Liam redux

Sri Lankan Presidential Election: Vote Bahu against the war criminals

Presidential Election 2010  Why  vote Dr. Vickramabahu ?  Below is the text of an appeal for signatures to support the electoral campaign of  Vickramabahu Karunaratne, better known as Bahu. He is the only candidate in the election calling for self determination for the Tamil people. The Presidential Election in Sri Lanka comes eight months after…

Liam
2–3 minutes

Presidential Election 2010  Why  vote Dr. Vickramabahu ? 

Below is the text of an appeal for signatures to support the electoral campaign of  Vickramabahu Karunaratne, better known as Bahu. He is the only candidate in the election calling for self determination for the Tamil people.

imageThe Presidential Election in Sri Lanka comes eight months after the Lankan government declared victory over    Tamil    Tigers in a bloody onslaught that killed tens of thousands of Tamil civilians, maimed many thousands and rendered  hundreds of thousands homeless. While over 12,000 young men are incarcerated as political prisoners under draconian anti-terrorism laws, the number of those who have “disappeared” is in thousands.    Today, eminent international human rights groups, besides the UN and Human Rights    Watch, have accused the  government’s  ostensible “humanitarian operation” as a charade to cover up unprecedented scale of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

imageWhile the main contenders at this Election, the incumbent president Mahinda Rajapaksa and his wartime military chief Sarath Fonseka were carrying out the brutal war against Tamils with the full backing of their foreign masters, the majority Sinhala workers, the downtrodden and others in the south had to undergo severe hardships in order to feed the war machine. Journalists who undertook reporting these atrocities were killed, jailed, harassed or forced to flee the country.    The contained resentment in the south boiled over in a series of workers strikes as soon as the war was declared over, forcing rulers of a yet divided nation to call for this early Presidential Election.

The Left Front led by Dr. Vickramabahu Karunaratne has been the pioneer leadership in Sri Lanka that championed the democratic rights of all people – those in the North and the South – and campaigned for a united movement of resistance to oppressive anti-people regimes. It has been Dr. Bahu’s consistent and committed stance for over three decades.

Today, the President and the retired General  are competing with each other at the Election to claim the lion’s share of war spoils whereas the Common Left Candidate

Dr.    Vickramabahu Karunaratne is standing for National Unity based on Equality of all people,     Autonomy and their right of Self Determination.. Dr. Bahu is supported by all radical left parties and mass organisations.    Voting for him will be the only way forward for those who wish for a pluralistic country, united in hope and peace.

Therefore, we call upon all Sri Lankans to vote for Dr.    Vickramabahu Karunaratne of the Left Front and build a meaningful force that will unite to  fight against racism, religious bigotry, media censorship, warmongers, warlords, war criminals and oppressors of all shades in order to pave the way for an egalitarian society which insures peace, security and human dignity for all.

24 responses to “Sri Lankan Presidential Election: Vote Bahu against the war criminals”

  1. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    Vickrambahu is not the only candidate who calls for self-determination for the Tamils. He isn’t even the most prominent candidate to do so.

    Siritunga Jayusiraya of the United Socialist Party outpolled Vickrambahu’s Left Front/NSSP in the last presidential elections by a factor of about four. Jayusiraya came (a very distant) third overall.

    The Northite SEP, I believe, also has a candidate and also support self-determination for the Tamils.

    It is, in my view, a pity that the NSSP/LF insisted on nominating its own candidate, which effectively ended discussions for a joint candidate of the socialist left.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Moreno Truth Kit Avatar
    Moreno Truth Kit

    To echo Mark P, I found the quote at the top shockingly sectarian.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    Not to mention the claim at the end that Vickrimbahu “is supported by all radical left parties and mass organisations.” That’s another rather blatant untruth.

    I don’t want to come across as hostile to Vickrimbahu’s campaign. I’d prefer that people voted for Jayasuriya who is, judging by recent elections, the more prominent socialist candidate but I would much prefer to see the NSSP/LF or even the SEP get a substantial vote than any of the main right wing and chauvinist candidates. I do think that this appeal makes some quite bizarre claims however.

    Like

    Reply
  4. CKB Avatar
    CKB

    Whether Bahu is the prominent candidate or not is a matter of opinion. Jayasuriya came third in 2005 in an election where the vast majority of Tamils in the North boycotted. Therefore it was a mandate mainly from the Sinhala majority that appointed Mahinda Rajapaksa to lead a genocidal war against Tamils. In this election, the Tamils are going to actively engage and the result is to be seen on the 27th. If one says that Jayasuriya is more popular than the NSSP in the Sinhala south, it is a telling fact on “calling for self determination”

    On the issue of self determination this is what his election statement says

    “A large number of people in the North are imprisoned in so–called relief villages. Their future is uncertain. Only the socialists are committed in solving the national question on the basis of accepting the Tamil people’s right to self-determination. The United Socialist Party (USP) is in the forefront of the struggle against all sorts of chauvinism and capitalism.”
    http://www.lankasocialist.com/english_appeal.html

    Though he says that socialists are committed… (which is s broad statement) he doesnt say that his party or he stands for it. Remember, there are “Socialists” in the governing coalition as well.

    Below is from the Northite SEP’s candidate Wije Dias’s statement. (Eelam is the Tamil area). It is based on emancipation -post socialism.

    SEP general secretary and a member of the WSWS International Editorial Board. Dias fights for a workers’ and farmers’ government—a Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and Eelam—as part of the struggle for socialism in South Asia and internationally.

    http://www3.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/meet-d30.shtml

    Like

    Reply
  5. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    CKB:

    I honestly didn’t expect that anyone would be crass enough to defend the open lies in this appeal.

    This appeal, presumably circulated by the USFI, claims that Bahu is supported by all of the left parties. That’s a lie. It’s not a mistake or an oversight. The NSSP/LF haven’t somehow failed to notice that the United Socialist Party outpolled them four to one last time around. They haven’t failed to notice that that the USP (and the SEP) are standing this time around. They are simply lying.

    This appeal also claims that Bahu is the only candidate who supports self-determination from the Tamils. That also is a lie. The programme of the United Socialist Party is for self-determination of the Tamils and Jayasuriya has called for self-determination throughout his campaign. The quote you pull out above and attempt a bizarre and dishonest reading of above is in fact clear on that score. Again the appeal is lying.

    I have no problem with your organisation standing its own candidate. I have a problem with it lying about others on the left. And I’m frankly astonished that you have the cheek to try to defend those lies

    Aside from your defence of dishonesty, I’m qenuinely startled at your implication that getting a small but respectable vote from the Sinhalese majority is somehow evidence that a candidate is anti-Tamil. The Sinhalese population, believe it or not, is not uniformally composed of chauvinists. There is a long tradition of Sinhalese workers and socialists supporting socialist parties and opposing chauvinism.

    The fact is that in the last number of elections the USP has outpolled all other forces on the socialist left combined. It may or may not do so this time, but for the NSSP/LF to pretend that its more popular rival simply doesn’t exist is the height of sectarian dishonesty.

    Like

    Reply
  6. R. C. Avatar
    R. C.

    On Tamils, Vickramabahu makes common meetings with Sivajilingam, the only Tamil candidate, and calls for a vote for either of them (that’s what i call unsectarian). Sivajilingam, , has also given his support to Bahu’s slate. But rather than give some support to Sivajilingam, the USP prefer to attack him on the ground his not “consistent” enough on his defense of Tamils and on his opposition to Fonseka… hahaha, i guess the USP knows best.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    That’s not what I call nonsectarian. it’s what I call tactically inept. If Sivajilingham was worth supporting Bahu shouldn’t be standing as well and splitting the vote!

    I note that you don’t defend the lies in Bahu’s appeal.

    Like

    Reply
  8. Moreno Truth Kit Avatar
    Moreno Truth Kit

    By saying “only the socialists…are committed to self-determination for the Tamil people,” Siri is obviously referencing himself and USP as “socialists.” USP has consistently put forward self-determination. This is not just a stretch on the part of CKB (and implicitly the article) to say the USP isn’t for Tamil self-determination; this is an outright lie. A terrible one at that, attempting to discredit people who have risked their lives over and over for their views.

    This is stuff I would expect from the Sparts, not the USFI.

    Like

    Reply
  9. Moreno Truth Kit Avatar
    Moreno Truth Kit

    As expected, the USP/CWI candidate got a higher vote total than anyone else on the left, including the NSSP/USFI candidate heralded above.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Liam Avatar
    Liam

    Sirithunga Jayasuriya 8,352 0.08%
    Vickramabahu Karunaratna 7,055 0.07%

    There is no comfort for anyone in these results and as we predicted after the annihilation of the LTTE there will be a period of intense Sinhala chauvinism.

    http://www.slelections.gov.lk/presidential2010/AIVOT.html

    Like

    Reply
  11. Moreno Truth Kit Avatar
    Moreno Truth Kit

    That is definitely true, Liam.

    Like

    Reply
  12. Duncan Chapel Avatar
    Duncan Chapel

    Moreno, the USP’s support for self-determination is fake. The Tamil people call for their own homeland, and the NSSP supports that call. The USP does not support that call. It says the Tamils should put off the fight for their own homeland until after the struggle for socialism has been successful. So, both parties say they support self-determination, but only one is prepared to stand with the Tamil people’s struggle for their own homeland.

    These results show the huge pressure that the left vote is under. Sirithunga, the USP’s candidate, saw his vote fall by more three-quarters, in comparison with the last presidential elections. In contrast Bahu was able to retain more than three-quarters of his party’s vote.

    Like

    Reply
  13. Moreno Truth Kit Avatar
    Moreno Truth Kit

    Turns out the candidate “supported by all radical left parties” got a smaller vote than another Marxist candidate. You’ve found a diluted reason for your other lie, but please explain that one.

    Obviously, the results are bad for the left, as we and you (to your credit) predicted. Of course making deals with pro-capitalist candidates can increase your vote total, but it still didn’t beat Siri’s unambiguous independent socialist vote.

    Duncan says “the USP’s support for self-determination is fake.” Tell that to the Sinhala chauvinists (right and “left”) putting bounties out on Siri’s life.

    Connecting self-determination to the struggle against capitalism isn’t “putting off the fight.” It is being honest (something the USFI seems to be clearly opposed to at the current moment). Tamil liberation will not come under capitalism; this is an honest fact that shouldn’t be confused with telling people to wait until the glorious future to struggle.
    How’s your position different than the two-stage theory of the fellow from Georgia with the mustache? On second thought: don’t. It would just help you avoid the first paragraph.

    Like

    Reply
  14. bill j Avatar
    bill j

    Lots of claims of lying flying around. Do any of you speak Sinhala? The difference between the two candidates is one of emphasis by the sound of it, it may reveal something more, we won’t know while they are both so marginal and isolated. It is certainly not a larger difference than say was contained within the Bolshevik Party both before and after the revolution. Why are there two separate organisations at all?
    Is it so that British socialists thousands of miles away and with only an inkling of what’s going on can call each other liars?

    Like

    Reply
  15. Liam Avatar
    Liam

    Bill – my ignorance of the Sri Lankan far left is extensive. I posted the thing to give readers a flavour of the election campaign and I’ll have to leave it to others better acquainted with the facts to comment.

    Like

    Reply
  16. R. C. Avatar
    R. C.

    Tamil liberation will not come under capitalism? Didn’t The Militant said the same thing about the Irish Liberation, wait until we win the elections? History shows that capitalism may not give social liberation, but sometimes, under strong pressure, he may recognize national independence for oppressed national minorities. The USFI tries to couple the struggle for national rights and the fight for social revolution, but we do recognize that independence is possible right here, right now. And we should defend it as a basic right for oppressed minorities.

    As a side note, The USP lost 77% of his vote since 2005. A balance sheet would be more useful at this moment than polemics against the NSSP (who also lost 25% of his vote).

    Like

    Reply
  17. Irish Mark P Avatar
    Irish Mark P

    Billj:

    The NSSP and USP used to be one organisation. They split when the NSSP decided to back the Indo-Sri Lankan accord, which was a deal between the Sri Lankan and Indian elites aimed at ending the civil war without involving the LTTE in the negotiations. The accord was the basis of Indian armed intervention in the North East of the country.

    The NSSP backed it. A minority within the NSSP (rightly) opposed it and a split occurred. That minority became the United Socialist Party and later grew into a more significant force than the NSSP.

    Before these elections there were discussions on the left about having a joint candidacy. The NSSP unilaterally terminated those talks by nominating its own candidate.

    I doubt if anyone on the British (or in my case Irish) left would have bothered to criticise the NSSP if it hadn’t been for the appeal above, which simply lies about the other left candidates, falsely claiming that only the NSSP (or more precisely its “Left Front” electoral operation) support self-determination for the Tamils and then falsely claiming that they have the backing of all left parties and social movements. I can certainly say that the appeal pretty much instantly changed my view of the NSSP’s candidature from benign indifference to mild irritation.

    Like

    Reply
  18. bill j Avatar
    bill j

    “Before these elections there were discussions on the left about having a joint candidacy. The NSSP unilaterally terminated those talks by nominating its own candidate.”

    Of course you unquestioningly repeat the story you’ve been told. You cannot have any intimate knowledge of why the negotiations were broken off. But that doesn’t stop you from condemning those who are not in your nominal “international”. You’re not of course in the least bit original in that respect. I suppose its just habit.

    Like

    Reply
  19. Duncan Chapel Avatar
    Duncan Chapel

    Bill, you can hear Bahu in English here: http://bit.ly/BahuVideo

    Moreno, the USP is [a] this side of the socialist revolution, not in support of the demand of the Tamil people for an independent homeland and [b] the far side of the socialist revolution, also opposed to it. They are for a unitary Sri Lankan state. They are in favour of the right to self-determination only when the Tamils don’t use it.

    The position you express on the national question is not Lenin’s, it’s Rosa Luxemburg’s. Luxemburg rejected the right of self-determination in principle, declaring that its achievement was impossible under imperialist capitalism and that under socialism its application was unnecessary.

    So, how about your most moral point: “Duncan says “the USP’s support for self-determination is fake.” Tell that to the Sinhala chauvinists (right and “left”) putting bounties out on Siri’s life.”

    The sad fact is that you don’t need to call for a Tamil homeland to be targetted by the death squads run the Sinhala police. You can be a judge, a journalist, a trade unionist, just someone who will tell the truth. It’s not only the socialists who are brave in Sri Lanka, it’s anyone who tells a truth the government opposes.

    If the NSSP really had simply supported the Indian peace-keeping force, how did the CWI react? The official history of the CWI says the differences were over the national question, and that it was only after the NSSP left the CWI that the USP was formed. Surely if this was true, the history would mention such a scandal and NSSP would have been expelled.

    Like

    Reply
  20. Irish Mark P Avatar
    Irish Mark P

    Duncan:

    The CWI reacted angrily. And supported the minority within the NSSP which opposed the capitulation of that party to the Indo-Sri Lankan “peace process”. That was the facet of the national question which led to the factional division and eventually the split. The NSSP supported the Indo-Sri Lankan Accord, the minority within it, which later became the USP, opposed the Accord.

    I am not surprised that you are ignorant of the NSSP’s history however.

    The USP is in favour of self-determination for the Tamils, including their right to a separate state. However, the USP argues that the fight for Tamil self-determination is inextricably bound up with the struggle for socialism across Sri Lanka. That is not a “Luxemburgist” position, but is a strategic argument entirely in keeping with Lenin. You are lying about and smearing the opponents of your organisation in another country, about whom you know next to nothing. That at least is entirely in keeping with the NSSP’s own practice, juding by the appeal which started this conversation.

    The NSSP/LF claimed that Bahu had the support of all left parties and social movements. It knew that to be false when it made that claim. You know that to be false when you defend them.

    The NSSP/LF claimed that Bahu was the only candidate who supported self-determination for the Tamils. It knew that to be false when it makde that claim. And you know it to be false when you defend them.

    Billj:

    I know for a fact that the NSSP/LF broke off discussions on a unity candidacy to nominate Bahu. I know no more about it than that and am certainly willing to listen to explanations for their actions from them. I did not just start putting the boot into them over the issue.

    The only things I initially criticised them over were the blatant and deliberate lies in their appeal. And yes, I do know for a fact that their candidate wasn’t supported by all left parties (there were two other left parties standing, one of which got more votes than the NSSF/LF). And I do know for a fact that they weren’t the only party supporting Tamil self-determination.

    Like

    Reply
  21. Duncan Chapel Avatar
    Duncan Chapel

    Mark, I am ignorant of faction struggles in the CWI in the 1990s – that’s true and, as you say, unsurprising – but that’s why I asked the question.

    But, seriously, if the USP supports the right of the Tamils for self-determination then why is not supporting the call for a independent Tamil homeland? That is the demand of the Tamil people. As far as I can see the USP instead says that, both before and after the socialist revolution, the Tamils should remain inside Sri Lanka.

    Like

    Reply
  22. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    Duncan:

    As a general principle, supporting the right to self determination does not mean advocating a particular use of that self-determination. The USP’s preferred option is for a free and voluntary socialist federation of the region. However it accepts absolutely the right of the Tamil people to choose their own path.

    The issue of the Indian-Sri Lankan Accords and the NSSP’s support for them is the core reason for the original split between the NSSP and the faction within the NSSP which opposed the Accords and later became the USP. That was the central difference between the two parties in the years following the split.

    Like

    Reply
  23. Duncan Chapel Avatar
    Duncan Chapel

    Yes, but if you support the right of the Tamil people for self-determination, then why are you not saying: “The Tamil people want a Tamil Homeland. If they want it, then we support them. Our party will join them them to work for independence.” What does your support for self-determination mean when, in the current context when the Tamils clearly want a homeland, your party continues to argue for them to stay inside Sri Lanka. Socialists didn’t argue for the Norwegians to stay inside Sweden, for for the Irish to stay inside the United Kingdom. Can’t you see the reason why the USP support for self-determination seems meaningless?

    Like

    Reply
  24. Mark P Avatar
    Mark P

    No.

    Firstly, a federation is the form the independence of any nation will take under socialism. We are not seeking to build a world of isolated “socialist” nation states.

    Secondly, arguing that the Tamils have a right to complete independence if they want it is not a “meaningless” position to take in a country where the expression of such sentiments is tantamount to a declaration that you are an enemy of the state.

    There is also the issue of strategy. How can the Tamils realistically exercise the right to self determination? That’s not a “moral” question, it’s a very practical one. Some thought that they could militarily win independence – that has now proven to be an illusion. Some within the Tamil community and in particular within the Tamil diaspora look for some combination of Imperialist powers to give them their independence – but in the unlikely event that it occurred what would result would not be “self determination” but complete domination by a different and even more powerful outside force.

    The United Socialist Party argues that the only way self-determination can be meaningfully exercised is in the context of a struggle for socialism alongside Sinhala workers. The Sinhalese masses are not all chauvinists and many of those who are can be won from a chauvinist view. Splitting Sinhalese society on class lines is the strategy the USP argues for. Now such a united struggle cannot be on the basis of the Tamils simply agreeing to drop their national demands. Instead it has to be on a basis which acknowledges the right of the Tamil people to self-determination – whatever they choose to do with that self-determination. That is the position of the USP.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Irish Mark P Cancel reply

Trending