|
Post-conflict state building and corruption
After decades of civil war, the following issues needs to be
considered. How to rebuild the state and nation which is based on
the assumption that there will be a permanent political settlement
of the ethnic issues, together with power devolution and the
establishment of democracy in the country.
Importantly, this should be addressed without any discrimination of
the Tamil community, which has suffered for many decades due to
deprivation of their rights, or the majority Sinhalese community
that has been ruling the country since Independence.
There is a need to consider how this shift has been shaped by
current understandings of the good governance and also in the light
of existing critical and post-war trends being taken by some local
and international commentators voicing dissatisfaction.
One consequence of a suitable framework of good governance is
that it regulates national bodies and domestic political processes.
Governance is a term which gives priority to the framework of
regulatory controls, ‘Rules of the game’ established at an
institutional level. For many decades, we have been suffering to
establish good governance which has been drastically compromised
since the 1980s. This erosion in governance has exacerbated our
inability to pass political regime in the country and so has
resulted in economic development being badly affected and unrest
among the ethnic minority.
State building, democracy and political autonomy are the end
goals that need to be attained. I will concede that some attention
is being paid to state capacity building, albeit as a spin off from
pseudo-politico capacity-building. Such pseudo activity has
encouraged local political groups to play a major role in party
politics in order to take mean advantage in spreading their narrow
and extremist political opinion to the both the Sinhalese and Tamil
extremists. Such arrogance and ignorance are seen to be crucial
aspects in de-stabilising the process of the political and economic
sphere and for down-playing social engagement in the political
process.
The most worrying aspect is the current development of adverse
international opinion on war and post-war political negotiation for
establishing a permanent political settlement of the ethnic issue.
The present government also seems to me to be avoiding this main
issue.
If we do not apply a suitable and acceptable political solution
to satisfy the Tamil minority, all international sympathy will go to
them. The Tamil community is widely spread around the world and it
currently stands together, massively supported (developed by all
past governments mistakenly, but now we complain to the
international community) by the international community, in
demanding an end to the struggle without arms. These developments
need to be considered very urgently. The government’s current lack
of consideration of the importance of the Tamil issue in the
political process shows how the prioritisation of governance over
government has integrated with critical and post-war trends in Sri
Lanka.
Most of the West looking at the conflict and human rights issues
sees a lack of domestic governance capacity. This, as we have seen
in the past few decades was mostly the consequence of political
elitism, developed by major ruling parties since 1977, for their own
survival. This has had an effect from grassroots level to the top
also, it hasn’t much political legitimacy. It’s very clear that
though we hold elections in the country very often, we need to
develop democracy and its associated processes without corruption.
Therefore, although it is very easy to intervene, the correct
approach required to develop due respect for peace and safeguard of
justice in the country is a different matter. It doesn’t mean that
the UN is going to involve by force in Sri Lanka under any condition
even if they want such things to happen. However, neo-liberal policy
is being promoted in all over the world through new economic and
humanitarian interventions. Countries which suffers internal
conflicts, the so called ‘failure states’ will most probably to face
post-war political interventions rather than traditional
interventions, sending UN force or other involvements. Today the
thrust, involve humanitarian intervention rather than sending in
forces to intervene in wars in conflicts ridden states. In this
manner present international interveners assume capacity-building
roles as the supporters and creators of state institutions of
legitimate governing authorities with a view towards developing
democracy and political interests. These should be taken into
account as being of considerable importance, as it has become one of
the main issues that we have been facing for decades without giving
it adequate attention in Sri Lanka.
International norms and, ‘Cosmopolitan’ law have gone hand in
hand with the redefinition of existing rights. At the same time
international organisations including INGOs, have attempted protect
human rights as they are highly considered and internationally
constituted. These replace domestically constituted, civil or
democratic rights and are at the centre of the new world order, than
states centered power development in traditional international
relations. Considering this new world order we need to address the
minority rights and democracy which does not need to be imported
from the West, if we know how to protect our own people in a
civilised manner ensuring their own rights and democracy. If we
don’t know how to do it, then we need to import western democracy
with their rules and regulations to develop a civil society and
democracy in the country. This, however, has not been a success in
practice, where they applied it in countries like Kosovo, Bosnia,
East Timor, etc.
International experiences
The question is whether we give them a chance to do it, showing
our weakness. This depends on the behaviours of the country’s
intellectuals and academic scholars in how they get involved in the
post-conflict state building process and political trends in the
country after war. Today’s export of democracy occurs commonly in
non-western states. These are being experimented in post-colonial
countries, and apply largely in the political sphere for good
governance in these weak states. Especially troubling is
international intervention for the export of democracy in
post-conflict states building rather than the use of existing
domestic politics and administrative processes which includes
scientific and technical processes. The major thrust of this is to
effect, social, economic and political reconstruction. This is the
new world order of international humanitarian intervention which is
on the way to Sri Lanka from the UN or non-state agencies. The
present situation of human crisis and ethnic unrest in the country
make it much easy for outside influence to interfere with impunity,
disregarding politics and administrative processes. If we have to
build up the peace and harmony among the majority Sinhalese and
minority Tamil community in the country, we need to change the
divisive ethnic mentality among the Sinhalese.
Under the new international mechanisms of democracy promotion and
state-building, borders are disappearing and with it increasingly
diminished accountability for policy making is effectively entering
domestic and international relations. We are unable to refuse any
international interference because we haven’t been able to do it so
far. If any one thinks that we are able to find a solution for
ethnic issue in an aggressively or arrogant manner without much
consideration of the roots of the ethnic issues in Sri Lanka it
would be a disaster for country in the future, although we have
defeated the LTTE by militarily any solution will not depend on only
on military mechanisms but would be totally based on how we analyze
the facts that cause ethnic unrest (very honestly and genuinely)
among Tamils community in the country.
Good governance
It is necessary to extend this discussion of the question and
contradictions that have developed by state building and democracy
promotion in the post-conflict context in this time. It’s
undoubtedly true that external intervention is going to make a major
impact on the good governance and political processes if we are not
able to act decisively in a democratic manner. Also, it can be
affected to a highly significant number if refugees return to their
former homelands without democracy or the autonomy in the political
sphere. Especially if power is transferred to politically elite
groups who will make use of such a situation, as has occurred in
east Sri Lanka. Unfortunately, I have to highlight here that it is
not as easy a task as we wish, without secure basic social and
political legitimacy. This is needed for the internal administration
and policy reforms to institutions that result in good governance.
Referring to the process of social engagement in the making of
policy and in the legitimate government; this takes place at a
variety of levels and through a number of different mechanisms which
include discussions. And inputs from special, academic researchers
and scholars who wish to discuss the issue in broad manner rather
than from a narrow point of view of this matter. This further
extends to public debate and civil society engagement as well as
more formal political campaigning and the party competition for
representation through out the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil
minority. If we do make such changes, then they can be developed
into the producing broader social and political development in the
country
Major issues for good governance, tackling corruption and
establishing the rule of law, are widely accepted as the central
question being faced today. This has been increasing over all
sectors and has damaged, and become a major disaster for any
development programmes for economic and political processes in the
country since 1977. It seems that this capacity for corruption
variously blamed for every problematic aspect of social, economic
and political life has become central issue of the political empire.
This is the issue we need to address today before we go further into
state-building or find the solution to the ethnic issues in the
country. It has interrupted to policy making and capacity building,
and it’s, of course, has affected the racial and cultural
understandings of problems in the past few decades.
Corruption
The anti-corruption framework appeals to the administrative
institutions and it legitimises increased regulatory intervention
and upholding of technical standards to empower the citizens or to
uphold and strengthen democratic institutions. For this, we need to
consider the practice of the rule of law regulation imposed within a
depoliticised administrative and technical framework of good
governance which is aimed at empowering and the capacity-building of
both state and citizens in the country. Over the last ten years a
high international importance has been given to the implementation
of an internationally coordinated anti-corruption strategy. This
experience of anti-corruption strategy and the good governance
agenda are lessons for us to apply for internal management of
capacity building and to strengthen state institutions which involve
maintenance the rule of law before we start to do state building in
the post-conflict situation in the country to get any lasting
solution to the ethnic issue. If we are unable do it today it may
results in having to repeat the history in Sri Lanka.
Responsibility of academics and intellectuals
It’s a responsibility of academics and intellectuals to think of
post-war state building and should be discussed in all university
academic groups within the necessary framework (within the Sri
Lankan context) that would lead to a final solution to the problem.
This should ideally be done without the involvement of local
political extremist groups and international interference. If we
avoid this opportunity it may encourage international agencies to
discuss the matter and propose solutions as they wish, such as
Indian influence. Also if there are no established suitable
mechanisms to address our issues, common western attitudes, which by
their analysis perceives non-western countries as failures with
ethnic conflicts, economic crises, and crime and human rights
abuses. Rather than having rational political causes, both present
and past non-western states have been considered incompetent and
their peoples incapable of solving problems without strong
international involvement. In accordance with this, international
intervention is more common to international politics with new
liberal imperialism. We need to later discuss this matter at
academic standard level than political negotiation which is to be
discussed later with political groups that are representing all
ethnic divisions in the country. Unfortunately this hasn’t happened
in the past and recent present. Rather, since independence, this
responsibility has only been taken by political parties with their
own agendas; because of this we have been so far unable to find an
acceptable permanent solution to our ethnic issue. If we give this
chance to find a solution to only political parties, it may be
another mistake.
Colin Athuraliya
International Relations
University of Westminster |
