Pathology of a Decadent Democracy: Sri Lanka on top of the Failed States Index 2013 By Athulasiri Kumara Samarakoon Sri

Lanka has obtained the 28th place in the Failed States Index of 2013. The Foreign Policy magazine publishes this index annually since 2005. For the last eight years, Sri Lanka has never been within the positive ranks of this index, a composite representation of a countrys social, political, security and economic stability. International taxonomy of countries using an array of diverse variables contributes for a system of global governance constituted with intervention mechanisms in the issue areas, inter alia, of security, development, poverty and political instability. Nevertheless, the politics of constructing indices and using them with vested interests seems an integral dimension of the global political reality today; but, as members of the international community, we need to closely scrutinize the edifying messages contained in global rankings; and, if possible, adopt them for correcting the dilapidated systems and institutions of our states. Endless search for cynical interpretations of international political structure and its workings can help small states very little in its survival in the international system. And, therefore, realistic implications of the Failed States Index (FSI) for Sri Lanka oblige more in-depth reading of causes which really has made it a failed entity as a nation. If a certain state is ranked within the critical and vulnerable perimeters of this index, then that country is considered as an unstable state, which is unable to provide basic amenities and democratic rights for its citizenry. During the last phase of the Eelam war Sri Lanka was used to receive varying ranks, but within the positions from 25 to 29; and those countries ranked on top of this index are basically identified as most critically unstable states. In 2013, Somalia has topped the FSI as the most failed state, while Finland is ranked 178, the last, and the worlds most successful state. Sri Lanka having scored 92.2 out of 120 points stays well within the club of most failed states in the world. In South Asia only Pakistan and Afghanistan are ranked as more failed than Sri Lanka and other South Asian countries are ranked as less failed than it. India ranked at 79 holds the best position in South Asia in the FSI. Overall, SAARC region has got very little to be happy about the positions of its member states; and it seems, today, that more dynamic regional solidarity is required to prevent the region from becoming a failed region in future. The Failed States Index is calculated using twelve major variables namely, uneven development, human rights, demographic pressures, poverty and economic decline, factionalized elites, human plight, external intervention, refugees and IDPs, group grievances, legitimacy of the state, public services and security apparatus. Sri Lankas has fared very much inferior in two

of these variables group grievances and human rights. We can assume that Sri Lankas failure to address issues of human rights violations and problems of the ethnic minority may have caused for receiving such grievous ranking. Also in the areas of poverty alleviation and economic development Sri Lanka is still well below the required capability to dodge the failed state syndrome. All in all, Sri Lanka needs to carefully analyze its overall FSI rank and the variable specific scores in order to figure out where it has really failed and what measures can be brought in order to rectify those spheres of failure. Issues of human rights and development have constituted two major variables employed in analysis of Sri Lankas recent domestic socio-political undertakings and its relations with the world. As the FSI represents it categorically, Sri Lankas development initiatives have failed to follow a holistic approach; and it has mostly become one dimensional approach towards growth. Consequently, the problem of economic inequality has remained a phenomena inviting for radical political intervention; and, if the existing democratic deficit further widens, another violent phase of politics aimed at state restructuring could be imminent. Therefore, FSI has alarmed that Sri Lanka has to rethink of the social costs of growth by redistributing wealth into social investments such as education, health, and research that buttress the growth in turn. Another area of concern is the security, a perplexed concept. Sri Lankas FSI score for security apparatus remains very high at 8.5 whereas in developed states it is less than 2 points. Militarization of state apparatus and society has added to the woes of the ethnic minorities in Sri Lanka. Various international and national studies and reports have pointed out that post-war reconciliation should be based on an approach of demilitarization. Despite increasing international concern and domestic outcry, militarization of public institutions and large presence of military in administration of the war-torn regions have been inadequately addressed issues through democratic means. The acute political instability in the state is further visualized by the factionalized elites. In the FSI, Sri Lankas score for this category remains at 9.2 and this is an alarming state. Social and political elite can exert a huge influence on a democratic system of governance. The factionalized elite class in Sri Lanka further adds to the fractured nature of the polity and its implications for lack of social cohesion and decaying democratic traditions. The emerging sociopolitical scenario in post-war Sri Lanka has surfaced factionalisms in political parties, social activist groups and educated classes. The state machinery has largely earned its legitimacy not by the approval of the elite, but mostly with the use of coercive means to control the dissent and largely manipulated system of law and order. Legitimacy of the state is another issue area surveyed by the FSI and Sri Lanka has earned a high score of 8.2, which reiterates that the state needs to fight back for its legitimacy. State legitimacy simply means the ethical and political approval of the public for the government in power and

external recognition for the state. Currently, the regime in power is reported to have launched an international campaign for rebuilding its image. Locally, the regime has used majoritarian and manipulated victories at different levels of elections to establish that it enjoys the publics approval for legitimate governance. However, the entire minority sections in the public have increasingly been marginalized from the decision making and implementation mechanism of the state. The ongoing debate over the 13th amendment also have largely frustrated the hopes of the minority to join force with the govern ace of the state. Since external intervention also constitutes a major variable in the FSI, an analysis is required as to how Sri Lanka figures within its parameters. The score that Sri Lanka has earned for this variable is over 6 points. It is understandable that in the current context of world politics Sri Lanka is not facing any direct military intervention by an external power. However, external intervention in many other forms remains a huge reality for Sri Lanka. Currently, Sri Lankas economy mostly depends on foreign investment and export of domestic unskilled labor. Therefore, the low rank in this variable suggests the government to adopt a more pragmatic policy with the major powers in the international system. In sum, the overall message of the FSI for Sri Lanka can be encapsulated in a short phrase; democracy is a life style and not majoritarian authoritarianism.