The New Nation - Internet Edition

TAC to hook big fishes

AS reported in the media recently, the Truth and Accountability Commission (TAC) will soon summon some top brass bureaucrats in the administration and ask them to explain their involvement in graft. 'We have come to know a lot of things about the involvement of top bosses of certain authorities in graft by interrogating low-level employees and will serve notices to them soon', the TAC chairman Justice Habibur Rahman Khan was quoted as saying at a press briefing. The three-member commission has so far interrogated a total of 126 individuals, mostly lower-grade employees who sought clemency by making voluntary disclosure of their graft pledging to return their ill-gotten property. In fact, they gave a lot of information about the practices in government offices. So, the commission is going to summon some top officials to take them to task for crimes, if any.

The TAC chairman, however, did not specify whom the commission is going to summon. But, he said, there are quite a few offices where bribery is frequent according to the people's perception. The commission chairman expressed the optimism that a few of the big fishes would have to appear before this quasi-judicial body following the confession by some of their subordinates. He sternly warned that corrupt officials, whether senior or junior, big or small, must get punishment. The Truth and Accountability Commission requested the Anti-Corruption Commission to scale up its anti-corruption drive to bring the big fishes to justice. So far the TAC received a total of 266 applications from individuals, of whom eight are businessmen, 229 government servants, 22 spouses of government servants. The Anti-Corruption Commission referred 83, the National Coordination Committee 167, and the courts three other individuals to the commission which asked 126 petitioners to deposit 18 crore to the state exchequer.

Checking fake currency notes

MANY of the defence personnel at work along the borders reportedly received fake currency notes as part of their salary. It is reported that the notes were withdrawn from banks. It means that fake currency notes have penetrated the banking system. One person from Tongi was arrested the other day on charge of currency forgery. The Detective Branch of police detained some people with fake notes amounting to Taka 10 lakh this month.

Counterfeiting is probably as old as money itself. Gold or silver coins were counterfeited by 'shaving' the edges of the coins, a process known as clipping. With the development of computer and photocopy technology, counterfeiting of paper currency became easier since the late twentieth century. A crime, counterfeiting was construed even as treason in the past. It is warfare against the monetary system of a country and considered a threat to the safety of a state. Counterfeit money artificially increases money circulation and creates inflation leading to increase in prices of commodities. Wide circulation of fake notes results in the reduction of value of real money. Members of the public are cheated and they incur losses.

A strong vested quarter is involved in this financial crime. Banks are supposed to check notes while receiving cash. Supply of fake notes reportedly from banks is a dangerous aspect of it. Surveillance by the central bank is vital in the fight against this heinous crime. Other banks and financial institutions must also raise alertness. Awareness of the people is the most effective means to check spread of fake notes. People must be taught how to differentiate the fake notes from the genuine ones. Intelligence agencies must heighten surveillance and co-ordinate among themselves to nab the culprits.

Only creative leadership can save the situation

M. Mizanur Rahman

There is a cry of election all over Bangladesh. Even the leaders and governments of the Donor-Countries abroad are vocal of it mainly the leaders of all political parties of our country! The sooner the better, election is a must in democracy. The tenure of the present caretaker government is to be ended soon. Prior to that both Upazilla Parisad and parliamentary elections must be completed. The Election Commission in Bangladesh is at hectic moment towards its necessary preparation. The leaders of the existing political parties are preparing their ground works as earlier as possible.

According to election roadmap necessary political reforms are necessary. It is yet to be clear in public what are those reforms that would be beneficial to the people being the soul of such election in democracy. The country is deluged in sky high corruption earlier and defamed by different high-ups and concerned quarters at home and abroad. The people are yet to know whether the proceedings of corruption cases against the high profile corrupted civil and political elements of the People's Republic of Bangladesh have been disposed off or not and the other listed elements who are yet to be netted should be taken into accounts soon or not. The beginning of the ACC was encouraging but the people are apprehending fear if the honest desire of the government in power let loose before the end of its tenure the people would continue to suffer as earlier.

It is evident that recent exorbitant price hike of essential commodities in our country at the behest of international market and devastated flood affected people's agonies could neither affect any political party or its any leader nor anyone of them came forward to succor the suffering humanity at any measure showed that they had no love for the people except capturing power and do their old political business. What politics in Bangladesh is meant for the business of profit of the so-called politicians at the cost of blood and tears of the suffering wretched people?

Had there been any political leader who did not pledge for the welfare of the people by alleviating their poverty and by bringing about peace and happiness in the society by extirpating the anti-social elements from its roots? But the picture what we witnessed earlier was dismal and disappointing. Its custodians rob the poor nation! What a funny politics! Should the people ask for its revival? Should someone put on a pair of shoe costs 5000$ to kick on the poor like Imelda Marcos of poor Philippines who displayed a lot of valued shoes mocking at the people at her heydays? Often a lot of such instances reach public through the media. But where's the remedy? Could a million dollar foreign car, air conditioned residence, a heap of monies, smart well-dressed orderlies, well-uniformed securities, radio-T.V. and other media coverage appease our political leader of a poorest country so long? Could the person in our poor country's state of affairs shy of following the Chief Minister Buddhadev Bhattacharya of our neighbouring state of West Bengal, India's austere life and his sense of sacrifice for the cause of the people without prejudice? It's really an instance for love for his country and the people. Still he encounters a lot of criticisms for administrative faults but he runs the government in all traits of democratic means. If we do not know the things we should learn it from all available sources conducive to benefits of our people.

What our people reasonably expect from the political leader is his/her dedication for the cause of them. And to achieve that one must have the sense of sacrifice, honesty and missionary zeal. One thing must be remembered that we must have to overcome the poverty line by strenuous efforts nationally. Each citizen should be brought up properly in all respect to become worthy of the state to face all the ensuing challenges of different aspects to be fit as the nation. The people in all stages of life should have equal benefit from the state towards education, health care, befitting jobs to earn livelihood by honest means. This spirit should have been inculcated with sincere motivation for the people must be ensured that the state is always people-oriented and service-oriented. As a matter of fact the people require guidance from the honest and wise leadership. None can expect it from the corrupt politician whatever influential s/he might be.

The character of a nation depends on the character of its leader. Why the entire fabrics of national ethos got corrupted? Because its leadership is faulty and infested with corruptible elements in the hierarchy of its administrative channels, so if the character of a nation is lost everything is lost. Since liberation this nation is facing challenges at every step of its character contrary to moral uplift and became a thing of derision to developed nations. The foreign traders and business communities have ever exploited this weakness while the loss is entirely ours.

We fail in intelligence and become fools to submit ourselves to alien influence whether that is right or wrong. If we had been morally strong since we could develop ourselves to a great extent. We got enough foreign aids, loans and many other advantages along with our most valuable manpower but we could not develop our country up to that mark because of moral degradation.

Now the time is ripe for taking strong decision whether we would take appropriate steps to have moral uplift in order to make our nation befitting to modern needs of honest living to bring about a paradisiacal state where the people can breathe well, feel well and act well with full security to their lives and properties or we should fall in the trap of ensnared political hegemonies being confused of democratic urgency of the election spree.

Still the ball is in the court of the benevolent as well as unimpaired government. Still the people have hopes and aspirations for the better days to come with better leadership in the man of character. That leader shall make men and women of this heroic nation befitting to technological and scientific works boosting agro-economy and other aspects of research, discovery, invention with vigor, determinant courage along with will to work efficiently in all nation-building fields. Even politics of the nation must be centered round creativity of true leadership blended with wisdom and sagacity and far-sightedness with national integrity. It would never be confined to false oratory and business of profit and personal gain with dictatorial hegemonies. Rather it would be a sense of sacrificial mission for the welfare of the people and progressive ideals towards global union of humanism. All persons of politics must volunteer themselves above their individual self to render service to the nation and then only the people will ensure their existence as the soul of election in democracy. Let that democracy fulfil the mission of the people to be ever happy and prosperous.

Return of Gorbachev to politics

Dr.Abdul Ruff

The author of Glasnost (openness) and Perestroika (reform) in Soviet Russia and the last Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev is planning to return to active politics. Mikhail Gorbachev and his close business partner Alexander Lebedev, a maverick ex-KGB officer turned Russian billionaire banker are founding a new political entity, the Independent Democratic Party (IDP), as an opposition group which is scheduled to make its debut in the 2011 State Duma elections. The two men are already partners in the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta. Gorbachev, now 77, and Lebedev, who is 48, have become close after taking over a 49 percent stake in Novaya Gazeta, Russia's last genuinely opposition newspaper.

As a billionaire ranked the 358th richest man in the world last year by Forbes Magazine, Lebedev belongs to the unpopular caste of oligarchs - even if he is less hated than most of his peers. Lebedev has an interesting background that combines KGB, Ph.D. and CEO on one resume. Now holding significant stakes in several banks and Aeroflot, Lebedev's doctoral dissertation was titled "The Problems of Debt and the Challenges of Globalization." He left the intelligence services with the rank of lieutenant colonel and immediately did so well in the private sector that he was tagged "the spy who came in for the gold."

Even after quitting his political and government offices, he continues to play active role in Russia. Otherwise busy with socio-political activities at home and lecture tours abroad, Gorbachev is keen to reinvigorate his openness agenda in politics and fight corruption in society and government apparatus. Both are preoccupied with plans for a future Russia.

A widely respected statesman, the Nobel peace laureate Gorbachev backed the Kremlin's position over last month's war with Georgia, however, he attacked the official tendency to resort to Cold War rhetoric and says that the West is 80 per cent responsible for the breakdown of relations with Russia. However, blamed for causing the collapse of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev is widely reviled in Russia.

Gorbachev has championed freedom of speech in a country where journalists are frequently harried or even killed for opposing the authorities and he has conspicuously avoided direct criticism of Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister. But he also insisted that his party would not be a toothless cipher and would be prepared to criticize Putin when necessary. By his own admission, Lebedev says his party will be the "polite" opposition, eschewing the firebrand tactics of former chess champion Garry Kasparov's The Other Russia movement, which was banned from contesting last year's parliamentary election. The Kremlin was not very tolerant of other such challengers in the 2007 Duma election and the 2008 presidential election, when the price of oil was high and the world economy stable.

While Gorbachev is more likely to play a role as elder statesman in the party, Lebedev could emerge as its leader. He already sits in the Duma with a Kremlin-created opposition party, A Just Russia. However, he is prepared to list things that he believes Putin got wrong in his eight years as president and which his party will seek to reverse. He even attacked Putin's decision to end the practice of electing regional governors and criticized his administration's failure to reform the judiciary. He also condemned the violent manner in which police disrupted rallies by The Other Russia, while expressing his personal antipathy for Kasparov and his colleagues.

Unable to successfully overcome the anti-communist strategies of US-led capitalist countries to end communism as one of two key threats to its supremacy (the other is Islam) and to do anything about rampant corruption in Soviet society and overwhelm the Soviet citizens with more creative ways, Gorbachev did away with communism in Russia. His successor Boris Yeltsin also tried his best bring Russia closer to the Western civilization, but miserably failed, mainly because of the unipolar policies and unilateral actions of USA. Gorby criticized Yeltsin for his flawed rule of new Russia. However, he somewhat favored Vladimir Putin for his economic endeavors, although he killed thousands of freedom fighting Chechens.

As a usual strategy of the US-led West to contain Russia and restrain its global influence, Western media have been harping on the return of authoritarianism in Russia. Although there are already rumors in Moscow that this IDP party will be used by the government as a sort of Potemkin village of democracy, this is no doubt only the Russian weakness for operatic hyperbole that thrives in a vacuum of trust and reliable information.

It's perfectly possible that the Independent Democratic Party will prove a quixotic venture. Fearing their own proclivities to larceny and anarchy, Russians may decide that democracy is at best a dubious luxury for a generation or so. But even if this new party does not perform especially well in the next Duma elections, its real importance lies elsewhere. As much as anything, Russia needs institutions and examples that feel homegrown, not imported from USA. The Independent Democratic Party can provide an example of what a political party can be. The other Gorbachev-Lebedev venture, Novaya Gazeta, is an example of what a free newspaper can be. It was not, however, the co-owners of the newspaper who faced danger but its journalists, like Anna Politkovskaya, who was murdered two years ago.

Although widely respected in Russia and abroad for his broad visions, Gorbachev as a politician remains unpopular in Russia. He received less than 1 percent of the vote in the 1996 presidential election, and he probably wouldn't have done any better if he ran in 2008. If he were truly popular at home and had a solid power base, that might put him and his new party in jeopardy. Chess champion Garry Kasparov can be dismissed with a few bureaucratic dirty tricks, but someone like former Yukos CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who had a real power base, had to be dealt with more radically. So, in an odd way, Gorbachev's unpopularity at home can buy him some time to build his political structure.

Conversely, the fact that Gorbachev remains famous and respected outside of Russia could also contribute to the success of his venture. It is one thing to move against Kasparov, darling of The Wall Street Journal and The New Yorker, but quite another to move against the statesman who presided over the Soviet Union's soft landing and received a Nobel Peace Prize. The scrutiny of the world media makes direct attacks less likely, especially after witnessing the capital flight that occurred after Russia's defeat in the court of public opinion following its victory in the Georgian war.

The focus of IDP party's opposition is likely to be in the financial sphere, where he accused the government of failing to improve infrastructure and spending too much money on defense and extraneous projects like the 2014 Winter Olympics, which will be held in Russia. Yet even on these issues he refuses to blame Putin entirely. How marketable the duo is to the Russian public, 88 percent of whom approve of Putin according to opinion polls, is a matter for some doubt.

Russia under Putin and Medvedev would not like to tolerate any steps that would undermine the importance of Russia in international arena or affect adversely its economy and both are seen gearing up Russia to reengage the world as an emerging super power. In this context, Gorbachev's role in cleansing Russian polity to some extent is surely undeniable, even though he could not make Russia totally free form all evils. His continued participation in political and poll processes keep the fields some what free from any possible extreme authoritarian trends in Russia.

Gorbachev and Lebedev deserve applause for creating a new political party in a hostile climate, but the best tribute the outside world can pay them is to keep a sharp eye on that party's fate in the Russia of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev.

Gorbachev is to be commended for his genuine courage because he is knows too well his party cannot come to power in Russia and the Kremlin hardly takes a more-the-merrier attitude toward political parties other than the dominant United Russia and the tolerated Communist Party. Of course, this new party poses little real threat to the status quo, thanks to soft politicking being engaged in by former and the last General Secretary of Soviet Union. The Kremlin can be expected to be even less tolerant in times of shock and volatility, when suddenly nothing seems solid or sure. Gorby is not unaware of all these emergencies of Russia. And he is not too keen to be back in power which he himself had decided to leave voluntarily in 1990s.

Crashes are good for us

William Rees-Mogg

A major financial panic is a horrible experience of risk and uncertainty at any time and for anyone. There is no doubt that the 2008 crash is a disaster, comparable to the Great Depression of 1929 to 1933. I have lived through great national crises but have not experienced a global economic panic on this scale before.

A financial panic is by its nature almost always unexpected; it happens because people have assumed the economy was so stable that they could take risks of expenditure and debt. That is true for individuals, businesses, banks, regulators and governments.

When individuals have taken on debts they cannot repay, when businesses are trading beyond their resources, when banks have lent too much to overstretched borrowers and a government faces a rising budget deficit, the stage for the crisis has been set.

It then takes only a trigger event for the underlying shortage of credit to become apparent. Everyone needs money at once, and nobody wants to lend money. In the current case, the trigger was the rising defaults on American mortgage debt, but if that had not been the trigger, something else would have been.

In the pre-crisis period it can be impossible to change the public mood. People want to think debt is a good thing. Before the 1929 crash on Wall Street there was a Cassandra in New York, a statistician called Roger Babson. On September 5, 1929, he said that 'more people are borrowing and speculating today than ever in our history. Sooner or later a crash is coming and it may be terrific'. Nobody took any notice of him until it was too late.

Quite a few financial commentators, both in London and New York, took the Babson view in the run-up to the 2008 crisis. The warnings have proved equally true; they may have helped individuals, but they had little influence on policy or events. In this panic, the great engine of the global economy entered the crisis at full throttle.

After the 1929 crash and the bank closures of the early Thirties, there was a major debate among economists about the causes of the Depression and the best way to make sure that a similar catastrophe would never occur again.

The controversy over economic policy involved the Cambridge school, led by Maynard Keynes, the Chicago school, led by Milton Friedman, and the emigre Austrian school, led by Frederick von Hayek. It was one of the most brilliant intellectual discussions of the 20th Century and an education in itself for many who were not economists but wanted to understand these issues.

The irony has been that people came to believe that the world had now been given the answers, and that adhering to the Keynesian policy of 'demand management' would protect us from a global depression in the future. We should be more than grateful for the outstanding work of these leading economists.

Undoubtedly, they have contributed to the world's ability to deal with the present crisis. Hardly anyone now thinks that the right thing to do is to introduce tariffs in order to protect home markets, a policy adopted by the United States in the period of President Herbert Hoover (from 1929 to 1933) and by Britain when Neville Chamberlain was Chancellor of the Exchequer (from 1931 to 1937).

Few people now think governments can stabilise a deflated economy by deflating still further. Both Keynes and Friedman stressed the need to avoid a contraction of the money supply. Keynes stressed the need for government intervention. In fact, most governments do follow Keynesian policies in a recession, though they rightly worry about the longer-term inflationary effect of too generous increases in money supply.

If one looks at the phases of the present financial crisis, one can see how the infection spread from one sector of the world economy to another. Probably the present crisis was in seed at the time of the financial panic of 1987. Certainly there were inflated asset values in the United States by the late Nineties - these were the 'bubbles'. The most dangerous bubble proved to be that of the American housing market, which was imitated in Britain in recent years.

Both in America and in Britain, regulation was weak and the authorities failed to recognise the risks the banks were taking. Alan Greenspan, then the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, seemed to think it was his duty to pour money into the market to prevent even a minor fall in share prices. He had a pathological fear of allowing the stock market to correct itself.

In the early months of 2007, it became apparent that American mortgages that had been packaged and sold to other banks were subject to default. A year ago, the problem of the housing market was the focus of the crisis; in the past month the crisis has spread further to Dow Jones companies and derivatives; inter-bank lending had dried up. Obviously, stabilisation will not be reached quickly or easily. What are the grounds for optimism, if any?

First, there is evidence that the world's governments will go to great lengths to provide funds for their leading banks. These banks should survive. Second, stock market values have already reached levels at which companies that survive look attractive to investors. Third, we shall have a new American President elected next month, with the authority of a new mandate.

Fourth, Asia is financially much healthier than the West. Fifth, man is a resilient animal - the world has seen many crashes, crises and disasters in the past few hundred years.

David Hume, the greatest of Scottish philosophers, dropped a line to Adam Smith, the greatest of economists, in the middle of the Scottish banking crisis of 1772. He saw a silver lining to the crash.

'On the whole, I believe that the check given to our exorbitant and ill-grounded credit will prove of advantage in the long run, as it will reduce people to more solid and less sanguine projects.' Crashes are good for us - that seems unlikely, but there is probably something in it. With Hume there usually is.