A Mandela for Lanka? — We’re crying for the moon!
Who is Nelson Mandela? What are those qualities of head and heart of his which have made him an international icon?
When Mandela completed his address to a joint session of the Houses of Parliament in London in 1996, it was said that there were many wet eyes among British legislators. Even Sri Lankans watching the programme on Sky T.V. were reported to have been deeply moved. What is it in the man that evoked such a response from people who had not even seen or heard him speak earlier?
James Gregory, in his compelling and moving book "Goodbye Bafana — Nelson Mandela, my prisoner, my friend", reveals the kind of man Mandela is. Gregory was Mandela’s jailor for over 20 years and was a witness to Mandela’s innermost thoughts, fears and desires. He was a zealous advocate of apartheid but ended up becoming an intimate friend of the future President of South Africa. The extraordinary friendship between the two led to the one-time jailor being invited as a personal guest of the President at his inauguration.
As Mandela was walking out of Victor Verster jail on 11th February, 1990, he handed to Gregory an envelope in which was enclosed a note "the wonderful hours that we spent together during the last two decades end today. But you will always be in my thoughts, meantime I send you and your family fond regards and best wishes".
Gregory writes "As Nelson walked to his car, the third in line, he veered over and came to me. Without saying a word he put out his hand and I put out mine. We shook firmly.
"He said, ‘this is goodbye’. My throat was closed, blocked. Several times I swallowed, ‘Ja,’ goodbye and good luck.
He looked directly into my eyes and I could see the tears. He let go of my hand and grabbed me by my shoulders and embraced me. I hugged him back. We did not move and all around us people stood still not wishing to break us.
As he eased his grip he added, ‘No, this is not goodbye. We will see each other again’.
At that moment I knew in my heart this man was going to lead my country and I bowed my head slightly and said, ‘thank you, Sir.’
The fact of the matter was that Mandela’s strength of character, courage and wisdom had transformed Gregory’s outlook on life. As their friendship blossomed over the years, they had become each other’s confidant and source of comfort.
The quintessential Mandela comes to light in an incident which Gregory relates in his book.
It was February 3rd 1990. Gregory goes to see Mandela in his room in Victor Verster jail expecting to find him excited and in high spirit because on the Previous day, F.W. de Klerk, the then President, had announced the dismantling of apartheid. In a dramatic speech in parliament, de Klerk had announced the lifting of the bans on the A.N.C., the Pan-African Congress, the South African Communist Party and thirty-one other illegal organizations. He had announced "the time for negotiations has arrived".
Gregory says, "Good morning, Nelson, howzit man?" Mandela replies "Good morning, Mr. Gregory. I’m fine, thank you. How’s the family today? How’s Natasha? any exam results yet?"
The jailor comments "Same old Nelson, always interested in someone else, always inquiring with that genuine concern for another person, when surely this morning of all mornings, his mind would be filled with the implications of de Klerk’s speech."
I was prompted to write this brief note on Mandela after reading in the recent issue of a week-end newspaper, a letter captioned "wanted a Mandela for Sri Lanka." Not a hope. Just forget it. We — I mean, the ruling elite, especially the English educated among us, are such a mediocre, self-centred lot, utterly devoid of the "genuine concern for another person" which Gregory writes of, as being the essence of Nelson Mandela.
In October 1962, when Mandela was indicted on charges of having incited African workers to strike in the previous year and having left South Africa without a valid travel document, he conducted his own defence and addressing court before sentence was passed, said.
"Your worship, I would say that the whole life of any thinking African in this country drives him continuously to a conflict between his conscience on the one hand and the law on the other. This is not a conflict peculiar to this country. The conflict arises for men of conscience, for men who think and feel deeply" (No easy walk to freedom — articles, speeches and trial addresses of Nelson Mandela - Zimbabwe Publishing House (Pvt) Ltd, 1965).
To think deeply and to feel deeply and to have a conscience — this is something totally alien to our clowns and buffoons, thugs and murderers who masquerade as the servants and liberators of the people.
To be a Mandela means to be able to live a life of great renunciation which comes naturally to people who are not attached to the things of the world. The torture and privation Mandela endured during his 27 years in prison, because of his commitment to the freedom of his people bear testimony to the fact that he had turned his back on the good life, which is what our "educated" class is solely concerned about.
"For my part, I have made my choice. I will not leave South Africa, nor will I surrender...The struggle is my life, I will continue fighting for freedom until the end of my days", Mandela once wrote in a "letter from underground" on 26th June 1961, on the occasion of South African freedom day (Mandela — No easy walk to freedom).
Basically, Mandelas are strangers to the ways of the world. They do not hanker after money, power, position, status and so on which have no intrinsic worth. But this is what Sri Lankans, even those who wear the yellow robe or the cassock, go after. Hence to cry for Mandelas is to ask for the moon.
The readiness with which Mandela stepped down from the Presidency, once his period was over — can anyone even imagine such an act of "letting go" happen in this country?
by Stanley Jayaweera (Avadhi Lanka)
Open letter to Sanath: ‘Curb your style till the time is right’
You should know that your countrymen who loved you and regarded you as the doyen of cricketers are now beginning to be concerned about the manner in which you open the innings for Sri Lanka. We think that you should NOT open the innings for Sri Lanka. Gone are the days when your swashbuckling tactics in the one-day game brought you runs. But, now all the other countries know your weakness for deflecting shots on the off and they are ready and waiting for you to make the same old mistake.
See the record — 0, 0, 6, 1, 0, 10. Three times out to the VERY FIRST BALL. No other batsman in the world has this record. When McGrath & Fleming drop a fast bouncer on your toes you are not ready. You try to deflect the ball on the off, hoping to see it through the slip fieldsmen, but they are eagerly waiting for your suicidal shot! Also, when you made 340 against the Indians and was within easy reach of Lara’s record, they bounced a ball right on your toes and you offered no stroke. The ball hit the bat and they took an easy catch. Like Aravinda, you should offer the full face of the bat and not try to glance the ball.
Even the world’s greatest crickter and batsman of all time, Don Bradman, never opened the innings. He went down at the fall of the 2nd or 3rd wicket, seeing how the openers fared, and thereafter he massacred the English bowling. But, you want to hit every ball from the very start, be it a Test match or a One-Day game, cavalier tactics to please the crowd. But this can demoralise the entire team, and it is a wonder that we won our recent matches in spite of your batting. Try to be at the wicket for a little while and study the bowling before you lash out. Even Bradman did that, so why can’t you? See how Ponting comes at the fall of the 6th wicket and is still able to score a century.
Muttiah Muralitharan — When he was being thrashed by Ponting, Murali kept on dropping the ball in the same place instead of varying his pace and swing. Shane Warne is a tactician and Murali should emulate him. Also, when a bowler is being thrashed, the captain should remove him from the firing line immediately and bring him on later if necessary. DON’t allow the batsman to get used to his line. There is no loss of face for the bowler. It prevents the batsman from thriving further.
Arnold — He took 1 wicket for 3 runs in 4 overs and broke a big partnership at a critical time. How, then, is it that you DID NOT BRING HIM on for a second spell? Everybody is asking this question.
Kalu and Atapattu are easily the best openers. Kalu is also of the swashbuckling type. But he controlled himself and played a restrained gem of an innings for 95 not out. He played with great responsibility, like Don Bradman, and never lifted the ball ever. Please take our advice in the spirit in which it is given, for the Honour and Glory of Sri Lanka. Millions are now waiting with bated breath for the show in Sharjah. Please do not let us down.
GOOD LUCK TO YOU!
Prof. M. B. Sahabandu
‘Not a statement’ of Avadhi Lanka
Editor’s note: We apologise for the headline error. The news report covered an address "to some Avadhi Lanka activists" by Mr. Champika Ranawaka, the organiser of the National Movement Against Terrorism, as the body of the report made clear. The report itself was supplied to us by one of these activists. Sorry about the headline error.
Your esteemed Newspaper on its issue of the 3rd of October, 1999 on page 3 carried a news item entitled "Fight Not Against Tamils, but Prabhakaran and his gang:— Avadhi Lanka." This is to inform you that Avadhi Lanka did not have any discussions with the National Organizer of the Movement Against Terrorism as reported by you. Moreover, the title of your news item is misleading as it indicates that the title given by you to the news item is a statement of Avadhi Lanka.
Please be kind enough to give adequate publicity to this statement that we are sending contradicing the news item.
President’s donation of gifts received
A few days ago one of the leading newspapers had a photograph captioned ‘INTEGRITY’ and showed Her Excellency the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, looking rather whistful, and parting with all the wonderful and expensive gifts she received for the last 4 years from other countries. We have to assume for the sake of Protocol, that the President received these gifts from other Heads of State and not from some ordinary generous businessmen.
The question uppermost in our minds is why did the President wait for 4 years before she decided to hand over all these ‘goodies’ to the Treasury. Obviously there is a law which compels the Head of State to hand over any gifts over a certain value to the State and not accumulate them. Unless of course, this is another ‘election gundu’
It is customary for a Head of State to name the dignitaries who gave these gifts. Why is it that no names of those giving these gifts have been mentioned. Even if these are kept in the National Museum, these should be properly catalogued. That is how the people of this country know. Surely, these were not given to the President in her personal capacity. If so, as President, she should refuse to accept them.
Now coming to the value of the gifts, it appears that in all the 4 years of her extensive travels, our poor President has ONLY got gifts to the TOTAL value of a mere Rs. 2.5 million, which today is about US$ 35,000/-! Can anyone imagine a Head of State getting this paltry gifts, unless ofcourse our exalted President was treated as a poor relation by other countries. The ONLY valuable item is the Piaget Ladies Watch which is valued at Rs. 2 million, so ALL the other gifts TOGETHER is ONLY Rs. 500,000!
I hope the opposition and the media will ask the President to identify the Heads of State and also the dates on which she received these gifts.
Lal Fonseka
Colombo 8
Setting the record straight
Having read the article "Sinharaja and Uda-Walawe "setting the record straight", appearing in the Sunday Island Features, of 26.09.1999, I would like to set the record straighter.
During the administration of British period Uda-Walawe was one of the main "elephant kraaling" regions of Ceylon (Sri Lanka). After the country gained independence in 1948, this region was earmarked and later developed into an irrigated agricultural scheme and the Forest Department commenced unrestricted logging operation within the proposed Uda-Walawe reservoir and its catchment area. In its wake large scale encroachment by people estimated at around 10,000 were in occupation of the land area above the reservoir bund resorting to slash and burn, chena, bannana and ganja cultivation, gemming, poaching etc., and causing tremendous confusion.
In 1968 the Director of Wildlife Conservation, Mr. Lyn de Alwis, together with Mr. A. B. Fernando and his wild life staff visited Uda-Walawe twice. Seeing the devastation and havoc done to the environment by such a large population within the catchment and the damage it could cause to the sitting of the reservoir, intended to resurrect the region, by removing the encroachers and mobbed the idea of a park. Unfortunately he could not fulfil the task then, as he had to leave the country for a few years on an assignment in Singapore.
However his successor the new Director of Wildlife got the area in question, (119 sq miles) declared the Uda-Walawe National Park, on 30.06.72. Besides this the period from the date of declaration until late 1977 to quote Loris Vol XV No. 4 of December 1980. "During the 6 year period that followed, the Park did not receive an, attention at all, and was nobody’s baby". "But as a National Park it was still born " It was a mere paper declaration that gave it a legal status".
Declaring on area a National Park under such prevailing conditions was madness. It was no wonder very many people ridiculed the declaration. Mr. Lyn de Alwis was not one of them, as stated in the article. He was out of the country at the time.
However the fact remains that after late 1977 with the return of Mr. Lyn de Alwis as Director Wildlife Conservation once again, meaningful steps were taken in stabilizing and developing Uda-Walawe National Park. The illegal encroachers were all evicted, proper controls and management was instituted. The elephants returned to the area and a gradual build up of other species of animals commenced and Uda-Walawe National Park was officially opened to the public to view it on 15th September 1980 offer a lapse of 8 years since it was declared a National Park.
Childers Jayawardhana
UNP and the ‘War’
An English language tabloid newspaper has attributed within quotes to UNP and opposition Leader Ranil Wickremasinghe, a statement so outrageous that it should concentrate the mind of every individual Sinhalese elector, besides commanding the immediate attention of the National Joint Committee, and especially of the National Movement Against Terrorism.
The Midweek Mirror of 06 October quotes Mr. Wickremasinghe as stating: "If the military approach is the solution, then we have fought and failed" The next day’s issue of this paper, the Daily Mirror of 07 October, carries neither retraction nor correction.
Hitherto, it had been his consistently stated position that the failure of President Kumaratunga and the PA Government successfully to neutralize the armed challenge of the LTTE to the sovereign unity, and the unitary character of the Sri Lankan state, had been due to the fundamental flaw of subordinating military strategy to the dictates of a partisan political agenda. He had contrasted this with the military performance of UNP times.
Now, with the patent objective of garnering the minority vote at the forthcoming national elections, he has, by this one contemptibly cynical throw-away sentence, repudiated the ultimate sacrifice made during these past several years by the flower of Sinhalese youth.
Contrary to the rhetorical assertion otherwise of President Kumaratunga, the Sinhalese electorate has been deeply concerned with the threat posed to national sovereignty and unity by her so-called devolution package. That electorate would doubtless have considered the desirability of an UNP alternative. Now, they have their answer. For, Ranil Wickremasinghe was a senior Minister of an UNP Government which gave arms end ammunition to the LTTE, ordered 650 or so police personnel to their deaths through surrender, and engaged in undefined talks with the LTTE to the nation’s disadvantage.
Ranil Wickremaisnghe, desperate for the minority and peacenik vote which conventional wisdom has hitherto regarded as being in the preserve of President Kumaratunga, has not only dismissed as an irrelevance that sacrifice of the flower of Sinhalese youth, but is clamorously demanding the same sort of undefined talks with the LTTE which have already twice lead the country to grief: the first time under President Premadasa, and next under President Kumaratunga.
Meaningful talks can only ever take place between parties who proceed from the same agreed starting point/s. In this instance, that agreed common starting point has necessarily to be the twin propositions, that the unity of the country is sacrosanct, and that democratic plurality must be the inviolable principle of governance.
C. Wijegooneratne
Colombo 8