A comprehensive governance deficit is the
defining condition of most if not all Third World
countries and societies. It is the state or the nature of the state and its
ancillary apparatii that is implicated in this. The harassment of the average
citizen or denizen of Third World societies
and countries begins from the bus ride to work, the abysmal and exploitative
working conditions, and the demands that society exacts. In sum, both the state
and to some extent, the society is predatory in these societies. This condition
is all pervasive and structural. The systems-political, economic,
administrative and cultural- in place in these societies are ossified, regressive,
unwieldy and unresponsive.
The average person
gets caught and trapped in a grind and a kind of a pincer movement from which
it is next to impossible to extricate himself/herself. The results are insalubrious
or unsalutary: simmering and latent anger underneath the patina of surface calm
and peace- the kind that can get ignited and catalyzed into a revolution
anytime- , over indignities and injustices that are all pervasive and
structural. This leads to the politics of opportunism and system wide human
rights violations, both by omission and commission. The options available to
the denizens of these societies fall along the classic Hirschmanian formulation
and continuum: exit, voice and loyalty.
Given that the state and the political class
of these societies is unresponsive, self serving and corrupt, loyalty to these
is a far cry. And because the political systems
of these societies are primitive and ossified, there is no real scope for voice
or interest aggregation through political systems. This leaves scope and room
for exit: the victims of badly governed states make their exit by immigrating
to where opportunity beckons. This is usually the west. If this exit is precluded,
the result is all pervasive and structural violence and chaos in the societies
and countries.
This raises a set
of questions: what can be done to ameliorate the condition of the Third World ? Can the impetus for change and reform come
from within these polities and societies? Does the west have a moral
responsibility to the denizens of these countries? If so, what form and shape
should western assistance come in?
The condition of
the Third World is abysmal. Ameliorating this
condition does not lend itself to easy and facile solutions like aid or even
trade. Profound structural factors, limitations and path dependence of ossified
and moribund institutions militate against this. This and the fact the impetus for
reform will never come from within can be said with certitude. Where the basics
of life have to be fought over and the need for survival informs the life quest
and aspiration and where politics is shambolic and predatory, reform can never
crystallize save in the form of a revolution. And the tragedy of the Third World revolution is that it is, in the final
analysis, a farce. This then leaves scope and room for Western intervention in
these societies. This intervention is not predicated only upon moral grounds
but is also premised on pragmatic reasons. The exports of the Third
World to the west-terrorism and immigration, for instance, accrue
from the conditions obtaining in these countries. These can be potentially
obviated by prudent western intervention in the Third
World .
What form and shape
should this intervention come in? Despite the flak and harsh criticism that the
twin sisters-the IMF and the World Bank-have come under from various quarters,
their prescriptions of the gravamen of these prescriptions remain relevant. Be
it the focus on ‘good governance’, structural reform or conditionality, these
are and remain the best antidotes to resolving or obviating conditions in the Third World . However, these approaches need to en tweaked
a little. Market fundamentalism which informed the much criticized ‘Washington
Consensus’ should give way to a balanced approach to both the state and the
market. Instead of a manic focus on a minimalist state, the emphasis should be
on a better and a ‘good’ state-one that is responsive to the needs of its
citizens. Or in other words, good governance with a remit and aim to improve
the life chances of denizens of poor countries and enabling them to reach their
potential, justice, provision and latitude for human rights should be the
mantra of the institutions of global governance and western countries. It is a
clear cut definition of the notion of good governance and its implementation
that can potentially improve the condition of the denizens of the Third World . Structural adjustment and conditionality is
but a concomitant to this and should thus not be given up or discarded. The sovereignty of Third
World nations is notional and in some cases even fictitious and
this should not be allowed to come in the way of vigorous programs aimed at
alleviating and improving the life chances and conditions of peoples comprising
these nations.
These programs have
come under considerable flak especially from the political left. Ensconced in
some western universities and blowing hot air, lambasting the concept and
notion of good governance and its corollaries has been a favorite past time of
these academics. In the final analysis, this self indulgence is costly , more
so given that these academics cannot and have not provided a viable alternative
to improve the condition of the Third World .
It is what exists that has to be improved upon , streamlined and made more
efficient. Sleeping over the problem is fraught with peril given the
implications and consequences of the continued degeneration of Third World polities and societies. This is made all the
more salient and poignant by globalization. It is therefore about time that
good governance be made a reality and a policy prop of western governments in
their engagement with the Third World . It may
not be an exaggeration to posit that , in the final analysis, world peace and
stability may come to depend on this. Let haste me made slowly and efforts made
to improve the human condition.
No comments:
Post a Comment