Columns

Often discussions on Sri Lanka lead to the question as to what the country has achieved in more than seven and a half decades after independence. Often, people tacitly agree that the country has achieved little. Government members and their supporters keep asking what post-independence governments did in the 77 years after independence.

On the other hand, critics keep asking what the JVP/NPP government has done in the first year of their regime.

Good question

These are good questions. However, often, the answers are highly tainted by political bias and prejudice. The plain truth is that there have been achievements, as well as shortcomings and failures in the past. The incumbent government is no exception. Significant economic and social achievements have been made in the 77 years after independence and in the last year under the NPP government.

President’s address

Last Sunday’s column discussed President Dissanayaka’s address to the Sri Lankan diaspora in the US and pointed out that he gave a detailed exposition of the government’s objectives and its first year’s performance. He spoke of the eradication of corruption, building a just and equitable society and the country’s economic performance since his party took office.

The President’s budget speech on November 5 will likely be prefaced by a detailed account of the government’s achievements. Today’s column focuses on the question of the country’s post-independence economic and social performance. Have post-independence governments failed?

Initial conditions

Given the favourable initial conditions at independence, it is reasonable to be disappointed with the country’s post-independence economic performance. However, to deem it a failure is incorrect. Inasmuch as there have been significant achievements, there have been shortcomings and failures.

The inability to forge national unity and mitigate corruption are two costly failures that impacted adversely on the country’s development. On the other hand, the improvements in social conditions and social indicators are significant achievements. Political bias should not blind us to these realities.

Answers

Let us address the question as to whether successive governments that ruled the country in the seven decades after independence improved the living conditions of the people. The answer is a definite “yes”. Remarkably, Sri Lanka has achieved social progress that exceeds that of many countries with significantly higher per capita income.

Seven decades

The country’s post-independence years are marked by economic and social progress. The low-income country of the 1950s has become an upper middle-income country. The 77 years have witnessed a social transformation. This is not to deny that we could and should have achieved much higher economic growth given the favourable conditions at independence. The country at the time of independence had a higher per capita income than most other Asian countries, with the exception of Japan and Malaysia.

Economic growth

In spite of this, economic growth was around 4 per cent from 1950 to 2020. This is not a mean achievement. It elevated the country from a low-income country to a high-middle-income country. In spite of a high population growth in the first few decades, per capita income rose.

Social transformation

Sri Lanka can be proud of its social achievements. Life expectancy that was around 55 years has increased to 77 years. Literacy that was relatively high for a low-income country reached near full literacy. In fact, Sri Lanka’s social attainments are considered exceptional, given its per capita income.

Self-sufficiency

Another achievement is that the country that imported about one half of its requirement of rice for a population of about 7 million attained self-sufficiency by 2020 with a population of 21 million. There were similar gains in other crops too. The pertinent issue is not that we did not progress but that we could have done much better. One of the reasons for this was the failure to forge unity among diverse communities. This led to ethnic riots and a disastrous three-decade war. Uniting the country is now a national priority.

Summing up and conclusion

The post-independence period has not only been one of economic and social development but also one of underperformance. The economy has grown by around 4 per cent and moved from a low-income country to a middle-income country. Even more significant has been the country’s social development. Life expectancy and health conditions have improved significantly; literacy and education have reached impressive levels; social amenities such as electricity and housing have improved; and the country’s infrastructure has leapfrogged.

Nevertheless, there are reasons to be dissatisfied with the country’s progress, as the country’s initial favourable conditions should have enabled much higher economic growth and social transformation. Other countries in Asia with less favourable conditions at their times of independence, such as Singapore and Malaysia, have achieved higher levels of economic growth and development.

When the country liberalised in 1977, much ahead of other South Asian countries, it was poised to reach high growth. The communal violence of 1989 and the nearly three-decade civil war set back the economy. In fact, the communal violence and disunity of the country have been fundamental reasons for our economic retardation.

Forging national unity is an essential condition for the country’s economic growth and social development. The current government’s success in achieving its goals of ushering in a rich and prosperous society is very much dependent on forging national unity and ethnic harmony.