Pathology of Decadent Democracy

7/27/2019 Pathology of Decadent Democracy

1/3

Pathology of a Decadent Democracy: Sri Lanka on top of the Failed States Index 2013

By Athulasiri Kumara Samarakoon

Sri Lanka has obtained the 28th

place in the Failed States Indexof 2013. The Foreign Policy

magazine publishes this index annually since 2005. For the last eight years, Sri Lanka has never

been within the positive ranks of this index, a composite representation of a countrys social,

political, security and economic stability. International taxonomy of countries using an array of

diverse variables contributes for a system of global governance constituted with intervention

mechanisms in the issue areas, inter alia, of security, development, poverty and political

instability.

Nevertheless, the politics of constructing indices and using them with vested interests seems an

integral dimension of the global political reality today; but, as members of the international

community, we need to closely scrutinize the edifying messages contained in global rankings;and, if possible, adopt them for correcting the dilapidated systems and institutions of our states.

Endless search for cynical interpretations of international political structure and its workings can

help small states very little in its survival in the international system. And, therefore, realistic

implications of the Failed States Index (FSI) for Sri Lanka oblige more in-depth reading of

causes which really has made it a failedentity as a nation.

If a certain state is ranked within the critical and vulnerable perimeters of this index, then that

country is considered as an unstable state, which is unable to provide basic amenities and

democratic rights for its citizenry. During the last phase of the Eelam war Sri Lanka was used to

receive varying ranks, but within the positions from 25 to 29; and those countries ranked on topof this index are basically identified as most critically unstable states.

In 2013, Somalia has topped the FSI as the most failed state, while Finland is ranked 178, the

last, and the worlds most successful state. Sri Lanka having scored 92.2 out of 120 points stays

well within the club of most failed states in the world. In South Asia only Pakistan and

Afghanistan are ranked as more failed than Sri Lanka and other South Asian countries are ranked

as less failed than it. India ranked at 79 holds the best position in South Asia in the FSI. Overall,

SAARC region has got very little to be happy about the positions of its member states; and it

seems, today, that more dynamic regional solidarity is required to prevent the region from

becoming a failed region in future.

The Failed States Index is calculated using twelve major variables namely, uneven

development, human rights, demographic pressures, poverty and economic decline, factionalized

elites, human plight, external intervention, refugees and IDPs, group grievances, legitimacy of

the state, public services and security apparatus. Sri Lankas has fared very much inferior in two


2/3

of these variables group grievances and human rights. We can assume that Sri Lankas

failure to address issues of human rights violations and problems of the ethnic minority may

have caused for receiving such grievous ranking. Also in the areas of poverty alleviation and

economic development Sri Lanka is still well below the required capability to dodge the failed

state syndrome. All in all, Sri Lanka needs to carefully analyze its overall FSI rank and the

variable specific scores in order to figure out where it has really failed and what measures can be

brought in order to rectify those spheres of failure.

Issues of human rights and development have constituted two major variables employed in

analysis of Sri Lankas recent domestic socio-political undertakings and its relations with the

world. As the FSI represents it categorically, Sri Lankas developmentinitiatives have failed to

follow a holistic approach; and it has mostly become one dimensional approach towards

growth. Consequently, the problem of economic inequality has remained a phenomena inviting

for radical political intervention; and, if the existing democratic deficit further widens, another

violent phase of politics aimed at state restructuring could be imminent. Therefore, FSI hasalarmed that Sri Lanka has to rethink of the social costs of growthby redistributing wealth into

social investments such as education, health, and research that buttress the growth in turn.

Another area of concern is the security, a perplexed concept. Sri Lankas FSI score for security

apparatus remains very high at 8.5 whereas in developed states it is less than 2 points.

Militarization of state apparatus and society has added to the woes of the ethnic minorities in Sri

Lanka. Various international and national studies and reports have pointed out that post-war

reconciliation should be based on an approach of demilitarization. Despite increasing

international concern and domestic outcry, militarization of public institutions and large presence

of military in administration of the war-torn regions have been inadequately addressed issuesthrough democratic means.

The acute political instability in the state is further visualized by the factionalized elites. In the

FSI, Sri Lankas score for this category remains at 9.2 and this is an alarming state. Social and

political elite can exert a huge influence on a democratic system of governance. The

factionalized elite class in Sri Lanka further adds to the fractured nature of the polity and its

implications for lack of social cohesion and decaying democratic traditions. The emerging socio-

political scenario in post-war Sri Lanka has surfaced factionalisms in political parties, social

activist groups and educated classes. The state machinery has largely earned its legitimacy not by

the approval of the elite, but mostly with the use of coercive means to control the dissent and

largely manipulated system of law and order.

Legitimacy of the state is another issue area surveyed by the FSI and Sri Lanka has earned a high

score of 8.2, which reiterates that the state needs to fight back for its legitimacy. State legitimacy

simply means the ethical and political approval of the public for the government in power and


3/3

external recognition for the state. Currently, the regime in power is reported to have launched an

international campaign for rebuilding its image. Locally, the regime has used majoritarian and

manipulated victories at different levels of elections to establish that it enjoys the publics

approval for legitimate governance. However, the entire minority sections in the public have

increasingly been marginalized from the decision making and implementation mechanism of the

state. The ongoing debate over the 13thamendment also have largely frustrated the hopes of the

minority to join force with the govern ace of the state.

Since external intervention also constitutes a major variable in the FSI, an analysis is required

as to how Sri Lanka figures within its parameters. The score that Sri Lanka has earned for this

variable is over 6 points. It is understandable that in the current context of world politics Sri

Lanka is not facing any direct military intervention by an external power. However, external

intervention in many other forms remains a huge reality for Sri Lanka. Currently, Sri Lankas

economy mostly depends on foreign investment and export of domestic unskilled labor.

Therefore, the low rank in this variable suggests the government to adopt a more pragmaticpolicy with the major powers in the international system. In sum, the overall message of the FSI

for Sri Lanka can be encapsulated in a short phrase; democracy is a life style and not

majoritarian authoritarianism.

Documents

Pathology of Decadent Democracy