Sri Lanka Presidential Election - January 8, 2015

[politicus]

Sri Lanka will be electing a President right after New Year. Voters can rank up to three candidates,  second and third preferences from ballots whose first preference candidate has been eliminated are used if no one wins in the first round.

19 candidates, only two have a chance.

Incumbent and slayer of the Tamil Tigers Mahinda Rajapaksa (69) from the aristocratic Rajapaksa dynasty seeks a third term backed by his own officially leftist Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the rest of the broad United People's Freedom Alliance.



Minister of Health and SLFP Secretary General until a month ago Maithripala Sirisena (63) from the  New Democratic Front is the challenger backed by a dozen fellow UPFA defectors, the conservative United National Party and most other opposition parties. Also endorsed by Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, who was SLFP leader and Prime Minister 1994-2005. She is the daughter of party founder Solomon Bandaranaike.
 Sirisena is accusing his former boss of rampant corruption, nepotism and a breakdown of the rule of law + wanting to implement a family based dictatorship. The Rajapaksas control half Sri Lanka's national budget, so he got a case. Promise to abolish the executive presidency, form an all-party national government and call parliamentary elections if he wins.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lankan_presidential_election,_2015

[politicus]

Sri Lanka has a plethora of political parties that never seem to merge but just join various broad alliances with small parties jumping ship at regular intervals, but the basics are:

Sri Lanka Freedom Party is the old reformist socialist and Sinhalese nationalist party created by the scion of the land owning Bandaranaike dynasty in the 50s and mostly dominated by that family until fellow large land owner Mahinda Rajapaksa beat the Bandaranaike heir for the presidential nomination in 2005. When it returned to power in 1994 after 17 years in oposition it started pursuing neo-liberal economic policies and is not exactly back to its own socialist self, which was always somewhat distorted by the fact that the party was led by rich elite families. Their current United People's Freedom Alliance is very broad and got most of the left wing and a handful of Tamil parties, some Muslims + the trade unions.

Unusually the opposition hasn't formed a formal alliance, but the big conservative United National Party still has their own coalition with a moderate union based Tamil party, everyone else seems to have deserted to the government side. UNP has lost it's populist wing and is today standard conservative with neo-libeal economic polices. Founded by status quo oriented (pro-dominion) country squires and businessmen and generally more tolerant towards ethnic minorities in its early days than SLFP it beame right wing nationalist after it's founder's son's death in 1973. It has a violent past in the 70s and 80s with pogroms against leftists and Tamils and was taken over by a fascist type 1988-1994, who instigated a campaign of "white terror", but it has been pro-democracy since the late 90s. The New Democratic Front that Sirisena has joined is a splinter group from a UNP breakaway party containing their more moderate and populist wing which split away in 1990, and since Sirisena started on the left I assume NDF is a centrist party.

Then there is the Tamil National Alliance seeking autonomy for Tamil areas, which still holds a couple of parties after half of them have deserted to UPFA. They back Sirisena.

The fourth group represented in parliament is a small alliance of "misfits", among them a Muslim NGO, with the Communists holding four of their seven seats. A former cricket star and a populist businessman among the other three. The Communists have endorsed Rajapaksa.

[politicus]

Just in case anybody wondered: Rajapaksa is obviously complete scum and all good forces in Sri Lanka are against him - incl. whatever is left of honest people on the left wing (lots of "deserters" from the left wing parties) and all human rights NGOs. He is responsible for massacres on 40.000 Tamil fighters and civilians after they had surrendered, has curtailed freedom of the press, instigated ethnic violence, and is in the process of turning the country into a personal fiefdom for his own family.

[politicus]

A former cricket star...

Arjuna Ranatunga, presumably? He was originally an SLFP member.

Yes.

[politicus]

No polls, but this article claims Sirisena has a good chance and mentions some causes why he might lose despite  8% growth rate and low unemployment and inflation level.

- price hikes on some basic commodities (despite the overall low inflation)
- extreme nepotism
- corruption
- united opposition
- Sirisena being "rural and plainspoken"
- minorities hating the regime


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dad179a0-7c4f-11e4-aa9c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3MHgbgZxn

Sirisena will likely get the vast majority of the Muslim and Tamil vote, so Rajapaksa needs to win big with the Sinhalese.

Still, the Sinhalese-chauvvenist National Heritage Party (JHU) has also joined Sirisena which gives him an important vote bloc, but may harm him with the Tamils.

http://www.dw.de/sri-lankan-election-the-tighter-the-race-the-more-violent-it-threatens-to-be/a-18123365

[politicus]

State of the race article from BBC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30656219

Rajapaksa also tries too get Tamil votes on his infrastructur improvements and "there is a saying that the known devil is better than the unknown angel".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-30659137

[politicus]

If Sirisena was one of Rajapaksa's ministers, wouldn't that serve to somewhat dampen Tamil enthusiasm for his campaign? It doesn't seem like he's critical of Rajapaksa's handling of the civil war even now.

None of the candidates really address Tamil concerns and there is zero enthusiasm for any of them among Tamils (my source for this is Tamils in DK citing contacts back home, so take it for what you want, but international media also take this for granted), but it was assumed by everybody that the Tamils would go with "anybody-but-Rajapaksa" and the Tamil National Alliance backs Sirisena, but then Sirisena accepted support from the ultras in National Heritage Party and that blurs the picture considerably, but on the other hand I think it would be wrong to underestimate how hated Rajapaksa is among Tamils. Amyway, low Tamil turnout is much more likely than Tamils voting for Rajapaksa.

[politicus]

I assume a Sirisena victory wouldn't really have any effect on Sri Lanka's foreign relations?

Sirisena wants to end Rajapaksa’s heavy political, economic and military dependence on China and establish “equal relations” with all major powers in Asia - mentioning Japan, South Korea and India in particular.
He is also focused on improving Sri Lanka’s relationship with the US, which has been critical of Rajapaksa’s human rights violations. So a much more pro-Western and pro-India line with a lot more distance to Beijing.

(that is of course an interpretation since he basically says: We will work with everybody (incl. Pakistan), but given his alliance with the right wing and what he emphasizes I think it is a reasonable interpretation)

[politicus]

I would be surprised if Tamil turnout goes above 15-20%.

That would be a disaster for Sirisena and also unrealistically low IMO (it was around 40% last time compared to 74% for the country as a whole). This is going to be a high turnout election since so much is a stake and that will affect Tamil turnout as well.

[politicus]

Sri Lanka is one of those cases where I feel the election system had a huge impact on how politics and then the civil war developed.   The original Tamil conflict really got escalated in the late 1960s when the center-left SLFP and center-right UNP got into a competitively Sinhalese extremism battle when it should have been a debate over economic policy direction.   The reason is because of the FPTP system.  Since Sinhalese/Buddhist dominated seats formed a clear majority of the seats it was always possible for either of the two parties to out-compete each other for the Sinhalese extremist vote and sweep all the Sinhalese seats while the Tamil parties might win the remaining 15-20% of the seats dominated by Tamils.  So the FPTP system actually encouraged a political strategy for both parties to gain power by bashing Tamils and catering to the Sinhalese extremists.

This dynamic is to some degree changed with the executive presidency since the opposition needs minority support to win the presidency.

Basically Sirisena is in the same situation as a US Democrat. He knows he will lose the majority group and needs to rely on minority support. Ideally he needs a margin among Tamils similar to the one a US Democrat typically gets among Blacks and a margin among Muslims similar to the one a US Democrat would get among Hispanics, with a turnout that is at least relatively close to the Sinhalese. This makes it all the more puzzling why he has accepted support from the National Heritage Party. To keep up the analogy it is like our Democratic candidate accepting endorsement from a white nationalist group in the hope of getting votes from racist whites, while still banking on retaining minority support because the  Republicans just isn't an option for most of them.

Of course Sri Lanka is not the US and the analogy only goes so far, but it is still an enormous gamble.

[politicus]

I would be surprised if Tamil turnout goes above 15-20%.

That would be a disaster for Sirisena and also unrealistically low IMO (it was around 40% last time compared to 74% for the country as a whole). This is going to be a high turnout election since so much is a stake and that will affect Tamil turnout as well.

How low was it in the northern provinces ? I may have just seen those numbers and forgot about the east.

I could not find exact turnout numbers for Tamils (and they would have to be extrapolated somehow anyway, there was no exit poll), but I have seen 40% somewhere and it seems realistic - even a bit low.

Turnout in districts with either Tamil majority or a high share of Tamils in the population:

Nuwara Eliya, Central 77.2%
Jaffna, Northern    25.7%
Vanni, Northern    40.3%
Batticaloa, Eastern 64.8%
Digamadulla, Eastern 73.5%
Trincomalee, Eastern 68.2%

Also, in 2010 the Tamils only realistic choice was Sarath Fonseka, the general in charge of the brutal crushing of the Tamil Tigers rebellion (the districts he won  all have significant minority population - most were minority-majority). Basically they could chose between the politician responsible for the brutal crushing of the rebellion or the military commander in charge of executing it. Hardly motivating. Sirisena was after all not involved in operations that included massacres, torture and mass rape. He has got to be less toxic even with a National Heritage Party endorsement.

[politicus]

As a reference here is the extremely ethnic 2010 map. It will be the base map from which Sirisena needs to expand.

[politicus]

This appears to be a surprisingly meaningful affair. Would Sirisena be likely to take "Socialist" out of the country's name? Why, indeed, do large landowning dynasties lend their support to socialist parties at all. This seems rather peculiar.

I know Rajapaksa has become very cosy with the Chinese of late- just the other month they "donated" a new national theatre. What has been the effect of this on the economy? Is there any real desire for a return to the liberal policies of the UNP (which, interestingly, got it's start opposing independence) or is it an entirely ethnic affair?

"Socialism" in some form is a way to appeal to the masses. The Bhutto dynasty in Pakistan also leads a "leftist" party, but yeah it is a strange phenomenon seen from a Western POV.

Also UNP was founded as a pro-dominion party, which is not quite the same thing as being against independence. Their founder was actually a leading advocate for independence - just within the empire.

Regarding policy the important thing is that Sirisena has promised to abolish the executive presidency, form an all-party national government and call parliamentary elections if he wins. So whoever wins them gets to decide policy.

Sri Lanka has had solid growth rates of about 7% in recent years, but they have been 6,4% on average for the last decade, so getting closer to China has not really boosted their economy. It is mostly a political choice. Rajapaksa is authoritarian and pseudo-leftist, so authoritarian and pseudo-communist China suits him as a partner.

Any Sri Lankan government needs to balance Indian power somehow. Rajapaksa chosed China, while Sirisena wants to court Japan/South Korea, normalize with the US and accept more Indian influence.

[politicus]

Well, by the sound of it we should really hope Sirisena wins, for a number of reasons, then?

Yeah, apart from Snowstalker I think that few forumites should be able to find a reason to support Rajapaksa. You need to be fanatically anti-Western and care more about ideological labels than actual policy and human rights to do so.

[politicus]

Voting started at 7AM local time and closed at 4PM. There have been a number of "irregularities" and army units have been deployed to the north (Vanni) against the election law, some voters in Tamil constituencies were prevented from voting. Nevertheless the election seems to have gone relatively smoothly and the violence level is not unusual for Sri Lanka.

One opposition activist killed in a drive by shooting. First causality in the campaign.

Results expected tomorrow according to international media, but the electoral commissions result page opens at 8PM local and maybe we will get preliminary results earlier:

http://www.slelections.gov.lk/

EDIT: It did not open at 8PM as announced.

[politicus]

Turnout was 60% by 2PM.  Most likely turnout will match it not exceed the 2010 turnout of 75%.  Turnout was higher than expected in Tamil-dominated areas of the north and east which seems like bad news for Rajapakse.  Of course if turnout in Sinhalese areas also stays high that could help Rajapakse who managed a landslide victory in 2010 even though the opposition backed the general that actually won the 2009 war against LTTE.  Sirisena's chances has to be based on higher Tamil and Moor turnout (seems to be true) and hope that the marginal Sinhalese Rajapakse voter does not vote (does not seem to be true.)  That Sirisena, based his Sinhalese credentials can swing a lot of Sinhalese votes to him does not seem likely.  It will have to be based on pro-Rajapakse Sinhalese voter not coming out to vote.  Sirisena will have to hold Rajapakse's share of the Sinhalese vote to around the low 60% to have a chance.  

Just to be clear the ethnic breakdown is Sinhalese 75%, Tamils (incl. Hill "Tamils" of Indian origin - who are not necessarily of Tamil stock) 15% and Moors 9%. You can not win a Sri Lankan election without at least 40% Sinhalese support even with equal turnout since it is impossible to get all minority voters.
This election is a lot more complex than Sinhalese vs. Tamils/Moors. It is also a referendum on continued authoritarianism with large parts of Rajapaksa's own party deserting him (incl. the former president) and you got a strong conservative Sinhalese party in the opposition. While running up margins with minorities is important (see my comparison to the dynamics of a US presidential election earlier) it would be wrong to reduce it to an ethnic headcount.

[politicus]

Only thing counted today was the postal votes for Ratnapura, where Sirisena got more than twice as many votes as Fonseka in 2010 and 43.2%. Dunno if that is anything to go by, but at least a positive result from the Sinhalese heartland.

Results:

http://election.dailymirror.lk/presidential/en

[politicus]

One of the first non-postal results is Bandula Polling Division in Bandula District, which is 74% Sinhalese, 20% Tamil and 6% Moor, so with an average majority/majority balance. Sirisena gets 52.4% and Rajapaksa 46.4% and it is the sort of district Rajapaksa would be winning if he was on track to a victory.
Still this might just be a part of the district with above average share of Tamils.

But the first numbers look good. There is no reason to believe postal votes are skewed towards Sirisena afaik.

With 550.000 votes counted it is 56.2-42.7 to Sirisena. There are a little over 15.4 mio. registered voters and turnout has most likely been around 75%, but no official number yet.

[politicus]

Things are looking good, but it's very early in the game. What history does Sri Lanka, and I suppose Rajapaksa in particular, have of electoral "peculiarities"?

Not the best, but Rajapaksa's capacity to rig the election is primarily in the north and east, where the Army still has a lot of control after the war. He gets suspiciously high numbers from some places in these provinces and in the north some Tamil voters have clearly also been disenfranchised. His problem is that he does not have the same opportunity to influence the result in the Sinhalese areas and the Hill Tamil (Indo-Tamil) areas in the highlands.

It is a "they can do some rigging,  but if the opposition's margin is sufficiently large they will lose anyway" scenario.

Last time Rajapaksa was very popular after defeating the Tigers and didn't need to rig anything to win, but there were voter suppression and intimidation in the north (Jafna and Vanni) anyway.

Some officers support the opposition, which also limits his capacity to cheat.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/world/Rajapaksa-Plans-To-Rig-Polls-with-Help-of-Armymen-Opposition/2015/01/02/article2599769.ece

[politicus]

53.2-45.6 to Sirisena with 2 mio. votes in.

Rajapaksa wins the postal votes from Colombo 51.2-48.4.

[politicus]

Getting closer, 51.4-47,2 at 3,5 mio.

[politicus]

5, 7 mio. - 52,7-46,0

It is going to be a relatively clear victory,

[politicus]

Actually a bit surprising Rajapaksa has conceded this early, but I suppose the top brass in the Army have made it clear that they will not accept him trying to hang on to power with a clear defeat.

The officer corps has been divided with some leaks about rigging plans to the opposition etc. and the generals would probably not risk internal strife,

Good news, obviously. Hopefully the transfer of power goes smoothly.

[politicus]

Rajapaksa wins the postal votes from Colombo 51.2-48.4.

As you'd expect the city to be weaker for him than average... but then how representative are postal voters?

The postal votes seems generally to have been better for Sirisena than the "regular" ones, but it is not a large difference.

[politicus]

52.4-46.4 at 7 mio. Not moving much.