[chottala.com] Bangladesh: Sovereign or Subsidiary?

Dear All,
 
Like a coin has a HEAD and a TAIL, all businesses have the mixed blessings and follies of both PROs and CONs. Business is like a game where the outcomes are aimed for winning. Businesses must make profits for existence and expansions. However, it can not be boundless. Only in the US major corporations, the CEOs and the topmost management people have millions of Dollars of salary and benefits per year. This is unreal. This contributed heavily to the recent economic meltdown of the American and World financial systems. This must be stopped. This unrealistically extreme high compensations for the top management officials of US corporations is not, and was not before, a normal practice for the national and multinational companies. Freeing the market extremely open and not imposing any fiduciary regulations to these corporations, made it happen. Current Government is responsible for it.
 
Competition controls the outcomes. Like a sole authority Government in a country that does not compete with the others, and so regardless of their performance, they do not face challenges, until the people overturns it, when gets sour. This is the main reason why the communist, socialist, military, and monarch administered countries do never have sustainable economic progress, except China. China is politically socialist but she has a perfect free market economy. This free market economy gave china a huge boost in the financial sector. 
 
The businesses need to compete to keep them from over profiting via monopoly. The anti-trust laws of the country must have to assure it. If the businesses can not be regulated properly and impartially, there will be monopoly. So, the blanket statement that all multinational corporations are the institutions of international monopoly is a wrong idea. It is like a horse. If the horse is let remain wild not providing training to provide the good rides, no benefit we can get out a horse. Similarly, every country needs investments, from internal or from external sources, unless a country is a closed capitally blocked communist, socialist, or military ruled country. But the benefit can only be obtained if the operations of the businesses in the country are well regulated.
 
These multinational companies flourished originally in the most advanced countries and then gradually started to spread into the developed countries, and at the last to the developing third world countries. So, the statement that the Land, water, air, surface and underground resources located in the third world or peripheral countries have become increasing target of profit making venture; is not a right statement.  If a country where a multinational company does operate, can not impose their own commercial and financial laws, rules and regulations, the like a wild horse, the company will hoard as much as it can. Why a country will let it happen, unless the country itself is not lousy. And if a country is lousy, nothing good will happen there, not only a multinational company, everything else.
 
Specifically for the third world countries, foreign investments are extremely necessary, for improving, economy, skills, international relationships, and to be a regarded player of the internal and world affairs. Discouraging the multinational companies to investment in the country, is extremely unproductive. Its a wrong notion that the multinational companies do harm the sovereignty. If the administration of the country do provide that chance to the multinational companies, why they will not utilize it? So, the country must strongly invite the multinational companies to invest in the country but must outline and impose the applicable rules and regulations such that they do not get any chance to do any harms to the political and financial systems of the country. The Government and public must remain steadfast in implementing, observing and applying the applicable rules. Then only the multinational companies will be helpful towards the growth of the country. Short of which would just be a disaster.
 
Thanks and greetings.
 
Regards,
KR


 

From: Adhiraj Bose

To: alochona@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 12:41 PM

Subject: [ALOCHONA] bangladesh : a colony? of America?!

Bangladesh: Sovereign Or Subsidiary?

By Anu Muhammad

17 April, 2007
Countercurrents.org

'World Capitalism (Bangladesh) Ltd', this was the title of an article
that I wrote 17 years ago to theorize the location of Bangladesh in
world capitalist system drawing parallel with the structural setting
of multinationals around the world. Multinational Corporations are
the institutional face of International monopoly capital, do their
business around the world with their subsidiaries. Subsidiaries may
have autonomy but that do work under global plan and strategy of the
corporate centre or principal. What I wanted to show that the status
of the peripheral countries like Bangladesh were gradually turning
into mere subsidiaries in global capitalist system.

 

In the last 17 years global and local equations proceeded through
simultaneous solving and confronting new variables. GATT (General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) agreement opened up the globe for the
stronger Capital. Land, water, air, surface and underground resources
located in the third world or peripheral countries have become
increasing target of profit making venture. Invisible Capital and its
visible fists do not accept the right of the people and the nations
over their own resources, even over their own lives. Therefore the
concept of common property is redundant, concept of human rights in
real terms also was marginalized. Essence of the global lords' vision
is to maximize profit by grabbing resources around the world. Media,
experts, consultants, civil society, military, bureaucracy, and
politicians have always been under projects of scrutiny,
marginalizing or bribing, moulding and twisting.

II

In this setting strategically important geographical location is a
curse of a weak country, so do its natural resources, if the ruling
class does not represent its own people. For capital, countries like
Bangladesh are not considered as country per se, it is just a region
for investment. Sovereignty, therefore, is an ornament in the model.
Neoclassical economics, favourite ideology of the corporates, believe
that there is nothing exists to be called national or interest.
Everything is individual. But who are these individuals? Nobody
except capital can have any individuality when capital rules. In its
hegemony it gives first lesson to everybody: look at the world
through the eyes of capital, so much you see in that way, you may
have a better future for yourself. All individuals become one; the
capital, the corporation, everything is for sale. Long term is
nothing, as Keynes gave the sermon: in the long run we are all dead.
But what about our future generations? Forget them. What about people
around me? Don't give a damn. Make money by selling everything, first
your conscience!

III

Bangladesh had parliaments, had development programmes. However,
these never interacted. Major economic decisions, those shape the
direction of Bangladesh, have never been discussed in parliament. The
last GATT round that effectively opened Bangladesh for global capital
has been unknown to law makers and even bureaucrats till date. The
production sharing contracts (PSCs) signed on country's natural
resources, which took away resources from the people of Bangladesh to
be handed over to multinational companies, were not discussed in the
parliament. The contracts on coal and natural gas have been kept
secret till today, even parliamentary standing committee did not dare
insist to have a look at those. Bangladesh has eventually abandoned
its development planning in order to give space to the so called
poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP), a vicious commodity marketed
by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, that was
initiated to absolutize their control over policy making process of
these countries. Ironically planning ministry still exists. The PRSP,
that has become the 'economic constitution' of Bangladesh, was never
brought in the parliament to be discussed. Global institutions, the
World Bank- IMF-ADB etc, wrongly called donors, have gathered enough
maturity for lobbying and getting their 'good guys' (ministers,
bureaurocrats...) in policy making to legitimize everything they
want. Their agenda is simple: privatize everything, Bank, Port, Gas,
Coal, Water, Forest, Hospitals, Educational institutions to give
business and authority to big companies.

The people are happy to see the present caretaker government express
its commitment to uproot corruption, irregularities and injustice. It
has brought some big looters under legal scrutiny and is working to
make institutions work in some cases. Will it keep highly corrupt and
disastrous deals like Phulbari coal project to continue then? Will it
allow foreign companies, lobbying agencies and bigger plunderers to
grab our own resources, to have command over our own territory after
making the commitment to serve people's interest?

IV

'Are we recolonised?'

A friend of mine, an activist of the country, asked me a few hours
after President, Iajuddin Ahmed, proclaimed the state of emergency on
11 January 2007.

'We have been in the colonial power frame, how can we be re-
colonised? What is the big deal?'

I replied reluctantly.
His enthusiasm did not recede. He said,
'But you see, I know global imperialism controls everything in our
country. They protect and promote parties, groups those are
convenient to retain their imperial control. Now they are not in
supporting stage they are now trying to be in acting mode. Don't you
find this is significantly different?'

V

My friend, who is an expert in International Relations rushed to my
place and said,

'What is happening? Don't you think we are entering into a new phase
of governance?'

'Why?' I asked curiously.

'Because it is a coup with difference. It is coup conceived by civil
society on behalf of global corporate power represented by 'Big apa'
(US ambassador) and allies implemented with the help of coercive
power.' She tried to explain.

'But these global corporates have everything in their hands, both the
allies have been competing with each other to offer more and more
service they have been asking for. So, why they need a different set
up?'

I tried to draw her attention to the ground reality.

Nevertheless, she insisted,

'But the old set up was not working and moreover don't you think they
need more?'

'You see, all the thugs and plunderers who looted peoples money, and
sold our country to the foreigners are on the run. I feel happy to
see that', I continued with enthusiasm.

'But the policies of those goons continue. Moreover are you sure the
bigger fish is not behind?'

VI

My friend working with a network campaign against corporate and IFIs
(World Bank and IMF) crime phoned me after one month, 'is your
country turning into Afghanistan?'

'It cannot be' I said. 'We do not have Talibans like Afghanistan;
moreover we have far more developed institutions to resist that kind
of thing. We have people...'

She seemed annoyed and said, 'I know how Talibans grew and how they
were used as excuses. I am talking about Hamid Karzai model.
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq....'

'Why?' I was naive.

'Can't you understand that the ex officials from World Bank or global
agencies or big businesspersons can be as good as an ex official from
UNOCAL. They are of the same generic code.'

'We are looking for a difference.' I said.

VII

'Who is Dr. Yunus'? Asked non-residential Bangladeshi friend from
Sweden at the end of February.

I was surprised, however, replied, 'he won Nobel peace prize and made
Bangladesh known to the world.'

He seemed impatient, said, 'I know that. But don't you see that he
seems to behave like public relations officer or, if you put it in
better way, a lobbyist of global corporate groups?'

'He loves business. He is highly successful in ideas, innovation in
business indeed. He deserved Nobel Prize much before for that. He
wants to turn everybody in the country a successful businessman or
woman.'

'But not as entrepreneur but as nat boltu (nuts and bolts). I know he
loves rhetoric too, as he says, " our youth are the most brilliant in
the world", but he cannot rely on our youth to take charge of our own
port or develop our own mineral resources. He finds only western big
companies suitable for that. He says, "the hurdles on the way should
be removed" we find he means to remove hurdles for global companies
to grab our resources and sectors, he says " amrao pari [we can]",
here amra means clique favouring big companies and pari means to give
away own resources in favour of global plunderers like Nigeria or
Argentina in the 1990s.'

'It seems that he is determined to play a leading role in
governance.'

VIII

Global capital is in confrontation with people all over the world,
among others, on three issues: (a) whether people and the country
should own and have authority over their own lives and natural
resources or global corporates should be allowed to take over; (b)
Whether natural resources should be used or preserved for the maximum
utilization for the development of the country or to be extracted in
a big way to maximize profit of foreign big companies; and (c)
whether resources will remain common property or turned into private
property of corporates. Bangladesh needs to answer these too. People
in general and Phulbari in particular and many experts opine in
favour of utilizing resources for people as common property. Their
verdict is simple: we need our limited resources badly for our own
development; we cannot let that to be plundered by leaving disaster
for us.

IX

We need to free the country from corrupt and criminals; to sustain
that we need to change the policy framework that create and recreate
power of corrupts; to make that meaningful we need to make our
country belong to our people. Whether Bangladesh will be reduced
permanently to the status of a subsidiary company in world capitalist
arrangement or will act as a sovereign nation depends now mostly on
the rulers who are in the driving seat and have to make the choice.
We are also living under US regime of global terror.

The crucial question therefore remains to be answered, whom our
rulers would like to represent: people of this country or global
corporate and terrorist power that lives on corrupts and criminals?
This is an acid test indeed.

 

---

Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger  Get it now! __._,_.___

[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___