Anti-imperialism: Rhetoric and reality
The old clique twice kicked out by the people on January 8th and August 17 for imposing an authoritarian regime on them has again appeared in their thread-bare garbs and is rehearsing for another circus performance. While the conductor is behind the scene prominent on stage are the comedians belonging to the fringe outfits of the UPFA. As before their proclaimed credo is “Salvation of the country”.
They say that imperialism is trying to devour our country, to annex it to their empire. Is this news? All those who have even a little knowledge of world affairs and history knows the objectives of imperialism. Imperialism thrives on the subjugation of dependent countries.
However the world has changed much. The system of subject colonies has been thrown overboard. Imperialism now uses neo-colonialism instead of direct colonial rule. There is an unholy trinity – the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization that directs neo-colonial plunder of dependent nations. A rational struggle against imperialism should obviously oppose this holy trinity.
This could be done both within and outside these organizations and in alliance with similarly placed developing nations. It cannot be an isolated struggle. Hence real anti-imperialism means a relentless struggle for an independent economic development. This serious and long drawn-out struggle cannot be replaced by rhetorical onslaughts on imperialism in public which reminds one of ill- disciplined village drunkards challenging everyone under the influence of liquor.
Most governments in office collaborated with imperialists to develop and consolidate capitalism in the country while engaging in tirades against imperialism to gather support of the masses for their political agendas. They never dreamt of bypassing or replacing capitalist relations. Though several anti-imperialist measures were taken by the national bourgeois in power in alliance with the working masses they began collaborating with imperialism especially after the middle of the 1960’s.
The Mahinda Rajapaksa administration also followed the same path. It did not hesitate to offer privileges on multi-national companies or obey the dictates of international financial agencies. No could anyone say that it acted in a people-friendly manner. Rajapaksa administration did not clash with imperialism on the economic front. It clashed basically on certain human rights issues which arose in association with the war and the war environment. Western nations became sensitive to this situation since a considerable Sri Lankan Tamil Diaspora lived as refugees and citizens in them. At the same time the Rajapaksa regime pursued a repressive domestic policy in an effort to perpetuate its rule. The consequences of its naïve and foolish foreign policy led to the seclusion of Sri Lanka in the international community.
This shows that the political forces that rallied round the Rajapaksa regime were not anti-imperialist in deed despite their strong anti-imperialist rhetoric. That is why one should not be carried away by their present pseudo-patriotic slogans and rhetoric. They are merely means to regain political power by hoodwinking the masses and exploiting their love for the motherland.
Their entire argument is based on a false premise that says that western nations and India are out to bifurcate Sri Lanka. This is a total fabrication. Really all countries recognize the territorial integrity of Sri Lanka and defend it. It should be remembered that some of them provided strategic assistance to Sri Lanka during crucial moments in the war. It is only those whose imagination has gone wild that could conclude that India which has banned the LTTE would support a separate State led by it in the backyard of India. Similarly it is not to the interest of India to have an unstable Sri Lanka as a neighbour.
Though it is not the reality let us for a moment assume for the sake of argument that there is a threat of bifurcation facing Sri Lanka. In that case how could it be faced? Obviously it would need the unity and strength of all Sri Lankans. Mahinda Rajapaksa clique, on the other hand, is doing all it can to divide the people both racially and religion-wise. The consequence of such action is the weakening of the country and the people in face of an external threat. That is a situation favourable to imperialism as seen by the experience of Iraq and Syria. Certainly, the ultimate result of the action of the pro-Mahinda clique would be place Sri Lanka in a really vulnerable situation.
The struggle against imperialism is basically a struggle for independent economic development. It is a long and arduous struggle. You need to educate, mobilize and guide the people to pursue that struggle. Anybody who abandons that task is no real anti-imperialist however much he berates imperialism day and night.
Let us not forget why the people defeated the government of Mahinda Rajapaksa on January 8 and again humiliated him on August 17. They did not vote against capitalism. They voted against the neo-fascist form of capitalism practised by the Mahinda Rajapaksa regime. Actually they voted for democracy and good governance. They had, however, no illusions about the democracy they anticipated. Compared to the situation under the Rajapaksa regime much progress has been made in terms of democracy and popular freedoms. Much more ha to be done. It is also clear that there are forces opposed to change inside the Government too. Hence, the delay in implementing many election pledges.
The struggle against the Geneva Resolution is only a prelude to a bigger struggle that would emerge when the proposed Constitutional changes are put forward. Reactionary forces would definitely try to sabotage the drafting of a new Constitution. It is only through a new Constitution that present and impending changes could be made irreversible.
What is required to overcome imperialist influences is a domestic and foreign policy based on national requirements. Actually the foreign policy is only an extension of the domestic policy. An enlightened foreign policy is a must in order to develop cordial and friendly relations with all countries. For historical reasons most of our foreign relations, especially economic relations are with Western nations. Hence it would be foolish to neglect them, similarly we have to develop relations with China and the emerging nations, especially of the BRICS group.
Needless to say that our relation with our closest neighbour India is a special one which has to be nurtured and developed. We have to be mindful of geo-political strategies of world and regional powers if we are to maintain our independence and defend our national sovereignty. For example, we should not be a party to the design of the United States to involve us in a strategic alliance to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region comprising the USA, Japan and India. It would be more appropriate to work towards a tripartite arrangement comprising India, China and Sri Lanka for maintaining pace and stability at least in the Indian sub-continent area. A similar arrangement is there in North East Asia between China, Japan and South Korea.
In the context of today’s developing multi-polarity of the world non-alignment has a revived vitality.