The New Coalition The landslide victory of the SLFP-led coalition and the crushing defeat of the UNP at the recent general elections in Ceylon has given rise to a certain amount of interest in Ceylon politics. Mrs. Bandaranaike, the new Prime Minister, had appointed three "Trotskyists" (theleaders of the reformist LSSP are referred to as Trotskyists" by the bourgeois press. The LSSP was expelled from the Fourth International in 1964) and one Communist (Moscow wing) to her 21-member Cabinet.
In accordance with their election manifesto. the new Government had decided to (a) nationalise foreign banks and imports of essential commodities; (b) establish state agencies to guide tea and other plantation industries and to control the activities of British-owned agency nouses: (c) appoint employees councils and People's committees; and (d) recognise North Vietnam, North Korea, East Germany and the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam.
Confusion The victory of the coalition and the announcement of the above measures has caused a great deal of confusion amongst many militants. Those who opposed all forms of parliamentarianism (even using the parliament as a platform for propaganda purposes) only yesterday, have begun to talk about conditional support for the coalition government. What should be the attitude of revolutionaries to the Bandaranaike government? Moscow and Peking have hailed the electoral triumph of the coalition, interpreting it as a victory of the people. Some even go further and predict a uban-type development initiated by Mrs. Bandaranaike. Therefore should we give critical or conditional support to the bandaranake Unproment? is it more progressive than the Exploited Countries In order to answer the aoove questions and to ascertain what our attitude should be, it is essential to examine the content, and not merely the image, of the coalition government. Of course, we should welcome the recognition of North Korea North despite the fact that they would reinforce the illusion amongst a large mass of people that the coalition government is a genuine socialist government. However, we should recognise the fact that all these measures go no further than tidying up the coalition image. They are not designed to resolve the basic contradictions in a class society. The SLFP-led coalition is no less a capitalist government than the UNP. In order to understand the nature and content of the Sandaranatke government, it is necessary to examine the predicament of the nationa bourgeoisie in exploited (sometimes erroneously referred to as "under-developed") countries today. Ceylon is no exception to the general pattern of developments in this sector of the world.
The national bourgeoisie in all exploited countries are weak and impotent. They are incapable of providing even partial solutions to the basic problems facing these countries, c.g. unemployment, continually deteriorating standards of living, etc. They are sandwiched between imperialism on the one hand and the dissatisfied masses on the other. In these circumstances the policies of the national bourgeoisie takes a dual character.
Dual Role On the one hand it plays the role of junior partner to imperialism. They protect the imperialist interest and cannot have an existence independent of imperialism. To this extent national bourgeoisie and imperialism are complementary. On the other hand they are also competitive forces. Imperialism tries to squeeze as much as possible from the national bourgeoisie, and the latter in turn seek to exact as many concessions as possible from the big brother. To this extent it tries to play one imperialist country against another, or imperialist countries against the Soviet block and China. To a limited extent the national bourgeoisie therefore comes into conflict with imperialism. But such conflicts. which are partial and temporary, always lead to a new accommodation with imperialism. Given the class interests of the national bourgeoisie it cannot be otherwise.
These partial clashes with imperialism in fact it is forced to take measures which are designed to (a) contain the mass upsurge, and (b) strengthen its own bargaining position vis-a-vis imperialism.
Partial nationalisation of foreign enterprises in countries like Peru, India, Ceylon, Zambia, etc. are not designed to destroy the capitalist property relations in these countries When one examines the election manifesto of the coalition parties, the past record of the SLEP governments, the class composition of the SLFP and the relative weight of the reformists within the coalition, it becomes crystal clear that the coalition government is no more socialist than the UNP Not Anti-Capitalist The coalition programme does not contemplate the abolition of the private property system. On the contrary they would assist, guide, and encourage the growth of the private sector in accordance with the long-term needs of capitalism. Nor will the coalition government hesitate to seek the assistance of Washington and London. Whether they will obtain such assistance on better terms than the UNP is, of course, another matter.
People's Committees The people's committees proposed by the Bandaranaike government are in no way real organs of power. Mrs. Bandaranaike in a public statement made it crystal clear that they will in no way replace the existing state machinery by the proposed committees. These committees would at best serve in an advisory or consultative capacity.
The coalition programme promises to implement the notorious racist horse-deal transacted between Mrs. Bandaranaike and Shastri (late P.M. of India) over the heads of the to give critical or conditional support to the plantation workers, to repatriate 300.000 estate workers of Indian origin, who have lived and worked in Ceylon for over three or four decades. Furthermore, it has no intention of granting the rest of the estate workers their democratic right of franchise, which was taken away by the UNP in 1948.
Past Record in the past the successive SLFP governments have used repressive legislation and emergency regulations to suppress the working class; they have denied the rights of minorities and the living standards of the masses have continually eroded. Problems of unemployment, housing and rural indebtedness became more and more acute. Their record is therefore no better than that of the UNP Class Composition The SLFP itself was an offshoot of the UNP. Today it is an assorted grouping mainly consisting of old landed aristocracy and a section of the new rich. There is no basic difference between the UNP and SLFP in their class composition Balance of Power Today the SLFP can well afford to form a government without the LSSP or the C.P. because they gained 90 seats out of a total of 150. Mrs. Bandaranaike is, however, well aware of the role these reformist leaders could play in disorienting the working class. When th occasion arises they will serve the ruling class to divide and defeat the oppressed masses. The LSSP with 19 seats and the C.P. with six seats have no real power within the coalition. Task of the Revolutionaries When the pomp and pageantry is over, and the glamour has gone, the fundamental problems of the oppressed people will remain unresolved None of these problems could be solved within the capitalist framework, A new upsurge in the class struggle will once again reveal the class nature of the Bandaranaike government and expose the reformists.
Therefore the job of the revolutionary is not coalition, but to prepare for the coming struggles. His task is two-fold. Firstly, to construct a revolutionary alternative to the reformist parties who would soon become discredited, and secondly, to advance a series transitional demands designed to break the vars sectors of onese plan