Democracy as the Solution to Sri Lanka's Ethnic Crisis (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ethnic conflict, ethnic imagination and democratic alternatives for Sri Lanka
Futures, 2005
Sri Lanka's unitary state and consequently much of its pluralist contestations are products of a precise colonial legacy, particularly the organization and reproduction of the constitutional principle of European/British unitary state in the island. Only after decades of violent ethnic conflicts between the minority Tamils and the majoritarian Sinhalese population did the Sinhalese ruling elite realize the need for altering
Managing Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka through Constitutional Arrangements
NJIPS, 2021
Marginalization causes conflicts; they may be political, social, or economic. A careful contemplation over the history of Sri Lanka reveals that the sentiments of being marginalized have been presentin one (ethnic) group or the otherin the island right from its independence. When the majority ethnic group, i.e., the Sinhala, was in a position of power, it manipulated the constitution of the country to safeguard its own interests. This widened the rift among different ethnic and religious groups, especially between the Sinhala and the Tamil. This structural marginalization resulted in a civil war, starting in 1983, that lasted for 26 years. However, the ethnic conflict did not resolve even after the end of the civil war and continues to exist in the form of a political struggle between the Tamil and Sinhala. The Tamil demand for federation, autonomy, inclusion, and self-determination can only be achieved through constitutional means. Therefore, this research evaluates the post-Civil War constitutional development and amendment processes that were, at a point in time, more pluralistic and liberal, and contributing well to managing the ethnic conflict in the country. It was expected that the ethnic conflict would be permanently resolved through the constitutional arrangements, which Sri Lanka was already heading. However, the majority (Sinhala) reversed the progress through a new (20 th) amendment to the constitution. Against this backdrop, this article argues that all segments of the society can be accommodated in the political sphere of the state through political liberalization which is possible only through constitutional arrangements.
2017
The essay begins by providing a brief account of the peculiar nature of the trajectory of democratization in Sri Lanka that has not only widened democracy horizontally, but also has contributed towards deepening ethnic divisions and antagonisms. This essay argues that democracy is the hegemonic ideology in Sri Lanka despite many anomalies in its functioning. However, this clear unanimity with regard to the choice between democracy and authoritarianism disappears when it comes to the nitty-gritty of democracy and its functioning. The paper argues
Democracy and Civil War in Sri Lanka
This paper attempts to demonstrate how the Westminster-Style of democracy adopted at independence instigated the spiral of polarization that led to the Sri Lankan civil war. The underlying analysis will focus on political entrepreneurship and how the majoritarian system of democratic governance incentivized the Sinhalese majority to promulgate sectarian policies and exclude the Tamil minority from access to political power. The paper will seek to rationalize the failure of inter-ethnic co-existence and elucidate the radicalization of the Tamil minority through the lens of the relative deprivation theory.
IS FEDERALISM A SOLUTION TO SRI LANKAN ETHNIC CONFLICT?
NUJS' International Journal of Legal Studies and Research, 2018
The change of power in 2015 and Maithripala Sirisena becoming the President of Sri Lanka is said to have sowed hopes for a political solution to the ethnic conflict. But the President has openly expressed on several occasions his intention in not compromising the unitary nature of the state and the primary status of Buddhism, the prime reasons for the conflict, under any circumstance, in the new Constitution. This assertion by the current president reflects that Sri Lanka, the Germany of South Asia, is yet to learn a lesson from its historical mistakes. This paper analyses the effectiveness of a federal constitution as a political solution to the ethnic conflict of Sri Lanka. The author in this paper has argued that even if Sri Lanka comes with a federal constitution, it is difficult to retain the different ethnic groups united due to the difficulties in creating a common national identity, a mandate for the unity of deeply divided ethnic societies.
Abstract Reconciliation is a more forward-looking process of healing divisions between and within communities. It requires recognition of others‘ grievances and experiences and changes in policies that may have worsened the conflict or prevented greater cohesion. In the history of ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, ethnicization of politics and politicization of ethnicity have become very common. The politicization of ethnic and religious revivalism as also assertion of various ethnic and regional identities is posing serious problems for the integrity of Sri Lanka. The post-colonial Sri Lanka followed strategies of modernity and economic progress. However, the modernization and development process led to the centralization of development progress. The negative connotation of such centralization was the manifestation of discriminatory attitudes in terms of ethnicities and region. Discriminatory distribution of rights and privileges together with the arbitrary attitude of power elites led to a feeling of deprivation among minority ethnic groups. The Sinhala elites largely failed to strengthen the democratic institutions by decentralizing political economic power. Instead, they responded by strengthening and using coercive powers to preserve regime interests against minorities which paved the way for a civil war. Four years since the end of civil war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Sri Lanka is farther from reconciliation than ever. Devolution of power to the north and east is essential to for sustainable peace. It has become no less urgent with the defeat of the LTTE; indeed, the end of the war and the return of normalcy in those areas make real power sharing all the more important. In this context, the government has essentially rejected the need for any political solution or power sharing with the Tamil-speakingmajority in North and East under the 13th amendment. This is a remarkable change from previous governments. The current chaos on devolution creates uncertainty and, therefore, it is difficult to outline the future moves of the present government. But despite such problems, prospects for reconciliation through devolution should remain hopeful. This study focuses on the current crisis of the 13th amendment of the constitution of the Sri Lanka. The prime objective of this study is to critically analyze the ongoing debates over the devolution of powers to minority under the 13th amendment. The fundamental questions of this research are the following: why does the present government deny provision of reasonable devolution of power to minorities and its impact on reconciliation among the multi ethnic society of Sri Lanka. This research is a critical one based one interpretive analysis in which has used both quantitative and qualitative data have been used. Here, the stated purpose is being examined by studying both primary and secondary materials. This secondary data have been collected from books, reports, journals, news papers, official documents and research articles Keywords: Ethnic Conflict, Politics of Sri Lanka, Reconciliation, Devolution of Power.
Fiscal Devolution: A Stepping Stone towards Conflict Resolution in Sri Lanka
Countries afflicted by claims of territorial sovereignty within nation states have been predominantly preoccupied with sharing of administrative and political powers, as in the case of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. This article argues that fiscal devolution has the potential to empower the regions within contested nation states and thereby contribute to conflict resolution in countries afflicted by internal strife and armed conflict, taking Sri Lanka as a case in point. For too long, the political processes in Sri Lanka to resolve minority grievances have been preoccupied with the nature of the state (unitary versus federal), unit of devolution of political and administrative power (village, district or province), language, land, police and other administrative issues. Very little discussions have taken place regarding the division of financial/fiscal powers between the centre and the peripheries. All the previous political processes have failed on one political and/or administrative issue or the other. Even the externally imposed provincial council system under the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution has not lived up to the expectation of the minority communities because of the lack of devolution of land, law and order and fiscal powers. Though land and law and order power devolution continue to be contested , the matter of fiscal devolution has not attracted the attention of the protagonists or the opponents of the Thirteenth Amendment thus far. So, this window of opportunity should be made use of to promote fiscal devolution as a stepping stone towards a durable political solution to the grievances of the minorities,
Sri Lanka Nation Building, Devolution and the Thirteenth Amendment Full Article 24 Sep 2023 English
Nation-building cannot be accomplished by a top-down approach with the government dictating the rules. It requires the active participation of ordinary citizens in the shaping of a common political will, and the pursuit of policies that promote national integration. Governance institutions need to be more responsive to local needs and aspirations. “Nation-building further presupposes a socio-cultural structuring and integration process leading to shared characteristics of identity, values and goals.” It is not so much the homogeneity of these characteristics that is crucial, rather it is the acceptance and toleration of heterogeneity and the facilitation of inclusion.