An initial assessment of the post-1988 JVP

-- Upali Cooray

The following excerpt from a newspaper published in the Gulf, soon after the May Day celebrations in Sri Lanka this year, indicates the reaction of some people to the recent growth and expansion of the Janata Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP).

“The tens of thousands of people wearing red shirts on May 1 sent shivers through many of us who have lived through the two bloody insurgencies in the south of Sri Lanka. In the aftermath, the political reverberations are continuing. May 1 was a show of strength by the Janata Vimukti Perumuna (JVP), a Maoist political movement and the junior partner in the ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) of President Chandrika Kumaratunga. The red-shirted JVP workers and supporters thronged to the rally in a clear demonstration that the movement responsible for two bloody insurgencies in the south is again expanding its power base exponentially”. The article goes on to say that the “Red Brigade has no presence in the north and east, where the Tamil Tigers have controlled matters for decades” and that the The urban classes continue to support the two major parties, but the rural support is now for the JVP. In this post-tsunami period, while national leaders have been crisscrossing the globe or spending holiday time in Europe, JVP leaders have organised a Voluntary Service Force. Right now, the southern coastline is dotted with tents and shelters carrying the JVP symbol. As long as the tattered peace process continues to remain in limbo and the government fails to deliver on its promises, the JVP’s strength is likely to grow exponentially”.

No link to Maoism

Although, Raj Prasad, the writer of this article claims that he had lived through “two insurgencies”, he is woefully ignorant of the ideological and political standpoint of the JVP. He refers to them as a “Maoist political movement”.  Nothing could be further from the truth. The JVP has never subscribed to Maoism even in the heydays of Mao. In the Sino-Soviet political conflict, the founder and the main ideologue of the JVP, Rohana Wijeweera was squarely on the side of the Soviets. In fact some of the sternest critics of the JVP in Sri Lanka were “Chinese wing” leaders like Watson Fernando and Shanmugathasan. In fact the only prominent member in the present government, who has a Maoist past, is President Chandrika Kumaratunga.  Similarly, Prasad’s claim that the JVP has no presence in the North & East is no longer true. In Vavuniya and Batticaloa the JVP has successfully recruited Tamil youths while the LTTE (Wanni) is finding it difficult to move freely in Batticaloa. Similarly, as we shall see later, the claim that urban classes do not support the JVP is untrue. While the forecast of exponential growth of the JVP is an exaggeration, there is no doubt that very many people are impressed by the dedication and discipline of the JVP 

A common approach

Prasad’s ignorance is not unusual. Many writers blissfully repeat old and often erroneous formulae about the JVP. Moreover, it is not only in relation to the history and political lineage of the JVP that many political commentators get their facts wrong. For instance many Tamil commentators often refer to the JVP as a chauvinist organisation. Again there is no factual basis on which such a characterisation could be sustained. Therefore it is important to make a careful study of the JVP in order to understand its ideology and its political programme.

JVP’s Marxism

In some ways the JVP remains wedded to its Marxist origins. They still carry the placards of Marx, Engels and Lenin in their demonstrations. They feel an affinity with communist and socialist parties all over the world. Recently senior JVP leaders were invited to attend the annual conferences of the Communist Party of India and the Communist Party of India (Marxist). In their newspapers the JVP has published reports of the activities of communist and socialist parties all over the world. They express their solidarity with the Bolivian workers and peasants, Cesar Chavez’s movement in Venezuela, Fidel Castro in Cuba, and workers movements in Turkey, Brazil, Bangladesh, Palestine etc.  However, there is little theoretical discussion in their journals on important political issues that concerns the workers and progressive movements today. In that sense the JVP has remained unchanged since the days of Wijeweera. Even writings of Gramsci and Lucas are rarely, if ever referred to in their writings. Although the JVP is opposed to privatisation and imperialist control of the process of globalisation, there is no direct link between their formal adherence to Marxism and their day to ay practise. For instance they fails to critically analyse the current policies of the Chinese and Vietnamese parties which involve the recruitment of capitalists into the communist party and the suppression of trade union rights. Their day-to-day practise seems to be governed more by pragmatism and political expediency than by theoretical and ideological analysis.

Social base of the JVP  

In the 70’s and 80’s the JVP was largely made up of rural youth. They had a strong following amongst some sections of the university students and amongst the unemployed rural youth. They still command the support of a large number of rural youth. But there has been a significant change in their support base. At the last general election, the JVP made impressive gains in urban centres such as Colombo and Gampaha. The urban workers of today have strong rural links and that has helped the JVP to expand both its urban and rural bases. In the trade unions sector the JVP has a commanding presence. Today the Communist party, the LSSP and the NSSP have little influence amongst urban trade unions. If there were a democratic system of leadership selection in the Ceylon Mercantile Union (CMU), by now Bala Tampoe would have lost “his union” to the JVP. In any event, many CMU braches in the industrial sector have gone over to the JVP unions.  It is important to note that the present crop of JVP union leaders have adopted a more cautious and prudent policy in relation to trade unions. They no longer adopt a policy of dead-end activism that leads to closure of work places and wholesale dismissals. In fact, in recent articles the JVP union leaders have criticised the SLFP and UNP trade union leaders for placing unreasonable demands on the Employers. This is an important change in their approach to trade union activities. 

The JVP’s attitude to the right of Tamils and Muslims

Although the LTTE and its supporters have tried to portray the JVP as an anti-Tamil party, there is no truth in this claim whatsoever. On the contrary, the JVP has never participated in any of the anti-Tamil pogroms and has never advocated or condoned violence against Tamils or Muslims. In 1983, having organised the most barbaric anti-Tamil pogrom Sri Lanka had ever seen, J.R.Jayawardene sought to implicate the JVP for the very crimes he planned and executed. But the JVP was never implicated in any of those attacks. Unlike the CP and the LSSP organised. demonstrations against the grant of “reasonable use of Tamil” in the late 60’s, the JVP has never engaged in such activities.

Their position on the Tamil national question is uncomplicated and simple. They oppose all forms of discrimination against Tamils (as well as Muslims). They are against suppression of the rights of the Tamils. They will strive for a socialist society where all the people regardless of their ethnic origins, gender or caste will have equal rights. They are opposed to a separate state, federalism and the proposed joint mechanism. They stand for a unitary state in Sri Lanka and India and they see the demand for Eelam, federalism and the “joint mechanism” as machinations of the imperialists who are seeking to balkanise South Asia.

The JVP’s opposition to the LTTE springs from its Marxist influence on the one hand and the nature of its social base on the other. The particular Marxist orientation of the JVP has led it to adopt an elementary internationalist position on the national question. That sits quite comfortably with the understanding of the national question by its largely Sinhala speaking base. While we could argue that the demand for formal equality of all national and ethnic groups is insufficient to resolve the problems of the Tamil nation today, it is impermissible to assert that the position of the JVP on the national question is a chauvinist or a nationalist standpoint.  

Since 1988 there has been one important change in their assessment of India. At that time the JVP campaigned against Indian intervention. Now the JVP sees India as a strong ally of Sri Lanka. Another important change in the JVP practice is their willingness to discuss and maintain as continuous dialogue with members of Tamil political parties which are opposed to the LTTE. This along with the influx of more Tamil recruits into its ranks is likely to have an impact on its policies in the near future.

Is the JVP a chauvinist party

Often, and particularly in Tamil nationalist circles, including those who consider themselves as Tamil progressives, JVP is branded as a chauvinist party. In their eyes all the parties in the south are chauvinist. Perhaps it is useful to start with some definitions of the term Chauvinist. This word has its origin in the name of Nicholas Chauvin, who was a soldier in the First Empire after the French revolution of 1789. It was used to convey passionate admiration of Napolean Bonaparte and his imperialist exploits. Today it means an aggressive form of nationalism. “Chauvinism exalts consciousness of nationality, spread hatred of minorities and other nations, and is associated with militarism, imperialism and racism” [i] . It expresses a “militant devotion to and glorification of one's country; fanatical patriotism; a prejudiced belief in the superiority of one's own gender, group, or kind” [ii]

The difference in perception between Marxists and “Tamil progressive” is largely due to the tendency of the latter to see all social movements through the tunnel vision of  Tamil nationalism. If one defines all the parties in the south as chauvinist, then every capitalist party in Western Europe, not to speak of the US, has to be defined as chauvinist party. Then this term becomes pretty useless as a tool of social analysis. It is an emotional and not a political characterisation. Looking specifically at the JVP we could use a number of yardsticks to ascertain whether the term “chauvinist” is appropriate to define its character. Firstly, unlike chauvinist parties [iii] , the JVP does not exclude Tamils, Muslims or Burghers from membership on the ground of their ethnic or religious basis. Secondly, the JVP has never argued that the Sinhala ethnic group is superior to other ethnic groups. Thirdly, the JVP has never advocated or participated I n any form of ethnic cleansing. Fourthly, while the JVP has been strident against imperialism and (in the past) Indian expansionism, it has never used chauvinist rhetoric – anti-Tamil; or anti-Muslim – to mobilize Sinhala voters. One must not forget the fact that the JVP still work within the narrow political Stalinist framework of “socialism in one country”. Fifthly, it is hardly possible to describe JVP political practice as one of “fanatical patriotism or aggressive nationalism”.

While the JVP operates within the existing political and economic structures which may have in-built chauvinist characteristics, they do so not because they necessarily approve such structures. It is clear that today the JVP has abandoned the strategy of armed struggle and adopted a strategy of working within the bourgeois political framework. While one could argue that the acceptance of such a framework is itself an act of compromise, that would not be a basis on which one could argue that the JVP is a chauvinist party. Furthermore, it is not contrary to Lenin’s own thinking about the need to compromise in order to continue the struggle.

JM and JVP’s dilemma

At the time of writing this article the JVP is facing an extremely difficult decision. Chandrika is adamant that the agreement to set up a Joint mechanism must be signed. The JVP has opposed it all along. If Chandrika signs this deal, it will become extremely difficult for the JVP to remain in government. On the other hand it would not be an opportune moment for the JVP to bring down the government or compel it to depend on UNP/TNA votes in parliament. It would be tactically unwise to leave the government now. There seems to be a difference of opinion amongst the top leadership as to the tactic they should adopt on the Joint mechanism. If it stays in government under protest, the JVP may lose some face. In the short run the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) will benefit from the JVP’s dilemma. But in the long run the JVP is likely to benefit by staying in the government under protest and letting Chandrika stew in her own juice, because the LTTE is bound to make life impossible for her.

Tsunami assistance and JVP popularity

The work that the JVP cadres have carried out in Tsunami affected areas have won them new recruits and new supporters. The common perception is that the only important political force in Sri Lanka that is disciplined, incorruptible and totally committed to resolving the problems of the people is the JVP.  Even the LTTE cannot match their honesty and dedication. The JVP has adopted a similar approach to the administration of the Pradeshiya Sabha they control and the ministries they run. They have cut out waste and streamline the administration.

It is important to remember that today the JVP is not a small party. It won nearly 19% of the seats in parliament. It has extended its control over many local organisations such as the co-operative societies. In the next period it is poised to increase its share of the vote regionally and nationally.

Need for a comprehensive policy framework

Although the opportunity to interact with other left and progressive parties abroad may assist the JVP to widen its horizons, it is unclear how far such interactions would assist the JVP to address some of the intractable problems Sri Lanka is facing today. Unfortunately, the JVP will not be able to learn much from China or Vietnam. Both countries have adopted a variant of capitalist development coupled with the suppression of civil liberties. The task the JVP is facing is a more difficult and a more complex one. It must develop an alternative strategy for economic development with a comprehensive policy of extending human and democratic liberties, including the creation of institutional provisions that could guarantee the fundamental rights of Tamils and Muslims.

Our task       

There is no justification for isolating the JVP or dismissing it as a Chauvinist party. It is not sufficient to write commentaries about the JVP and its real or imagined defects and shortcomings. It is important to take a leaf from the book of the CPI and the CPI(M) book and engage the JVP in dialogue on all the issues that concerns us.  In every seminar and conference on human and democratic issues we organise, we must ensure the participation of the JVP. Philosophers have sought to interpret history, our task is to change it! 

Home