Sultana Kamal, lawyer and human rights activist, member of CPD board of trustees, former Executive Director of Ain o Salish Kendra, and former advisor to the caretaker government of Bangladesh, talks to Eresh Omar Jamal of The Daily Star about the upcoming national elections and the state of human rights in Bangladesh.

Sultana Kamal. Photo: Anisur Rahman

In your question you have not spelled out what exactly are the steps taken by the government ahead of the national elections that the HRW is fearing will have a chilling effect on people’s freedom of expression. I presume they are referring to the random, arbitrary arrests of social activists as well as the members and supporters of the opposition political parties and implicating them in anti-State cases. They have been very random as many of the accused in such cases are known to have died already. These cases have been termed as “ghost cases”.

Police excess in controlling meetings and rallies of the opposition could also be an example here. In our current political culture where there is every reason to believe that police actions normally are manifestations of the wish of the ruling party, the Human Rights Watch quite justifiably sees these as steps taken by the government to have serious effect on people’s freedom of expression.

In addition to the above, the other concern the Human Rights Watch may have in mind over which we could not agree with them more, obviously relates to the passing of the Digital Security Act (DSA). This Act, as had been promised by the government, was supposed to replace the previously passed ICT Act, Section 57 of which was notoriously misused by the government and its supporters to stop dissent and shun any criticism against them. It is worrying to note that even after passing the DSA, the cases filed under Section 57 of the ICT Act remain in force.

Coming back to the DSA, Bangladesh now has this regressive Act giving police unlimited power, as illustrated in a write up of the Sampadak Parishad, “to enter premises, search offices, bodily search persons, seize computers, computer networks, servers, and everything related to the digital platforms.” Aided by this Act the police on the ground can arrest anybody even on suspicion without warrant—not requiring to seek approval of any authorities. It’s worth remembering that the responsible ministers of the government under the pressure of concerned citizens and journalists sat with the Sampadak Parishad with a view to review the Act but unfortunately did nothing to bring the desired changes. This kind of dependence of the government on police is most unbecoming of a democracy.

This attitude of the government of demonstrating its will to not allow people to speak their minds without fear sends serious signals to everyone concerned. It has a far-reaching effect in curbing people’s freedom of expression and other civil liberties, eventually negatively influencing them in freely exercising their right to vote during the elections. In a weak democracy like Bangladesh where political parties are not sure of their power base, all parties in power across the border unfortunately tend to follow the same strategy of silencing the people’s voice by taking such actions.

It may not be out of context to note here that the dialogues that were held in the meantime among the opposing political alliances ended without any conclusive decision. This happened, in my opinion, due to the lack of political will of the main parties to use the opportunity to seriously dedicate their focus and everything else towards holding a free and fair election. From what we gather from the media, the parties were more determined in re-asserting what they have been saying to each other in their public speeches rather than discussing ways to meet the election challenges posed in front of them.

Over the last months, we have seen a number of police cases being filed against leaders and activists belonging to opposition political parties. Some of them were filed against individuals who were abroad at the time they are said to have committed a crime, or who had earlier passed away. What effect can this have on voter confidence?

Well, people mainly depend on the police for safety and security on the day of polling. It is the police that is entrusted with the sacred duty of ensuring an atmosphere for the voters to feel confident that the election is being held in a free and fair environment where they can cast their votes without the fear of their votes being rigged or manipulated—physically or technically. It is therefore important that they find people with integrity around them for the desired protection.

Police actions, as described in your question, certainly have a negative impact in the confidence level of voters which manifests in the fear and anxiety expressed by them in relation to the election time. This is particularly true of the religious and ethnic minorities, women and supporters of the opposition parties who, without exception, become victims of violence and have their rights violated in the pre, during as well as post-election periods. In the past, we have seen these people not being given timely or proper protection by the police.

In your view, have the different political parties been emphasising enough on human rights in their appeal to voters?

Unfortunately, the answer is no. Not only in their appeals to voters, in general even, as it seems from the discourses of the different political parties, human rights are placed quite low in their list of priorities. In their appeal to voters the emphasis of the different political parties is on development which, to many, lacks reflection of human rights values to a considerable extent.

As I said earlier, the aim of the political parties is to win the elections at any cost. Unfortunately, our elections with very few exceptions have been characterised by dependence on money, muscle and manipulation. In such an atmosphere, human rights is not given a fair chance.

Only recently in one of the TV talk-shows, a very high-ranking police officer when asked to comment on remarks made by human rights activists about escalation of human rights violation in the country, responded by saying that he finds these comments “irritating and ridiculous”. Such statements coming from a high-ranking police officer clearly demonstrate the degree of apathy and disrespect officers and politicians have towards human rights. Promotion and protection of human rights evidently are placed in subordination to all other priorities of the power centric political culture that the political parties have embraced so dearly.

Rights violations have taken place under every regime. Even though we’ve seen the party in power change, why is it that we don’t see any meaningful improvement in the government upholding the basic rights of citizens?

It all depends on the state of democracy in a society whether the State will seriously dedicate itself to upholding the basic rights of the citizens. In Bangladesh, historically, because of repeated interference by undemocratic forces in political processes, democracy was not allowed to take root in society.

Hence we are confronted with socio-political and cultural conditions that permit the State to undermine the norms of human rights without having to answer for the lapses. This was originally facilitated by the rehabilitation of the anti-liberation forces accused of war crimes in every sphere of our life. They were not simply allowed to return to the country but were rehabilitated with power and opportunities to infiltrate into our political, social and economic fabric, and to mould our culture to embrace the character of intolerance towards the “others”. The fundamental principle of respect for equal rights and dignity of all somehow ceased to bear much value to the power centric political forces. Which is why we do not see any meaningful improvement in the government upholding the basic rights of citizens.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The notion of today’s press freedom is deeply rooted in the idea of freedom of speech and expression, intellectual freedom, liberty of thought, etc. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, given that the basis of a democratic government is “the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right [to freely express one’s opinions].” Because, “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.”

Source: thelibertarianrepublic

At the same time, however, placing the entirety of the blame ‘uniformly’ on the media itself would be a misnomer. First, because the environment in which the media operates varies from country to country. And second, because the ‘constraints’— an age-old problem faced by all those who have sought to convey a message that others had preferred to have kept hidden — that the media faces in regards to what it can and cannot disseminate vary as well (from place to place, situation to situation, etc.).

Despite the challenges, scholars, philosophers, journalists (in more recent times) and others have been fighting for the freedom to publish their work without the threat, fear or reality of being persecuted for centuries. The unfettered dissemination of information, ideas, etc., however, has always been opposed, in one form or another, by powerful sections of virtually every society. Mainly because ideas have a tendency to challenge the powerful and empower the weak.

Before the invention of the movable printing press by Johannes Gutenberg for example, it was the Catholic Church which almost entirely controlled the production of books. Gutenberg’s invention allowed the cheap production of books for the first time, challenging the church’s monopoly and allowing for different viewpoints to be heard.

When Professor of Theology Martin Luther posted his ’95 Theses’ on a church door in Germany, criticising its practice of selling ‘indulgences’ — paying the church in return for a reduction of one’s time in purgatory — the printing press spread his writings throughout the country in two weeks and most of Christendom in less than a month, launching the Protestant Reformation and challenging the power of the Catholic Church. In response, Pope Alexander VI, in 1501, issued an edict against unlicensed printing and in 1535 Francis I of France prohibited — under penalty of death — the printing of books altogether.

Similar attempts at censoring the free flow of information and the media have been made throughout the ages. What is sometimes different today are simply the means that are used. For example, authoritarian regimes have frequently used ‘anti-terror’ laws in recent years to crack down on journalists. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) reported in 2013 that “The number of journalists jailed worldwide hit 232 in 2012, 132 of whom were held on anti-terror or other national security charges,” both setting new “records in the 22 years CPJ has documented imprisonments.”

What some may find surprising is that similar practices are shockingly taking place also in countries that proclaim to be the beacons of democracy. In 2014, a British High Court for example, ruled that journalist Glenn Greenwald’s partner could be treated like a terrorist because he was trying to deliver leaked documents to reporters. Journalists and whistleblowers in the US too have recently been treated the same way and increasingly so.

Given the current climate, it should, therefore, come as no surprise to find journalists facing severe pressure to do their jobs in almost all corners of the earth. Rights organisation Article 19, in a report titled Bangladesh: Violations against journalists and online activists in 2016, revealed to have recorded “320 violations, including three murders, against 141 journalists, three online activists and three officials of a publishing house,” in 2016.

These violations included “attacks on physical integrity, including murder, attempted murder, serious bodily injury, abduction and attempted abduction, intimidation and threats, harassment through unwarranted application of laws, including criminal defamation cases, vexation cases, and the use of Section 57 of the ICT Act”, among others. All this combined has made journalism a dangerous profession in our country to say the least.

In its World Press Freedom Index 2017, Reporters Without Borders (RWB) ranked Bangladesh 146th among 180 countries in terms of press freedom — slipping two notches from the previous year — and warned of a “tipping point” for journalism, going as far as to say that “media freedom throughout the world has never been as threatened as it is now.”

What, however, needs to be realised from this is that, it is not only press freedoms that are under threat, but rather the basic tenets of democracy from which press freedoms are derived in the first place, that are currently under attack. And that is something that should concern everyone. Because it is not only the media that benefits from rights such as freedom of expression and thought, but rather all individuals in a democracy and democracy itself, which cannot function without a free press.

Once again, as Thomas Jefferson had said, “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.” Why? Because a government which does not tolerate a free press (or freedom of speech, thought, expression, etc.), surely isn’t going to act in ways that would be tolerable to those who aspire to be free human beings.

The writer is a member of the Editorial team at The Daily Star.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

Two very positive economic developments have recently come to light. One is Bangladesh moving up a notch to rank 106th among 138 countries in the Global Competitiveness Index. Second, that the country’s extreme poverty has declined to 12.9 percent in the financial year (FY) 2015-16 from 18.5 percent in 2010, according to the latest Bangladesh Development Update released by the World Bank (WB).

The two are, it can be argued, correlated to a certain extent. For evidence, all we need to do is look at recent Chinese development history. The more competitive China became, the more jobs flocked there from overseas, some of which, eventually became well paid. Many of the initial jobs also — those of factory workers for example — were mainly taken up by those belonging to the bottom of the economic ladder. Now the increased consumption (and earnings turned into savings) brought forth by such developments is leading to much greater domestic and foreign investments there, creating high tech and better paid jobs.

Over the years, something similar has happened in Bangladesh; with the flourishing of the ready-made garments industry where the majority of workers belong to economically poorer sections of society, some of whom, perhaps, would have had to struggle much more, had the sector not thrived the way it has. The industry has also helped many women achieve, despite its numerous imperfections, some form of economic emancipation.

But have we done the best we could have? I would say NO. In terms of increasing competitiveness, it has taken Bangladesh six long years to just move up one step. Meanwhile, one of Bangladesh’s competitors, India, has made remarkable progress, moving up to 39th position in the ranking from last year’s 55th.

According to the Centre for Policy Dialogue’s additional research director, “Bangladesh’s performance is improving in domestic competitiveness but not in global competitiveness compared with its competing countries that has kept the country stuck in lower-end segment of business competitiveness.”

Moreover, when it comes to the reduction of the extreme poverty rate, one must not, in getting too carried away with our progress, forget the near 2 crore people who are still extreme poor, which in itself is, if not an economic failure, a moral one for certain; and that some portion of the reduction was based solely on the rise of the Taka against the US dollar which can well be temporary only.

Returning to competitiveness, according to the country’s businesses, the top 5 problematic factors for doing business (which naturally hamper competitiveness) are corruption, inefficient government bureaucracy, inadequate infrastructure, unskilled and uneducated workforce and limited access to financing.

And when it comes to Bangladesh, it is usually impossible to separate corruption from inefficient government bureaucracy; as sometimes, the only way to get any form of service from government institutions is by scratching the hands of bureaucrats, their lackeys, and the lackeys of their lackeys. Over time, this practice has even outlasted its criticism, as most people nowadays, disappointingly, are not even seen protesting it as much anymore, weary, perhaps, from years of their remonstrations falling on deaf ears.

Inadequate infrastructure too has been synonymous with Bangladesh for decades. The authorities, despite their big talk, have repeatedly failed to deliver on the promised development projects. Repeated incompletion, extensions of deadlines leading to astronomically higher costs compared to initial estimates and utter incompetence in many cases have been the usual story. The extended Moghbazar-Mouchak Flyover near Sonargaon Hotel is a perfect example.

Badly planned from the beginning, needing extensions and adjustments, the flyover is now estimated to cost taxpayers Tk 1,219 crore. But before writing the check, taxpayers should give past increases a thought. Understand that they might still be in for some unpleasant surprises. Yet, we must also state the positive. Bangladesh is expecting the completion of a second submarine cable installation by March next year. This is another form of infrastructure in today’s modern age. Not of the conventional type, but necessary, nevertheless. With greater investment in technological infrastructure, the question arises; do we have the technical knowhow to operate them optimally?

This brings us to the skilfulness of the workforce. An estimated USD 6 billion is reportedly spent on foreign skilled hands employed in various sectors of the country. According to unofficial estimates, the number of workers is around 200,000 — many without work-permits — working in mills, factories and other establishments. And the main reason for such a high number of foreign workers is the shortage of skilled or technical hands in the country as very few students choose technical education. While 60 to 70 percent of students in developed countries take up technical education, the rate is only 10 percent in Bangladesh.

Increased investment in technological infrastructure without sufficient investment in training people to properly use them is again indicative of the short-sightedness of the authorities that we are all too familiar with. But perhaps their sight is getting better. Recently, quite a few investment initiatives in human capital and training programmes have popped up here and there. The scale of it is still quite insignificant. But one can only hope that that too will get better.

Lastly, looking at access to finances is when our jaws should hit the floor; because the scale of disaster that is the financial sector has been staggering. Numerous scandals such as the Hallmark and Bismillah Group affairs have wreaked havoc in the sector. Continuous issuance of questionable loans, followed by a lack of will for loan recovery has only compounded the problem. As of June 2016, defaults amounted to Tk 63,365 crore, which is 10.06 percent of the total outstanding loans, according to the latest data from Bangladesh Bank. The toothless restructuring of doubtful loans by the authorities, which has kept the problem rolling over, is indicative of a level of ineptitude that is baffling to say the least.

Amidst such incompetence and lack of due diligence, it is impossible to have efficient allocation of resources — something the normal functioning of banks in a free markets is supposed to adhere to. It is particularly because of the flow of funds from banks to such unproductive ends, that access to finance for productive purposes is being prevented. And whereas the other obstacles for businesses mentioned have remained in place for decades, the disastrous financial policies currently in place have the potential to obliterate the economy and, with it, all the progress we have made over the years very quickly.

Needless to say, bailouts of such corruption infested banks using taxpayer’s money only encourages what in economics is called ‘moral hazards’. At the same time, it is also a form of ‘wealth transfer’ — increasing inequality and slowing down the reduction of the extreme poverty rate. And here is where we must draw the line. For without substantial changes, not only do we face the dangerous prospects of economic bankruptcy; but we will continue pursuing a path of moral bankruptcy, indicative of the worst form of poverty. And as history teaches us, once put in place over time, unshackling the chains of such severe poverty is what is most difficult.

The writer is a member of the Editorial team.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

While the slaughter of Yemenis continues, the world remains silent in response to their screams. Why is that? Has the world lost its senses, especially to feel the sufferings of the tormented? In an alleged effort to defeat the Houthi rebels, a coalition of Arab states led by Saudi Arabia, supported by the United States and the United Kingdom have been bombarding Yemen, already one of the poorest and least developed countries in the world, with air-strikes since March 2015, sending it literally back to the stone-age.

The war has triggered a major humanitarian crisis. Since the air-strikes began, “food prices [in Yemen] have gone up 60 percent, leaving 14 million people across the country classified as ‘food insecure’.” (Yemen’s children die from bombs, bullets, hunger, ABC News, August 23) According to figures provided in the New York Times, “the war has killed more than 6,500 people, displaced more than 2.5 million others and pushed one of the world’s poorest countries from deprivation to devastation.” (“America Is Complicit in the Carnage in Yemen”, August 17) Other reports have shown these figures to be much higher. Meanwhile, the United Nations has blamed the coalition for at least 60 percent of deaths and injuries to children last year, warning along with human rights groups, that the coalition may have been “commissioning international war crimes” (Saudi-led coalition could be committing ‘international crimes’ bombing civilians in Yemen, UN warns, The Independent, March 19).

At a press briefing at the United Nations on June 29, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International revealed that, “Unlawful air strikes by the Saudi-led coalition have killed and maimed hundreds of children in Yemen and damaged dozens of schools, but the coalition strong-armed the Secretary-General in an attempt to escape scrutiny.” That is, to have Saudi Arabia removed from the UN’s list of shame. The Secretary General Ban Ki-moon himself after being bullied said, “There has been fierce reaction to my decision to temporarily remove the Saudi-led Coalition countries from the report’s annex. This was one of the most painful and difficult decisions I have had to make. The report describes horrors no child should have to face.”

Yet, the media, and especially the western media, continues to keep mum. Why? Well, one explanation may be that because the coalition consists of those allied with the West, the western media does not want to report on the alleged war crimes that they may have committed. Another reason for such deafening silence, however, may be because most of the killings are actually being committed using weapons supplied by the West.

According to the Washington Post, the US has sold the Saudis a total of USD 20 billion in weapons over the last one year. Britain too has sold close to USD 4 billion worth of weapons to the Saudis. The Obama administration, despite aggressively lobbying for greater gun control in the US, “has discreetly brokered and authorised the sale of more arms to foreign governments than any other US president since World War II”, according to Owen B. McCormack. During the first five years of his tenure alone, “new agreements under the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Sales programme — the largest channel for US arms exports — totalled over USD 169 billion,” exceeding the amount authorised during the entire tenure of his predecessor by almost USD 30 billion.

And, of course, the main recipient of American made weapons has been Saudi Arabia — “almost 10 percent of US arms exports” while 9 percent went “to the United Arab Emirates, an ally of Riyadh in the Yemen war.” (“Such a long silence on Yemen,” The Hindu, August 22) According to Congressional Research Service, even as early as 2010, the Obama administration authorised the sale of a whopping USD 90.4 billion worth of arms to the Saudis. And according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, “arms imports to Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states increased 71 percent from 2005-2009 to 2010-2014, accounting for 54 percent of imports to the Middle East in the latter period. Saudi Arabia rose to become the second largest importer of major weapons worldwide in 2010-2014, increasing the volume of its arms imports four times compared to 2005-2009.”

Not surprisingly, many of these weapons are being used to devastating effect in Yemen according to the likes of Human Rights Watch, Oxfam and Amnesty International, including the British made cluster bombs, even though the weapon was banned in conflict decades ago because of their catastrophic effects on civilians (“British-made cluster bomb found in Yemeni village targeted by Saudi-led coalition”, The Independent, May 23).

And so it goes, with innocent Yemenis being torn to shreds by the most horrific of weapons out there, the Lords of War continue to make windfall profits. Fortunately for them, the media’s silence guarantees that there is no significant pressure to end the supply of weapons to maim and kill a bunch of poor people here and there. After all, how else will the demand for these weapons keep up with their massive supply? As the fictional character in the movie Lord of War, Yuri Orlov said, “where there’s a will, there’s a weapon”. And the “coalition of the willing”, whether it be to go to war in Iraq, or for the destruction of Yemen, have been more than ready to oblige to the will of western arms manufacturers. For the Yemenis, however, the horrors of having these weapons used on them are, unfortunately, very real. As should be our shame for failing to genuinely care for the lives of innocent men, women and children, despite repeatedly saying otherwise, as evident from our remorseless silence in the face of their desperate screams.

The writer is a member of the Editorial team.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

By Eresh Omar Jamal
Aug 24 2016 (The Daily Star, Bangladesh)

The World Bank (WB), at the end of April this year, had some very encouraging things to say about the Bangladesh economy. In its Bangladesh Development Update report, the bank highlighted that the “economy continues to do well” despite external and internal hurdles, but that “weak private investment rates continue to be a concern with its contribution to gross domestic product (GDP) growth declining from 1.5 percentage point to 1.3 percentage point”. Since then, the economy has had to endure quite a few punches including the Gulshan attack that has shrouded businesses with fear and uncertainty.

On August 1, Bloomberg, in agreement with the WB’s forecast, reported that “Bangladesh’s economy has held up well” against the sluggish global demand and that the future looks bright “with economists in a Bloomberg survey last month raising growth forecasts to 6.75 percent, one of the highest among emerging markets”. Yet, the report did express concerns following the attack as it has suddenly made “Bangladesh a scary place to do business”, and the consequent mass exodus of expats that “threatens to cause long-term economic damage” to the country. What is worse is that some risk consultancy agencies are actually “advising clients to avoid travel to Bangladesh if possible,” the report says. And this can only harm Bangladesh even more, adding salt to injury. As The Daily Star reported on August 9, “Foreign investment dropped 32 percent year-on-year in the first quarter of the year due to uncertain business climate”, showing the already significant effect such reservations are having.

But this is not the time for Bangladesh’s foreign friends to abandon her. In such a time of crisis what the country needs, particularly for its economy, is for its friends to stand beside her. And India, fortunately, seems to be willing to do just that. On August 20, The Daily Star reported, “As part of efforts to boost trade and improve rail communication, five rail routes will be launched between Bangladesh and India in phases by 2018. . . The governments of both the countries are sincere in boosting trade through Benapole and Petrapole land ports,” the Indian High Commissioner in Dhaka said. He also said that “promoting economic integration and fostering linkages and connectivity between our two countries through cross-border trade, transport, telecom, cyber, and energy links is a policy priority for us [India].” This is a very positive statement, especially during such times.

Bangladesh’s exports to India have already been increasing over the last two years. In fiscal 2014-15, it increased by 15.4 percent and in fiscal 2015-16, by 30.8 percent (“India calls for simpler capital repatriation”, The Daily Star, August 9). In terms of investment, foreign direct investment from India increased 45 percent to USD 82.79 million in fiscal 2014-15 from a year earlier with Indian companies investing over USD 3 billion in Bangladesh and the figure likely to increase. Despite the substantial increase in bilateral trade over the years, the Indian side did, however, express its concerns over “the poor physical infrastructure at the land border points” that may impede trade by raising costs, if not addressed quickly.

In this hour of need, China too is looking to extend her helping hand to Bangladesh.

The China Railway Group, one of the world’s largest construction companies, has only recently won a USD 3.1 billion project to build a rail network in Bangladesh, as Chinese companies continue to snap up infrastructure projects across Asia under the “One Belt, One Road” initiative meant to “promote trade links between Bangladesh, China, India and Myanmar”. As The Indian Express reported on August 11, “The project will be built under the Trans-Asian Railway (TAR) project aimed at creating an integrated freight railway network across Europe and Asia”, which is another bonus for Bangladesh and the region as a whole.

And that is very important as this is not only a time of crisis for the Bangladesh economy alone, but the Chinese economy also. And given that the Chinese economy is the second largest in the world, the entire region too, to a certain extent, depends on it doing well. In that respect, the Chinese economy, as reported in a local daily, “struggled in July with a worse-than-expected trade performance as imports plunged 12.5 per cent year-on-year…. As the world’s biggest trader in goods, China is crucial to the global economy”.

Furthermore, as Ajay Kanwal, Regional Chief Executive Officer of Asean and South Asia at Standard Chartered wrote, “Indicators show that regional trade is more important than world trade to Asean members, as compared to other regions. According to the Asian Development Bank, Asean’s intra-regional trade intensity index was 3.54 in 2014, higher than the European Union’s 2.04 and East Asia’s 1.54.” Bangladesh, being a member of the ASEAN regional forum, should, thus, look to increase economic cooperation with the other member and non-member states in its time of crisis which also happen to be a time of global unrest, particularly in economic terms. And to maximise the benefits of increased cooperation with its two willing partners — India and China — the government immediately needs to facilitate greater trade, connectivity and scope for dialogue. To that end, it needs to improve its infrastructure and trade carrying capacity. India and China too should continue their aid to Bangladesh at her hour of need. Surely that is the best way forward for the region and its people in general.

And although the emphasis of cooperation should now be more on the economic side, by building trust and greater synergy through increased economic cooperation, other forms of collaboration, battling militancy and ensuring regional security, for example, can also be eventually increased. It could help conduct Bangladesh and the region to not only overcome its current troubles, but also orchestrate and stride towards a brighter future.

The writer is a member of the Editorial team.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

The current condition of global economic inequality should be of concern to all. An Oxfam report published this year titled, An economy for the 1%, revealed that “the richest 1% now have more wealth than the rest of the world combined.” It also said that “62 of the richest people now own more wealth than the bottom half of the world’s population. In 2015 it was the 80 richest, in 2014 it was 85 and in 2010, only six years back, it was 388 richest that owned similar wealth”, showing that inequality is actually growing at an increasing rate. This is also made evident by the fact that “the wealth of the poorest half of the world’s population has fallen by a trillion dollars since 2010, a drop of 38 percent” while “the wealth of the richest 62 has increased [during the same period] by more than half a trillion dollars to $1.76 trillion.”

Whereas many people around the world rightly blame the existing global economic system for the growing inequality, they also wrongly blame the free market. Wrongly because the system we have is anything but a free market, something that most fail to recognise. As Oxfam reported, “The 80 richest people have doubled their wealth between 2009 and 2014” during the period of austerity and quantitative easing. And as any economist that is not bought and paid for by the top 1 percent will tell you, neither of these have anything to do with the free market — they are a part of the cronyism that exists in our society.

The idea of a free market is based on the relationship between risk and reward, which determines the interest rate. When borrowers take out loans, they often put up their owned assets as collateral against the loan. They then try to invest what they borrowed prudently, hoping to earn a ‘reward’, pay back the loan and not lose the asset they had ‘risked’ as collateral against the borrowed amount. This is perhaps well understood. But as there are always two parties to any such transaction, lenders too are exposed to ‘risks’ because of which they acquire an ‘interest’ — reward — on the loan. As both parties face certain risks in going ahead with such transactions, both parties are also ‘liable’ to do their own ‘risk analysis’ — whether taking or giving the loan is beneficial.

This means that when there is a non-payment, the borrower and the lender are both liable, as both were supposed to do their own risk analysis which, in case of a default, they failed to do properly (except for in cases of force majeure). Yet, we have seen borrowers losing their homes through foreclosures or going bankrupt because of their failure to repay loans throughout the world, whereas big banks were bailed out using public funds for their ‘failed risk assessments’ or lack of ‘due diligence’, as was also the case in Bangladesh.

Just think about it. When you make bad decisions in your professional life, does the government ever bail you out? I would not think so. If we truly had a free market, these banks too would not have been bailed out. They would have gone bankrupt for making bad decisions like they should have in a free market. Furthermore, that alone would have discouraged most of these banks with highly ‘skilled professionals’ from making such ‘amateurish mistakes’.

In reality, however, they were anything but mistakes. For example, in Bangladesh, even the finance minister had said in Parliament that the loan scams in the banks were ‘dacoity’ (robberies). And it is because we do not have a free market and instead, have such ‘selective interventions’ by states that are largely serving the interest of the top 1 percent — bailing them out for committing robberies — that inequality throughout the world has increased and continues to do so. Meanwhile, those who are poor and have no involvement in these robberies have to endure extreme austerity measures that are literally inhumane, enhancing economic inequality in the process. For example, the current government budget saw the lowest allocation of funds to the healthcare sector since 2010-11 and to the education sector since 2009-10, while the proposed budget for the next fiscal year has a provision of Tk. 2,000 crore for investment in recapitalisation of the state-owned banks despite massive amounts of money being already injected into them over the past years, to save them from the consequences of their own disastrous policies.

All this combined is simply a form of wealth transfer that is being facilitated by the collusion between states and big banks. It has nothing to do with the free market and is, in fact, the opposite of it. Ironically, however, more and more people throughout the world, as they wake up to the fact that the current economic system is flawed, are starting to blame everything on the free market. And this is perhaps what we should be most concerned about, our lack of understanding of economics.

Such a lack of understanding can also be seen on part of the pro-free market economists who can identify that we do not have a free market but then say that if we did, we would have perfect equality by misquoting Adam Smith, the father of modern economics. Because what Mr Smith said was that the free market would only produce equality “in a society where things were left to follow their natural course, where there was perfect liberty [emphasis mine], and where every man was perfectly free both to chuse [choose] what occupation he thought proper, and to change it as often as he thought proper” (The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith). Given, however, that we have never had conditions of ‘perfect liberty’, it is impossible to say whether Mr Smith’s assumption was right or wrong.

But regardless, what is important for people to realise is that the economic despairs plaguing the majority of the world’s population today, has very little (if at all) to do with the free market, and more to do with the fact that states are ‘selectively’ allocating resources to ‘special interests’ groups — largely the 1 percent. Because in order to cure the patient (economy), we must not get distracted by the symptoms; we have to first, identify, and second, treat the disease. To be able to do that, however, we must first educate ourselves in economics rather than letting the talking heads on TV, bought and paid for by the 1 percent, define what it is for us.

Henry George, one of the best economists of the 19th century, prophetically identified the tendency for such problems to arise in his book Poverty and Progress and how they can be best addressed, as so brilliantly defined by Cliff Cobb in more recent times, in the foreword to that book: “Many economists and politicians foster the illusion that great fortunes and poverty stem from the presence or absence of individual skill and risk-taking. Henry George, by contrast, showed that the wealth gap occurs because a few people are allowed to monopolise natural opportunities and deny them to others. If we deprived social elites of those monopolies, the whole facade of their greater ‘fitness’ would come tumbling down. George did not advocate equality of income, the forcible redistribution of wealth, or government management of the economy. He simply believed that in a society not burdened by the demands of a privileged elite, a full and satisfying life would be attainable by everyone.”

The writer is a member of the Editorial team.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh