|
Bangladesh
Conundrum
Guest
Column by Kazi Anwarul Masud
Bangladesh
is in a quandary. Confrontational politics has been decades long phenomena
in Bangladesh though ironically both the ruling and the opposition combines
have publicly expressed their desire for sustainable democracy.
The
quarrel arises from the opposition’s accusation against the government that
democracy is not safe in their hands, elections held under the present
ruling combine would not be free and fair unless an independent and neutral
body were to hold and supervise the next general elections, and the
oppositions’ apprehension that the country is being transformed into a
police state. The government is determined not to bring back caretaker
government system (demanded by the opposition) that has already been
excised from the Constitution through amendment but is open to
dialogue with the opposition on modalities of holding the next
elections.
Ordinarily
in such situations there should be no problem as both the contending
parties want discussions to resolve outstanding issues. But the tension is
increased by different signals given by the leaders on both sides through
their statements and counter statements confusing an already explosive
situation. Framing criminal charges against leaders of opposition and their
consequent incarceration, now under judicial process, is not going to help
the political situation despite the axiom that all are equal in the eyes of
law and lawbreakers, irrespective of their political or social position,
cannot be treated differently. US Vice President Agnew was jailed and
Richard Nixon was set free by President Ford’s pardon. There are
innumerable instances in developed and many developing countries, where the
rule of law has taken root, of political leaders and captains
of industry have been sent behind the bars.
The
question that can be asked whether Bangladesh has achieved the level of
politico-social maturity of claiming of having a just and law abiding
society, where the weak and the marginalized are not denied justice, where
taking revenge does not play any role in suppressing opposing voices.
But in countries where democracy without going through an interim
phase of economic growth, political tolerance, literate
electorate, stable and equitable social
contract helping the growth of institutions essential for
sustainable democracy; removal of trust deficit may require an umpire
for acceptance of election results by all contending political parties. How
this will be shaped depends on discussions among the stake holders. But the
most important thing to the people in general in Bangladesh is that
discussions must take place.
The
Economist (Politics in Bangladesh-May 26th 2012) observed “strong doubts
persist about the fairness of democracy. The United States’ ambassador in
Dhaka this week repeated Mrs. Clinton’s warning that the next election must
be participatory, i.e., run fairly so the opposition will take part”.
The
Economist even went to the extent of suggesting foreigners’ involvement in
solving the impasse. Writes the paper, “The outside world rarely pays
attention because nothing seems to change. Recently, though, the squabbling
has turned into a crisis which threatens to make life still worse for the
170m poor Muslims who suffer under one of the world’s worst governments.
Since Bangladesh’s political leaders show no interest in their fate,
outsider need to do so ”( Bangladesh’s toxic politics-May 26 2012). Law and
order situation has also come under scrutiny of both national and
international human rights organizations. The overall law and order has
deteriorated in the country at recent times with the increase of killings,
snatchings, muggings and robberies by the armed assailants.
According
to a study of human rights watchdog Odhikar, a total of 42 persons were
killed and 3,663 were injured in political violence during the first three
months of the year. Besides, 34 people were allegedly lynched by mobs and
31 people were victims to extrajudicial killings. The worrying thing is
that, most of the incidents are taking place in crowded places and no one
is coming forward to help as criminals are using firearms and bombs to
carry out these crimes. Lack of proper supervision of the authorities
concerned is considered to be the main reasons for the lawlessness.
According to the collected statistics of Detective Branch (DB) police, car
lifting has reached an alarming level in the city as over 600 vehicles are
stolen alone from the capital every year and over 30 percent of these
vehicles could never be recovered. The statistics revealed that 640
vehicles, mostly cars, were lifted from the capital in 2010, while the
figure was 632 in 2011 and 234 until April this year. In a statistic
conducted by Bangladesh Truck and Covered Van Owners’ Association revealed
that increasing highway robberies worried the business community as 400
drivers and helpers of goods-laden trucks and covered vans were killed by
gangsters every year. (Independent-18th June 2012)
Recent
incidents involving alleged molestation of a woman by the police and
their indiscriminate attack on the press who happened to be present
to record the incident, the disappearance of an opposition political leader
who still remains untraced, US State Department’s latest report on
human rights violation in Bangladesh, concerns expressed by Amnesty
International and Transparency International on the question of personal
security and violation of human rights, World Bank suspension of loan for
Padma Bridge construction project, and bad press in the West with potential
impact on Bangladesh economy, might have gone to the advantage of the
opposition for the time being and to the discomfort of the government; the
negative effects of all these on the image of Bangladesh as a
promising developing country are yet be assessed.
Professor
Hae S Kim( of Troy University- The Determinants of Internal Conflict in the
Third World) states that conflict-ridden countries suffer from
poverty, refugees, civil war, political violence and instability, food
shortage, drought, AIDS, famine as well as economic devastation.
Other reasons, wrote Kim, contributing to conflict could be racial,
religious, cultural, ideological, economic factors as well as political and
social structures. Many of these factors are present in Bangladesh
while many are not. One may, therefore, conclude that to be a
conflict-ridden country the presence of all factors are not necessary.
Bangladesh is known to be a poor and one of the least developed countries.
But it would be wrong to put Bangladesh in the same group with
sub-Saharan countries where military conflict within the country and with
neighbors are frequent creating large number of internal refugees ,
genocide, violence against women used as an instrument of policy of
subjugation and economic devastation are rampant.
Positives
for Bangladesh are possibility of “demographic dividend”, a thriving
entrepreneurial class, hard working female work force who have transformed
readymade garment sector into internationally competitive industry,
manageable food insecurity, absence of religious or sectarian and/or racial
conflict etc. On the negative side there is a well entrenched corrupt elite
comparable to Stephen Cohen’s “moderate oligarchy” of Pakistan excepting
that feudal and tribal structures do not exist in
Bangladesh. The rich-poor divide due to absence of distributive
justice or in the words of Hae Kim the gap between economic growth( the
quantitative dimension of economic development) and the quality of life(
the qualitative dimension of economic development) is
increasing. Fortunately Bangladesh has in large measure
linguistic, religious, and racial homogeneity making conflict resolution
easier than in Third World countries that do not have this advantage.
Besides it has been found that conflict ridden countries with greater
freedom or those having democratic system of government have better chance
of conflict resolution compared to countries with totalitarian or authoritarian
system of governance.
What
then ails Bangladesh which has so many factors favorable to be a
non-conflict country? Can it be the prospect of power transition from one
party to another as happens in case of power transition from authoritarian
to democratic regime? Can it be that the party in power, assuming massive
corruption in administration, is reluctant to face the possibility of
electoral defeat at the hands of the electorate as it has less trust in
them due to its years of maladministration? It is commonly believed that
corruption eats up 6% of the GDP in Bangladesh. Additionally the social
cost of corruption in the form of denial of justice( as justice can
be bought) , denial of common facilities like water, electricity, cooking
gas, health facilities that people are entitled automatically without
having to pay bribe, denial of political freedom as nomination to
parliamentary seats are reportedly not given to the deserving and
honest candidates but is auctioned off to the highest bidder with the
inevitable result that parliament members start to represent not the
aspiration of the people but the interest of their group. This becomes
blatantly evident when the majority of the members of parliament belong to
the business community and not politicians who have been serving the people
for decades but lost the race for nomination.
Clearly
political parties in Bangladesh need to wash away the filth accumulated
over the years and seriously think of nominating honest and dedicated
people for the parliament. Is it possible that the current conflict is
because that once defeated in the elections in our first past the post
system the defeated lose all power and become toothless tigers while the
victors take the cake and eat it too. In any corruption ridden society
winning elections is the surest way to power and the way to amass wealth
that otherwise would have been impossible. Is there a case for proportional
representation or for a US Senate or Indian Rajjya Sabha as an upper house
of parliament where good people from different walks of life can be
accommodated to participate in the governance of the country? Albeit
history of the formation of the US Senate was to ally the fear of the
smaller states that their voices would be heard. In the present day context
the case for an upper house of parliament is to accommodate talents who
otherwise would hesitate to get involved in horse trading which is believed
to be the hallmark of politics.
Bangladeshis
are being told that the country would become a middle income country in the
foreseeable future. World Bank has defined middle income country as those
with per capita gross national income between $996 and $ 12195. Middle
income countries have also been defined as those having per capita income
of $400 to $4000. There is evidently a wide range of possibilities for
undeveloped economies to be transformed into sophisticated industrialized
economies. This process of economic development requires certain
ingredients. Presence of those ingredients will determine how
far this optimism is well founded. But in countries where democracy without
going through an interim phase of economic growth, political
tolerance, literate electorate, stable and equitable
social contract helping the growth of institutions essential
for sustainable democracy; removal of trust deficit may require an
umpire for acceptance of election results by all contending political
parties. How this will be shaped depends on discussions among the stake
holders.
But
the most important thing to the people in general in Bangladesh is that
discussions must take place. The conclusion reached by The Economist,
for example, smacks of colonial mentality when the brain and brawn used to
be supplied by the metropolis to its periphery and equally depicts a
shade of modernization theory which held that underdeveloped
countries needed to be helped out of poverty and led along the path of
development trodden upon by the developed countries in the past.
Dependency theorists argued that underdeveloped countries were not
primitive version of the developed region but they all had unique features
and structures of their own and were able to chart ways suitable to their
needs.
It is
true that the West from the days of renaissance and industrial revolution
had stolen the march over the developing world. But the current position of
the industrialized countries, in particular the woes of the Euro Zone, have
revealed the weakness of the Washington Consensus (as representing the
development model of the West) and has put the China/India model for
emulation by the developing countries in addition to lessons that could be
learnt by the developed world. . Middle class, universally recognized
as the main driver of economic development, is being squeezed due to uncontrolled
price increase of essentials, rising food and non-food inflation,
industrial unrest, inequitable distribution of national wealth, lack of
investment due to inadequate infrastructural facilities, and most
importantly looming political instability. It is possible to compress
sequential progress towards democracy and Walt Rostow’s stages of economic
growth in today’s flat earth for developing countries to
overcome the seemingly insurmountable difficulties and let democracy
flourish to serve the will of the people. As a part of the
former British colony we appear to have embraced the British parliamentary
system.
But
do we have the decent behavior of the British politicians? When
Edward Heath lost his premiership he borrowed money from his friend of
opposition Labor Party for shifting his belongings from 10 Downing
Street. Fiction writer Len Deighton once remarked that in Mexico
there is a saying that a politician is like an air conditioner that makes a
lot of noise but does not work very well. Yet democracies cannot function
without politicians guiding the destiny of the nation. Winston Churchill’s
oft quoted observation on democracy as the best system of governance does
not need repetition.
The
aim of democracy being to serve the people in a framework of free market
mechanism brings up the question of reconciliation of capitalism with
democracy. Decades back Harold Laski had observed that the “mass of men”
having captured political power providing enough solid benefit to these
people has become of urgent necessity for the preservation of the
democratic system. But then some have wondered (Francis Fukuyama for
example) if there is proper sequencing of transition to democracy. Samuel
Huntington argued that transition to democracy should follow industrialization
creating middle class and other institutions necessary to support
democracy. Prominent economists like Joseph Stieglitz, Arthur Lewis, Milton
Friedman, to name a few, hold the opinion that a certain degree of economic
development is necessary before democratic system can be sustained. South
Korea and Taiwan have been cited as examples of the successful democratic
transition. In other words procedural democracy or multiparty elections
before ensuring substantive democracy or economic distribution may not be
the surest way to retain democratic way of governance.
It
has also been argued that embracing modernity is an integral part of the
democratization process. Modernity, in this case, has been elucidated as
secular political power centering on ideas of sovereignty and legitimacy
and operating within the bounds of a nation state; transition of power from
authoritarian rule to dynamic form where power would be shifted
according to the will of the people; and decentralized power and acceptance
of welfare state. Do we have the elements of modernity where
vast majority of the people live in poverty and a considerable
portion of the poor live in a state of ultra-poverty? But the
democracy variant is also possible. Harvard scholars Steven Levitsky and
Lucan Way( Election without democracy-The rise of competitive
authoritarianism-Journal of Democracy-Vol 13-Number 2-April 2002) have
argued that authoritarian governments may coexist indefinitely with
meaningful democratic institutions as long as they avoid well publicized
rights abuse and do not steal elections. Besides using bribery,
co-optation, and other forms of “legal’ persecutions governments may limit
opposition challenges without provoking mass upsurge.
Competitive
authoritarianism may result from the decay of full blown authoritarianism
as seen in Bangladesh from public upsurge against the regime of General
Hussain Mohammad Ershad that was followed by election resulting in the
installation of a seemingly representative government. Problem arose when
this representative government which commanded absolute majority in
Parliament started indulging in widespread alleged corruption and abuse of
the rights of the people, in particular of the minority community who,
though briefly in post- liberation Bangladesh in 1971 till the
assassination of the Father of the Nation and consequent change over were
left largely untouched, had been subjected to
discrimination in many areas of their livelihood that would have been their
right as citizens of the country. One of the reasons behind such
persecution of the minority community was the doubt held by a
section of Bangladeshis of their loyalty to the country .
This conviction of disloyalty was sown in the minds of the people of former
East Pakistan since the partition of India in 1947 based on religion and as
an attempt to concretize and legitimize the existence of Pakistan and to
firm up the belief that Hindus and Muslims cannot coexist peacefully as a
nation.
Historians
have cited many examples of peaceful coexistence of the two communities
till the advent of the British rule in India who to perpetuate their
rule adopted and encouraged such constructed division between
the two religions that unfortunately has become embedded in post-partition
India into Pakistan, India, and now to an extent in Bangladesh. Professor
Sushil Chaudhury ( of Calcutta University-Identity and Composite Culture:
The Bengal Case-presented at the Diamond Jubilee Celebration of the Asiatic
Society of Bangladesh) tried to explain how the question of identity and
religion are intertwined with the evolution of cultural syncretism and that
from sixteenth to eighteenth centuries a composite culture evolved in
Bengal. As opposed to that Professor Afia Dil (of Alliant International University-San
Diego-California) in her paper Arabic Impact on Bengali Language and
Culture demonstrated the impact of Arabic script and its influence on
Bengali life and culture in general. This debate on our identity and
culture becomes relevant if one considers the debate on
multiculturalism raging in the West. Language though an important element
in defining identity is not the only factor because the influence of
religion, believed to be bred in the bone becomes no less an
important factor in the evolution of identity.
If
Jurgen Habermass’s post-secular society in which “a worldwide resurgence of
religion, the missionary expansion, a fundamentalist radicalization, and
political instrumentalization of the potential for violence innate in
some religions” are noted and have come to stay then the common
thread of linguistic similarity would not be enough for the
governance of countries like Bangladesh where 12% of the population consist
of Hindus, Christians and Buddhists. In such cases both transactional
and transformational leadership is needed to enthuse the people to strive
for furtherance of economic development regardless of religion, gender,
ethnicity or cultural differences. One has to be careful that in quest of a
national identity one does not fall into the trap of hybrid or illiberal
democracy because it is easier to impose on than to enthuse people to
voluntarily adopt a common identity. But enforced laws or regulations are
always transitory in nature and do not grow roots. As Levitsky and Way have
pointed out there are mainly four areas of democratic contestationthe
electoral arena, the legislative arena, the judicial arena, and the media.
In
Bangladesh the ruling party has three fourth majority in Parliament that
may seemingly indicate stability but effectively means instability as the
oppositional views are more likely to be voiced through street
demonstrations with inevitable governmental repression in the name of
maintaining law and order. The very fact that the legislation on the
bifurcation of Dhaka city into two took less than ten minutes to be passed
into law in Jatyo Sangsad without debate or deliberation is indicative of a
possible dysfunctional Parliament. If on examination it is later found that
the bifurcation was a mistake then all the money and manpower spent on
implementation of the decision would have been in vain.
In
this context James Madison’s words are worth heeding to: In framing a
government which is to be administered by men over men you must first
enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige
it to control itself. Democratic contestation in the electoral arena would
not apply as elections so far held after the fall of authoritarianism have
been free and fair despite opposition parties’ complaint of machinations by
internal and external forces. Unfortunately in Bangladesh the democratic
culture of gracefully conceding defeat is yet to take root. Likewise
opposition party’s complaint of politicization of judiciary in the forms of
appointment of judges and verdicts given on important legal issues do not
hold water as such complaints are not backed by popular acceptance.
Democratic contestation in the field of media prevails in Bangladesh. The
situation, however, has improved with the passage of time.
In
2006 Freedom House rated Bangladesh with 66 points which put the country in
the Not Free press group. Each country is rated in three categories, viz
legal environment 0-30, political influence 0-40, and economic pressure
0-30.with the higher numbers indicating less freedom. A country's
total score is based on the total of the three categories: a score of 0-30
places the country in the Free press group; 31-60 in the Partly Free; and
61-100 in the Not Free press group. Apart from the crisis of democracy
facing Bangladesh due to inflexible attitudes of both the opposition
parties and the ruling combine mainly on political issues the financial
crisis facing the world put the free-market or neoliberal model of
development on trial.
The
Chinese model and that of some emerging economies of reducing their
exposure to foreign financial markets by accumulating large foreign
currency reserves (China reportedly has $three trillion as reserve) and
maintaining strong regulatory control over the banking system have posted
impressive economic growth and at the same time supporting social policy
have earned praise of the developing world. Hesitation to fully embrace the
Chinese model by the developing countries en masse stems from authoritative
political system China has and also increasing inequality between the rural
and urban sectors and profit of growth going to minority of the people that
can lead to social unrest. For countries like Bangladesh devastating
effects of climate change in a few decades, lack of adequate food to
increasing number of people due to increasing food price and decreasing
income, greater focus on stemming population growth to a
manageable level, de-industrialization and lack of FDI due
to inadequate infra-structure and energy, uncertain future for
manpower sector due to global meltdown and unsettled political situation in
the Middle East and increasing diplomatic initiative towards labor
markets in Malaysia and South Korea, reduced exports of RMG and other
products to the US and Europe due to falling of demand will remain
critical challenges for the governments in power.
Apart
from economic reasons Professors Ingleheart and Welzel (Foreign
Affairs-March/April 2009) have argued that economic development is
conducive to democracy in so far it contributes to structural changes (rise
of a knowledge sector) and cultural change. They pointed out the difference
between effective democracy and electoral democracy where veiled
authoritarian and corruption ridden dictates often distort the wishes of
the people who due to lack of education and consequent lack of expression
remain marginalized and the new elites suppress dissent in the name of the
people. They cited examples of easy transformation of Czechoslovakia and
East Germany from authoritarian rule to democracy, as Gorbachev renounced
Brezhnev Doctrine of military intervention in the East European countries,
because these two countries were most economically advanced countries with
high level of education and advanced social welfare system among the
communist nations.
We
have to ask ourselves whether we possess the qualities that modernization
demands as xenophobia is more to be found among underdeveloped societies
than in developed ones. In the ultimate analysis if the conclusion is that
electoral democracy is not enough in today’s knowledge based
post-industrial world then we should aim for effective democracy and
renounce the path of confrontational politics that will only arrest the
socio-political and economic development of the country. Foreign
policy, and to be precise, our relations with India plays an important role
in the our domestic politics. The latest visit by Pranab Mukherjee
gains utmost importance as it provided an opportunity for the Indian
leadership to reiterate their commitment to implement the agreements
reached during Bangladesh Prime Minister’s visit to India and Indian Prime
Minister’s visit to Dhaka. The visit has helped to reduce trust deficit
that has been growing in Bangladesh vis-à-vis Indian intentions on Teesta
water sharing, proposed construction of Tipaimukh Dam, ratification of
Mujib-Indira Agreement of1974 , killing of Bangladesh nationals along the
Indo-Bangla border, reducing the imbalance in trade with India, and other
issues.
The
people of Bangladesh, however, would be more satisfied with implementation
of the accords than with mere assurances. It is not known whether
like Hillary Clinton Pranab Mukherjee availed himself of the
opportunity given by his visit to discuss with both the government and the opposition
to review the prevailing political situation in Bangladesh as instability
in any neighboring country of India would pose threat to Indian
security and economic growth. Some Bangladeshis would consider such
discussion as interference in our domestic affairs. But given the change in
the conduct of international relations, shifting definition of security and
sovereignty, and the interlinking of interests of members of
the global village the progress of the world demands continuity of
stability and peace as essential prerequisites. Absence of peaceful
conditions in any country now becomes a matter of concern to
other members of the international community, particularly of the
neighboring countries. US State Department considers Bangladesh “a valuable
ally in global efforts to defeat terrorism. As part of these efforts, the
Government of Bangladesh has begun to address problems of money laundering
and weak border controls to ensure that Bangladesh does not become a
terrorist safe-haven. Despite porous borders, ungoverned spaces, and poor
service delivery, Bangladesh’s strong national identity and moderate
Islamic tradition help it serve as a key player in combating extremism”.
Rise
of extremism in Bangladesh, now being strictly controlled by the
government, would affect Indian security as well as ours as the
increasingly destructive influence of Tehrik-e-Taliban in Pakistan amply
demonstrates. Is it not to the advantage of India as the
only regional great power to assist in the socio-economic and political
development of the countries of South Asia? Economic prosperity in
Bangladesh will relieve the Indians of the burden of alleging the entry of
economic migrants from Bangladesh and also stem the tide of the entry of
third country terrorists through Bangladesh territory.
Stability
in Nepal would prevent the onslaught by Mao insurgents in North East and
one or two other states in the South. Even in Pakistan sizeable number of
the people want increased trade with India and they believe that this would
have salutary effect on Indo-Pakistan relations. American advice to India
to restrain her “increasing influence” in Afghanistan to assuage Pakistani
discomfort may be listened to as India has done in the case of import of
oil from Iran. In the same vein it is difficult to see how Indian interest
is served by having a pre-modern agricultural economy in Bhutan. Returning
to the basic premise of the necessity of political accommodation between
warring parties in Bangladesh, essentially for the Bangladeshis to
construct, friendly help and advice should be welcome and not
rejected as an exercise of view of xenophobic nationalism. After all
the concept of sovereignty has changed as demonstrated by the members of
the European Union and the strict socio-economic contract now being imposed
by donor European countries on countries to help them out of
becoming bankrupt.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment