By Khairi Janbek.
Some countries are built on credit, while others are built on corruption. Why not?, I mean why keep looking whether the glass is half full or half empty when the term "corruption" is mentioned?.
It certainly has many virtues as a system. Well, all what the state needs to do, is to actually claim for itself the means of corruption, its distribution and exchange. This will immediately attract the most politically astute and economically capable salivating class in the country, to chase up the prospects of sharing in this corruption.
In this sense, the state the state becomes the "corruptor" and the astute salivating class" the corrupted". However, for this corrupted class to sustain its own corruption, it needs to maximise the gains of its own corruption, which needs the expansion of the base of those involved in corruption. By promising more influence and largess to the expanded base of corrupted citizenry, and with competition among themselves to attract the majority of newly corrupted citizens, this class; which has started of as being corrupted, would transform itself into a "corruptor" class.
As a consequence, the state can afford at this point to withdraw from active participation in the system of corruption, and sets itself up as the regulator of corruption, trying to check any attempts at emerging circles that claim monopoly on corruption. But the state being a priori corrupt anyway, will face what is known as a Munchhausen triple Dilema, or for the more general in thinking Agrippa's Dilema. In order to solve that, it will open itself to the best offeres of the competing corruptor class, to benefit from their largess, and bestow upon them the political blessings, which are frequently required by the corruptors in order to attract more corrupt citizens; by virtue of state bestowe blessings; ie. prestige.
But what about the donor countries and creditor institutions?. Nothing much will really change for them; except for the better. For a start, they will start knowing without beating around the bush, where their money is going, and who are the most effective circles in the country to approach in order to use/ abuse or make business partnerships with. Of course that will also provoke plenty of competition among the indigenous corruptor class, as to whom is the most suitable for foreign business interests, and whom has the more popular backing form the citizenery. There are clearly more benefits here from this competition, in favour of both corrupted and corruptors, not to mention the benefits to foreign interests. A win-win scenario for everyone.
I suppose the continued demand by the foreign powers and instituions for public participation in corrupt countries, can be seen clearly to fit the demands of the western powers and international institutions; albeit in terms corruption, and stability will bemaintained as everyone in the country would be scarmblling for their share of corruption.
lundi 23 mai 2011
jeudi 12 mai 2011
The GCC; Jordan and Morocco : Solving the Palestinian Problem and Balancing Iran.
By KHAIRI JANBEK.
One is rather surprised that, no one actually sees the huge importance and consequences of the potential expansion of the GCC. I think if it works out, it will be tantamount to a massive tectonic shift in the future politics of the Middle East.
One is not going to sing praises of the obvious; that being mainly the advantages of the freedom of movement of people, goods, and capital; in addition to the essential gas and oil, but one wishes to talk about the impact on the strategic concerns vis a vis Iran, as well as the solution to the Palestinian problem; albeit both aspects tend to be by and large inter-related.
Now, you may or may not believe in the existence of a Shi'ite cresecent engulfing the Gulf Arab states. Still, if you look at the map of the region you'll see on one side of those states to the east; there is Iran, and to the west, Shi'ite ruled Iraq which connected to the close ally of Iran; Syria, then Hiuzbullah in lebanon and ambivelant Hamas in Gaza. These are geopgraphical facts rather than sectarian squabble on my part, for I have never been sectarian nor will ever be. If both Morocco and Jordan join the GCC, the latter will not only be able to break out of this pro-Iranian envelope, but also extend its strategic depth all the way to the shores of the Atlantic and to teh south ; bordering Israel.
This means, that Jordan will no longer be considered as the buffer zone between Israel and oil, but actually that, Israel becoming an active stake-holder in the security of the oil Arab states. On the demographic balance, Saudia has the population of around 29 million, Morocco of around 32million, and Yemen; which will be incidentally absorbed into the GCC in 2016, has the population of 23 million. The overwhelming majorities here are Sunni Muslims. They will proivide an adequate population balance balance to Iran's 70-75 overwhelmingly Shi'ite population. This will have a poitive confidence balance for the Arab Sunni population in the region. Again, one is not sectarian, but I didn't say the region is not looking at the situation from a sectarian perspective.
When it comes to the Palestinian issue, what is the thorniest factor in the peace process between palestine and Israel?. Well, it is the right of return of the Palestinian refugees. So, if Jordan becomes a member country of the GCC, it will be factually and geographically part of a geopolitical entity much larger than itself, with various diverse populations in this large zone among them Jordanian from palestinian origins. Moreover, the only logical move would be then for Palestine; which is going for its bid at the UN in September, to apply for membership to the GCC through an association with Jordan or without; because it wouldn't make much difference then in reality. What will happen to the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon or Syria?. They will the first citizens ever carrying the nationality and passport of the first ever tran-national state in history; I think, with the choice of staying in the countries hosting them and having economic and social rights, but without politcial rights, or to move into any GCC country which will provide them with full rights.
As for israel, it will have less and less reasons to reject the creation of a Palestinian state then; consequently with real peace prospects then, Israel will have a large share in the security fo the GCC, as well as a large market for it products.
One is rather surprised that, no one actually sees the huge importance and consequences of the potential expansion of the GCC. I think if it works out, it will be tantamount to a massive tectonic shift in the future politics of the Middle East.
One is not going to sing praises of the obvious; that being mainly the advantages of the freedom of movement of people, goods, and capital; in addition to the essential gas and oil, but one wishes to talk about the impact on the strategic concerns vis a vis Iran, as well as the solution to the Palestinian problem; albeit both aspects tend to be by and large inter-related.
Now, you may or may not believe in the existence of a Shi'ite cresecent engulfing the Gulf Arab states. Still, if you look at the map of the region you'll see on one side of those states to the east; there is Iran, and to the west, Shi'ite ruled Iraq which connected to the close ally of Iran; Syria, then Hiuzbullah in lebanon and ambivelant Hamas in Gaza. These are geopgraphical facts rather than sectarian squabble on my part, for I have never been sectarian nor will ever be. If both Morocco and Jordan join the GCC, the latter will not only be able to break out of this pro-Iranian envelope, but also extend its strategic depth all the way to the shores of the Atlantic and to teh south ; bordering Israel.
This means, that Jordan will no longer be considered as the buffer zone between Israel and oil, but actually that, Israel becoming an active stake-holder in the security of the oil Arab states. On the demographic balance, Saudia has the population of around 29 million, Morocco of around 32million, and Yemen; which will be incidentally absorbed into the GCC in 2016, has the population of 23 million. The overwhelming majorities here are Sunni Muslims. They will proivide an adequate population balance balance to Iran's 70-75 overwhelmingly Shi'ite population. This will have a poitive confidence balance for the Arab Sunni population in the region. Again, one is not sectarian, but I didn't say the region is not looking at the situation from a sectarian perspective.
When it comes to the Palestinian issue, what is the thorniest factor in the peace process between palestine and Israel?. Well, it is the right of return of the Palestinian refugees. So, if Jordan becomes a member country of the GCC, it will be factually and geographically part of a geopolitical entity much larger than itself, with various diverse populations in this large zone among them Jordanian from palestinian origins. Moreover, the only logical move would be then for Palestine; which is going for its bid at the UN in September, to apply for membership to the GCC through an association with Jordan or without; because it wouldn't make much difference then in reality. What will happen to the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon or Syria?. They will the first citizens ever carrying the nationality and passport of the first ever tran-national state in history; I think, with the choice of staying in the countries hosting them and having economic and social rights, but without politcial rights, or to move into any GCC country which will provide them with full rights.
As for israel, it will have less and less reasons to reject the creation of a Palestinian state then; consequently with real peace prospects then, Israel will have a large share in the security fo the GCC, as well as a large market for it products.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)