Will we see a new form of economic leadership?

Mainstream media has been offering wall-to-wall coverage of the American and affiliated lenders. Smiles and bonhomie abound. The message is that of foreign friends flying in as partners to the Bangladeshi renaissance to come. Addressing the World Bank, the Chief Advisor exclaimed ‘Be our partner’.

This is being framed as the country and its people emerging from a suffocating fifteen years. The adjective is spot on – digital surveillance and analogue torture cowed the population. Note the number - fifteen years. This reflects the reign of the despotic regime. So far so good. The mass uprising overthrew a family-run fiefdom. This was a political event.

However, when one talks of loans and finance, one ventures into the arena of economic development and management. All regimes, elected or selected, are united in one thing – they have subscribed to neoliberalism and the ethos of the World Bank ‘Consensus’. This has lasted since at least the eighties, if we ignore the chaotic seventies.

Thus we should be referring to four decades of mis-management, under the aegis of Foreign Aid. The difference in economic philosophy between the Awami League and the BNP is as thin as a roll-up Rizla paper.

What’s in a number?

It is true that in the seventies the Awami League followed a fake Nehru-like socialism, which was simply abysmal government takeovers of private factories, plus Stalinist stultification. The unmentionable famine of 1974 was not a surprise. The following military regimes ‘loosened up’ the economy. So there was clear blue water for the first decade where the Awami League could claim to be a centre-Left party. Since the return of democracy in 1991, on the back of another uprising, it has an almost indistinguishable run of World Bank alumni economics ministers and central bank governors.

Thus, we must differentiate between fifteen years of draconian political oppression from 30 to 40 years of similar developmental governance. If we do not, then we give a clean pass to the illegal coup operators of 2007-8, as well as an awful BNP-Jamaat administration.

Looking at things through this lens we then get to put the Awami League record in its rightful place. Note that the self-styled partners (US, World Bank) of today were piling gushing praise on the Awami League government for the first half of its reign. It all fed into the narrative that globalisation and neoliberalism were the vehicles for advancement and high rates of economic growth. Things soured just a little in the early 2010s over a large bridge project but essentially things remained amical. That is, until Chinese President Xi Jinping landed in Dhaka. Bangladesh joined the Belt and Road Initiative and this went against the wishes of our Western partners. Criticism on political grounds rose steadily. Economic rumblings of discontent followed, but only very recently. The main, and correct, claim was that of uncontrollable corruption.

Was there ever a miracle?

Let’s take a step back. Since 2009, the economy has grown at higher than average rates. Just like India before but nothing like China, or even Cambodia in its early bursts. Yet, the Awami League were surfers. They took advantage over three things: the first was a phenomenal rise of remittances. This used to be 3 billion dollars a year. Today it is 23 billion dollars – through official channels. On top of this are billions more, routed out of the reach of the Central Bank. All ended up all over Bangladesh, fuelling a rural and mofussil town construction and consumer boom.

Secondly, after the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 (Lehman Brothers in September), the Chinese invested in upgrading their economy. Think high speed rail and higher value industrial retooling. Workers wages rose. The Western retail multinationals scoured for cheap labour locations. Their buyers found Vietnam, and a rock-bottom Bangladesh as perfect replacements for a chunk of Chinese production. This has very little to do with Awami League Ministers of Industry or anyone else. Thirdly, the farmers continued to ramp up food output, despite receiving minimal assistance from government. This last point has been a constant throughout independent Bangladesh, over five decades.

One could add the large injection of Chinese and Japanese investment in infrastructure over the last several years too. Concurrently, skimming led to capital flight of 100 billion dollars.

If not east, at least look south?

So, the current “Indefinite Government” and the BNP, have to show what they have in mind, beyond the short-term emergency management to ramp up foreign reserves and reduce inflation. They are not going to shift away from Western neoliberalism. They are not going to implement East Asian style industrial policies and hands-on direction.

If on the other hand, the Interim Government is only planning to stick around for a year before handing the reins to an election body, then it would be unfair to expect a medium-term framework. What may be in the works is a World Bank – IMF straitjacket, which the BNP would be more than happy to work with, just to return to office. Unlike the Sino-adverse Interim government, the BNP will probably cosy up to China to obtain more financing and projects, just like the Awami League.

The BNP has not explained in detail how they would offer a new form of economic leadership, even though they had fifteen years of gardening leave.

Any new political force should think through this. There is an incredible space open for an alternative economic agenda in an age of Asian resurgence. Right now, I would just settle for Dhaka brainboxes to learn from Tamil Nadu. To investigate how it became the most industrialised state in India, along with successful welfare cushions. But then who among the Bangladeshi elite has even heard of the Dravidian Model?

Farid Erkizia Bakht is a writer and analyst.●