strengthened the illusion among the people that there is a reformist, parliamentary strategy powerful enough to eliminate the power of capitalism. But as was shown in 1975, to be the surgeon of capitalism is not the same as being its grave-digger. In any case, the LSSP and CP areclearly tail-ending the pro-capitalist parties in the current coalition.

The working class is ready to push for reforms. The NSSP slogan "Defeat the World Bank Dictates: Implement the pledges given to the people" became popular almost instantly. The UNP has retaliated with their own slogan; "Defend the open economy and implement the pledges given". The pledges they are so concerned about are those given to leading capitalists by Chandrika before the elections.

The UNP is not yet supporting any open campaigns against the PA government. But they are very busy consolidating the right-wing programme inside the government. UNP leaders hope to prune the PA programme of its support for Tamil autonomy and constitutional reform. In the meantime he is assuring tactical support for the PA, and trying to neutralise the commissions established to investigate corruption, disappearances and torture under the previous UNP government, of which he was prime minister. The UNP leaders understand that, if they provoke the masses, they will unify the forces to their left, and so they are very cautious for the moment. UNP members have been warned against associating themselves with workers' struggles, or campaigning against rising prices.

Political uncertainty and the tug of war within the political elite has created a space for the freedom of expression and public agitation. Trade Union membership is growing. Public discussions and campaigns attract a growing public.

The 'left' in the government is obliged to criticise the rightward policies of the Chandrika leadership. The government as a whole may even start to zig-zag left and right to absorb all these tensions, before gaining enough strength to break to the right. As for the left, it will have to leave the government under such circumstances.

The NSSP hopes to bring together the left forces within and outside the government into a block representing the workers and peasants, and proposing a non-capitalist alternative. The above analysis suggests that the coming period may allow such an alliance to form. *

(1) Gamini was one of those responsible for inviting the Indian Army to intervene in Sri Lanka. Close to American leaders over the years, Gamini advocated the sale of plantations to 'dollar' companies.

17

I EASTERN EUROPE/C.I.S.

← The Americas: Mexico: Chiapas Amnesty — Who Should Judge? · Europe: Eastern Europe and the Former U.S.S.R. Five Years On: Economic Reform in the East →

Something wrong on this page?