The Role of Islamic Social Financing in Humanitarian Action

The recent Briefing Paper from Global Humanitarian Assistance 'An Act of Faith: Is Islamic charitable giving a promising new resource for future humanitarian assistance?' makes for interesting and pertinent reading. The very nature of the question that it asks points to a paradigm shift in thinking with regards not only to fundraising for humanitarian causes but ultimately program implementation as well. The former to some extent determines the latter in terms of resource allocation and implementation.

We are all too aware of the number and scale of humanitarian crises facing our world today, not least in Syria where an estimated 220,000 people have died in the four year conflict at a rate of more than one death every ten minutes and now in Yemen. These spiralling needs mean we also have a record shortfall in assistance with US$7.5billion of humanitarian funding requirements going unmet last year. More than ever, humanitarians are having to start thinking creatively about how humanitarian assistance is raised, processed and used.

One thinking that has emerged over the last few years has been the potential for Islamic Social financing led by zakat. Islamic financing is a surprisingly underexplored territory. Surprising because previous estimates suggest that anywhere between US$200 billion and US$1 trillion is spent in the form of Islamic charitable giving (zakat) across the Muslim world each year, and the Global Humanitarian Assistance (GHA) programme's research published today indicates that this area of finance is potentially in the hundreds of billions of dollars, with a significant proportion already going on humanitarian efforts.

These numbers speak not only to the duality of increasing religiosity and wealth in the Muslim world, but also the globalisation of increasing poverty made more immediate through social media. It is estimated that ¼ of the Muslim world is living on less than $1.25 a day (calculated by IRIN based on 2011 HDI) with new spaces opening up in the Muslim world such as Somalia, Syria, Mali (and so on) for humanitarian and peace-building responses.

The concept of charity is central to social justice, which is a sacred value in Islam and a central tenet of the faith. Indeed the Qur'an considers an act of charity as more than just a good deed because of its function in balancing social inequalities. The Qur'an also has numerous references to the importance of creating a just society and provides a framework for justice in inter-personal relationships, toward the poor and needy, and connections between communities and nations.

Zakat, the mandatory Muslim practice of giving 2.5% of one's accumulated wealth for charitable purposes every year, is one of the main tools of Islamic social financing. It is explicitly intended to reduce inequality and is widely used in Muslim countries to fund domestic development and poverty-reduction efforts. There are clear parallels to be drawn between the eight individual categories of eligible recipients of Zakat listed in the Qur'an and people in need of humanitarian assistance.

The GHA findings show that it is currently impossible to accurately find out how much zakat is being collected globally, where it is being spent, and what opportunities it could present for the humanitarian world. With estimates ranging from the tens to hundreds of billions of dollars, and only a handful of countries formally reporting a proportion of the zakat that is given by their populations, there is a lot of work to do.

However the World Humanitarian Summit does offer an opportunity to take on the challenges to discuss as it strives to seek alternate sources of funding. Islamic Social Finance contributions have to be part of the discussions of humanitarian funding going forward. The task for the WHS is to offer models of operation and partnership.

(this was originally published here for the World Humanitarian Summit)

This originally appeared on Huffington Post

An Islamic Perspective on Refugees

The crisis of the Rohingya refugees in the Andaman sea with at least three Muslim countries refusing them support, has prompted many to pose the question as to the treatment of refugees from an Islamic perspective.  There is surprisingly very little work that has been done on this basis, the most notable recently being done by Islamic Relief.

The lack of work is not because of a lack of treatment within the faith teachings or principles on the subject.  In fact an examination of Islamic precepts reveals the falsity of such allegations, especially with regard to refugees and asylum.  The lack of mechanisms is more to do with the lack of understanding on these issues and lack of scholarly work on the role of Islam in issues of asylum and refugees.

In Islam, asylum is a right of anyone seeking protection. In studies of asylum in the Arab- Islamic tradition,  scholars argue that asylum "is an integral part of the islamic  [sic] conception of human rights".    Islam's most important scripture, the Qur'an, speaks explicitly about the issue of asylum seekers and refugees: "And if anyone of the disbelievers seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the word of Allah, and then escort him to where he will be secure" (Surah 9:6)

In particular, there are two major incidents in the early days of Islam which bear testimony to Islam's response to a climate of hostility and persecution through migration.  The first is the emigration in 615AD to Abyssinia by a small group of Muslims who found  asylum under the rule and protection of the Christian King.  The second is in 662 AD, when Prophet Muhammad fled persecution in Mecca and sought refuge in Medina. This hijrah, or migration, came to symbolize the movement of Muslims from lands of oppression to those of Islam. It is a term that along with its derivatives is mentioned 27 times in the Qur'an.

Thus the concept of asylum within Islam is based on a spiritual principle imposed by the will of God, which means that there are moral, religious and legal obligations (especially with reference to the Qur'an and Hadith) as well.  Hence from an Islamic view point, the exacting rules of human conduct are recognised as positive divine law, which that  for a believer - whether an individual or a ruler - asylum is "a right and a duty".  Consequently a refusal to grant asylum will not only entail dishonor and contempt but also the violation of an oath.  In other words, since asylum is mentioned in the Qur'an, it becomes a sacred duty, the breach of which "constitutes a challenge to the will of God.  The result is that asylum constitutes both a subjective right for the individual and an obligation of the community"

Islam obliges host societies to give asylum-seekers a generous reception, for which the hosts will be rewarded as it is said in the  Qur'an: "He that flees his homeland in the way of God, shall find numerous places of refuge in the land and abundant resources" (4:100).  Islamic law or  Shariah   also affirms the practice of providing sanctuary to persecuted persons  and the sacredness of some places, such as the Kaaba in Mecca. However, asylum according to Shariah law is not confined only to sacred places - it is also granted to certain urban areas such as homes and designated communal places under the protection of Islam.  At the heart of this obligation to protect asylum seekers is the verse in the Qur'an:

 "... the men who stayed in their own city ... love those who have sought refuge with them; they do not covet what they are given, but rather prize them above themselves, though they are in want." (Surah 59:9)

In particular, once asylum is granted protection, assistance offered to forced migrants cannot be resented, and hosting communities are obliged to privilege the needs of forced migrants above those of their own, even where they themselves are in need of protection and assistance.

However, despite its significance in Islam, hijrah is rarely invoked by Muslim states today. In fact from a shariah perspective, there is no comprehensive legal system for the protection of refugees or displaced people at least according to current understandings of protection.  Hence this tends to nullify the obligation of Islamic states to provide asylum according to the shariah.

Wider thinking on this issue and the promotion of 'Islamic understandings' of refugees  and how they are to be treated could encourage Muslim states to widen their acceptance and protection of Muslim refugees.  This is the obligation for the future to avoid future scenarios such as that faced by the Rohingyas.

Sri Lanka Floods 2016: Avoiding the Mistakes of 2004

Sri Lanka is experiencing its worst natural disaster since, arguably, the tsunami. Thousands have been displaced and hundreds killed by the floods and landslides caused by the unprecedented rain (ironic in itself given that many for weeks before had been praying for rain to bring some relief to a heat wave that had been plaguing the country).

While the attention is understandably on immediate search and rescue, it would be wise as well to remember the lessons from the tsunami, where we had so much initial help which stopped in the days that followed. While there is immediate need like food and non food items it is probable that everyone will forget the medium and long term. We can not afford to forget the medium and long term because this is where the needs of the affected people should not be neglected.

People at the center of the crisis will need to be empowered to cope and recover with dignity in the coming days, months and years. Thus it is not just about the provision of goods and services but the rebuilding of services and structures to cope and resume their livelihoods on their own. This will include restoring infrastructure to help people communicate and connect them to the markets, the creation of employment opportunities, to make sure remittances flow and to help to stimulate the local private sector. It is important to understand the market dynamics and establish and adjust priorities for the most appropriate time of assistance. Often the increased use of cash or vouchers (as opposed to relief items) would be preferable as it is a flexible response tool that supports the autonomy and choice of these people particularly those affected in and around Colombo, whilst making humanitarian aid more accountable to the affected people. It allows them to recharge their phones for example to communicate with loved ones or even to look after their own specific businesses. It also gives them agency at a time when you have lost everything. It helps them to get engaged.

The first responders (those most closest and most invested) need support and there has to be coordination with and between them and all players on the ground including the government, private sector and NGOs. The voices and choices of the affected people and the first responders should guide our response even when outside actors are called upon to provide assistance and protection. It is all very well for us who from outside talk about the provision of food or non food items but we have to take into account that surveys consistently show that many affected people do not believe the aid they receive is relevant or meets their priority needs. Even when we are able to meet those needs we need to ensure we do not create additional problems. For example, I have seen pictures of food being distributed in plastic bags and plastic water bottles being distributed. However if there is no process for garbage and waste management, then we will create environmental issues in the future.

We need to close the gender gap in our response to those who have been affected. Religious and cultural norms in Sri Lanka will mean that women and girls often are unable to claim their rights and fulfil their needs in a crisis. This has to start with an effective information management which includes disaggregated data and other key relevant indicators. In addition to gender, age is a crucial factor. Both young people and the elderly as well as the disabled are also often neglected in any response. Psychosocial and health responses have to take this into account.

Lastly those affected will need support in getting back to their homes so cleaning and return kits are essential. This is where we often fail. They will need help to restart their businesses and rebuild their shattered lives. How can we ensure that we have programmed this in our fundraising as well as our time and resource allocation? What provisions do we have for livelihood support? When the crowds die down and the interest declines, how can we ensure that people are still remembered?

Moving forward there has to be greater investment in managing shocks differently especially on disaster risk. We need to innovate in disaster resilience and reconstruction. Could the impact of the flooding have been mitigated had people been better prepared and their capacity built to expect this? Or had there been a better early warning system in place?

We know that Sri Lanka over the last few years has suffered from rain causing flooding with every year becoming much worse. Yet, we are in a scenario where every year, it seems as if we are responding for the first time. Surely there should be some contingency planning put in place through the local government, schools and faith based institutions (for example, storing copies of ID cards and pass books at the local temple or mosque which is not known to suffer from flooding or some stock piling of non essential items close to areas known to be at risk of flooding). Local authorities (as well as first responders) need to be better trained and equipped in areas of preparedness and response to disasters and crisis. The government needs to strengthen national legislation on emergency preparedness including contingency planning and early warning systems which also identifies the roles and responsibilities of various actors including the private sector (the work of the CBI and APAD Sri Lanka are good models to follow). As international aid for humanitarian and development work declines for Sri Lanka due to its middle income status classification, it is left on the shoulders of the national NGOs, Government and Private Sector to respond. There has to be innovative ways for financing. The concept of risk finance mechanisms to provide rapid resources when triggered can help to provide a safety net at such times of crisis .

We have to strengthen local capacities including collaboration with private sector and the military for resilience preparedness; response to disasters in accordance with humanitarian principles and peace building. There needs to a be a more inclusive, disciplined and coordinated action to disaster response. We also need investment in the capacity of formal and informal local systems (including private sector based resources) to respond to in advance of crisis events, following the preparedness principle of Disaster Risk Reduction.  There also means innovation in data collection, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and mapping in order to get and share data.

We have to ask serious questions about urban planning and haphazard developments which have contributed to deforestation, diverting natural rivers and flood plains and poor drainage. In our quest to urbanise and become rapidly developed, we have taken short cuts in our approach. If left unchecked, we will have these recurring with a great cost to the country. We have to prepare for the new generation of the risk of crises in cities. This requires better planning processes and development

Much of these recommendations have all come out of the Consultation Processes for the World Humanitarian Summit, scheduled to take place for discussion in Istanbul next week. The discussions at the summit are designed to try and gain commitment and consensus from the international community for a much more responsive humanitarian structure and system to be developed to address the changing complexity of needs. The work done in preparation for the summit and the summit itself should afford an opportunity to really reflect on how things need to be changed for a more effective response. Tragically, though Sri Lanka has largely been a passenger for the past two year in this process with very little Government interest being shown to get engaged. The government delegation to the Summit is currently being led by the Minister for Transport and Aviation (hardly an authority on humanitarian responses and disaster management) with a couple of civil servants and a few civil society activists. The absence of many local NGO and Civil society participants from Sri Lanka is due to the fact that sponsorship is not available for the summit since Sri Lanka is a middle income country. There has also largely been little appetite for any comprehensive discussion in country (sadly by the UN country team itself) prior to the Summit or in the consultation phases to get a Sri Lankan perspective. The sole ‘national’ consultation carried out for Sri Lanka was done by a few national CSO’s and INGOs, and ironically pointed out the following as things to be considered:

• The need to improve coordination in humanitarian response involving a central body at the country level coordinating all humanitarian agencies working in the country
• The empowerment of local communities
• The use of GPS and drones for the location of victims
• The use of mobiles for with a recommendation for telecom operators to operate specialized cross network channels to allow for ease of communication
• The stockpiling of food and non essential items.
• The involvement of young people in humanitarian responses

All of these recommendations to the World Humanitarian Summit should be reflected in the stance of the government as it also makes its commitments to the WHS. However more than the commitments, there is a ready made framework for action, which should be the foundation for any action of the government moving forward. Given the scale of the disaster, it can’t afford not to.

The rains and floods itself also serendipitously occurring on the seventh anniversary of the end of the conflict in Sri Lanka perhaps serve as a reminder from Mother Nature. Nature will rebel if the natural equilibrium of the law of inter-connectedness and interdependency is broken. Nature reacts when human atrocities become unbearable, and go out of control, flouting the laws that it (nature) has laid down to maintain stability. By being non discriminatory in its actions, we are reminded about what our relationship should be. The sacred responsibility of looking after nature by respecting laws governing it, can not be left to one group of people. It is a collective responsibility. The reminder once again of the momentary meeting of hearts during this crisis is an opportunity. An opportunity perhaps to re-address this imbalance. As we remember those affected by the current crisis, we can not forget those affected by the previous crises. From the sharing of our dhansals this weekend with those who have been affected by the crisis, to the opening up of places of worship for people of all and no faith, to the remembering and praying for all those who lost their lives in the run up to May 2009, to creating a path of healing for the past; herein is the opportunity to be seized to realize that very valuable lesson of the sanctity of life.

this originally appeared on Groundviews

An African Answer to an African Problem

On the 12^th of November 2010, a new documentary, ‘An African Answer’, featuring the reconciliation work done in Kenya of Imam Ashafa and Pastor James from Nigeria was released in London.  Those not familiar with the ‘The Imam and The Pastor’, will be struck by their story.  Emerging from the 1990s in Northern Nigeria after being in the frontlines of confrontations between Christians and Muslims which saw the killings of thousands in inter-religious warfare, Imam Ashafa and Pastor James are two of the most unlikeliest of allies, forging new grounds with their   Interfaith Mediation Center, responsible for mediating peace between Christians and Muslims in Nigeria's kaduna state.

Once bitter enemies, determined to kill each other (The pastor had his hand hacked off while defending his church against Muslims and the imam had his spiritual adviser and two of his brothers killed by Christian extremists), the two men are now embarking upon an extraordinary journey of healing and forgiveness.   Through talking to each other, they questioned the cost of the violence finding passages in the Bible and the Koran which showed common approaches of working together and more importantly started teaching about it to others, despite staying faithful to their religion.

In fact it is this demonstration of the importance of staying faithful to one’s own religious principles whilst reaching out to others of a different faith, is what has been the appeal of their story over the last decade or so.  This and the fact that their solution is a home grown solution that has not had any external influences, means they talk not only with credibility but with a refreshing sense of uniqueness.  This credibility is important especially for a continent that has suffered from being told how to solve its problems rather than being provided with a space and facilitation in order to solve the problem for itself.

An African Answer is a continuation of their story and how they have now transferred those skills outside of Nigeria, to helping the people in Kenya in the aftermath of the electoral violence  in 2007.  The video is a powerful testament to the fact that people in the developing world or the global south pretty much know how to solve their own problems if they can be provided a space to do so. 

Imam Ashafa and Pastor james are hardly candidates for setting an example for their country or for peace building or unlikely to be described, as they are now, by the Archbishop of Canterbury as ‘a model for Christian Muslim relations’ yet today their story is one about the power of the   responsibility placed upon the shoulder of the individual to take the lead in becoming a true citizen of the country and of the world, where he / she  can rise above their  narrow confines of individualistic concerns to face the broader concerns of all humanity and  to redress the contradiction of society.  This is not just something that should be left to the politicians or the institutions but really no one can be ruled out having a part in contributing. Ultimately the contradiction of society will be redressed when people come together confident in their universal principles; strengthened by their common values; defenders of pluralism in their society and respectful of identities of others, which means that they will take up the challenge of joining forces in a revolution of trust and confidence against the tide of discrimination and intolerance and poverty.

Michael Henderson in his book No Enemy to Conquer, captures their story more eloquently as he attempts to highlight  some of the lessons that their story tells us such as the need to move beyond the concept of a clash between each other to reaching out and developing an alliance with ‘the other’ .  This journey of forgiveness and reconciliation means to take an individual  responsibility to create a safe space for people to talk and share ideas.  This safe space entails not only moving beyond victimhood but also being cognizant of the past (accepting and facing up to the past honestly)

The story of the Imam and the Pastor shows that strong ethical commitment in religious traditions can sharpen identity politics but more importantly can form the basis of inter and intra faith collaboration.  Thus religious pluralism can not only lead to an absence of violence mainly due to better understandings and interaction but it opens a space for discussion, dialogue and engagement.  In short, we must learn to listen closely to one another, not simply because it is polite, but because it is just possible that we might learn something important about ourselves, and build a better global village in the process.

The story of Tansen, the master musician at the court of the Mogul Emperor, Akbar, sets an example of how listening can build understanding towards working with each other. He had some fifteen musical instruments in the Emperor’s chamber, which he had tuned to one frequency. Upon playing just one instrument’s musical note, the other fourteen started to resonate, to the astonishment and delight of the audience. Ideally this story serves a metaphor for how communities can work in harmony to achieve an enlightened result. Not everyone sees it that way. Certainly not every faith community is tuned to the same frequency, indeed, not every faith community has achieved harmony within itself but an opportunity exists through the promotion of working in partnerships with/between faith communities, to harness more cross-community collaboration, in the interest of peace, tolerance, and wellbeing.

In Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers, Kwame Anthony Appiah, writes eloquently of the urgent need for ‘ideas and institutions that allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become’. The roots of all global crises can be found in human denial of the eternal principle of peace and in order to fight this denial there needs to be self-critical reflection.

Thus we need to be cognizant of the ‘other’ so that  we can come together on issues of commonality, as opposed to focusing on our differences. In the analogy of Appiah, addressing the challenge of religious pluralism in the world today requires careful positioning of these differences to create a compelling mosaic. Addressing these challenges offers an antidote to sectarianism and the polarisation of different faiths in multi-cultural societies . This will never be easy, but remains vitally important for, as Appiah illustrates, it involves creating the very ‘ideas and institutions that will allow us to live together as the global tribe we have become’.  This is perhaps the greatest lesson we can get from the story of the Imam and the Pastor.

This was originally published in The News Hub

UK Elections 2015: Why Let Migrants Out?

The upcoming UK general election appears to be too close to call. Regardless of who wins on May 7th, it is clear that one of the issues that has been contentious in the run up to but also after the elections, will be the issue of 'migrants' / diaspora / expats or whatever the terminology that is issued to describe them. Whilst UKIP is guilty of shamelessly playing the migrant card to a dangerously xenophobic level, the other political parties haven't really shied away from the debate, knowing that in the fluctuating economic climate, migrants become easy whipping boys. In addition certain elements of the media led by certain individuals have succeeded on jumping on an anti migrant train for their own commercial and publicity interests. If you are part of this loud club of minority opinion, then it is clear that migrants are a problem!

Yet the reality as is often the case is a marked 180 degree opposite of what these shrill voices claim it is. Few campaigns have sought to address the issues of migration and diaspora such as the campaign called "I am an Immigrant" which had recent posters on London undergrounds. There have been few studies that have also attempted to look at the positive contributions not only for migrants or diaspora towards the UK, but how they also contribute greatly (and by extension, promote a greater UK investment) in their countries of origin.

One such small piece of work undertaken in the last 2 years has tried to highlight the contributions of around 2.8 million people of the diaspora communities in the UK and makes for very interesting reading. If understood it potentially has implications for how such communities' social capital can be expanded for greater contriution to the UK and how the UK govt can extend its 'development footprint' in many countries around the world that it supports with overseas development assistance (ODA).

The work carried out by the organisation BUILD (Building Understanding through International Links for Development) entitled BUKDIP (Building on UK Diaspora International Partnerships) Illustrates that whilst diaspora communities contribute nearly as much in remittances as the entire population contributes through the aid budget, they also contribute greatly to the UK. They are more likely than most to pay taxes and less likely to claim benefits; and, although only 4.4% of the population, they account for 9.7% of employees in strategically important sectors. These are important figures to be cognisant of in this upcoming elections because for example as the report claims, "If every member of the diaspora stopped working, the NHS and other parts of UK plc would collapse". Yet despite this, the poorly informed characterization in debates on migration, terrorism and welfare that sitgmatise diaspora and migrants, have allowed a disproportionate focus to be placed on the diaspora. This in turn has led to isolation from national and local government as well a decline in social cohesion. The threats to the diaspora where action was required from others include: Increased xenophobia, arising from attitudes to migration, terrorism and benefits debates; Misconceptions: e.g. "scrounger" imagery for good tax-payers and low benefit claimants

The report advocates for a new approach with regards the diaspora which involves the recognition of diaspora as an integral part of British society and for greater engagement with government and private sector. In doing this, there are opportunities for increased impacts. With more effective engagement with the diaspora, the UK government (and INGOs) can effectively extend their development / humanitarian footprint within countries of heritage. In addition, the social capital of the diaspora can be utilised to make positive contributions to the UK communities. For example the net contribution to the UK economy is £3 billion.

Yet there is a character to engaging with the diaspora playing field that complicates matters. The diaspora communities, whether they are numerous and powerful; a minority struggling for a voice; or even an influential tiny cadre, have undeniably, as strong a history of internecine strife and struggle as they do of cooperation and collaboration. They often bring with them conflicts from their countries of heritage or their vision of their country of heritage is frozen at the time in which people left. Thus they can be removed from some of the real grassroots and political dynamics taking place in their countries of heritage. Nevertheless it is against this framework of potential inter and intra disagreement and division, that there is a need to engage with diaspora organisations and build and sustain links with them. In addition, there should be linking, between and within diaspora communities-and certainly diaspora hub, to diaspora hub.

In this day and age, the notion of partnership though is that in reality no organisation can operate in isolation in today's complex world. The partnerships are about encouraging institutions to work across traditional boundaries to enhance their core competencies.

Genuine cross cultural, diaspora partnerships, give back to both donors and recipients, who realise that cultural contacts alter fundamentally the way in which they interact, giving them the power and strength to work cooperatively.

this originally appeared on huffington post

On 26 December 2014, Sri Lanka commemorated the 10th anniversary of the Asian tsunami.

It was quite a muted affair given its symbolic place in history, largely overshadowed by an unwanted presidential election campaign. No one, though, would have predicted the political tsunami that saw close to 82% of people take part in the election on 8 January; saw a new president voted in; the army refuse to instigate a coup and the incumbent president Mahinda Rajapaksa having to concede defeat when only 3 million of an estimated 15 million votes had been counted.

Called two years ahead of time, the presidential election was always going to be a gamble taken by the incumbent to shore up popularity among the traditional Sinhalese Buddhist vote, and establish a platform to carve out his family dynasty in politics – largely reminiscent of what happens in south Asian politics.

However, six weeks after the campaign, that gamble backfired in what can actually be termed a shock defeat. Sri Lanka has a new president – Maithripala Sirisena, a former health minister, who gathered 51% of the vote after an unprecedented turnout at the polls. The mood of course is quite jubilant and for once there is hope, evidenced by the turnout to see the inauguration of the new president.

So what went wrong with the re-election of the incumbent president for a third time? The analysis of this election has to be done based on how the incumbent lost, rather than necessarily focussing on what the challenger did to win.

First, people have been talking about a need for change. The fact that corruption and nepotism had got so rampant, that press and general media freedom had got so bad, that the conduct of the politicians had become untenable and that there was the danger of the regime going down the route of authoritarianism, prompted people to talk about change.

Coupled with this was the feeling of isolation among the minority ethnic Tamils and Muslims and a growing intolerance of Sri Lanka’s multi-faith landscape by radical Buddhist monks(this link will open in a new window) (operating with impunity from the state), it was clear that the incumbent would have a lot to answer for. Because of this, there have been claims by many that he only lost the minority votes and hence the election.

However, the incumbent also lost votes from his traditional support base (going down from over 6 million to 5.7 million), allowing the new president to win the election with over 70% of the votes from the majority community. Numbers aside, the hope and aspirations are for change.

So what does this ‘good news’ story mean for Sri Lanka? The new president will have an uphill struggle on his hands. So much anticipation and expectation has been created that this could be difficult to handle if not managed properly. There will be the task of ensuring a political solution to the grievances of the minorities in a way that ensures that the country moves forward after 20 years of conflict. There will be a need to contain the Sinhalese Buddhist elements who seem intent on hammering the Sinhala nationalist identity home at the loss of the minorities’ stake in the country.

More importantly, however, there will be the task of arresting the moral and intellectual corruption that seems to not only pervade the political scene, but has also trickled down into society as a whole. Yet neither of the main candidates has presented a clear proposal for the reconciliation and integration of the society.

This is perhaps the gap that International Alert is best equipped to fill.

Over the last few years, our work in Sri Lanka with young political leaders, faith leaders and Sri Lankan youth based in the UK, has been about creating spaces for people to talk about a ‘positive peace’.

What this means in practice is about setting the conditions right for people to get to talk to each other, understand each other and eventually work with each other to solve their problems. Now more than ever, a window of opportunity has arisen for a paradigm shift in attitude for people to make a principled ‘change’. This principled change will have to insist on a radical overhaul of the whole system of party patronage, ethnic nationalistic representation and political ‘one-upmanship’.

This is the aspiration of the citizens of Sri Lanka (regardless of whether they are the majority ethnic and religious community or the minority; whether they are the urban elite or rural working class), that spoke loudly on 8 January.

Alert’s experience in supporting such dialogue and conversation could be vital in further strengthening local initiatives in realising these aspirations for a more inclusive and just political system and society.

this originally appeared here

Sri Lankan Elections 2015: Will There Be 'Change'?

Today, 8 January 2015, Sri Lankans will be heading to the polls to elect a new President. Unlike in previous recent presidential elections, it now seems that there is a real contender to challenge the incumbent and suddenly the apathetic Sri Lankan voter has become energized. Voter turnout is expected to perhaps be one of the highest seen for a long time. In pure Sri Lankan politics style, the main opposition challenges has emerged from within the ranks of the president's own party adding a Shakespearean twist to an already fascinating tale of intrigue, nepotism, corruption and so on. Where else would you find the president running against his former health minister who whilst still belonging to the same party is being supported by a coalition of opposition parties?

Elections are nothing new in Sri Lanka, and over the last decade or so, we seem to have had our annual share of them. The process of elections in Sri Lanka is a rather superficial attempt to paint a picture of democracy in action. For the last 60 plus years, the two main parties between themselves have held power with very little difference in policy, approach and effect. Policies and manifestos seem to come second. There has been a trend of 'political up-manship' where the main opposition party would wreck attempts by the party in power to ensure that the country would not benefit from decisive decisions made at critical junctures. As a consequence,when rival parties came to power, they have tended to undo what has been done by the previous opposition government much to the detriment of the country. Most voters are largely not policy based but are mostly entwined in party patronage with parliamentarians being mainly elected for their ability to redistribute resources, provide access to public sector goods and jobs, and develop infrastructure for supporters.

This election has seen its share of this patronage. Support has been garnered based on much one can get out of each candidate, and so there have been crossovers and counter crossovers (from each party) like musical chairs, as 'horse deals' ensure that politicians and their supporters needs are met. Circumstances have now changed and former allies have become enemies and former enemies have become allies with actions being taken sometimes bordering on the point of absurdity in some cases. Take for example, a member of the Buddhist nationalist party who had crossed over from the government to the opposition a few weeks earlier, would then re-cross back to the government side citing a change of heart and establish a much more stringent Buddhist party (as if to indicate that he had an epiphany twice). The rumors (if true) of the amount of money being paid for politicians to cross over is staggering and points to expediency rather than principle.

This in itself highlights the glaring weakness in Sri Lankan politics and the current state of affairs in the country. This election rather than focusing on policies and manifestos has boiled down to removing the incumbent not because of anything but largely that even in this 'winner takes all' culture that has traditionally existed, it seems that there is a threshold that the incumbent has now crossed.

Even for politicians representing minority communities who have come increasingly under attack by Sinhala Buddhist nationalist elements declaring their support for the incumbent, their recent switch from the Government to the opposition was more in line with political opportunism than principled stance. After all how does this explain for example many of the Muslim ministers suddenly talking about how the government was complicit in the rising anti Muslim violence and rhetoric when over the last 2 years, no one responsible for perpetrating that has been brought to justice? A principled stance would also challenge the opposition candidate to being more clear with concrete policies in his manifesto to deal with the minority communities, an accusation pointing to the weakness of the opposition policies.

There is also very little appetite for any intellectual analysis of the situation on the part of the general public, especially those that live in Colombo, which is as far removed from the realities of the country as it can be. Everyone is advocating for a regime change, tired of the cost that the country has had to endure in the post conflict era; tired of the corruption of the political system, tired of how Sri Lanka has become as a nation and society. However very few people are willing to discuss and address the root causes that have allowed the system to manifest itself like this.

Speaking to people mainly in Colombo, there are only two camps. Those who want the incumbent and those who want the main opposition candidate with very little room in between. People have forgotten that there are actually other candidates for the election as well. There is not really a middle path or alternative and no avenue for a middle path. Those that advocate such are a silent majority on the sidelines. Yet dig further and you will find that people have absolutely no clue as to why one should vote for the incumbent or the opposition. 'Well we need to get rid of Mahinda so that is why we want Maithree' has been the most common argument that I have heard '. 'Mahinda brought peace and developed the country' is another one that has been said with those saying it, not wishing to go into the criticisms leveled against the incumbent.

What all this means though is that for the first time in 20 years, the Sri Lankan electoral carnival has come to life. This is one of the positives for the election and for the country. Apathetic voters have become energized; new voters are excited; social media has been in overtime and it has become the mainstay of most conversations over the last month, be it at the annual wedding season that seems to affect Sri Lanka at this time, to discussions with taxi drivers or in restaurants. There is an anticipation and expectation for change. Thus the stakes are quite high for both parties to win or lose. A loss for the incumbent might mean a quick exit from the country if the rumour mill doing the rounds in Sri Lanka is to be believed in terms of assets already being transferred abroad. A win for the incumbent, might mean that the challenger (and many of the government MPs who joined him in challenging the president) would have to seek residence elsewhere.

Of course, no matter who wins the presidency, he will have an uphill struggle on his hands. So much anticipation and expectation has been created that this could be difficult to handle if not managed properly. There will be the task of ensuring a political solution to the grievances of the minorities in a way that ensures that the country moves forward after 20 years of conflict. There will be a need to contain the Sinhalese Buddhist elements who seem intent on hammering the Sinhala nationalist identity home at the loss of the minorities stake in the country. However more importantly there will be the task of arresting the moral and intellectual corruption that seems to not pervade the political scene but has also seemed to have trickled down into society as a whole. Yet neither of the main candidates has presented a clear proposal for the reconciliation and integration of the society and for really addressing some of this burning root causes.

This then begs the question: will there be a change if the main opposition candidate is voted in ahead of the incumbent? Whilst a new face will get into the driving seat, the vehicle and direction will be the same. The paradigm will not have shifted!

Thus frankly despite all the illusions of grandeur of talk of change and principles, the concept of being 'principled' and seeking change by electing the main challenger or even the incumbent becomes laughable. Both these candidates and the parties and alliance they represent are two sides of the same coin and at this critical juncture in Sri Lanka's history may not be able to offer anything of value for taking the country forward especially as it moves towards post conflict reconciliation. Picking the opposition candidate is at best, frantically grasping for a last minute consolation prize and it would be based on a limited understanding of the ground realities and ingrained prejudices. There will be nothing pure or principled about the choice. It is about the desperation of the situation, which we find ourselves in to change the person at the helm and which frankly I am also not opposed to.

So let us be realistic and honest about this. The choice is not about 'change' of the vehicle per se but about the 'change' of the driver. The vehicle remains the same and will pose the same challenges (perhaps to a lesser intensity than previously) for people. However the start perhaps has to be this change in the driver. But people need to realize that this is just the start and not the end.

If people do want to make a principled 'change', then there will need to be a paradigm shift that involves changing the vehicle. Variations on the same old themes can not be the order of the day. They will have to insist on a radical overhaul of the whole system of party patronage, ethnic nationalistic representation and political 'up-manship'. This is the principled change that Sri Lanka desperately needs in order to meet the aspirations of all its people (regardless of whether they are the majority ethnic and religious community or the minority; whether they are urban elite or rural working class).

Regardless of who wins in this election, it is clear that people want a change for a better equitable future that allows them to voice their concerns, whilst having the security and stability for their children to go to school. Petty rivalries will need to be forgotten. Past grievances will need to be looked into and addressed. This requires the support of all concerned from within Sri Lanka and outside of it. This aspiration and expectation cannot be left unfulfilled or simply ignored. The consequences of doing this could be disastrous for the future of Sri Lanka.

this originally appeared on Huffington Post