Kazi Anwarul Masud [kamasud@dhaka.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 9:29 AM
To: 'editor@bol-online.com'
Cc: 'enayetrasul7114@gmail.com'
Subject: ATTENTION: MR. SHAHNOOR WAHID REPEAT MR. ENAYET RASUL
NEED TO SOLIDIFY DEMOCRACY
By Kazi Anwarul Masud( former Secretary and ambassador)
FOR PUBLICATION ON FRIDAY THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2014
Alyssa Ayres of the Council of Foreign Relations described the attempts to frustrate the 5th January elections as " an opposition party which not only boycotts an election but seeks to prevent citizens from voting isn't furthering a democratic process at all". Like many other observers she found Bangladesh as "a country that has achieved around 6 percent economic growth for much of the last decade, has the eighth largest population in the world, has delivered maternal and child health improvements on a scale comparable to the great Meiji restoration of 19th century Japan, is the world’s second largest exporter of ready-made garments after only China, and has achieved a 94 percent infant immunization rate". Recently Bangladesh government expressed hope to graduate to the threshold of a middle income country by 2015 ( the next triennial review period of LDCs). The up-to-date criteria for a LDC are the ‘per capita income’ criterion, based on the gross national income (GNI) per capita (a three-year average),with a threshold of USD 992; the ‘human assets’ criterion based on a composite index (the Human Assets Index), which consists of indicators on nutrition, health, school enrolment and literacy; and the ‘economic vulnerability’ criterion based on a composite index (the Economic Vulnerability Index), which includes indicators on natural shocks, trade shocks, exposure to shocks, economic smallness, and economic remoteness. On all three fronts the government is hopeful to meet the needed criteria for graduation to the threshold of a middle income country. UNDP report of 2013, World Bank reports and some others positively assessed the recent economic performances of Bangladesh with a question mark on the political instability that may very well undo the successes achieved and stall the progress of the country to solidify its democratic structure. Ayreen Khan (a researcher at the Peace and Security and Democracy and Governance fields at the Institut fur Entwicklung und Frieden (INEF), Duisburg, Germany) has assessed that the current political impasse hampers the economy of the country. Each day of strike or blockade mount huge loss to the economy of the country, estimated an amount of USD 193million per day. Every sector of the economy gets affected for political clash, e.g., garment industries count loss of USD 25.8 million per day, transport sector USD 32.2 million and small retailers face an amount USD 77.4 million loss per day. The current deadlock has affected every economic-monetary sector possible, e.g., hotel, restaurant, tourism, housing, raw materials (low growth in cement production: 3.6%, iron and steel production: -8.72%), remittances (-8%). Transport owners counted loss of USD 540.8 million while 4000 (3000 vandalised, 1000 burnt) vehicles were damaged in one and a half years. Agricultural growth weakened from 3.1% in 2012 to 2.2% in 2013. Service growth declined from 6.3% in 2012 to 6.06% in 2013 (“Bangladesh Development Update: Resilient Economy Facing Internal Risk”, World Bank, accessed on 29 December 2013). Investor’s confidence declined 1.2% in the real private investment rate. Due to the inevitable political clash during the election time, economic growth declines in every election year. The GDP growth rate declined during the election years in 1996, 2001, 2008 and in 2013 from 4.93% to 4.62%, 5.94% to 5.27%, 6.43% to 6.63% and 6.32% to 6.01%. The recent escalation of the nationwide blockade and existing thrust hampered the average rate of 6.2% GDP growth of the last four years( Where is the limit to political violence--3rd January 2014) . The loss to the economy listed above bring in the debate on inequality raging in both the developed and developing world. The most advanced industrialized economy in the world--the USA--is also believed to have most unequal distribution of national wealth. In Bangladesh and in other comparable societies the poor are hurt more than the rich because the poor have less shock absorption capacity than the rich. Gini coefficient, that measures the extent of distribution of income among individuals and households, last reported by the World Bank for Bangladesh was 3.12 in 2010 where 0 represents perfect equality and 10 perfect inequality. As the rich( noveau or otherwise) in most societies, particularly in ours, are believed to have cards stacked in their favour they even on occasions of hartals/strike take advantage of supply disruptions forcing farmers to sell their produce below production cost and in turn sell the same products to the city dwellers at exorbitant prices by forming syndicates. Then one has to take into account structural inequality and its adverse effects on the poor. Even in the US, writes Rutgers Law School Professor David Dante Troutt, " We experience structural inequality — see it in the quality of local schools and their test scores, smell it in the access to healthy food or not, feel it in a sense of safety or danger as we walk the streets.
The American dream is more than a job or an income. ... People’s fortunes strongly correlate to their parents’ status. The Harvard researchers also found that the ingredients of mobility require certain structural components — including low residential segregation, low income inequality, better primary schools, greater social capital and more family stability.
In my own recent analysis of U.S. inequality, I found that income profiles closely follow residential profiles. Far more than pluck and merit are needed to get into the middle class". The same is true for Bangladesh. The children of the rich and the powerful go abroad for studies or to English medium schools in the country with more skilled teachers and lower student-teacher ratio. By the time they are in their teens these children are ready to compete internationally. In today's technology driven economies better schooling gives them a decided advantage to go up the socio-economic ladder compared to the children who are trained by less skilled teachers and less equipped schools. In essence, argues Salvatore Babones of the University of Sydney, by definition, rising inequality is a shift in economic rewards from poor to rich, and almost by definition it represents a shift in economic power from poor to rich. Obviously, rich and powerful people in every country have enormous incentives to promote policies that result in rising inequality. It is not credible to suggest that rising inequality is entirely due to larger economic forces without so much as a hand in the right direction from those who stand to benefit most from the trend. Rich and powerful people would be extraordinarily irrational indeed if they did not promote rising inequality. Our political leaders would be well advised to seek the path of communication forsaking violence because in the ultimate analysis people seek peace and fast lose interest in an electoral process where their will is not fully expressed. Uncontrolled violence also opens up the possibility of strengthening radical Islamists movement introducing an international dimension to our political crisis. The present government has to its credit suppressing radical Islamists by taking strong actions against them. The continuing trial and conviction of those accused of crimes against humanity has done the nation proud. But the conflict between the ruling parties and the opposition parties combine, unless settled soonest possible, may encourage external forces to fish in troubled water. One would like to hope that meaningful communication between the feuding parties would be restored and possibilities of interference would be denied to external forces.
The American dream is more than a job or an income. ... People’s fortunes strongly correlate to their parents’ status. The Harvard researchers also found that the ingredients of mobility require certain structural components — including low residential segregation, low income inequality, better primary schools, greater social capital and more family stability.
In my own recent analysis of U.S. inequality, I found that income profiles closely follow residential profiles. Far more than pluck and merit are needed to get into the middle class". The same is true for Bangladesh. The children of the rich and the powerful go abroad for studies or to English medium schools in the country with more skilled teachers and lower student-teacher ratio. By the time they are in their teens these children are ready to compete internationally. In today's technology driven economies better schooling gives them a decided advantage to go up the socio-economic ladder compared to the children who are trained by less skilled teachers and less equipped schools. In essence, argues Salvatore Babones of the University of Sydney, by definition, rising inequality is a shift in economic rewards from poor to rich, and almost by definition it represents a shift in economic power from poor to rich. Obviously, rich and powerful people in every country have enormous incentives to promote policies that result in rising inequality. It is not credible to suggest that rising inequality is entirely due to larger economic forces without so much as a hand in the right direction from those who stand to benefit most from the trend. Rich and powerful people would be extraordinarily irrational indeed if they did not promote rising inequality. Our political leaders would be well advised to seek the path of communication forsaking violence because in the ultimate analysis people seek peace and fast lose interest in an electoral process where their will is not fully expressed. Uncontrolled violence also opens up the possibility of strengthening radical Islamists movement introducing an international dimension to our political crisis. The present government has to its credit suppressing radical Islamists by taking strong actions against them. The continuing trial and conviction of those accused of crimes against humanity has done the nation proud. But the conflict between the ruling parties and the opposition parties combine, unless settled soonest possible, may encourage external forces to fish in troubled water. One would like to hope that meaningful communication between the feuding parties would be restored and possibilities of interference would be denied to external forces.
No comments:
Post a Comment