Wednesday, April 27, 2011

UN re(sup)port

How often do enemies end up in the friends’ corner? How often do enemy activities become a blessing in disguise? How big is the bigger picture, and how little do we see of it? These questions baffled me while the nation and the globe argued as to how factual, legal or biased the UN report is.

The little journalistic experience I have and the few Hollywood movies I have watched have taught me that in every "big" story, there are always little twists. To get carried away with the obvious facts is convenient...but what if the obvious facts are all but obvious? I chose to tread a different path; I treated the situation at hand as a Hollywood movie, directed and acted by the Martin Scorseses and Brad Pitts of politics today.

Sit back and relax, if you wish to, grab that bowl of pop corn too, for here unravels “The Great UN re(sup)port”. The world, as much as it condemns radicals, seems to have a very special place for them too. Ask yourself: do you know more about Adolf Hitler or Mother Theresa? Is Che Guevara renowned as a rights activist or a rebellious leader? The answers will tell you that we seem to appreciate the “Pepsi-men” as they are called now, hardcore game changers, while easily forgetting those whose change was subtle and often unnoticed.



Ban Ki Moon is no ordinary secretary general, Mahinda Rajapaksa is no ordinary political leader. In the true sense of it, they are game changers. Kumaran Pathmanadan alias KP and Karuna Amman were such game changers for the LTTE in the past, against the government kindly note, but 2 years down the line they lie low and pledge their support to the government, an enemy they once fought, when their once so called ally, the UN thrashes the GOSL in a report. What irony, don’t you think?

The UN that has been fighting a cold war with Russia over the past few decades has been extremely vocal in making its stance on Russia, clear. It has vehemently condemned the support pledged by the Vodka nation to criticizers of UN, in the caliber of former headline-stealer Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and even current headline-stealer Muammar Gaddafi. But a fortnight ago, when Ban Ki Moon took a trip to the Kremlin, it was not to discuss how to save the world or what the newest brand of Vodka is, but to simply canvass for his 2nd term in office. Despite being a cold friend and an unsung enemy, Moon had to plead with Russia to refrain from vetoing his 2nd term. Again, irony, wouldn’t you think?

It’s not over, just yet. With his tenure in office reaching the closing stages Moon is in dire need to prop up his image, he wants the world to see him as the global leader who would resolve all matters, a leader who can make tough decisions. Like hard-hitting T.M. Dilshan became a game changer with his “Dil scoop”, Moon came out with his very own “Moon scoop”. After all, in what better way can he achieve his goals than throwing stones at a tiny island like Sri Lanka? Remember the report was submitted not by the UN Security Council or the Human Rights Council; it was compiled by an advisory panel of the Secretary General. For those who are not familiar with the intricacies, Moon cannot take any action based on the report submitted, instead he can only forward it into the agenda of the Security Council where it can possibly be debated on and possibly used to determine a future course of action. Simply put, direct threats require decisive action, in this case, there is neither direct threat nor decisive action. Do you see the irony once again?

Let’s look at the other side of the coin. In the eyes of the Sri Lankan public, as showcased by the 
government, Moon and the UN are Sri Lanka’s new enemies. The local Conan, a president who was able to eliminate a ruthless terrorist organization, will he back down when Moon (for that matter even the when the sun) levels allegations? Remember President Mahinda Rajapaksa is not known for his diplomatic skills, he will not go down the wire as one of the best economists we’ve had, but surely he is one of the best fighters the world has seen. 


For the President to survive, and in order to bolster his image, there needs to be a fight. What value does a fighter have other than in a fight? Fortunately or unfortunately there isn’t a single force within our territories that could pose a fair threat to the man in the red shawl. The present regime thrives and prospers on extremism. Let’s face it; they have the men and the strategies to counter it.

Moon’s stones are like showers of blessings for MR, finally he can take his sword out and there is a worthy opponent to fight. The government’s vocal army now has reasons to takeover the news stations with their incessant and over-budgeted condemnations. They can once again protest at the gates of the UN compound, burn effigies and become the local heroes who allegedly have, on several occasions, had the UN on its knees. The government which was yawning in boredom is now full of action; like rampaging pachyderms, they are all over the media, streets, walls and the minds of the people.

I hope you are beginning to see the behind-the-scenes footage of this movie. In a matter of days Ban Ki Moon who was taken to the cleaners by the international media organizations including CNN, BBC and Aljazeera is portrayed as a man who stood strong and independently appointed a commission to look into war crimes in Sri Lanka. The UN diplomat is making headlines for issuing an unedited and comprehensive report to the world and demanding the GOSL to respond to it.

Isn’t it a win-win situation for both parties?

And those who think this UN report is already a storm in the international circuits, let me assure you, this storm is a gentle breeze in comparison to what lies ahead. It would be very surprising if no post-argument action is taken by the international community or the government. It’s a battle to entertain the masses, simply to demonstrate to the world and the country the virtues of individuals or organizations, and why they should keep playing the lead roles.
 
Do not forget, there must be extremism for anther form of extremism to survive. So watch the game-changers play this game; choose, though, if you should cheer them on, or laugh at them.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Modern day “Cricket-(Polit)icians”



28th of April 2007 was a disastrous day for most Sri Lankans due to the overnight LTTE air craft bombing, moreover due to the loss of a cricket world cup that was believed, could have been won. Steve Buckner and Aleem Dar made the Lankans batsmen bat in absolute darkness; a blunder that is criticized to date. This time around, it is the players themselves that have left island nation cricket followers in darkness, due to the dismal performance.

Many believed Sri Lanka had a far more better chance of grabbing the converted title this time around as opposed to 2007, but one wonders whether it was because the men in dark blue had a better team or a weaker opposition. Sri Lankans, at least most of them have the habit of joyously clapping when giants whack the hell out of midgets and take it to the next step by boasting of the powerful strokes or the in swinging Yorkers not withstanding the spinning doosras. But what they fail to see is how inconsistent this giant becomes when dealing with one of its own size. Yet, the pure passion Lankans have to the game keeps them in a state of delusion hoping we could catapult out any side.

Like in the rest of subcontinent nations, cricket is not a mere sport, but a religion practiced every time of the day over meals, while traveling, at work, pursuing studies, to sum up; over every action one could possibly think of. They follow the games from ball one, subtle changes don’t miss their eye. Lack of interest among players and a stupid team, field or bowling change are spotted instantly. All of the above were noticed by the cricketoholics on the 2nd of April when the inflated Sri Lankan team took on the best team of the tournament.


One may argue that the mere fact that Lanka were taking on tournament favourites might have made the team hit the panic buttons, but really should the panic buttons have been hit when Sri Lanka were 31/1 after 10 overs or when India were 33/2 chasing a mammoth 275? I’d go with the first.

Parachuting, despite not being a popular hobby or sport in Sri Lanka, is no unfamiliar phenomena to most of us, as it is ever so common in the political arena. How can I forget the state and private offices too? However the latest parachuting didn’t take place when an opposition MP crossed over to the government, but when a player who was not good enough to be in the initial 15 was picked to be in the best 11 of a “CRICKET WORLD CUP FINAL”. The selectors and the skipper may come up with various theories to defend their move which backfired, but the average Joe, in Sri Lankan terms the average Sunil will keep asking why Mendis who was Sri Lanka’s best bowler in the tournament was over looked. Remember, in cricket what matters is not what happened 2 years ago, but yesterday, and yesterday Mendis was far more better than Randiv.


 
Throughout the tournament the selectors praised and showed confidence in a below par Silva, but come the big day, he is overlooked to bring in a worse candidate to the post. The logic behind it fails me every time I think of it, may be the selectors thought of saving a trump for the last battle. But where they went wrong is failing to understand that the younger Chamara was no ‘Trump’ but more like ‘Donald’ as in the duck. Also what they might have forgotten is that final trump generally works in warfare not cricket-fare, where ‘time in the middle’ is that matters the most.

When the shot is accurate it’s the gunman’s ability but when it is not, it’s the fault of the gun. Let me rephrase it, when the Yorker is spot on, ‘slinger is king’, but when he lacks focus and sprays the ball all around the wicket ‘ball is wet and blame it on the wind’. No cricketer can deliver everyday, a point that has been agreed even by my great grand pa, but Sri Lankans as a society, who has been guilty on numerous earlier occasions too, might want to be careful in jumping the gun of praise far too early, at least next time.

Drama doesn’t end with the loss, it continues when the skipper tenders in his resignation, leaving a team who runs around like headless chickens or gripless bats. He claims it’s a move for the betterment of the future, but here’s where you should draw a comparison between cricket and warfare; when a regiment loses a close battle if the general steps down and throws in a brand new general the casualties rise. The cost of the learning curve is far too much to bear.  The eloquent skipper claims he had plans of stepping down 3 weeks prior to the tournament, then why not groom someone for battle while engaged in ‘The battle’. You might have made some master moves in the past, but Sanga, this time you ‘hit the bunga’.
And just as we thought ‘resignation spree’ has taken a break, there you go, the ‘mother-board’ who picked the wrong players and hit the wrong buttons also tendered in their resignations. Is it an indication of a fresh start or an impending cricket crisis? Only time will tell.

Icing on the cake came when the government this time around replaced the LTTE air attacks with submarine attacks; coming from down under and increasing the prices of fuel and gas in the eve of the final game of the cup that matters.

Many say politicians cannot be compared to none, others say cricketers cannot be either. Wait, hold on, how about comparing politicians with cricketers? I think it fits, after all both varieties have similar characteristics.

Hobby- Parachuting
Game- Blame game
Motivating factor- Money
One word definition- Unpredictable
Makes fools of- The public

Long live politicians! Long live cricket!