Editorial
A general’s day out with
political scientists
The regional conference of the International Political Science Association on ‘The Challenging Interface of Democracy and Security’, hosted by the Bangladesh Political Science Association in the capital on Monday, could itself be an interesting study in paradox, with the chief of army staff, Lieutenant General Moeen U Ahmed, presenting the keynote speech on the need for Bangladesh to ‘construct its own brand of democracy’ at a time when the democratic order in the country has been stalled and the fundamental rights of the citizens have been suspended under a state of emergency. The conference was a reminder that these are curious times. That a general preached democracy and development was also a poignant manifestation of the failure and the lack of courage of our intelligentsia to do what they are supposed to do. Should they not have been at the forefront of a discourse on democratic construct, instead of being in the audience?
To give the credit where it is due, we acknowledge that the general did touch upon certain home truths. It is true that the people in general ‘do not want to go back to an “elective democracy” where corruption in society becomes all pervasive, governance suffers in terms of insecurity and violation of rights, and where political “criminalisation’ threatens the very survival and integrity of the state’. It is also true that ‘the idea underlying the development of politics and democracy must take into account the need and requirement of a particular country’. However, what the army chief did not mention is the fact that the concept of democracy, as adopted and adapted by the United States, the United Kingdom and other countries, does not envisage the army in a policymaking role vis-à-vis governance. Democracy is, to borrow from the famous Gettysburg address of US president Abraham Lincoln, of the people, for the people and by the people. General Moeen also conveniently kept mum on how sporadic intervention of the army in the political process had set back democratic continuity in Bangladesh.
There is little doubt in anyone’s mind that democracy is essentially a western concept and that the brand of democracy, practised in the United States or the United Kingdom or even India, may not be suitable for Bangladesh. There are different modes of democracy and since the people of Bangladesh have never failed to show their commitment to democratic governance, we need to choose one form of democracy or the other, either in entirety or after certain modifications. Such a choice must entail an effective discourse among politicians, academics and other civil society groups, and not be imposed by any forces that are supposed to be under the political control of a civilian government elected directly by
the people.
If we are to make a choice from the available modes of democracy or construct our own brand, we must first have the democratic order restored and the political process resumed so that academics, politicians and people at large can engage in an effective discourse on the issue. General Moeen, believed to be calling the shots now, and his army should, therefore, have the democratic rights of the citizens restored as soon as possible.
Hike in fuel price shows the govt’s
apathy to the poor’s plight
The military-backed interim government has increased fuel prices between 15 and 22 per cent on the ground that it will reduce the losses of the Bangladesh Petroleum Corporation, which currently stands in the excess of Tk 14,000 crore, according to the energy adviser, Tapan Chowdhury. Tapan’s comment suggests that the corporation’s losses are due entirely to the low fuel price and have nothing to do with the outstanding fuel bills of Biman and other government entities or the mismanagement and corruption within its ranks. However, there are reasons to believe that had the government agencies been regular in their payments to the corporation and corruption and mismanagement within the corporation curbed, the losses would have been much less than what they are now. Another oft-quoted reason for increase in fuel prices is that it limits the scope for smuggling of fuel to India where the prices are reportedly much higher than in Bangladesh. Smuggling is a law and order issue and can be prevented with heightened vigilance by law-enforcement agencies, especially along the border.
Whatever the actual reasons behind the price hike, it certainly reflects the interim government’s indifference towards the poorer section of society. The prices of kerosene and diesel, used mostly by the poor, have been increased 21 per cent whereas those of octane and petrol, consumed mostly by the more affluent sections, have gone up 15.5 and 16 per cent respectively. The differential aptly demonstrates where the government’s priorities lie. And this is not the first time that the poor people will have to bear the brunt of the government’s actions.
One of the first few things that the interim government did upon its assumption of office was to initiate demolition of slums and removal of makeshift shops on footpaths and roadsides, without making any alternative housing and employment arrangements for the evicted. The government has since stopped its demolition drive and introduced holiday markets for the evicted hawkers; however, the measures seem to have come about only as an afterthought and proved ineffectual. Meanwhile, some multi-storeyed structures, clearly built without permission and on government land and owned by moneyed people, have remained untouched. The government has also shown pathological apathy and callousness in bringing the prices of essential commodities under control, which continue to spiral out of the affordability of even the lower middle class.
Although the international financial institutions insist as if it were, a state must not be treated as a business entity or a corporation for which balance of accounts is imperative and profit the sole motive. We expect the government to keep in mind that the prime motive of a state must be the welfare of its citizens, more particularly the welfare of its deprived citizens, which this government has seemingly failed to ensure.
SAARC summit: list of regional
problems is growing
The best connectivity is an intensified people-to-people contact. Democratic countries perhaps have nothing to lose – that is nothing to hide – from improved traffic from neighbouring countries. Some countries suddenly tighten their visa rules. An outcome of increased contact at people’s level is greater inter-cultural and inter-religious understanding and mutual respect,
writes Zakeria Shirazi
THE 14th summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation began in New Delhi on Tuesday. The significance of this summit lies in that it is the first summit after its enlargement with the inclusion of Afghanistan as the eighth member and interest in the organisation shown by other countries seeking observer status. For the first time observers from China, Japan, South Korea, the European Union and the United States are attending. Iran’s request for being an observer has also received favourable response. This time there is a strong emphasis on trade, ‘connectivity’ and action against terrorism. The summit aims to lend a fresh impetus to the implementation of pledges over the past two decades for the well-being of the people in the region.
The new interest shown in SAARC by some extra-regional powers goes to prove that this regional grouping is far from a moribund organisation, even if it has not yet delivered to the extent it should have. There is a common feeling that though it is 22 years old, SAARC, unlike organisations like the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, has not quite taken off, and in a more cynical vein, one may even feel justified in calling it a South Asian football federation. There was also some modest success in another less important field, namely tourism. But then tourism is not only a pastime of the rich but also a means of interaction at people’s level. Innuendoes are aplenty, and a result of unfulfilled expectation.
The primary impulse of SAARC was regional trade and here the picture is anything but inspiring. The member-countries’ trade among themselves is less than five per cent of their global trade. No broad areas of interdependence and complementality could be found. But then, the present global interest in the organisation is an important pointer. Though mutuality in trade was the basic stimulus, many new pressing issues have since come up demanding a regional approach. In trade also some belated outcome can now be expected after the South Asia Free Trade Arrangement came into effect July 2006. Under the agreement, Bangladesh has agreed to reduce by five per cent on about 4,000 items originating from the six other signatory countries. However, the onus of duty cut should lie more on counties which enjoy favourable balance of trade. The items include Portland cement, plywood, raw silk, vehicles up to 3000 cc, raw silk, shampoo, suitcase, milk and cream, dairy spread, lentils, some fruits and vegetables. But experts maintain that lists of sensitive items of the member-countries are so lengthy that the agreement loses its effectiveness.
Establishment of the South Asian University is a landmark. The university will be based in Delhi but Bangladesh’s proposal that each member-country should have a campus deserves serious consideration. Another landmark is the setting up of a food bank to tide over food crisis in times of natural or other disasters. Each country will have its separate food bank and will replenish it as necessary.
One-fourth of the total world population live in SAARC region. The world’s largest concentration of poverty is in this region. But that is not the whole story. The region also has a very large pool of scientific manpower and technological capability including the nuclear and space capability. No one can afford to treat South Asian countries as a cluster of least developed countries at the receiving end for everything. Brown Asians have at times shown a gleam of their prowess; what will they be if they can resolve their differences and become united! This is post-colonial era, remember.
A grouping of this nature is always a stabilising factor in global context when worldwide there are forces of instability galore. Most member-countries are internally disturbed but there are also some, namely Nepal and Bhutan, which are on the threshold of new possibilities. There are many shared concerns. In 1985 when SAARC was formed international terrorism had not acquired its present virulence. Nor had the smuggling of women and children assumed its present scale. Many local problems of yesterday are the regional and trans-national problems of today. The drug menace, for instance. For the first time last May the home ministers of SAARC countries met in Dhaka with the specific decision to fight the alarming spread of drug abuse. It was observed at the meeting that significant improvement could be made in the field of terrorism, drug smuggling and other crimes by maintaining closer cooperation with the Narcotics and Counterterrorism Institution of the United Nations and ASEAN. Sri Lanka has come up with a worthwhile suggestion that SAARC should take steps to prevent the linkage between trade and narcotics and terrorism, especially the terror financing through narcotics. Drug, terrorism, money laundering are regional as well as global problems. Te various expert committees have prepared reports including those on South Asian University, biotechnology, regional telemedicine, South Asian University, and textile and handicraft museum. Globalisation has introduced a trading pattern which has made the poor countries poorer. It is said, in a defeatist tone, that globalisation cannot be resisted and all we can do is to adjust with this tide of profit maximisation, consumerism and exploitation as best we can. SAARC as an eight-nation bloc, even as trading block, can go some way towards giving strength and confidence to member-states.
South Asia has vast potentials but massive challenges await the region, both foreseeable and unforeseeable. The ones we can vaguely anticipate are concern over energy security for South Asia in the coming decades, the threat of some countries, mainly Bangladesh and the Maldives, from the heating of the earth, and nuclear rivalry.
What is meant by connectivity must be spelt out. Mental connectivity can be welcomed unreservedly but geographical connectivity will perhaps entail more thorough discussion. We learn that Regional Multimodal Transport Study which outlines Dhaka-Kabul corridor will not be finalised in this summit and will be deferred to future meets. At any rate, the best connectivity is an intensified people-to-people contact. Democratic countries perhaps have nothing to lose — that is nothing to hide — from improved traffic from neighbouring countries. Some countries suddenly tighten their visa rules. An outcome of increased contact at people’s level is greater inter-cultural and inter-religious understanding and mutual respect. Respect and not just tolerance. Tolerance implies that I am willy-nilly suffering you knowing that you are wrong. Intolerance, fundamentalism, militancy and terrorism are the four successive stages. Fortunately for our world, most fundamentalists do not graduate to the two later stages. In this sombre milieu, a regional grouping can play a crucial role not only to improve economic conditions of the peoples of the region but to protect them from the ever-rising regional and global plagues of drug, militancy and terrorism. That Afghanistan has become a member is happy tidings. Many terrorists engaged in violent activities in this country or in disseminating incendiary messages were found to have connections in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Many JMB terrorists were trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan. An internationally dreaded terrorist who had masterminded the bomb blast killing hundreds in the Mumbai stock exchange in 1993 found a safe haven in Pakistan. And according to reports Pakistan is dragging its feet on the question of an extradition treaty. Is this how SAARC is going to handle regional terrorism? Trade is important but there are regional issues attitude to which can make or mar cooperation.
MAIN PAGE | TOP
|
|
