|
|
Sinhala consciousness today
by Dayan JayatillekaSo what’s really wrong with the Sinhalese? "Know yourself, know your enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories" was Sun Tzu’s injunction for success, delivered in The Art of War, a millennium before the Buddha. "Who are our friends? Who are our enemies?" was Mao’s echo and refinement of this fundament. The main problem with the Sinhalese is that they show no evidence of having a correct understanding of themselves, their friends and their enemies i.e. the LTTE, its allies and quasi allies.
"Clarity, clarity..... above all else we must have clarity". That was Lenin, the towering genius of political strategy in the twentieth century. And clarity is, above all else, what the Sinhalese - or at least their articulate opinion makers - seem to lack. Unclarity, lack of a correct analysis and consequently of a correct general line. The correctness or incorrectness of the political line "determines everything", according to Stalin and Mao, whose performance against the most stupendous odds, vis-a-vis Nazism and Japanese fascism, should be the only proof one needs of the authority with which they speak on the subject.
Politics, to my mind, is the art of the handling of contradictions (while political science, is, by natural extension, the science of handling contradictions). The dominant Sinhala strata have shown an inability to clearly identify and heirarchise the contradictions they are caught up in and to select the appropriate methods to handle the different types of contradictions (antagonistic and non-antagonistic). For example, the contradiction with the LTTE is an antagonistic contradiction, by its very nature, and cannot be resolved mainly by non-violent means. All other contradictions (UNP vs. PA, Thondaman, TULF, EPDP, PLOTE etc.) are non-antagonistic ones, which have to be resolved exclusively, or mainly by non-violent methods.
A civilisational absence
The main weakness of the Sinhalese therefore is a weakness of thinking, of analysis. It is relevant to recall that Sinhala civilisation and culture features no philosophical figure, no outstanding thinker, no political strategist. Doubtless there were political and military strategists but there is no single written work, no text, not even a collection of recorded aphorisms of such let alone any philosophical or conceptual-reflective text. Many great leaders, warriors, heroes then, many a wise manoeuvre, brilliant tactic and sagacious stratagem - but no thinkers. What a remarkable absence; remarkable also in that it has never been remarked upon - because the absence has never been felt to be noticed!In parenthesis I would note that this absence is reflected in the history of Sri Lankan Marxism. Never has it produced a single contribution to Marxist thought internationally, while comparable in poorer, smaller societies have done so - ranging from Peru’s Mariategui, to Guinea Bissau’s Cabral, Martinique’s Fanon and Guyana’s Walter Rodney.
The absence of a capacity for or an interest in serious thought and deep analysis possibly stems from a fundamental flaw in the Sinhala Weltanschuung (world outlook) and ontology (way of being in the world), which structurally precludes the capacity for accurate criticism - self criticism - transformation. I hasten to add that this may be an unfair criticism of the Sinhalese as a whole and even the majority of Sinhalese because we really do not know how they think. However, it is a valid criticism of the dominant strata - bourgeois and petty bourgeois - of Lankan society.
Contending lines
Today, the consciousness of the chattering classes is becoming increasingly polarised into two camps. An ideological war is being fought between two lines, not least in the columns of this newspaper. In the paragraphs that follow, I argue that both these tendencies, among the intelligentsia and opinion makers, are erroneous - and dangerously so. I argue against these two contending ontologies, these two world-outlooks, in favour of a third world outlook, which is also a Third World outlook, an outlook valid for and rooted in our location at the periphery of the unipolar capitalist world system.Marx’s line about events in history occurring as it were, twice - the first time as tragedy and the second as farce - is true even in the realm of ideas. They appear the first time as concepts and the second, as cliches!
Take for instance, ‘civil society’, used by Hegel, Adam Smith and Marx, deployed by Gramsci and debased and devalued by the ‘post’ men and women i.e. the post-Marxists/post-structuralists/post modernists (or should I have said post-persons?). Another example is the phrase ‘unity in diversity’, which like civil society, has a Hegelian heritage. In today’s world, it is a pious Presidential platitude, its depth and dimensions obscured.
The Lankan intelligentsia and opinion making stratum is increasingly polarised between the Sinhala hegemonists and the neoliberal cosmopolitans. The former over emphasise the first term ‘unity’, to the near total exclusion of the second term, ‘diversity’. Thus overblown and ‘culturalised’, the word unity is no longer a synonym for a united state; is no longer located in the domain of politics, but is turned into a self congratulatory ("we Sinhalese are so tolerant") recipe for cultural - religious -ideological hegemony. And this ideological incantation grows more raucous, insistent and widespread precisely as the ability to maintain unity at the level of the state i.e. at the politico - military - economic - diplomatic level, begins to contract! Ideology develops and politics and economy underdevelop. Thus the development of (Sinhala) ideology is an ideology of (Sinhala) under development.
The neo-liberal cosmopolitans are the organic intellectuals of the neo-comprador class, itself the facilitator of neo-liberal globalisation and bride of the uni-polar world order. (Samir Amin, James Petras and Perry Anderson have, separately and differently, made this critique - but none more effectively than the Cuban Communists). Their project to deconstruct the state renders their function that of a fifth column, undermining the only countervailing factor against neo-dependency and its attendant catastrophic consequences for the people. The state is also the most effective instrument for progressive, social interventions and poverty alleviation. These intellectuals seek to weaken and delegitimise that instrument, enabling imperialism to capture, confiscate and liquidate it. The neo-liberal cosmopolitans emphasise ‘diversity’ therefore, at the expense of ‘unity’. Their preferred form of unity is the loose federation or confederation, that is the form promoted by Bakunin and the anarchists, and bitterly combated by Marx, Engels and Lenin on the basis of reasons that are ever more valid today. Solidarity with the people, identity with a nation, sharing the fate of one’s people are replaced by a tenuous new consciousness - and this philosophy of existential disloyalty, opportunism, upward mobility and careeristic individualism is rendered as the ideology of ‘deconstructing the state’/’unmaking the nation’.
The Sinhala chauvinists, for their part, having failed to defeat Kumar Ponnambalam in a phone-in debate on TV in Sinhala no less, agitate that the state step in and arrest the man! Meanwhile the neo-liberal intellectuals appease secessionist fascism by echoing and applauding Prabhakaran’s call for unconditional, third party mediated negotiations..... displaying total amnesia about the fate of the last mediatory third party, blown to bits in Sriperumpudur while being garlanded.
State and nation
The crucial problem thus goes unaddressed, namely, that we need a strong state, a state strong and confident enough to permit Kumar Ponnambalam free access to TV (and guarantee his right to such access) while outwitting and defeating Prabhakaran on the battlefield. The Sinhala chauvinists want a protectionist state, one that is protectionist not merely - or primarily - economically but culturally, educationally and ideologically. The 1972 Constitution and the mediawise and districtwise standardisation in university entrance (under the SLFP - LSSP - CPSL in the early -mid ‘70s) was the apogee of such protectionism. Under its thick, sunless canopy grew a generation of Sinhala pygmies, unable to debate Kumar Ponnambalam credibly, in the Sinhala language!The generations of Sinhalese who could and did compete in the international arena (e.g. The UN and its agencies) were educated precisely in the period of the least protectionism. Today, we have a system of educational apartheid: poorer Sinhalese who can never compete and richer ones, educated in international schools or/and abroad, who do not compete either but are co-opted and assimilated. Of course they compete as individuals (students, job seekers), but never in the sense that a Shirley Amerasinghe or Denzil Peiris competed and achieved - as Sri Lankans. These youngsters bring no pride to the Lankan state or to Sri Lanka as a country, not least because their own identification as Lankans is a tenuous one, subsumed under another latent or a aspired identity as Asian Americans, or simply employees of this or that organisation of transnational capital (even when they do live in Colombo).
The Sinhala chauvinists want the state to step in and strengthen the nation. Fine, but only if the principle of reciprocity is observed: the Sinhala nation must be strong enough to defeat Ponnambalam and Anton Balasingham on prime time TV, if the state is to be strong enough to defeat Prabhakaran. The rootless cosmopolitans want borders to be ‘democratised’ when the real task is to defend them. This stratum wants the state to commit suicide in slow motion, having inserted the economy totally into the world system, locked it in and melted down the key. The real challenge however is neither to opt out and curse the world system, nor to join it unconditionally, but to participate, compete, defend oneself against its inequities and always be assertive as a state, as a country and as its citizens. (Cuba is the finest example and Fidel the finest personification of this approach).
Nationalists
While the narrow nationalists rave about Kumar Ponnambalam and Tissa Vitharana, white skins are increasingly ubiquitous on the boards and managerial structures of enterprises in Sri Lanka itself - and other Lankans turn themselves into a service sector, metaphorically and literally, intellectually and materially, here and while abroad, for the new colonisers.Ideologies, projects
Emphasising the basis of united front tactics as unity and struggle, Mao excoriated the twin deviations of ‘all unity and no struggle’ and ‘all struggle and no unity’. Similarly we must combat the two erroneous lines of ‘all unity and no diversity’ and ‘all diversity and no unity’. The first is an ideology of pre-modernism, of a state which echoes that of Asiatic despotism, a tributary mode in which the non Sinhala Buddhists pay cultural, ideological and symbolic tribute to the majority. The second is an ideology of post-modernism, which skips over or by-passes the necessary stage, specially in the Third World, of completing the modernist revolution which is essentially a bourgeois-democratic revolution. The Enlightenment project of an Age of Reason has to be completed in the Third World, before it is sought to be superseded. The ‘Goddess of Reason’, who always maintained a low profile while domiciled here, fled Sri Lanka in 1956 - or was banished - and has returned since only in fleeting visits and heavy disguises. This island’s Age of Reason has yet to dawn - and it has already been ‘critiqued’ and ‘deconstructed’ in University departments and off campus institutes!Both the Sinhala hegemonists and their cosmopolitan foes further the deadly contemporary danger of political fragmentation - the former by slogans that cause overstretch and the latter by sabotage of the collective spirit of resistance to fascism.
At the risk of digression, a word or two to my friends (and former friends) in and around academia. As the millennium beckons, more fruitful than the ongoing ethnic war in historiography and social sciences may be the application of core-periphery, world systems and Gramscian analysis to the island’s recorded history.
Discernible core
Is there a discernible core, periphery, semi-periphery and hinterland? Does the shift of capital cities correspond to a shift in the locus of accumulation? What are the periods of crisis? Are there discernible rhythms in the island’s history? In other words are there cyclical patterns or long waves (a la Kondratieff and Cameron) or both - and if so what is the periodisation? Within these rhythmic patterns, which periods are those of expansion i.e. upswings (A phases) and which those of contraction i.e. downswings (B phases)? What are the dynamics that take place during the upswings; what are the typical dynamics of the downswings - and what clustering of factors/phenomena do we discern in the transition from one to the other? What of the formation of blocs (‘social’ and ‘historic’) throughout this long sweep? What are the identifiable blocs and their constituent fractions - and what of the decomposition and recomposition of blocs, with their changing relations of hegemony and subalternity? Which fractions were hegemonic, which were dominant and which subaltern - and when, how and why did these positions change? What of inter and intra bloc rivalries? What were the modes and mechanisms of tribute extraction and the trajectories of surplus transfer?These questions should, I suggest, form the analytic and research agenda of progressive Sri Lankan scholarship.
To sum up then: between the Scylla of Sinhala hegemonism and the Charybdis of rootless neo-liberal cosmopolitanism must sail the vessel of a progressive centrism, raising the standard of a Sri Lankan Social Democracy and a strong modern state. This third world outlook, this Third ontological perspective and the project and programme that issues from it, constitute the only way out of the protracted, deepening, almost hopeless Lankan crisis. What better time for its consideration and self critical adoption, than the impending Millennial moment?
Globalisation and South Asia: Retrospect and prospect
Presidential Address by Professor A. D. V. de S. Indraratna at the SLAAS 54th Annual SessionsContinued from yesterday
Avowedly due to these changes, China has started growing fastest of all countries of this region at nearly 10% per annum in 1991 and has been able to sustain an average annual growth rate of around 11% since then. We will have something more to say about this paradigm of whether the sustained development of Korea and China was owing to globalisation alone.
Globalisation and South Asia
What about our own region? As I stated earlier, Sri Lanka led the way in South Asia in opening her economy and liberalising her trade, in November 1977. The growth rate which was less than 4% before, more than doubled to 8.2% in 1978, averaging an annual growth rate of 6.14% in 1978-1982, with unemployment halving from around 23% in 1977 to 11.7% in 1982. Unlike Korea or China, however, she was not able to sustain this growth, despite her continuance with the liberalisation reforms even on an increasingly intensive scale, with increased privatisation of public sector enterprises and financial deregulation. Since 1983 the economy was on a downward trend reaching a record low growth rate of 1.5 in 1987 with an average of 3.7% for 1983-1989. Although the war can be held as an excuse for this, reversal would have in any case occurred due to such factors as fiscal profligacy, the absence of a core of macro-economic policies for proper management of the economy, and unostentatious life styles which our people adopted to keep up with Joneses, since liberalisation. More about this later.The other countries of South Asia such as India and Pakistan took much longer than Sri Lanka (in fact as much as 14 years longer) to join this presumably inevitable process. I do not really know whether the old adage "fools rush in where angels fear to tread" applies to us in this case. India might not have found globalisation as a cure for her poverty (see below). Nevertheless, India’s faith on globalisation was somewhat justified by the scenario which subsequently emerged. The economy began to grow at more than five times the 1991 rate of 0.8 per cent; the inflation rate had declined from 14% in 1991 to less than 10%, and the external reserves had risen to a record level of $20 billion, in 1994; with exports increasing by 21%, the trade gap had narrowed to $1 billion and the debt service ratio had come down. Foreign direct investment which was only a trickle before India opened up, had risen to around $4.5 billion, inclusive of portfolio capital, and the largest share of it had come from USA and Japan (Economist, August 6-12, 1994), the greatest advocates of globalisation.
Pakistan joined hands with India in pursuing a Iiberalisation policy. It regularly reduced tariffs to reach a level of 35% by 1997, implemented a programme of rapid privatisation with its third nationalised bank being privatised in 1995, and deregulated the exchange system and the economy to, abolishing the investment; licensing system and opening banking, transport and power to the private sector. The economy picked up in the following year with a growth rate of more than 7%, but this could not be sustained.
The budget deficit could not be contained, inflation was creeping up? Current account deficit was rising and debt service ratio was increasing. The Pakistan experience of the aftermath of globalisation was thus not as salutary as Indian, Bangladesh, the third largest country in South Asia followed Pakistan and India and introduced wide ranging open market reforms, even though it did not go as far as the two of them. Its average tariff had come down to 26%, and non-tariff barriers had been removed, by 1995. Exports had increased by 37% in contrast to a GDP growth rate of 4.1% and the current account deficit had come down to a mere O.5% of GDP, in 1995.
Nepal and Bhutan followed suit by liberalising its trade not only with India but also the rest of the world, and by privatizing its manufacturing sector. Following India’s example, Nepal went even further by adopting a floating exchange rate with full convertibility for current transactions. By 1994, Nepal’s import weighted average customs duty had come down to 12%. Its exports - almost entirely private led - increased by 20-25% in dollar terms with the GDP growth rate climbing upto 5%, while the current account deficit declined from 9.3% in 1991 to 6.% in 1994, with the value of external assets rising to 10 months’ imports.
Generally speaking, as stated above, the countries of South Asia were increasingly liberalising their economies and moving towards integration with the global economy, since the beginning of the nineties, with Sri Lanka having given the lead even before in November 1977. However, as described above, unlike in East Asia, it was not a case of unmixed blessing for them: India seems to be the only country which has been able to sustain upto now the growth momentum gathered with the onset of globalisation.
It is true that the South Asian Region, as a whole, achieved spectacular growth in exports, inflow of private capital including direct foreign investment, since globalisation. Being the largest repository of about 1/5 (18% in 1995) of the total work force of the world, South Asia also found it a great boon to be able to export its labour not only to the Middle East but also to East and South East Asia, (even though to a much less extent), as a result of globalisation. In Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, for example, migrant remittances has become one of the largest foreign exchange earners, amounting to more than 6% of the GDP, whereas in India, Nepal and Pakistan, they account for 2%-5%, of the GDP.
Another positive development resulting from globalisation is the development of tourist industry in this region. Even though the potential here has not been fully exploted tourism is also increasingly becoming one of the major foreign exchange earners in countries like Sri Lanka, Nepal and Maldives. In Sri Lanka and Nepal tourist earnings contribute 2%-4% of GDP (IMF Statistics).
Unequal Benefits
Notwithstanding this positive side of globalisation what strikes one most is the fact that the South Asian Region, as a whole, was not getting an equitable share of the benefits which were deemed to have been flowing from globalisation. This is all the more striking because, though this region has been the second fastest growing region of the world, second only to East Asia, it is still the poorest. It contains one fifth of the world population but has a per capita GNP (1995) of $ 350 much lower than that of even Sub Sharan Africa, whose per capita GNP is $ 490.The inequity of sharing of benefits of globalisation is clearly seen when one examines the comparative growth in GDP, exports and net private capital flow of this region with some other regions. In the most recent fifteen years of 1980-1995 for which comparable data are available, while the world GDP and that of East Asia and Pacific and high income countries grew by 160% and 190% respectively, the GDP of South Asia increased by only 100%. In the case of exports, the world total grew by 157%, East Asia’s by 416%, but South Asia’s by only 235%. In the case of net capital inflow, while that of East Asia and the Pacific increased by more than ten times (1079%), that of South Asia rose by only three times (319%). The relative shares of South Asia in the world GDP and Exports between the beginning and end of this period also highlight the comparatively poor economic performance of South Asia and the inequity of the sharing of benefits of globalisation.
South Asia’s share of the world income (GDP) declined from 2.0% in 1980 to 1.6% in 1995, while the share of high income countries has increased from 72% to 81% with the share of East Asia and Pacific rising slightly from 4.3% to 4.8% during the same period. On the other hand, the seven richest (G7) countries with only 11.9% of the world population has further increased its share to 67 percent or 2/3 of the global income, during this period. In regard to exports, while East Asia and Pacific doubled its share of world exports from 3.5% to 7.0% and High Income Countries by 10% from 69.6% to 77.7%, the share of South Asia remained abysmally low at 0.9 % from its I980 level of 0.7 %. South Asia thus, in common with other developing countries, has also not been able to reduce its poverty levels through globalisation has proceeded for nearly three decades.
There is evidence to show that poverty in individual countries also had increased. In Sri Lanka, for instance, between 1973 and 1986/87 the share of the lowest 10% income group decreased from 1. 6% to 1.09% and that of the highest 10% increased from 29.98% to 41.3%, with the Gini coeficient rising from 0.41 to 0.52. In India, the percentage below the poverty line had increased from 34% in l989/90, just before liberalisation to 41.2% in 1992 two years after it.
Several reasons can be adduced for this increase in poverty levels. One of them is the decline in the relative share in the export trade to which reference has already been made along with the cumulative fall in the terms of trade for these countries - over the past 25 years a 50% fall. Another is the loss of about $ 60 trillion annually due to agricultural subsidies (CAP in EU) depressing thereby the commodity prices receivable by LDCs and protection through quotas (for Textiles and Garments in the USA) and use of NTBs .
Yet another is the unequal treatment in the transfer of technology whereby developing countries have to pay for transfer of IPR. Japan quickly recovered from the devastation caused by the Second World War, almost doubling her per capita income between 1945 and 1954 by adapting and developing US technology - the same thing US did in the 19th century by adapting and developing British technology. Paradoxically, the same countries are now imposing on the developing countries heavy licensing and patent charges for using their technology. There has been no significant transfer of technology to the South. Instead there has been much greater emphasis on enhancing the rights of holders of IPR in the North. TRIPS agreement of the Uruguay Round for instance, was more favourable to the countries of the North and Trans National Corporations.
Another cause is the neglect of their agriculture due to what I have termed export illusion - that is rushing in for low value added manufactures like garments for export because of their export value, reflecting high value adding food crops and even export agriculture and local resource-based manufactures. Sri Lanka is a good example for this. In the years 1982-1997, net output each from agriculture and export processing grew by a mere 2.3 per cent annually, whereas that from factory industry, 2/3 of which comprises textiles and garments, increased annually by nearly 20%.
It is interesting to note at this juncture that countries like Korea and PRC, which have benefitted from globalisation much more than South Asia, have been able to reduce the number of their absolute poor. China reduced it from 23% in 1970 to 5% in 199O and Korea from 33% in 1978 to 7% in 1994. The reason is this: Even though these two countries accepted liberalisation and globalisation as a matter of development policy they did not indiscriminately leave everything to the market or the private sector like what we seem to be trying in Sri Lanka. Without passively submitting to global markets, the state of Korea, intervened and guided the economy implementing a core of macroeconomic policies including import substitution and income redistributive measures to attain clearly defined objectives and targets. China after opening its doors to foreign goods and capital, continued with the regulatory mechanisms of its socialist economy, for industrialisation, agricultural development and welfarism with specified objectives and targets.
Negative Pall-out
Apart from these mixed and uneven blessings of globalisation which I have only outlined here due to constraint of time, there are several negative elements or outcomes of globalisation, without reference to which my task would not be complete. One was the damage done to the environment mainly because of the high mass consumption of the North (Rostow’s fifth and last stage of growth). They are responsible for emission of as much as 85% of the green gases. It was, in fact, accepted at the Rio Summit that the North should take a much larger share of the blame for exploration of the global environment with depletion of the ozone layer and global warming. There has not been global action planned, with the developed countries shouldering greater responsibility for preventing its further degradation; Instead the developed countries are pontificating to developing countries that they should protect the environment to have sustained development while at the same time propagating environment unfriendly agricultural practices such as of excessive use of chemicals and inorganic fertilisers on the one hand and when these developing countries are grappling with the dilemma of alleviation of abject poverty and conservation of resources and environment protection, on the other.Another negative fall-out of globalisation is the increase of crime within national borders. International terrorism and drug trafficking, proliferation of arsenals of armaments and deadly weapons, child sex abuse and money laundering. International drug smuggling has risen to unduly high proportions. Foreign nationals can guide with global positioning system (a navigational device which uses satellite signals) trawlers/ships hundreds of miles away to unload into other trawlers/ships narcotics/drugs. We had a typical case of this in Sri Lanka where a foreign national was caught. Until very recently, there has been precious little action on the global front to arrest these. Abuse of internet facilities is also on the increase. In addition to harmful disinformation campaigns by terrorist groups, internet has been used to accuses to pornography and blue films and allegedly even to credit other people’s credit cards with the costs of such access. Invisible to outsiders may be armaments industry is thriving in some developed countries giving a helping hand to international terrorism, much to the detriment developing countries like ours. Is it not paradoxical that the biggest exporters of arms today are the five permanent members of the UN Security Council!
Still another is a change in the life style of people of South Asian countries. With globalisation, consumption has been rising faster than production. Demonstration effect has been strong and developing countries have been trying to keep up with the Joneses. Luxury cars, coco cola and celltels have become part of daily life. Many of these countries have been gutted with cheap electronics and spotted with KFCs, MacDonald Hamburgers and Pizza huts. With the share of the income of the poorest section of the people decreasing further, relative deprivation has been increasing as a result. Domestic savings have not been rising fast enough and realizable growth rates have been falling. The sort of life style, now taking root in these countries, propagates a culture that glamorizes wealth; affluence, avarice and selfishness and even thuggery that tend to undermine the traditional culture of South Asia which enables the virtues of simple life and moderation. We see quite a hit of this happening now in our own country, under our own eyes.
Unequal Partners
As hinted earlier, globalisation can be compared to a fast ship. It is fuelled by technology and steered by Transactional Corporations (TNCs). There are two sets of passengers on it, LDCs of South Asia in its economy class, and the rich developed countries in the first class. For the two parties to share the benefits of this voyage of globalisation equitably, if not equally, they must be on equal level. This is not so.South Asia suffers from two types of handicaps. One is an handicap which has grown from within and the other imposed from outside, namely by the North, the rich developed countries. Two major handicaps from within are the inadequate economic infrastructure and low productivity. The level of infrastructure and productivity helps to determine a country‘s success or failure in diversifying production, expanding trade. Attracting foreign investment! Improving environment and alleviating poverty etc. for which globalisation provides opportunities. The handicap imposed by the North stems from the poor economic power of the South and subtle discriminatory trade practices of the North and the stranglehold of the TNCs.
Let me examine them briefly. First, the inadequacy of the economic infrastructure. Of the Asian regions South Asia comes out worst in regard to the economic infrastructure. Private investment, whether local or foreign is reluctant to come in when the infrastructure is inadequate which provides the external economies.
This may be one of the reasons why South Asia with 20% of the world population received a tiny fraction of only 1.4% of the net private capital which flowed into 107 countries (excluding 26 high income countries). This was higher in 1980 with 2.6%, that is before South Asia was liberalised except for Sri Lanka. The private sector of these countries is also not always willing to make good this inadequacy because of the huge capital outlay required as well as the low private benefits accruing from infrastructure investment. The governments of these countries have, therefore, to fulfil this role of providing adequate infrastructure.
When it comes to productivity the picture is even gloomier. South Asia once again suffers from one of the lowest productivity levels in the world, (excluding perhaps India). This is owing to not only the inadequate economic infrastructure but also the low R&D expenditure "in Sri Lanka it is less than 0.2% of GDP, compared to more than 2 % in Thailand and Korea) and the outdated education system".
Continued tomorrow
'Dreaming of a white Christmas'
By Rene AryaratneChristmas Christ’s birthday is almost upon us and nostalgia for those long ago times are beginning to take hold of me, my thoughts trail back to childhood Christmases spent so lovingly with our dear, departed father and mother and only brother, in Nuwara Eliya.
Our home at "St Michaels" was a lovely little country cottage, encircled by tall pines and green cypress and boasting a garden of richly scented flowers.
So many things had to be done in preparation for the great day. The first priority was making the Christmas cake. This was mummy’s forte, helped by four little girls and our little brother, the raisins, sultanas, cadju nuts and preserves, ginger, chow chow and pumpkin, were cut. Although mummy was ever so vigilant our little mouths worked harder than our fingers did. But, not to worry, as all these ingredients were bought in excess! When all the cut up ingredients were put into a large basin containing the creamed butter and sugar, we all joined in the stirring, the final stir had to be given by the head of the house, father. This was in keeping with tradition! Then to the bakery at ‘Abraham Saibos’ - now no more! Here the cake mixture in a large pail was put into cake tins and popped into the oven. Mummy however did not budge from the bakery for half an hour! Why? Because it was well known that the bakers sneaked a little of the mixture from each tin to make a sizeable cake for their own profit. The cake making over mummy made sweets, coconut rock, milk toffee not forgetting her speciality Turkish delight. A big six pound breudher was also prepared and also the Christmas pudding. Added to these sweetmeats were the kavun, kokis, athirasa and galkissa bibbikan, not forgetting the kaludodal, all of which was gifted by our grandparents in Colombo, so that on our Christmas table east and west met!!
It would not be Christmas without the sweet smell of the pine tree filling all the corners of the house in cold winter lands, as an emblem of immortality! This evergreen tree has been a tradition for many. Hundreds of years, the custom of having a brightly decorated tree inside the house has spread to all four corners of the world. This popular trend was set by Prince Albert, Queen Victoria’s German consort who introduced Christmas trees to Windsor Castle for the pleasure of his own children.
It was our job to deck our tree with decorations specially imported from ‘Gamages’ - a toy store in London. What fun it was blowing the balloons and clipping on little, coloured metal candle-holders and sticking fancy candles into them. In those long ago days there were no electric jets. I remember one Christmas night our tree was almost reduced to ashes!! Fortunately the mishap was spotted in time and our tree saved!
Food for the Christmas table was another important factor boiling a 20 lb leg of ham was an important operation. The ham was gifted every year by a dear family friend - the late Mr. Edwin Perera. God rest his soul!
When done, having been in the boil for almost two nights, mummy breadcrumbed it and dotted it with cloves.
Then there was the Christmas pudding, every family member is expected to lend a hand in the stirring of the pudding. The final stir is by the head of the family - father. It was customary to add to the pudding mixture before it is boiled, a silver coin, a thimble, a button and a ring. In the course of serving the pudding the one who gets the coin will become very rich! For a woman the thimble foretold her remaining a spinster - for a man who gets the button it foretold confirmed bachelorhood - the ring indicated marriage, finally there are Christmas bells, remembering that old carol "I heard the bells on Christmas Day."
Christmas Eve to us children was the most exciting!! Good old Santa Claus was expected. We heard the tinkling of bells announcing his arrival. We greeted Santa with a well practised carol, next our reports had to be shown and then came the gifts first on the list was a book. Brother Lorenz always got the yearly edition of "Tiger Tim’s Annual," as well as the most expensive toys. The girls got the usual - sleeping dolls and sewing kits and books. Then Santa had to be refreshed. remember he was dead beat after his long sleigh ride from far away Toyland." He was served with a giant slice of ham and a glass of good old arrack known in Nuwara Eliya as "Bambarakelle", (The tavern was here).
Come midnight the time was ripe to attend midnight mass, we walked to our church, "Holy Trinity". Ooch!! It was freezing cold. The cypress trees were heavily encrusted with thick frost! Frost paved the road and as we stepped on it we heard the crunching of ice!!
The night as I recall it was full of stars. We were reminded of that bright star that the shepherds in far off Judea saw so many centuries ago. It gave us a refreshing sense of hope, that while so many superfluous things change, there are the enduring varieties - such as family ties. After all it was to visit the family of Joseph, Mary and their new-born infant Jesus, that the shepherds and the magi came to Bethlehem almost 2000 years ago. These thoughts were uppermost in our minds as we entered the church and kept silent vigil at the crib.
The Christmas service over we congregated outside the church in the cold. Now was the time for meeting and greeting with hugs and kisses we said "Happy Christmas". I still can see those loving, familiar faces, most of them long departed from our midst. There were the Keyts, Bartholomeuzs, de Zilwas, Jansens, Van Royens, Jacobs, Modders, Lallyets, not forgetting our venerable pastor an his dear wife, the Rev. J. L. Williams and Mrs. Williams.
Returning home all we wanted were our beds and hot water bottles!
Christmas morning, our festive table was graced with the Christmas flower the Ponsietta! Breakfast was the traditional kiribath and lunumiris, not forgetting the Christmas cake. On each plate were two bon bons waiting to be burst by eager hands. The little trinkets and mottos hidden in them thrilled us!
Christmas night was fireworks night! The big rockets were handled by father. We handled the sparkles and Catherine wheels. I remember how on one night a parlour firework exploded and nearly blinded my little brother’s eyes!
In Nuwara Eliya the Christmas season ended on December 27th. On this day the late Mr. J. H. de Zilwa and his dear wife the late Eileen, held their annual social and Christmas tree, in which almost all the families in Nuwara Eliya participated. The Christmas tree was something out of this world!! And guess what? My late father — good old V. C. Perera, played Santa Claus...
Refreshments were in plenty. The children received gifts. While the men enjoyed beer, the ladies sipped wine.
How, very family those long years ago Christmases were. Today our loving parents and almost all of those dear people I associated with, are just a sad, sweet memory!! Yet the warmth and love they emanated live on.....
Today I sit alone, dreaming of those white Christmases - just like the ones, which together with my dear ones, I used to know, their memory tho’ sad are lovely, and remembering them, I say a prayer of thanks for those happy and fulfilling times, seeing in my mind’s eye all those dear folk, who shared so many Christmases with me."
