The good, the bad, and the ugly and how it is

harder to tell them apart now

Friday, 25 August 2017

As with many other champions of just causes, Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe may have
gone from campaigning for justice to becoming just another crusader out to
claim his own rights and privileges. But unlike many other pseudo-democrats
who traverse the primrose path from paada yaathra to walking the national
interest tightrope, WR may still stand tall or find his way back into a Cabinet
seat if the pragmatic brand of politics practised by his parties and their leaders
necessitates it. Once a Man for all Seasons advocate for social issues, devils
advocate on knotty political dilemmas, not so nice nationalist for personal
power-oriented reasons, perhaps the former justice minister is a case in point
for the impermanence of all things political. There are no permanent friends in
governance; but civics and/or chauvinism will redound to the increasing
visibility of stellar bigots and star-crossed bureaucrats in civics and country
matters
In-laws can be a source of mirth as much as the fountain of mercy. (Im playing it
safe here, folks.) After all, they bring us our spouses in the same breath as they
bring us grief and grouses, but also offer common or garden goodness.

So when one matriarchal member made a pronouncement on the recently

beleaguered justice minister, it was with mixed feelings that I received her
conventional wisdom. Do take it with a pinch of attic salt, trite though it be. For a
rose by any other name would smell as sweet in summer or as sour in the fall.
Here is what the revered in-law said: I never trusted that Rajapakshe fellow. He
has the same name as the other lot of bad eggs

If this isnt casting false pearls before real swine, Ill eat my hat. But you must
admit, there is some merit to mother-in-lawwisdom. Since the only-yesterday
embattled Justice Ministers removal, her words have taken on a new meaning in
the light of the Rajapaksa not-quite namesakes exeunt.

Claiming principled integrity and personal injury in the same breath, the former
ministers Parthian shot has left an impression in some minds at least that there is
more than one way to skin a fat-cat or sell the family silver. Combining vitriol at
the Central Bank bond scandal the Governments bte noire and victimhood
at his own blas sacking over alleged violation of Cabinet responsibility,
Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe has captured the nations attention if not its entire
sympathy.

It might be hard for many if not most to empathise with a loud-mouthed braggart.
WR was not one such at least, his dulcet tones announcing his lamentable
removal have my m-i-l convinced that there may be more to the man than meets
the eye; despite or because of his unfortunate moniker.

He speaks well, she said, with a hint of puzzlement. Is he a good guy, then?
she asked, as I moved off into the middle distance with an air of detachment. I
mean, why ask me? After all, I am (only) a (humble) journalist I know nothing,
as another worthy assured the world, shortly before he committed that humbling
act of hara-kiri which politicos know as resignation!

For all I know, they may all be good guys WR, RK, et al. and it might be RW, MS
& Co. who are the villains of the piece. MR that arch-villain in the pice de
rsistance of all administrations seems to think that the fault lies in the stars as
well as in Brutus and Cassius. Brutus and Cassius themselves have agreed to meet
at Philippi, or have already met at the Prime Ministers 40th Anniversary in
Politics Bash, or the honeymoons second-anniversary after party.

Milieu: the middle of a mixed up mash-up

In such a milieu, it is hard to tell any more who the good guys are and who the
bad and ugly. On the one hand, some politicos slide from being good to becoming
bad overnight before going on to be perceived as an ugly has-been until power
and position beckon again as perhaps can be argued happened to Tilak
Marapone.

On the other, certain power-brokers leverage their position with such canny savvy
as to be all things to all people by design, and by default are seen as good, bad,
and ugly in one breath as maybe Ravi Karunanayake is now regretting for having
played the man for all seasons. In extremis (for he, unlike these two above, was
removed rather than stepping down or being compelled to fall on the sword) is
Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe positioned and being positioned as valiant hero, hapless
victim, and hypocritical villain by himself and his swains as well as critics.

So is WR a hero for standing his ground on Hambantota being sold for a song, as
he says it is? Or is he a victim of a mercurial Governments fickle barometer that
has its best and brightest as well as its individualistic bad-asses fall on their
swords when theyve been naughty boys and refused to toe the line or danced
some idiosyncratic baila on their own? Or is he just another hypocritical politico
hungry for power, whos using his 15 minutes of present infamy to crown himself
with possible future glory?

Because, while principles are the first line of a fallen politicos defence and
patriotism the last refuge of the scoundrel, being a nuisance to and being a
nationalist and being both are sure-fire ways to endear oneself to the prelate
as well as the public. Maybe, theres more than a modicum of truth to the maxim
that one mans meat is anothers poison when the banquet is a Government bash,
and that there are no permanent friends in politics merely artists who make the
possible a reality for a time under the sun.

Smidgen: the quintessence of a smorgasbord

So for a time under a now-forgotten sun, WR was the

quintessential straight-arrow politico. The old SLFP can take more than a smidgen
of pride in its erstwhile blue-eyed boy. Then there were the halcyon days when
as the ostensible champion of anticorruption drives under an antidemocratic PA,
he could more than COPE with the embraces of the UNP and NGOs/INGOs alike
even to the extent of being nominated widely-read business magazine LMDs Sri
Lankan of the Year in 2007 an accolade to which this writer was partial, and a
party to whom yours truly was privy to present the award collegially with the
editors of LMD.

There was lately the patronage he extended to violent bad-mouthed bigots, who
had previously enjoyed the support and protection of powerful bureaucrats then
ruling the roost. WR adopting them, championing them, and eventually
supplanting them when their most verbose venerable was taken out of the
jingoistic equation made him attractive to the JO in particular and ethno-
nationalists in general. Which, of course, blotched his escutcheon a bit with global
villagers, but enamoured him to the mahanayakas and dayakayas of the Buddha
Sasana Ministry of which WR was (justly, his defenders said) minister.

Even if others, including the ministerial incumbent himself, saw it as just a

stepping stone to higher office, since the Justice Ministry was not all that WR
desired or deserved (as he probably felt himself QED.). His evolution from a
crime-buster MP into a post-corruption crusader against minorities made him
least likely to secure elitist laurels of the like of LMD again. But interestingly it was
guaranteed to win him friends in high places in the SLFP from where he
originated, while giving the UNP that grass-roots (read Sinhala Buddhist) edge it
lacked, and cravenly desired. However, it was the Justice Ministers open defiance
of the Governments stand on bringing mandarins of the previous Government to
book that first got him into trouble.

Be that as it may, it was a convenient stumbling-block to the powers that be, to

have no less than its Justice Minister allegedly obstructing the course of justice.
Allegations that a senior bureaucrat of the regime past had found his home in the
then Justice Ministers heart brought tears of rage to those in the ranks of
Tuscany who (like Cato of old) would mutter, Carthage must be destroyed
Cato being the grim would-be prosecutors of Rajapaksa & Co. and Carthage being
the & Co. bit of that cabal.

All in all, it reflected badly on the present ethos of justice that pragmatic
coalitions wield over their political opponents heads like a Damocles sword
you never know when the instrument of execution would descend (or so the
public thought); while insiders suspected it never would: a deal having been
struck that like that, lets go (ohoma yung!).

If none of this answers my mother-in-laws question as to whether WR was good,

bad, or ugly, theres a fair enough explanation to be essayed. In politics in
cabinets as in kitchens things are rarely pure and never simple. If governance
was ever pure and simple, the good the bad and the ugly would have been bought
to book, locked up, and the key thrown away long ago.

Is a politico or his party or platform or principles or patriotism good or bad or

ugly is simply to frame the question in the purest of nave forms. It is either both
or all, a free-for-all in which the arrogant villains rub shoulders with the alleged
victims so intimately that in a particularly political interpretation of the
uncertainty principle it is impossible to predict the position and the predisposition
of any given politico at the same time. If you doubt this premise or question its
practical value, perhaps a faux-exam of the type I usually administer to my in-laws
might help you:

End of Term Paper

A. Essays.

1. Explain why ministers are falling like ninepins in Good Governance. Say bad
things about Hambantotas many humbugs and ugly things about pragmatic
politics.

(Full marks if you manage to alliterate Hambantota with humbugs and

pragmatic politics with president and prime minister.)

2. State a case for Cabinet accountability. Is anyone who violates it a basket case
or simply a selfish little bad boy playing to the gallery?

(No marks for confusing one Rajapakshe with the other Rajapaksas.)

3. Say that there is no merit in Cabinet ministers being sacked under Good (or Bad
or Ugly) Governance. Go on, I dare you to essay it!

(Marks will be allocated on a quota basis, or on strict rotation of portfolios.)

B. Short Answers.
1.Say that you love me.(Be brief.) Even if you leave me or I have to let you go for
show so that you can come back in one day through the back door. (Debrief.)

2. Attempt to sell the family silver. (Be careful.) Analyse how port projects in the
Deep South are different from national assets in the north east. (Be creative.)

3. Stop wasting time and bring Gota, Basil, & Co. to book. (Be short about it.) Or, if
you find that too hard or too hypocritical given the skeletons in your own closet
start marking time by bringing Madam and Junior to court. (Be as hard as you
like. Or hypocritical if you are a big old softy who cant be bothered prosecuting
anyone as long as they let you play at being princely democrat or petty dictator in
your party.What, you are already doing that? Well then, dont bother answering
this shortly.)

C. MCQ.

1. WR being removed because he behaved stubbornly on a personal power issue

hes a nationalist butsincerely in the national interest he has a personal
power stake is:

a.Good

b. Bad

c. Ugly

d. Who knows?

2. RK removing himself from an office to which he had been rotated as a sort of a

temporary punishment transfer is:

a. Good
b. Bad

c. Ugly

d.There is nothing good or bad, but RK thinking about it makes it ugly in the
fullness of time and boy, is that mans thinking cap screwed on something!

3. TM removing himself from one portfolio and being reappointed to another in

due course is:

a. Good

b. Bad

c. Ugly

d. That way of all flesh: that there are no permanent black sheep in an all grey
state!

4. TM removing himself from one portfolio (he got caught out) and being
reappointed to another in due course (no one remembers Avant-Garde now
except SF) is:

e.Good

f. Bad

g. Ugly

h. An umpteenth instance of it paying to fall on your sword before youre stabbed

in the back by folks who wouldnt deign to spit in your face. (Smile. Youre on
camera, minister.)

Well did you pass? If you did, perhaps youve missed the point! The idea is not
to pass but fail because those who pass muster are expected to perform
while those who fail can live to sit the exam another day, another way, another
instalment of the dirty game to play.

If that isnt good, bad, and ugly rolled into one at the single throw of the dice, you
must be related to me on my wifes side or be so pure and simple that politics
might appear like some sort of a holy grail in a glamorous romance in which
case: turn off the radio; crumple up this newspaper; and get thee to a nunnery.

In todays cut and thrust and dump and pump, theres no room for nave and
sentimental lovers of good governance, bad boys, or ugly things that do not go
quietly into the night; but slink away silently until the time is opportune for a
comeback through the rear entrance pun perhaps perversely intended.

(The writer is a former Editor of LMD.)

Posted by Thavam