No more a ‘basket case'
Ishtiaq Ahmed
The key to development is a combination of political, economic, social and cultural changes. Bangladesh, once derisively described by Henry Kissinger as the ‘world's basket case', could become the most dynamic of all South Asian nations
The news from Bangladesh in the last few years has been consistently good, though we have learnt more about the spectacular political advances that country has made in the last year or so. The political advances should indeed be described as spectacular because in an era salient with the menace of Islamism and terrorism, Bangladesh has most wisely and foresightedly chosen to establish itself as a secular democracy. No doubt the political basis for it was laid when an Awami League Government won a landslide victory in the December 29, 2008 elections, but the crucial decision was taken by the Supreme Court of that country, which declared Bangladesh a secular democracy in constitutional terms.
Later, even more dramatic decisions have been taken, including a prohibition on the issuing of fatwas by the ulema and recently the media has reported that the Government has decided to remove the books of Jamaat-e-Islami’s Maulana Maududi from public libraries. The latter decision may irk absolutist champions of the freedom of expression but it can be argued that during the formative phase of democracy, restrictions on the freedom of expression are justified if such freedom threatens peace and harmony.
The writings of the three main ideologues of Islamism: Maududi, Syed Qutb and Imam Khomeini appeal readily to semi-literate Muslims who have failed to enter the modern world and in reaction converted their frustration into damning the modern world as a product of some grand conspiracy against Islam. I consider as semi-literate a rather large portion of South Asian Muslim intelligentsia comprising engineers, doctors, ‘scientists’, mathematicians, ulema and literally the semi-literates because they have never been exposed to a liberal education that would make them question received wisdom or to the social sciences that tell us that modern human existence is too complex to be reduced to some magic formula of perfection if the wheel of time is turned back to the 7th century.
However, no political reform can succeed if the economic foundations remain inimical to such reform. A secular democracy is premised on the equality of men and women and if women are not empowered then democracy remains a procedural ritual to elect the Government. The empowerment of Bangladeshi women started when a number of NGOs began to promote female economic emancipation and education. In this regard the most well known is the one taken by Grameen Bank of Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus, as it started extending small loans to poverty-stricken women with a view to enabling them to set up small businesses and enterprises. Once women acquired the means to earn an income they began to assert their rights and independence, thus denting traditional male domination. The Grameen Bank model of micro-financing has proved to be a thundering success and has now been adopted by both developed and developing countries. The other leading NGO is the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee. It is said to be the largest NGO in the world, and apart from micro-credit, has many other roles such as non-formal education for women. It is now also active in Afghanistan and in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province as well as in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Uganda and Sudan.
The third initiative is about prioritising such industrial development that can be profitably marketed globally. It was the apparel or garment industry that was chosen for stimulation and expansion. Currently Bangladesh is the fourth largest exporter of apparel after China, the EU and Turkey. It exported over $ 10 billion worth of apparel goods in 2009. Such production was particularly suited to a female workforce and thus proved to be another avenue for providing employment to women and thus empowering them.
Micro-financing, female education and employment in the garment industry has meant that women are less available to produce children against their will. Consequently, the population growth rate in Bangladesh has decreased dramatically from the earlier 2.7 per cent to 1.42 per cent. The total fertility rate that captures the population growth dynamics of a country has also improved positively. In Bangladesh it has declined from 6.85 children per women in 1970-75 to 2.36 in 2005-2010. It means smaller families, and if the family income is improving then it also means that the overall standard of living will improve.
However, such initiatives can bear fruit only if the national outlook is properly geared and focussed on productivity and all-round societal development. The current Awami League Government of Sheikh Hasina decided that cooperation with India instead of confrontation had to be translated into practice. Fortunately for Bangladesh the absence of a large military meant that it never tried to enter into military competition with India. Although right-wing Bangladesh Governments flirted with anti-India rhetoric, there was never any serious attempt to embark upon militarisation. It has enabled Bangladesh to invest its scarce resources into economic production and now the nation is benefiting from such policies. There is no evidence that India is planning to invade that country, and so a major bugbear accentuating the Bangladesh security paranoia is conspicuous by its absence.
The key to development and progress is always a combination of political, economic, social and cultural changes that complement one another. The combined impact of a number of initiatives has been that Bangladesh is currently the calmest country in the region. Thus a country once derisively described by Henry Kissinger as the ‘world’s basket case’ can actually become the most dynamic of all South Asian nations.
Since the Muslim world has the longest-running misogynist record in both time and space, one can theorise with confidence that the progress a Muslim nation has attained can be gauged by the empowerment of women it has achieved. Thus Saudi Arabia and Iran — both ****** rich — would be at the bottom of any ranking about progress and Turkey and Bangladesh at the top.
The second lousy record of the contemporary Muslim world pertains to the situation of religious and sectarian minorities. Once more advanced than medieval Europe, the Muslim world either stagnated at treating non-Muslims as dhimmis (non-Muslim subjects of a state governed in accordance with shariah law), or much worse in persecuting them to either convert to Islam or run away for their lives. Since Bangladesh now constitutionally asserts its secular democratic identity, hopefully the roughly 10 per cent Hindu minority and the minuscule Buddhist tribes will also benefit from their right to equal citizenship.
(The writer is a Professor Emeritus of Political Science, Stockholm University. He is also Honorary Senior Fellow of the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore. He can be reached at
billumian@gmail.com Courtesy: Daily Times)
---------- Post added at 03:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:20 AM ----------
Basket case: Pakistan or Bangladesh?
—Dr Manzur Ejaz
No government in Pakistan can dare to undo the constitutional provisions that make the country a religious state. As a matter of fact, democratic and military governments compete with each other to make it more religious. Presently, no political force or institution exists that can usher in modernity and enlightenment in Pakistan
An article titled ‘Bangladesh, “Basket case” no more: Pakistan could learn about economic growth and confronting terrorism from its former eastern province’ appeared in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) (September 29, 2010). During the same period, President Barack Obama specially congratulated Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed when she came to receive the prestigious United Nations (UN) award. Bangladesh was one of the six countries from Asia and Africa who were honoured for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Why have the US media and President Obama started pampering Bangladesh? Has Bangladesh bypassed Pakistan in economic development or is it about to do so in the near future?
Many insiders believe that besides the ground economic reality, the US is pampering Bangladesh because it wants its army in Afghanistan. The US administration has requested the participation of the Bangladesh Army in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban. It is highly unlikely that Bangladesh will dispatch its army to Afghanistan because of the geopolitics and lack of fighting skills. Many observers believe that the Bangladesh Army is a police force rather than a war-making machine.
Besides the US motivation, the WSJ article provides some useful insights into the development of Pakistan and its former province East Pakistan, now Bangladesh. To start with, Bangladesh had more population than Pakistan but after breaking away, due to successful programmes, it has checked its population growth. Now Pakistan is more populous than Bangladesh. If the trend continues, as expected, Pakistan will be left behind even if its annual growth rates are a bit higher than Bangladesh — a doubtful presumption.
Bangladesh’s garment industry is genuinely touted as a success story. Last year, the country exported $ 12.3 billion worth of garments and is considered fourth in the world behind China, the EU and Turkey. It is amazing how a non-cotton producing country can achieve such a status. However, the article acknowledges that other than the garment industry the Bangladeshi economy is shallow.
Most importantly, the ideological direction taken by the present Awami League government will help the country to industrialise fast. A few months back, the Bangladesh Supreme Court struck down a 31-year-old constitutional amendment and restored the country to its founding status as a secular republic. Furthermore, the government has banned Abul Ala Maududi’s writings. A long-awaited war crimes tribunal will try senior Jamaat-e-Islami figures for mass murders during Bangladesh’s war of independence.
The Awami League government could take these bold constitutional initiatives because of public support for such actions. No government in Pakistan can dare to undo the constitutional provisions that make the country a religious state. As a matter of fact, democratic and military governments compete with each other to make it more religious. It is hard to envision how long it will take to halt the theocratic onslaught on society. Presently, no political force or institution exists that can usher in modernity and enlightenment in Pakistan. Therefore, Pakistan will remain mired in the web of religious ideology while Bangladesh has a chance to modernise itself. Nonetheless, given the fickle politics of Bangladesh, its future direction is not assured.
Bangladesh can be optimistic about its future because of a multi-religious society and absence of feudalism as an economic order. Luckily or otherwise, Bangladeshi Muslims were mostly peasants while the Hindus constituted the landed aristocracy. The movement for creating Pakistan originated and strengthened in East Bengal because of the Hindu feudal domination. Ironically, the feudals of West Pakistan went along with the Muslim League due to an opposite reason: to save themselves from land reforms that the All India Congress had vowed to enforce. And the Nehru government fulfilled its promise of land reforms very early on.
In the united Pakistan, the eastern wing, led by middle class politicians, had a basic contradiction with the western part, which was largely dominated by the feudals. Punjabi and Sindhi feudals were always scared of Bengali Muslim rule because they could have abolished feudalism. Muslim League was routed in the first election held after independence and the liberal-progressive alliance called Jugto Front was expected to win the 1959 elections. One of the main reasons for Ayub Khan’s martial law was to pre-empt the Jugto Front’s possible government at the Centre. Ayub Khan just delayed the process, because in 1970 the Awami League, a middle class party, swept the elections that led to the independence of Bangladesh.
Like the movement of Pakistan, Bengali Muslims led most of the democratic movements in Pakistan. The separation of East Pakistan took away the most democratic and enlightened force from the country. This is one of the reasons that no significant democratic movement has penetrated in Pakistan after East Bengal broke away in 1971.
In this historical backdrop, one can comprehend how Bangladesh can become a modern, secular state, unencumbered by the landed aristocracy. At present, Pakistan’s per capita of $ 2,600 is much higher than that of Bangladesh’s $ 1,500. However, given the socio-historical trends, Bangladesh may have far better future prospects than Pakistan.
---------- Post added at 03:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:21 AM ----------
The Myth of the “International Basket Case”
A.B.M. NASIR
SOMETIMES MYTH lives on without any attempt of being rectified.
One such myth lived and thrived over more than three and a half decades, concerns the infamous statement depicting an emerging country, Bangladesh, as the “International Basket Case.” For more than three decades this myth has been erroneously attributed to Henry Kissinger having given birth to it.
This effort to debunking the myth is not to defend Henry Kissinger’s shenanigans during late sixties through mid-seventies. Rather, the aim here is to present the facts. The question is if Mr. Kissinger did not then who made that statement?
This issue was brought up in a Washington Special Group Meeting held in Washington D.C. on December 6, 1971. As the minutes of that meeting indicate, ambassador U. Alexis Johnson initiated the statement when the issue of an impending famine was brought up by a participant of the meeting, Mr Maurice Williams. As conversation went on, Mr U. Alexis Johnson at one point quipped
“They'll (referring to East Pakistan) be an international basket case.” Mr Kissinger responded by saying “But, not necessarily our basket case.” An excerpt of the conversion was also published in a Time magazine article on January 17, 1972.
Here goes a few excerpts from the minutes of the meeting:
Dr. Kissinger: (to Mr. Williams) Will there be a massive famine in East Pakistan?
Mr. Williams: They have a huge crop just coming in.
Dr. Kissinger: How about next spring?
Mr. Williams: Yes, there will be famine by next spring unless they can pull themselves together by the end of March.
Dr. Kissinger: And we will be asked to bail out the Bangla Desh from famine next spring?
Mr. Williams: Yes.
Dr. Kissinger: Then we had better start thinking about what our policy will be.
Mr. Williams: By March the Bangla Desh will need all kinds of help.
Mr. Johnson: They'll be an international basket case.
Dr. Kissinger: But not necessarily our basket case.
Mr. Sisco: Wait until you hear the humanitarian bleats in this country.
Kissinger’s vitriol (at loosing East Pakistan) is reflected in his response to Ambassador Johnson’s insensitive statement. As being the Chair of the meeting, instead of admonishing him, Mr. Kissinger, paranoid with the fear of communist takeover, seemed to take pleasure out of that insensitive statement about a country, which, at that time, was being subjected to one of the worst mass-murders, rapes, and human sufferings in the history of the world.
Labeling a country with such an epithet reflects the psyche of a disgruntled foreign policy expert, whose administration did everything from condoning the genocide of 1971, famine of 1974, overthrowing of an elected government to the brutal murder of the father of the nation along with his family members.
A recently published article titled “Bangladesh, 'Basket Case' No More Pakistan could learn about economic growth and confronting terrorism from its former eastern province” in the Wall Street Journal on September 29, 2010, brought up the issue in the fore. While the article praises many achievements of Bangladesh, the title, nonetheless, reflects the author’s predisposition in the belief of something that never was true. The fact of the matter is that Bangladesh has never been an “international basket case.” Thus, implying so is not only erroneous, but also insulting to the people of a nation born out of the sacrifice of millions.
Despite the wishful desires of Mr. Kissinger and alike, Bangladesh continues to thrive amid many obstacles. Successes in some areas have been so profound that they outshine many aspects of the development successes of India, dubbed as the ‘Asian Tiger’ for her phenomenal economic performance.
In the socio-economic front, Bangladesh has succeeded in lifting millions out of poverty, cutting fertility rate by more than half, lowering infant mortality rate by 75% and mortality of children under the age of 5 by 46%, all achieved only in less than three decades. It has also achieved gender parity in primary and secondary education enrolments and been able to raise primary enrollment rate to impressive 92% with completion rate standing at 72%. Real GDP growth has reached at an impressive 6.5% rate in 2007 with gradual improvement in inflation rate, high investment rates, high growth in export and remarkable macroeconomic stability.
In the political front, the citizens’ and government’s commitment to democracy, freedom and justice are reflected in various polls, data and actions of the government. For instance, during 1991-09 the Polity and the Freedom House indicators rank Bangladesh third in the status of freedom and fourth in the status of democracy among the Muslim majority countries in the world. Growing voter participation rates in the four successive parliamentary elections during 1991-08 reflect the rising electorates’ confidence in the democratic process.[ii] A Gallup World poll conducted in May 2007 showed 93% of the respondents revealing their confidence on a democratically elected government.[iii] Most recently, the country’s Supreme Court has outlawed the infamous 5th amendment, thus restoring the secular spirit on which the country’s liberation war was fought. The country’s commitment towards justice can be seen in the setting up of the long-sought War-Crime Tribunal to try the perpetrators of the Genocide in 1971.
True, political instability and many forms of institutional rigidities have been holding the country hostage to the whim of many special interest groups. Despite the influence of the special interest groups and against all odds of frequent strokes of natural disasters, unfavorable international support, frequent military intervention, and resource scarcity, the country has been able to pull through.
The evidence from socio-economic success, Gallup poll, Polity and Freedom House indicators, voters turn-out in elections, the Supreme Court verdict and the commencement of the War-Crime tribunal shows the freedom loving psyche of the citizens of the country, which seems to be unknown to many international media as reflected either in their patronizing tones and/or in the negative portrayal of the country.
Instead, with the records of the achievements, Bangladesh can be dubbed as the ‘Basket of Hope.’ #
________________________________________
Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976 Volume XI, South Asia Crisis, 1971, Document 235 (Minutes of Washington Special Actions Group Meeting1) 1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, NSC Institutional Files (H-Files), Box H–115, WSAG Minutes, Originals, 1971. Top Secret; Sensitive; Codeword. No drafting information appears on the minutes. The meeting was held in the White House Situation Room. A briefer record of the meeting, prepared by James Noyes (OASD/ISA), is in the Washington National Records Center, OSD Files, FRC 330 76 0197, Box 74, Pakistan 381 (Dec) 1971. See also the link Office of the Historian - Historical Documents - Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XI, South Asia Crisis, 1971 - Document 235. The link was visited on September 30, 2010.
[ii] Voter participation rates were 55.46%, 74.96%, and 75.59%, respectively, in 1991, 1996, and 2001 parliamentary elections (source: Bangladesh Election Commission website). In the most recent parliamentary election held in December 28, 2008, voter participation rate was 87%, showing strong enthusiasm among the citizens in the democratic process (Daily Star, January 1, 2009).
[iii] Lyons, Linda. Bangladeshis Positive, Despite Political Uncertainty: Citizens more likely to express confidence in their government and economy than a year ago. October 12, 2007. The document can be downloaded from the link Bangladeshis Positive Despite Political Uncertainty and was last viewed on February 27, 2010.
ABM Nasir, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor of Economics with School of Business, North Carolina Central University, USA
!
