WASHINGTON DIARY: Basket case: Pakistan or Bangladesh? —Dr Manzur Ejaz - Wednesday, October 06, 2010

Source : www.dailytimes.com

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.

The writer can be reached at manzurejaz@yahoo.com