Assessing NPP’s Political Balance Sheet One Year Later
Photo courtesy of Newswire
On September 21 Anura Kumara Dissanayake will be completing his first year as president of Sri Lanka. The government of the National Peoples Power (NPP) is an unprecedented experiment in Sri Lankan political history. This is the first time a left-leaning coalition has formed a government. Left wing parties have been in coalition governments but only as junior partners.
The JVP, the driving force of the NPP coalition, has been an outsider to the country’s traditional economic and political elite. As a party with roots among the ordinary masses in rural and semi-urban areas, the JVP was generally seen as a peripheral figure in politics; more a party of protest but never a party of government. Therefore, the 2024 elections that brought this political outsider to the centre of power sent shock waves across the political spectrum.
In the aftermath of the general elections in November 2024, I argued that the NPP’s mandate comprises three dimensions: revitalising democracy, ensuring a just economic revival and fostering better relations between ethnic communities. These were the main aspects of the NPP’s political and electoral discourse and therefore constitute the core dimensions of the mandate. To what extent has the government been true to this mandate? How to assess the progress or the shortcomings of the government? The first anniversary of the Anura Kumara Dissanayake presidency provides a pertinent moment to ask these questions and examine the new government’s political balance sheet.
The populist logic
The critique of the political establishment was the central theme the NPP highlighted during its election campaign. This anti-establishment discourse is what distanced the NPP from the two mainstream parties as both were depicted as belonging to the same corrupt establishment. This message had a cross-cutting appeal among diverse constituencies. The NPP’s strategy was to establish a political antagonism between the people and the elite political establishment, which reflects the approach of what is known as populism in political literature. This is not to suggest that the use of populist strategy by the NPP was a conscious theoretical preference of that party. However, from the outside, the populist traits of their approach are readily apparent.
To avoid misinterpretation, it is imperative to clarify what the term populism indicates. Populism has a negative connotation in certain political and academic circles as a demagogic tendency that aims to undermine the foundations of a democratic polity. This negative connotation is associated with the rise of right wing populism in many countries, both in the Global North and South. Thus, there is a tendency to treat populism as anathema to the functioning of a democratic system as right wing populism tends to impose categories of exclusion such as racism and xenophobia.
However, the logic of populism has been invoked in the opposite direction, too, questioning entrenched power structures that disempower the masses. This variant of populism, which is known as left wing or progressive populism, does not denounce the principles of equality and popular sovereignty, which are the foundational principles of a democratic system. Instead, these movements tend to invoke constitutive principles of popular sovereignty and equality in a democratic system in a way that challenges anti-democratic tendencies that can prevail in a democratic polity such as elite capture of political power.
Therefore, whether the logic of populism is a threat to democracy depends on the specific way and the form in which it is articulated. Invoked in a progressive form, it has the potential to rejuvenate democratic values, which could strengthen and deepen the democratic quality of a political system.
Democratic rejuvenation
How events have unfolded in the last few months in Sri Lanka testify to this rejuvenating effect of the populist logic. In contrast to the SLPP, which has historically mobilised mass sentiment against ethnic and linguistic minorities, the NPP’s populism depicted the political establishment as the enemy of the people that has deprived the masses of their sovereignty. The anti-establishment critique of the NPP comprised two demands: making politics accountable to the people by ensuring the rule of law and accountability for misdeeds committed by political figures and state officials and reducing the gap between those who govern and are governed. It is important to note that these were also the demands that were highlighted during the aragalaya protests in 2022.
The NPP government seems to have understood that its legitimacy largely relies on its commitment towards addressing these demands of a political nature. From the inception, the NPP government has shown keen interest in this aspect. It has launched a sweeping anti-corruption drive that has brought many former influential figures before the court of law on charges of misappropriation of public funds. The recent arrest of the former president Ranil Wickremasinghe was a pivotal moment in this drive as this was the first time in Sri Lankan history that a former head of state was summoned before the law on criminal charges. This was something once deemed impossible. Several prominent figures of former regimes, including Namal Rajapaksa the heir of the Rajapaksa dynasty, have been indicted and await trial.
A series of reforms have been introduced or are being implemented that aim to curb the privileges of those who hold political office. This includes slashing the controversial pension scheme offered to parliamentarians and the privileges accorded to former presidents and their relatives. Lavish bungalows in Colombo that were previously allocated to government ministers have been redirected for public purposes. The practice of filling government vacancies at the direction of chits issued by politicians has come to an end.
Critics have argued that these actions are merely symbolic and have no substantive impact on the political system. Even if considered as symbolic measures, the message generated through these decisions is of far reaching relevance; it establishes and reinforces the norm that democratic politics is about serving the interests of the demos and representatives cannot have a privileged existence disconnected from the lives of the represented. There are other interesting developments, too. The link between the political apparatus and organized crime has been decisively severed. There is a general conception that the elected members of the new regime are largely not corrupt and work with a considerable degree of integrity.
There is much to do to democratise our political system further. A new constitutional arrangement that empowers the citizenry vis-à-vis decision making and extends the scope of fundamental rights to social and economic life stands out as a vital necessity. To what extent the government will move towards this direction is yet to be seen. However, few would dispute the government’s relatively positive record in enhancing the democratic quality of the political system, which can be considered satisfactory, if not impressive.
Economy: challenges and contradictions
In contrast, the economy seems to be where the government has encountered many dilemmas, challenges and contradictions. The economic environment the government inherited cannot be separated from the consequences that followed the 2022 economic crisis. The great contradiction that lies in the crisis is as follows: while it sharpened the democratic imagination of the masses, strengthening an anti-establishment sentiment, the economic discourse saw a sharp shift towards the right, especially after Sri Lanka entered into an IMF bailout programme in April 2022. Thus, an anti-statist, libertarian tendency emerged dominant in mainstream economic debates that attributed the reasons of the economic crisis to state overreaching in the economic realm.
The NPP assumed office in a context that allowed little flexibility regarding economic policy preferences. On the one hand, the country was under an IMF bailout programme with stringent controls on government fiscal measures. On the other hand, the Ranil Wickremesinghe government entered a debt restructuring deal with international creditors before the new government assumed office. The terms of this deal remain highly problematic and have been criticised for not providing sufficient relief.
The NPP’s policy before the elections was to continue with the IMF programme but to renegotiate terms to ease the burden of austerity measures. The economic trajectory of the NPP government reflects continuities as well as discontinuities from the economic pathway the Ranil Wickremasinghe government adopted in the aftermath of the 2023 Extended Fund Facility (EFF) agreement with the IMF. There has been no deviation from the larger framework dictated by the programme. Nevertheless, there have been attempts to address the economic and social consequences of the financial crisis with greater attention given to the poorer sections of society.
For instance, the maiden budget presented by the new government largely remained within the fiscal targets established by the IMF framework but also included measures to provide relief for the poor and middle class strata through increasing subsidies, providing relief on taxes and raising wages for public sector workers. Another significant rupture can be seen in the importance given to the revival of state-owned enterprises and the suspension of the large scale privatisation process initiated by the Wickremasinghe government.
For example, Sri Lankan Airlines, which was often depicted as the poster child for the need for privatisation by neo liberal think tanks, is kept under government control. Furthermore, the government amended the Ceylon Electricity Board Act enacted by the previous administration to halt privatisation while restructuring the entity to improve efficiency within the framework of state ownership. The Ministry of Industries has embarked on an ambitious journey to revive SOEs in multiple sectors and the government is working on establishing a development bank to facilitate the long term capital needs of industries.
In debt negotiations, the NPP manifesto called for the adoption of an alternative Debt Sustainability Analysis (DSA) to ground negotiations with external creditors on a more favourable premise for Sri Lanka. However, this stance became obsolete as the Wickremesinghe government entered a debt restructuring agreement with external creditors a few days before Anura Kumara Dissanayake was elected president. On this front, the NPP government has opted for compromise. It has not sought renegotiation and has continued with the existing agreement.
Could the government have done otherwise? Ideally, the government could have denounced the debt restructuring agreement for failing to offer substantial debt relief and taken a more confrontational stance towards external actors like the IMF and foreign creditors. However, the political ramifications of such an approach should not be understated. The constraints the NPP government faces at the economic level reflect the complexities and dilemmas any progressive-oriented government in the Global South will have to encounter under the prevailing conditions of the international economic order. As evident from numerous experiences in other Global South countries, confrontation with the powerful actors of this order would invite enormous pressures that might include forced isolation, institutional sabotage or even sanctions.
It seems that the government intends to avoid such a scenario. This appears to be a pragmatic compromise. However, the tensions between the NPP’s stated vision to develop a production-oriented economy with a guiding role attributed to the state and the constraints imposed by an unfavourable international economic environment would continue to shape the future of the government’s economic policy direction.
National integration
When addressing the national question, the government seems to have adopted a somewhat novel approach compared to previous governments. After the war ended in 2009, there were two distinct approaches to address specific grievances raised by the people in the North and East.
The first approach, informed by the liberal peacebuilding concept, focused on promoting constitutional reforms that facilitate regional autonomy for North and Eastern provinces. This approach, followed by the Yahapalana government (2015-2019), is in one way a continuation of the strategy adopted by the previous Chandrika Kumaratunga (1994-2000) and Ranil Wickremesinghe (2001-2004) governments.
The opposing approach to the national question in the post-war era was represented by the Rajapaksas, envisioning a Sinhala majoritarian solution. The Rajapaksas were explicit on the privileged position the Sinhalese hold in the country. Both constitutional issues and issues of a humanitarian nature arising from the conflict, such as the issue of ensuring accountability for enforced disappearances, demilitarisation and returning land acquired during the conflict were ignored. Instead, a developmentalist solution was proposed on the premise that the people in the North and East needed development not devolution.
The NPP government’s position differs due to several factors. The liberal peacebuilding and Sinhala nationalist frameworks were proposed by governments that did not have a notable mass base in the North. The NPP government differs in this respect as the NPP secured a significant number of votes in North and Eastern constituencies during the last general election. In fact, it emerged as the party with the most seats in the North and East at the November elections. The NPP has a network of MPs, ministers and local council members in the North and East and therefore it is not external to these constituencies, at least in the same way the former governments have been.
On the other hand, how political rivalries have changed with the election of the NPP has far reaching implications for ethnic relations. Not only during the war but even in the aftermath, the political scene was divided along ethno-nationalist lines. Sinhala nationalist elements in the South whether in the government or opposition tended to mobilise people along anti-minority lines. This, in turn, strengthened ethno-nationalist tendencies in the minority constituencies as well.
The NPP’s rise has weakened the Rajapaksa political project, which has been the primary perpetrator of militant Sinhala nationalism in the South. As mentioned, this has been replaced by a new political rivalry between the corrupt political elite and the people. Consequently, the rigour of Sinhala nationalist domination has weakened, which has created a better opportunity for improved ethnic relations.
The government’s strategy to address the concerns of minorities seems to be premised on three considerations: maintaining a profile as a government of all people and therefore a regime of non-discrimination, addressing problems of a humanitarian nature associated with the civil war, and focusing on the development of economic and social infrastructure in the North and East. The government has consistently maintained a non-communalist profile, which has been proclaimed in multiple forums.
The government has taken several measures to address grievances related to the conflict. For instance during his latest visit to Jaffna President Dissanayake spoke about the actions taken to return the private land acquired by the military, the matter of enforced disappearances and the much-publicised Chemmani mass grave. The cabinet recently decided to complete investigations into 10,500 complaints of enforced disappearances within the year and allocate Rs. 375 million to fund investigative mechanisms.
Significant attention has been given to North and East development. There was a considerable allocation of funds for this purpose in the NPP’s maiden budget and during his recent Jaffna tour President Dissanayake commenced several developmental projects including the Myliddy fisheries harbour, Jaffna international cricket stadium, E-library programme of the Jaffna Public Library, a regional office of the immigration and emigration department and a project related to the development of the coconut industry. NPP’s focus on development differs from Rajapaksa’s developmentalism due to the disassociation from the Sinhala majoritarian discourse and the association with a discourse of equality and non-discrimination.
On the other hand, the main difference between the NPP’s discourse on national unity and liberal peacebuilding approaches lies in the importance given to the constitutional question of power devolution. The NPP election manifesto promised a new constitution with power sharing provisions. However, it appears that, to date, the government has largely refrained from engaging in this question, suggesting a cautious or tentative approach.
By avoiding the more divisive question of power devolution and focusing instead on humanitarian concerns, the government may be employing a political tactic to refrain from giving militant Sinhala nationalists in the South any grounds for remobilisation. Nevertheless, constructing a common Sri Lankan identity based on solidarity and equality is an enormous task and much remains to be done to accomplish this. Promises on returning land, complete demilitarisation, aligning anti-terrorism laws with international human rights standards and the release of Tamil political prisoners are yet to be fulfilled. Progress on these matters is vital if the government is to maintain unity among diverse constituencies that rallied behind its victory a year ago.
Whither the opposition?
With the NPP in power, Sri Lanka seems to have entered a phase of political modernisation that aims to revive democratic values and norms. Reconstituting the relationship between the representatives and the people, establishing the rule of law and anti-corruption measures, severing the link between politics and organised crime, bringing discipline and integrity to the functioning of the state apparatus – all these represent different aspects of a modernisation project in politics.
This modernisation task has long been overdue and interestingly it has been assumed not by the western-oriented elites who claim to be experienced in politics but by a new generation of politicians with plebeian social origins, moulded by a political force that has long stood outside the political establishment. The challenge before this political force is to maintain the connection between this political modernisation process and a progressive economic agenda and to develop it towards an authentic nation building project.
For now, it seems that the government commands considerable popular support. The reforms at the political level have been extremely popular, and the opposition has failed to advance a counter discourse that can surpass this popularity. In the aftermath of the arrest of Ranil Wickremesinghe, certain opposition ideologues have artificially tried to theorise the need for an anti-fascist popular bloc comprising Ranil, Namal and Sajith, which implies that the government has taken an authoritarian route.
It is unlikely that the people would view anti-corruption measures against influential figures of the former political establishment, twice rejected during the aragalaya protests and the 2024 elections, as a turn towards authoritarianism. The masses tend to celebrate these actions and look at them in a positive light. The more elements of the opposition object to these moves, the more they will be detached from public acceptance.
The post Assessing NPP’s Political Balance Sheet One Year Later first appeared on Groundviews.
