Bangladesh and Shock
Doctrine
By Kazi Anwarul Masud
One may wonder how relevant to Bangladesh
economy could be Canadian author Naomi
Klein’s The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of
Disaster Capitalism? After all the book has
both been hailed and trashed by prominent
writers/columnists for proposing the thesis
that free market fundamentalism and Breton
Woods Institutions’ imposition of their
prescriptions in the wake of the 1997 Asian
Crisis forcing the afflicted governments to
sell off many state owned enterprises to
Western companies had nothing to do with
Bangladesh. These were done when these
countries were reeling from the effects
disasters or upheavals. She took examples
from the last thirty years of South America
of the 1970s to New Orleans after hurricane
Katrina. Klein asserted that torture has
been an essential tool for authorities to
implement aggressively free market reforms.
She forcefully argued that neoconservatives’
project was not to spread democracy in
democracy deficit countries but to implement
maximization of profit mechanism for small
elites or in other words maintain
consistency in rich-poor divide by 20% rich
and 80% poor.
This segment of global population may be
termed as “disposable” poor doomed to
subsist in “planned misery”. This reminds
one of Scottish philosopher Robert Owens’s
belief that great majority of the people
have to remain poor for the small minority
to live in splendor that they have been used
to. Going back to Naomi Klein she alleged
that at the most chaotic juncture in Iraq’s
civil war a new law was enacted allowing
Shell and British Petroleum to claim Iraq’s
vast oil reserve. Klein was particularly
hard on Nobel laureate Milton Friedman and
Chicago School of economists who produced
neo-cons and neo-liberal thinkers who still
wield considerable clout in Washington.
Though Bangladesh at present is now being
governed by a freely elected government our
past has seen martial law, military backed
government and corrupt Islamist allied
government and the country has been ravaged
by natural disasters. Bangladesh has also
been identified as one of the worst victims
of climate change. If we look at the
apocalyptic political change of 1975,
constitutional change (now declared
unconstitutional by the Supreme Court) that
changed the basic character of the 1972
Constitution, and the change in our economic
system from socialism to unbridled
capitalism at the instance of the donors as
the military governments without popular
support had to be dependant on donors and
Islamist forces; then Naomi Klein’s Shock
Doctrine should not look totally unfamiliar
to us. Klein described the conditions that
would invite Shock Treatment as public
disorientation followed by mass collective
shock caused by war, terrorist attacks,
natural disasters, have been experienced by
the people of Bangladesh.
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz reviewing
Klein’s book alleged her treatment of the
subject of “oversimplification”. Stiglitz
equally blamed Milton Friedman and other
shock therapists of oversimplification
basing, he says, their belief in the
perfection of market economies on models
that assumed perfect information, perfect
competition and perfect risk market. In
another piece Stiglitz postulates that
market economy does not automatically
guarantee growth, social justice or even
economic efficiency. He advocates “moral
growth” that is sustainable, increases
living standard not just today but for
future generations as well and leads to a
more tolerant and open society. Since the
behavior of people –both buyer and seller
is not rational and information is not
perfect, not appreciated by market
fundamentalists, there remains an important
role of the governmental intervention as
implied by Nobel laureates Daniel Kahneman
and Vernon Smith.
Some have tried to depict such intervention
as Adam Smith’s invisible hand that
according to Smith was a conjunction of the
forces of self-interest, competition, and
supply and demand. Milton Friedman saw the
invisible hand as “the possibility of
cooperation without coercion”. Stiglitz
recently doubted the existence of an
invisible hand. He added that he “did not
think anybody today would say that the
pursuit of greed by the bankers led to the
well being of America or certainly the
world”.
The recent global meltdown has put countries
like Bangladesh in a difficult situation. As
it is Bangladesh will have to prioritize
between political development and economic
development in order to consolidate and
sustain democracy. While conventional wisdom
states that democracy being more accountable
to the masses should have more possibility
to reduce poverty, both Milton Friedman and
Joseph Stiglitz are skeptical that democracy
can be sustained in poor countries unless
these countries achieve rapid growth. This
accords with the views expressed by Stanford
University Professor Larry Diamond that the
Third World is witnessing a democracy
recession due to serious problems of
governance with pockets of dissatisfaction,
and unless income inequality is reduced,
freedom is guaranteed, and economic growth
is generated many of the struggling
democracies would eventually lean towards
authoritarianism.
Political theorist Benjamin Barber termed
the Western style of capitalism as “infantilisation”:
money is made to satisfy infantile desires
that in an orderly society would be seen as
childish exuberance for extravagance.
Barber’s criticism rests on his argument
that while early capitalism encouraged
virtues with the working men’s “robust
motion of agency and spirited grittiness”
while the decay that spells later day
capitalism suffers from a paradox“the needy
are without income and the well heeled are
without needs”. According to analysts the
people trapped in the culture of poverty
have a strong feeling of marginality,
helplessness, dependency, and the feeling of
alienation within one’s own society.
Closely associated with the concept of
culture of poverty is cycle of poverty also
known as “development trap” denoting low
income, poor education, poor housing and
poor health. Since these disadvantages work
in a circular fashion it becomes difficult
to break out of this cycle. Francis
Fukuyama thinks that basically four
conditions have to exist to facilitate
democratic transition: - (a) the level of
development, (b) culture, (c) neighborhood
effect, and (d) ideas. Virtually all
industrialized economies are functioning
democracies while relatively very few poor
countries are democracies. There are of
course exceptions. Albeit Francis Fukuyama
is not totally convinced that Islamic
culture which does not separate the temporal
from spiritual authorities and therefore
make themselves unable to sustain a true
liberal democracy and may use “one man, one
vote, one time as a route to establishing
theocracy of the sort that exist in Iran
today”, is necessarily reflective of the
situation prevailing in the entire Islamic
world.
It is true that barring exceptions virtually
all industrialized countries are functioning
democracies. Indeed once a country attains
per capita GDP of US dollars six thousand it
transforms itself from an agricultural
society to an industrialized one and the
country attains sustainable democracy.
Empirically it has been found that not a
single country which became democracy ever
reverted back to authoritarianism. Perhaps
because of the growth of the middle class
owning private property makes them a of
Ideology strong stake holder in the
sustenance of democracy. Harvard
University Professor Daniel Bell in his
End of Ideology wrote: “The
ideologist--Communist, existentialist,
religionist-- wants to live at some extreme,
and criticizes the ordinary man for failing
to live at the level of grandeur. One can
try to do so if there is the genuine
possibility that the next moment could be
actually, a "transforming moment" when
salvation or revolution or genuine passion
could be achieved.
Max Weber in a poignant essay entitled
"Politics as a Vocation," posed the problem
as one of accepting the "ethics of
responsibility" or the "ethics of ultimate
ends." For the latter--the "true believer”
all sacrifices, all means, are acceptable
for the achievement of one's belief. But for
those who take on responsibility, who forgo
the sin of pride, of assuming they know how
life should be ordered or how the blueprint
of the new society should read, one's role
can be only to reject all absolutes and
accept pragmatic compromise.”
In short, the state must ensure that the
system and services needed for a market
economy to function efficiently exist.
Importantly the legal system embodying the
commercial and corporate law must exist.
The state must also ensure an environment of
competition which both Adam Smith and Karl
Marx agreed that capitalists naturally do
not want competition and try to avoid it.
The basic infrastructure and social services
must also be provided by the state. In the
final analysis there is no unique
constellation of conditions that would
require the state to play its role which
would vary according to the stage of
development an economy is already in. This
strand of argument was further confirmed by
Harvard University Professor David Scott as
follows: - “Economic development requires
the transformation of institutions as well
as the freeing of prices, which in turn
requires political and social modernization
as well as economic reform.
The state plays a key role in this process;
without it, developmental strategies have
little hope of succeeding. The creation of
effective states in the developing World
will not be driven by familiar market
forces, even if pressures from capital
markets can force fiscal and monetary
discipline. And in a world still governed by
"states rights," real progress in achieving
accountable governments will require reforms
beyond the mandate of multilateral
institutions”. But since perfection of
democratic practice, for example, is
subjective and if one has to graduate from
the present ‘”imperfection” to what the
developed countries would consider
acceptable to be a member of the league of
democracies then many of the developing
countries would have to wait for years to
get their approval. Here again hypocrisy
runs wild if one were to consider West’s
haste to embrace the former East European
countries as members of the European Union
and of NATO that, as John Foster Dulles had
thought, was formed to safeguard the Western
faith and way of life.
The democracy that we all aspire for will
not be beneficial unless it can respond to
the needs of the people that the government
claims to represent. The future
configuration of the world does not
guarantee that democratic countries will
prevail. If China as predicted by the World
Bank were to become the largest global
economy with its authoritarian system intact
then many countries will be asking
themselves if pluralism is the best answer,
and whether in the short term public goods
cannot be better delivered through an
authoritarian system than one in which so
many centers of power have to be consulted
for their consent before a decision can be
taken. A counter argument can be that like
South Korea as the Chinese people gain
better standard of living they may want
greater freedom in the decision making
process. This brings us to the theses of
Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson and
historian Paul Kennedy on Rise and fall of
Great Powers. Ferguson finds in Kennedy’s
model that great powers rise and fall
according to the growth rates of their
industrial bases and the costs of their
imperial commitments relative to GDP. But
Jared Diamond, an anthropologist, concluded
that the Maya civilization fell into the
Malthusian trap as the population grew
followed by deforestation, erosion, drought
and soil exhaustion that again led to
dwindling resources and internecine fights
and eventual extinction. Diamond warns that
today’s world could go the Mayan way. But
then again Niall Ferguson poses a question:
what if rise and fall of civilizations are
not cyclical and it could be triggered by a
crisis and result in a fall within a short
time? In such a situation the entire game
plan can change.
There is a saving grace. Politicians of all
hue, both from developed and developing
world, follow short term policies that will
endear them to the electorate paving the way
to power. Since great powers by definition
are few in number medium and small countries
bother little for their place under the
sun. Yet in shaping policies the medium and
small countries have to be aware that
Westphalian concept of sovereignty as
inscribed in the UN Charter has been amended
as in the European Union where members
practice shared sovereignty. Additionally
the concepts of duty to prevent and duty to
protect, endorsed by the 1985 UN Summit,
have put responsibility of good behavior to
remain as a member of the international
community not only on the great powers but
on all members of the international
community. Globalization has also assisted
in the circumscription of sovereignty due to
the realization that fate of the global
community is interconnected and the welfare
of the developing world is closely dependent
on the welfare of the developed countries.
But as human beings are more Hobbesian than
Kantian in their dealings with others the
center-periphery relationship of the by-gone
days under a different rubric still exists.
This was clearly evident in Copenhagen
Climate Conference where the reluctance of
the guilty developed nations’ interests and
the newly emerging economies as opposed to
those of the innocent victims of the climate
change clashed and produced a compromise
document that fell far short of the
expectations of the great majority of
countries for justice and equity. No binding
limits on gas emission were agreed upon nor
billions of dollars of assistance to the
badly affected countries was guaranteed. But
then the assurance given by the developed
world that would give 0.7% of the GDP as
foreign aid remains to be fulfilled after
decades have passed since the promise was
made. Equally the farm subsidy given to
American farmers in the production of maize
to reduce external dependence for oil that
has restricted entry of agricultural goods
from poor countries to the US who are
already saddled with adverse terms of trade
as producer of primary commodities do not
induce confidence in the judgment of the
rich to be fair and equitable.
Apart from the brutalities inflicted by then
Pakistani occupation forces on unarmed
Bengali nation leading to bloody war of
liberation in 1971 Bangladesh has been a
victim of Islamic extremism nurtured during
the rule of “two army generals, namely Ziaur
Rahman and H.M. Ershad who were responsible
for shattering the country's secular fabric.
Sudden and violent departure of General
Ziaur Rahman from the political scene
resulting from a bloody coup left the
country's Islamization process in jeopardy
for a while. Enter General Ershad and his
regime took the mantle from the predecessor
in no time.
During the period of 1982 to 1991 the
country experienced proliferation of
religion-based schools, popularly known as
Madrassahs. There was no control; mushroom
growth of Madrassahs in all the nooks and
corners of Bangladesh gave rise to thousands
of Islamic zealots of Bangladeshi variety.
They were the epitomes of Bangladeshi
Talibans.Like General Ziaur Rahman, General
Hussain Mohammad Ershad became a darling of
the Oil Sheikhs. During Ershad era, droves
of Bangladeshi holy warriors left their
ancestral land to join fighting in Lebanon
and Afghanistan.
Yossef Bodansky, Director of Congressional
Task Force on Terrorism & Unconventional
Warfare mentioned Bangladeshi Islamist
zealots in one of his essays. Alarming
scenario was presented by Vikram Chobe in
his "Osama Bin Laden: Upholding the
Tradition of Jihad" essay. He wrote that the
Indian Intelligence recently discovered that
Bin Laden is generously donating funds to
the Pakistan-based extremist outfit
Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, which has contacts
with the Dhaka-based Bangladesh
Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami.
Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami has been assigned
the task of recruiting Bangladeshi and
Indian Muslims to fight in Kashmir under the
command of Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. The bureau
has also discovered that the Dhaka-based
terrorist organization has already recruited
1,000 Muslims who will be trained in the
terrorist training camps at Kormi and Kasia
in Bangladesh.
The American Taliban John Walker Lindh said
in an interview that Afghanistan's Mullah
Omar's body guards composed of Bangladeshis
also. In a CNN interview, Walker Lindh said
that two important languages spoken in
al-Qaeda power center were Urdu and Bengali.
According to Arabic newspapers, U.S. forces
in Afghanistan are holding nationals from
several Central Asian Republics, as well as
Jordan, Syria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Tunisia,
Morocco, Indonesia and some Kurds from Iraq,
although officials of some of those
governments say they know nothing about such
detention." (Resurrection of Taliban in
Bangladesh-Jamal Hasan 15-2-2005). The
Islamists nurtured by the rightist-Islamist
coalition government in 2001-2006 displayed
its violent fangs during the present
center-left government. Despite the leaders
of the Islamists having been hanged of late
terrorist activities by the Islamists with
alleged links with terrorists based in India
and Pakistan (with links with Pakistan
intelligence wings as confessed by one of
the Pakistani terrorists) has seen a
comeback.
With information available in the public
domain it is difficult to ascertain the
depth and breadth of the Islamic extremism
in Bangladesh. But the brutal murder of a
student in a Bangladesh university where the
main accused alleged that he received
direction for the murder from one of the top
leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami (denied by the
leader so alleged) deepens mistrust among
the people about the commitment to pluralism
by the Islamists in politics. Another
incident that occurred at the beginning of
the rule of the present center-left
government was the bloody, violent and
despicable revolt by the Border Security
Forces in Dhaka. As the trial for the
offences committed is now going on it would
be imprudent to comment on the mutiny. But
there is a school of thought that the BDR
revolt was staged to destabilize the
government, halt the execution of the
murderers of the Father of the Nation (the
guilty persons have sow been executed),
delay the trial of the Bengali collaborators
of the Pakistani occupying army in 1971 and
the process of secularization of politics
that is quite distinct from agnostic or
atheist politics in Bangladesh. If 9/11
terrorism was a shock to the US then BDR
revolt last year was a shock to the people
of Bangladesh.
Fortunately the Bangladesh government of
Sheikh Hasina has not been swayed by
successive natural and man made disasters
and so far is acting according to the
promises made in the Election Manifesto with
specific attention given to the agricultural
sector. Equally industrialization, widening
the export base, increasing manpower export,
promising to provide free education up to
graduate level, upgrading health sector etc
are being attention to. As the Western world
is yet to come out of the woods of global
recession with consequential adverse effects
on others including Bangladesh it would be
advisable to remind ourselves of the
lessons advocated by Naomi Klein, Paul
Kennedy, Jared Diamond among others so that
the country can be kept on an even keel for
its politico-economic development.
The writer is a former diplomat and
Secretary of Bangladesh