One of the biggest tragedies Sri Lanka has to face is the lack of national leaders, statesmen and women in meaningful numbers across the political spectrum. While Sri Lanka is not alone in this predicament, it is disproportionately affected by the issue, due the island’s current realities of economic crisis. 

Sri Lanka’s recovery plans, married to a $ 2.9 billion IMF bailout, need bipartisan support to progress. Bipartisan support is also needed for the governance of the island, as today charting an effective, acceptable and practical path towards recovery and sustainable growth. This is of utmost importance as Sri Lanka can’t afford to slide back to another economic crisis down the road.

Both main opposition parties have stated that they will attempt to renegotiate the IMF agreement depending on the outcome of the next Presidential Election and the subsequent General Election. Such commentary, largely populist in nature, has led speculation that a change of government might lead to a derailment of the ongoing IMF programme. The International Monetary Fund recently addressed some of the concerns about the endurance of its programme in view of the next election here. The IMF has outlined what they expect Sri Lanka to do. They want Sri Lanka to advance external debt restructuring and increase state revenue considerably. They have pointed out that it had made good progress in terms of economic recovery, but cautioned that Sri Lanka was not yet out of the woods.

Some have used this to point out that the continuation of the current Government with its warts and all, is essential to ensure that Sri Lanka’s recovery works. The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP)-led Government with President Ranil Wickremesinghe, has not wasted the opportunity to bask in the glory of securing the IMF’s third tranche of funding, signalling that there is ‘no one other than this Government and this President’ who can push Sri Lanka to see the light at the end of the tunnel. 

However, some have critiqued the Government’s approach is to adhere to the IMF wants. They argue that the Ranil Wickremesinghe-led SLPP Government has opted for the easiest way out; pressing the ordinary public dry, in place of streaming revenue collection by state agencies and avoiding significant reforms. Given the current approach by the Government to meet IMF goals, the question has to be asked, what is the price paid, and who is paying it. It seems that the masses are getting squeezed while the affluent remain less affected, while the state expenditure spree has not been effectively curtailed.

It is no secret that Sri Lanka’s governance had failed, resulting in the economic crash and a period of political and social upheaval. With many of the ‘same faces’ remaining in the political landscape, with little or no accountability for their actions, which over time led to the island’s downfall, the choices at the ballot box remain troubling for the millions who will have to vote in the coming months. However, Sri Lankans are, through their own folly, stuck with a leadership pool which has largely been stagnating for a long time. With elections on the horizon, it leaves the average voter with a predicament.

While the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) and the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) both have a mandate from the previous General Elections, both are dotted with faces of those who share part of the blame for fast tracking Sri Lanka’s economic failure. The JVP-led NPP, for all the popularity it has gained over the last two years, is yet to clearly articulate their plan of action to remedy the economic situation, with some members making wild assumptions and building straw men while economically illiterate voters will find appealing. The NPP has also not effectively shed their fondness of welfare state tactics, painting their plans with a dark cloud of uncertainty. The United National Party (UNP) and Ranil Wickremesinghe have been criticised for ‘election baiting’ by way of issuing land ownership, distributing welfare and commodities. The SLPP and the SJB are no different in action, leading up to the elections.

It is in this predicament that the Sri Lankan voter’s power of reasoning, political and economic maturity will be tested in the upcoming elections. Where once again, many of the same faces who drove the island to ruin will seek to return to power. Any external observer would sympathise with the Sri Lankan voter, due to the lack of leadership/statesmanship choices that they have to pick from, at the ballot box. However, we are to blame for the situation, we have reaped what we have sowed.