Nationalism is the manifestation of a

crisis, not a solution to it - Nirmal

2016-11-30

Q With the conclusion of the election in the United States,

there is a perception that nationalism is triumphing over
internationalism. What are your views?
First of all, internationalism has never triumphed. It is wrong to pit
one concept against another in this instance. Nationalism has
been a strong political and ideological force for the last two
centuries, particularly after the French revolution. It has a very
high attraction among the masses. It is a concept with strong
political appeal. Non nationalist ideologies also prevailed.
Internationalism was there. It emerged with a political connotation
with the communist movement. It arose with the initiatives of Karl
Marx and Friedrich Engels. In the aftermath of World War 1,
internationalism could not confront nationalism.
What we call supranational bodies came in. The United Nations
and League of nations were collectives of independent nations.
Powerful nations were dominating others as seen. The UN has
dominant forces, some even recognized formally. The countries
with veto powers in the Security Council are dominant. Even in
the informal sense, powerful countries dominate the affairs of
these international bodies using their economic and military
might. The economic power is associated with the ability to
control the worlds resources.
There are internationalist movements acting beyond national
governments. Some of them are the Human Rights Movement and
environmental movements. Let alone, globalization took place in
the international labour market and capital markets. Despite all
that, nationalism has sustained its strong political and emotional
appeal. Communism, despite being an internationalist concept,
could gain a foothold with the injection of nationalism into it.
Nationalism has always been a strong force.
Q How do you analyze it in the context of Trumps victory?

Along with Trumps victory, we can see Brexit. These two can be
compared. After World War I, there was economic integration in
Europe. The European Union was more of a German-French affair.
Other countries joined it. Britain only had a marginal relationship.
It was less integrated with the European Union.
Be that as it may, Britain developed itself as a colonial power.
They have links with countries outside Europe. Brexit is a decisive
move. It can be as a result of nationalism in Europe. It has been
there right throughout. But, Brexit is a manifestation. We can
juxtapose it with Trumps victory. Nationalism has its appeal. In
India, the victory of Narendra Modi is one. In Germany, we find
nationalism as it is opposed to migrants. There are reasons for
nationalism for it is due to the changes in the global economy.
In the United States, there are as many as 11 million migrant
workers. It became a campaign slogan. Nationalism was a
response to it.
Q How will Sri Lankas nationalism evolve or develop in
this context?

In Sri Lanka, nationalism was strong

in the 1950s. At that time, the non-nationalist movements such as
the leftist movement were relatively strong. The two main partiesthe United National Party (UNP) and the Sri Lankan Freedom Party
(SLFP) - had a distant relationship with ultra-national forces at
that time. After 1983, we saw a special situation due to the
advent of war. Then, again, nationalism became strong. Now, in
the post war situation Tamil nationalism is getting strong in the
North as well. In response, the Sinhala-Buddhist nationalism is
rising here.
The middle class within the Sinhala-Buddhist community also has
a bias in this regard. We can see the opposition to the Economic

and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ETCA). I also have some

criticism towards it. That is middle-class nationalism. Among the
upper middle-class, there is a nationalist trend. Within the
business community, we find anti-Muslim sentiments. The
Sinhala-Buddhist middle-class was not actively engaged in
business as such traditionally. The Muslims and non-Sinhala
Buddhists dominated it traditionally. Now, the Sinhalese are
entering into the business field. It has created a competition. That
competition is mediated by nationalism. It comes out in the open
as a Sinhala-Muslim problem.
The Sinhala nationalist movements are elated about Trumps
victory. They see it as a stimulant here. Yet, that is not the sole
reason. Nationalism is gaining ground here.
Q You are an academic who strived for the installation of
the current government that pledged to implement good
governance principles. How detrimental is this trend
for the country?
Good governance is something different I have to explain to you. I
do not use it in that sense. If I leave it aside, there will be a lot for
us to talk about in this case. Nationalism is actually a
manifestation of a crisis either here or internationally. Otherwise,
it is not a solution to the problem. For example, if we fall ill, it can
be seen through symptoms. We cannot see symptoms as the cure
for the disease. Nationalism is not the cure for the disease. It is a
manifestation of the disease. When there is a skin disease, it will
be irritating. Then, we scratch it for comfort. The more we scratch
it, the more we aggravate the disease. Nationalism is also like
that. Nationalism is a kind of relief. It has emotional appeal. The
non-nationalist ideologies do not have such emotional appeal.
When we talk about good governance, democracy or human
rights, it is not awe-inspiring for us. But, when we talk about
moves for the partition of the country, it becomes emotionally

appealing. As such, mass mobilization is easy within the concept

of nationalism.
Yet, we have to see other aspects. When Sinhala-Buddhist
nationalist sentiments get stronger, Tamil and Muslim nationalism
rise simultaneously. It gives birth to such movements within these
communities. It can give rise to the sentiments of other religious
groups including Catholics. It creates internal divisions. At the
future elections, the popularity of political parties with national
appeals will wane. As for the political party formed by former
President Mahinda Rajapaksas group, its ideological backing
comes from ultra-nationalist forces such as Nalin de Silva, Wimal
Weerawansa and Gunadasa Amarasekara. That party has the
dominant political appeal in the South today.
No other party can mobilize people voluntarily in this manner.
People do not support in that manner in political rallies of the UNP
or the SLFP. Mr. Rajapaksa can bring bigger crowds. There is
voluntary participation of people. President Maithripala Sirisena,
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe or former President
Chandrika Kumaratunga cannot mobilize people in that manner.
At the next election, we will see an ethnically divided political
map. It will be a big crisis. In the United States too, it is there.
There are 11 million illegal migrants there. They cannot be sent
back. If it is done, the economy will collapse. This is a paradoxical
situation. These illegal migrants provide cheap labour. White
supremacy is getting stronger, and at the same time other groups
also get organized. It foretells a crisis.
Q What is your role as a university academic in the face of
the emergence of such a situation?
We cannot avoid this crisis. We have to stand up to it. We should
talk about it. A public discourse is needed for it. This is a problem
that awaits it. I cannot see any force that can prevent this from

happening. It will reach the climax.

Only then will the alternative approaches emerge. I believe the
new party, being formed by the Rajapaksa group, will become the
main force. It has the largest attraction. Yet, it cannot secure the
total power because it can appeal only to a section of the Sinhala
Buddhist constituency. Then, it will lead to a crisis as happened in
France during the 1950s.
No party will be able to govern single handedly. The new party will
be unable to form a coalition government because its ideological
backing emanates from ultra-nationalist forces. These forces will
prevent an alliance with others. Nobody can counter it.
Q How challenging will it be to find a solution to the Tamil
national question?
We cannot find a political solution at all now. We cannot even talk
about it. We can just discuss it to raise funds internationally. A
Federal constitution is totally unrealistic now. A solution that is
acceptable to Tamils can be worked out only with the consent of
the South. Anything acceptable to the North is not acceptable to
the South. These two cannot be reconciled. Some possibility
existed in the past because the two main parties were not
controlled by the ultra-nationalist persons. Now it is different. The
extremist groups are calling the shots today in the Rajapaksa
group of the SLFP. Anything unacceptable to this group cannot be
implemented in the South.
It is structurally impossible to give a solution that meets the
aspirations of the Tamil people. It is useless to talk about it. We do
not know what will happen in the future.
Q In the installation of the current government, there
were a lot of hopes among groups such as yours. What do
you feel about the current predicament then?
It is the nature of politics. What happened on January 8 was a big

event. In such an instance people get together and put forth their
views. After that, the euphoria dies down. Then, elements with
different agendas dominate. There is a contrast between the
groups that rallied for the Big Event and these elements. We voice
against them. But, the government moves on. This is how politics
works.
Q What is the role of the Federation of University
Teachers Association (FUTA)?
It has no specially-assigned role. It is a trade union. It talks about
education and other rights. We too can talk about it.
Q How responsible is the government for the present
situation?
There are ways in which the governments work. They work
according to the interests of those close to them. They work for
votes. We cannot do anything about it. We have to build public
cognition about it. That is the way to do it.
Posted by Thavam