Original Article: Socialistworld.net
The United Socialist Party (USP), the Sri Lankan section of the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI), is contesting in the upcoming September 21st presidential election in Sri Lanka. Siritunga Jeyasuriya is running to highlight a Marxist alternative aimed at addressing the acute crisis currently facing the island. Below are the key points articulated in the USP’s election program. The article also outlines the programs of other left forces and explains why the USP is standing independently.
USP ELECTION PROGRAM (Click to download): English, Sinhala, Tamil
The upcoming election in Sri Lanka has become a crucial battleground. This is the first significant election since the Aragalaya— the 2022 mass movement that ousted former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa. Since then, the presidential position has been held by Ranil Wickremesinghe, a “placeholder” who did not even secure directly elected seat in Parliament but rather obtained his position as the only UNP member through the national list. He has delayed calling the election for as long as possible to give ample time to regroup and build support for the continuing rule of the elite and capitalist representatives. The reputation of the entire capitalist establishment has been shattered by the movement.
The so-called restructuring of debt and further borrowing from the IMF have dominated capitalist propaganda, while additional loans and aid from various countries have temporarily helped avert the looming economic catastrophe. However, although these measures may have delayed the crisis, none of the factors that led to the country’s bankruptcy have been adequately addressed or resolved.
The Sri Lankan economy is a dependent one, relying heavily on its main capitalist lenders: China, the United States, and India. Following the default on repayments in May 2022, domestic debt has continued to rise. Despite Ranil Wickremesinghe’s claims of being the person who will fix the problem, there is no real solution in sight—nothing new has been proposed. The so-called restructuring talks effectively amount to implementing further austerity measures, a neo-liberal program in action. In reality, poverty is on the rise, with over 30% of the population—more than 7 million people—now plunged into dire poverty.
The sharp increase in poverty began particularly in 2019, and new research from LIRNEasia indicates that nearly half the population has altered their food consumption habits, reducing what they eat to provide for their children and save money for energy needs. More than half of the population has no savings due to the soaring cost of living, and a staggering 6% of households have ceased sending their children to school. This is particularly alarming in a country where children’s education used to be highly valued and considered a primary priority.
Even welfare programs like Samurdhi/Aswesuma, intended to support the poorest, have failed to reach those in need. There are no signs that this downward trend will reverse. The so-called “Vision 2025” proposed by Ranil is a vision shrouded in blindness, as vast sections of the population are set to plunge further into desperate conditions. Meanwhile, lenders will continue their collaboration with a small elite of capitalists, prioritising the protection of their investments and profits over the well-being of the many.
In fear of a potential resurgence of mass movements, the government has intensified its repression against protests and strikes. Every demonstration led by students or activists is often met with police hostility and, at times, violent dispersal. Nonetheless, various protests and strike actions persist across the country.
Parties & Candidates
Though the mainstream parties of the past have lost significant support, they remain in power. However, unable to command full backing, a series of political maneuvers has begun as the presidential election approaches. Among the record 39 candidates who have filed nominations, many are seen as proxies, according to the former election commissioner.
Sajith Premadasa, the candidate from the main opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), positions himself as a reliable representative of the capitalist class while also claiming to support the Aragalaya movement. As the son of a former UNP president, Premadasa has garnered additional backing from the Muslim Congress and sections of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). The SLFP, having splintered into various factions, finds itself torn between supporting Premadasa, Rajapaksa, or Wickremesinghe. Amid these divisions, Premadasa is also negotiating with Tamil parties to secure their support. Given the considerable unpopularity of both Ranil Wickremesinghe and Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the SJB candidate has positioned himself as a likely contender for victory in the upcoming election.
The ‘Tamil Vote’
The right-wing Tamil political representatives have also become fragmented, with certain factions coming together for the first time to put forth a common Tamil candidate. Historically, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) and other Tamil right-wing leaders have advocated for alignment with their southern counterparts, particularly the United National Party (UNP). However, given the widespread discontent directed at all establishment parties in the south, a sentiment for boycotting and fielding a Tamil candidate has developed.
Despite this movement, the proposed Tamil common candidate has yet to articulate a clear program addressing economic issues, democratic rights, or the Tamil national question. Additionally, it remains uncertain who they will nominate for second preference, a crucial decision since none of the presidential candidates is predicted to secure the 50% + 1 of the vote necessary for outright victory. Some factions within the TNA may still call for votes for Ranil or Sajith, while the Sumanthiran faction has expressed a desire to negotiate with Tamil parties in the south to transfer Tamil votes to them.
In the last election, Gotabaya Rajapaksa triumphantly declared that he didn’t need Tamil votes to get elected. This is not the case this time. Hence, the Tamil vote could significantly influence the election outcome. An unspoken battle for Tamil votes is now unfolding in the south, yet none of the right-wing parties have stepped forward to address key demands of the Tamil community, let alone offer a viable solution to the national question.
The JVP and NPP Coalition
Meanwhile, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP)-led National Peoples’ Power (NPP) coalition, despite not playing a leading role in the mass struggle, has emerged as an alternative. Its candidate, Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD), was leading in opinion polls prior to June. However, a shift away from the NPP began as the SJB struck deals with smaller parties and intensified its campaign as a “reliable force” committed to continuing capitalist policies while also announcing populist measures in its manifesto. These measures included accepting the long-standing wage demand of hill country workers, fully implementing the 13th Amendment to the Constitution to appeal to Tamils, and restricting the executive powers of the president, among others.
Although the NPP brands itself as Marxist and leftist, it is important to question how its policies genuinely differ in substance and effect from those of the right-wing SJB. Due to its historical legacy and continued leftist rhetoric, the JVP/NPP has capitalised on past struggles and anger. The anti-corruption sentiment, in particular, has increased support for the NPP, as it presents itself as “clean.” However, their program offers little beyond “clean capitalism”. While using typical phrases often employed by capitalist politicians, such as “opportunity for all citizens” and “introducing new technology, new methods,” the NPP lacks concrete solutions for improving the economy.
On crucial issues such as debt management, they propose to “work diplomatically with counterparts to restructure debt repayment and obtain debt relief,” a position similar to that of Ranil, Sajith, and other capitalist politicians in Sri Lanka. The “counterpart” they mention is the IMF, which pushes for so-called restructuring that effectively results in a temporary reduction of interest to the debt, while neoliberal policies are implemented. Even Sajith has criticised the restructuring as less favorable compared to deals obtained by other countries. AKD has made it clear that they intend to work with the IMF and Ambani. Despite having previously targeted activists including killing them, as supporters of India, they are now prepared to protect the interests of Indian billionaires in Sri Lanka.
This shift indicates how far the JVP has moved from its leftist policies. Veteran commentator Kumar David has suggested that the JVP/NPP should not be labeled as a Marxist party, but rather a social democratic one. Yet, even that characterisation may be an overstatement, based on their election manifesto. They bear little resemblance to the programs of past social democratic parties. The NPP should not be equated with new left formations that emerged in Europe and elsewhere, such as Syriza and Podemos. Jeremy Corbyn’s manifesto in Britain, for example, was significantly more leftist than that of the NPP. The 16-point program of the LSSP – SLFP led united left front of 1964, despite working within capitalism, was also far more progressive than the empty proposals currently offered. The JVP, once responsible for an “insurrection” against a past so called left government that resulted in the brutal repression and deaths of tens of thousands of youths, has since abandoned its leftist ideals in favor of a more patriotic, Sinhala nationalist stance.
The NPP fails to address nationalisation or the protection of nationalised health and education. Instead of opposing privatisation, they propose to “regulate the quality as well as fees of private education.” They even fall short of the budgetary allocations for education set by past capitalist leaders like Premadasa, offering only a “gradual” increase towards 6% of GDP for education, with a mere 5% for health. There is no mention of reversing recent legislation that undermines labor and democratic rights. On the Tamil national question, the NPP merely states they will “affirm the Sri Lankan identity of all nationalities and make Provincial Councils formal and efficient institutions,” alongside introducing a “mechanism to protect the freedom and security of citizens, independence, territorial integrity, sovereignty, and dignity of the country.” Their stance remains largely unchanged from the days of organising the Patriotic People’s Armed Troops, known for their violent acts against trade unionists, socialists, and Tamils.
Weak Justifications
Despite the NPP’s pro-China inclination potentially challenging capitalist interests of Indian, Western, and certain local capitalists, a victory for The NPP and its leader AKD wouldn’t signify a win for the left. It may instead further erode democratic rights. The notion of “Sri Lanka turning red,” as proclaimed by JVP publications when NPP’s popularity rose, is misleading. Support for the NPP does not indicate a rise in Marxist ideas; rather, it attracts the nationalist base of the Rajapaksa family due to discontent with corruption and economic conditions. Distrust in capitalist institutions and politicians is widespread, and there is suspicion towards the West, IMF, China, and India. Some youth and militant workers are drawn to socialist alternatives, with socialist ideas not being unpopular. However, general consciousness remains confused, and AKD’s victory is unlikely to bolster socialist consciousness, as capitalists will likely exploit NPP’s shortcomings to propagate anti-left sentiment.
Those supporting the NPP from a “lesser evil” perspective argue that a defeat for AKD signifies a victory for Sajith, thus advocating for voting NPP as the practical choice. This mirrors capitalist democracies worldwide, where voters face limited options within the capitalist framework, similar to choosing between the Democratic Party in the US or the Labour Party in the UK as “lesser evils”. The issue with “lesser evilism” is its acceptance of capitalist representation as the sole solution, maintaining the status quo and suppressing workers’ voices. Marxists campaign for breaking from all capitalist factions and building an independent mass party for workers. Although pursuing immediate demands achievable under capitalism is crucial, Marxists must also focus on strengthening the independent power of the working class. Relying on shortcuts only delays progress, whereas the working class taking a leading role in struggles could transform the current situation.
Frontline Socialist Party
The Frontline Socialist Party (FSP), formed by those who split from the JVP, has created a small coalition called the People’s Struggle Alliance (PSA) and is participating in the elections. Their critique of the JVP as a Sinhala nationalist force and their efforts to advocate for socialist ideas are positive developments. Although their manifesto includes details of what they envision as socialist policies, such as establishing a constituent assembly, enacting the right to recall representatives, and reversing draconian laws, it falls short on two major issues: economic policy and the national question.
While they agree that IMF-led policies should be resisted, the PSA manifesto stops short of advocating for the complete non-payment or abolition of all debts. Instead, they propose negotiating with lenders and delaying debt repayment until the economy improves, with part of the income eventually allocated to debt repayment. This position is similar to that of other capitalists and the NPP, differing only slightly in nuance and intention. The fear of international repercussions influences this stance. Marxists understand that radical policies advancing workers’ interests will face resistance from international and regional capitalists and their local allies. Therefore, a clear strategy on implementing these policies is crucial. Economic growth based on capitalism would be unstable and likely exacerbate conditions for workers, farmers, students, and the poor. Marxists advocate for an alternative strategy, including debt non-payment or full cancellation, capital controls to prevent capital outflow, worker-controlled mechanisms for price control and essential goods distribution, and the nationalisation of key economic sectors. Education, health, energy, transport, and other key sectors should be managed by worker-controlled bodies, with increased subsidies for industry and agriculture development.
This vision can only be realised by a workers’ government and through solidarity among regional and international working-class movements. Marxist organisations must build strong ties with international working-class groups, not just passive connections or links with pro-capitalist entities, but a centralised international workers’ coalition that gains influence in each country. Simple plea for support – though that is also important – to the workers will not suffice. Or loose base connection like that of JVP has with the CPI(M) in India will not be effective. The CPI(M) will not challenge the “national interest” of India and the JVP promising to defend the “national interest” of Sri Lanka will – in effect – directly or indirectly serve the interest of the local capitalists.
National Question
The People’s Struggle Alliance led by the FSP also presents a muddled position on the national question. Since its split from the JVP, the FSP has not clearly articulated its stance on this issue. While they have moved away from past patriotic positions, their historical and materialist analysis of Tamil demands for separation still falls short. They equate Tamil and Sinhala nationalism as mirror images, without acknowledging the specific context of Tamil demands in relation to state repression. At the same time the armed struggle of the past is caricatured as destruction of public properties and killing of Sinhala, Tamil and Muslims. No mention whatsoever of the heinous crimes of capitalist state, destruction it caused, and the chauvinist base they relied on to carry through the genocidal slaughter. Tamils demand for separation should not be looked in isolation to that of state repression nor equated to that of Sinhala nationalism. Marxists when supporting the right to self-determination both defend the rights of minorities within any new entities that are created and argue that they should be formed on a socialist basis with an internationalist outlook.
While Marxists do not support terrorism, they understand the origins of armed struggles through an objective class analysis, recognising that conditions prompting such struggles persist. Marxist always opposed various mistakes and adventures of the armed groups (including that of JVP), their lack of far sighted perspective and strategy of winning mass support for socialist change that is the basis for revolution. National aspirations span all classes due to shared repression. Even if pro-capitalist or petty bourgeois sections lead the movement, Marxists must understand its roots and promote worker unity against all forms of oppression, including national oppression. Recognising demands such as Tamils’ right to self-determination is crucial. Marxists should support building an independent working class movement among oppressed nationalities and unity to dismantle oppressive capitalist systems. Supporting the demand of the oppressed nations to self determination will in effect weaken the very same capitalist they are fighting against –and can with internationalist approach, bring the working and poor masses in both nations (nationalities) closer together in struggling against capitalism. Without this approach the slogan “Workers of the world unite” (or “working class of all countries unite”) will be a “shameful lie upon our lips” as Lenin said.
Instead the People’s Struggle Alliance proposes some sort of “autonomy” (wrongly reads self government in Tamil) which is supposed to grant special rights to various regions in the country and will be under the control national assembly. In what way it differs from the already existing 13th amendment which grants some special rights to regions – while maintaining key powers (land, police etc.) with central parliament. While recognising the significance of why Marxist parties should recognise the national groups and their problems, it fails to adequately address it. Some left groups have a programme which seems to be Marxist until one sees a refusal, in the name of workers’ unity, to support the right of self -determination and thus not seeing this demand is an essential part of uniting workers and youth in joint struggle.
Principled Unity
Taking a class-based position remains foreign to most leftist groups in Sri Lanka, except the United Socialist Party (USP). This may explain why the People’s Struggle Alliance has not reached out to or engaged with the USP to join their coalition. Despite differences, the USP maintains a friendly relationship with the FSP, collaborating in various struggles and forums against ongoing repression. The USP and the Committee for a Workers’ International (CWI), with which it is affiliated, have consistently advocated for greater collaboration among leftist groups and the establishment of a principled alliance based on a Marxist program and strategy. The USP has put forward the slogan of debt non-payment from the outset and continues to campaign for it. They have fought for the establishment of workplace and nationwide committees to harness the momentum of the 2022 movement and sustain resistance efforts. USP members have actively participated in this work without adopting a sectarian stance. Many involved in the People’s Struggle Alliance have collaborated in this work, and they hope this effort will continue beyond the presidential election. However, Marxist participation in elections should avoid opportunistic or “lesser evilest” positions.
Given the severe economic crisis and heightened national tensions, Marxists should not compromise on articulating their positions regarding these two key issues. Through various discussions, it has become clear that uniting leftist groups around an emergency economic program or the national question is challenging. The USP has consistently defended the rights of workers, farmers, the poor, and Tamils. When the JVP and much of the left supported the Rajapaksa regime during the Tamil massacres, USP members refused to do this, instead stood against the slaughter and war. The USP often finds itself isolated and unable to forge alliances with the “left” in Sri Lanka because such alliances would require compromising on the principles they have long upheld. This situation is no different.
Siritunga Jayasuriya, a well-known figure on the left with a history of standing in elections to promote Marxist programs, has been nominated once again for the upcoming election. Despite limited resources, the USP aims to use the election platform to promote Marxist positions. This effort is not solely about gaining votes; it is about building an independent working-class organisation prepared to resist any post-election offensive against working class. The USP encourages everyone to register their protest by voting for Siritunga Jayasuriya and, more importantly, to participate in building a revolutionary Marxist party and a mass party of the workers.
