Those who have followed this column might know that I have regularly expressed strong reservations about Gotabaya Rajapaksa during his previous stint as the secretary of defence and later his reincarnation as the president. Those concerns would be vindicated when the Sri Lankan judiciary is unshackled from routine political meddling and inherent bias toward the powers that be. Nonetheless, after the other Rajapaksas resigned and their dynastic project crumbled, I, for one, had rather been inclined to put up with Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s continuation in office for the time being for the sake of political stability.
Initially, it appeared as a reasonable trade-off in exchange for political instability. Now, I must admit I have been naïve. Gotabaya is not a source of political stability, but rather the stark opposite. He is the greatest source of political instability. Not only was he the primary catalyst who mothballed an otherwise manageable sovereign debt crisis into a calamity of unprecedented proportions. His continuation in the office against a myriad of calls for his departure is prolonging the crisis. He should leave the office for the sake of the country. To begin, he should announce a timeline for his departure, removing the greatest handicap for the formation of an all-party government.
Once a new all-party government is formed, he should make himself redundant, (at maximum limiting himself to negotiate a safe way out). He should let the new government dig the country out of the hole, unencumbered by his presence. He should let Sri Lankans dream again, his government has been a long nightmare. If he and his ever-depleting number of sycophants cannot fathom why he should leave, here are a few reasons why his continuation would mean the ultimate demise of the nation.
Continue reading ‘Gotabaya Rajapaksa is the greatest source of political instability; He should leave for the sake of the country. To begin, Gota should announce a timeline for his departure’ »Filed under Guest blogger
Posted by Administrator on https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df32d0b66317ee%26domain%3Ddbsjeyaraj.com%26is_canvas%3Dfalse%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fdbsjeyaraj.com%252Ff166f259b49f74%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=730&font=arial&href=https%3A%2F%2Fdbsjeyaraj.com%2Fdbsj%2Farchives%2F78103&locale=en_US&ref=above-post&sdk=joey&share=true&show_faces=true&width=325
Return of Ranil : Remarkable Resilience of Premier Wickremesinghe. -Part Three
Let me rewind back to my boyhood when I first read the fable about the scorpion and frog which I believe is of Russian origin. The scorpion which cannot swim wanted to cross the river. So the scorpion begged the frog to carry him across. The frog refused saying the scorpion may sting while he was ferrying him across. The scorpion replies he would not do that because the frog will then die resulting in the drowning of the scorpion too. Therefore it was not in the best interests of the scorpion to sting the frog while going across the river.
The frog thinks things through and finds the scorpion’s argument rational and logically sensible. So the frog accedes to the request and swims across the river with the scorpion on his back. Midway across the river, the scorpion whose sting is in the tail, strikes suddenly. The stung frog in a state of paralysis begins to drown. The scorpion dislodged from the frog’s back also is drowning. The dying frog is baffled as to why the scorpion has acted irrationally and doomed them both. “Why, why? asks the frog.The scorpion replies , “ I don’t know. I couldn’t resist the urge.It’s in my character.It is my nature”. And so both perished.