National Discourse, Political Narratives and Policy Debates

Bangladesh’s relationship with the West transcends the intergovernmental level. It takes place through the Bangladeshi diaspora and through Bangladesh’s status as a ‘developing’ nation. The trend of strong economic growth and improved social development indicators, in an environment characterized by poor governance, is known as the ‘Bangladesh paradox’ or the ‘Bangladesh conundrum.’ On an essential level the mystery is: how does a country like Bangladesh, with such poor governance, achieve such development? How has a country like Bangladesh, consistently ranked in the lower part of Transparency International’s corruption perception index, experienced such economic, social and human development? Since 1990, international organizations and economists have upheld Bangladesh as an example of overcoming adversity. Bangladesh was numbered by Goldman Sachs in the club of ‘next eleven’ nations that would follow Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the ‘BRICs’) onto the global stage as key drivers of the world economy.⁴ Bangladesh’s extraordinary fiscal improvement has been accompanied by improvements in major civil development indicators such elementary school enrollment rates and life expectancy and decreases in infant mortality. The improvement in these indicators is among the best in the world. The Economist calls attention to four explanations behind this achievement.⁵ These are: (a) viable birth control resulting in more enabled women and a ‘demographic dividend’; (b) stable rural family unit earnings, which have fallen in numerous equivalent nations, propped up by expanding horticultural profitability and non-agrarian revenue streams such as expatriates’ remittances; (c) a political agreement among the elites favorable to social projects, (for example, restrictive money moves); (d) lastly the efforts of Bangladesh’s acclaimed NGOs.Meanwhile, analyses of Bangladeshi politics over the same period paint an unequivocally miserable, violent, and critical picture. Bangladesh’s government is characterized by fundamental political cronyism and regulatory defilement, a wasteful state, feeble administrative limit, angry legislative issues, political precariousness, and politicized and degenerate legal establishments. Basic liberty is an area where worries about governance in Bangladesh push the nation solidly back into Henry Kissinger’s territory. The US Secretary of State dubbed Bangladesh a “bottomless basket” at its introduction to the world in 1971, and Bangladesh seemed to endeavor to live up to the moniker. To the rest of the world, a significant part of the Bangladeshi experience can be summarized as a haze of political fights and disasters interspersed by upheavals of jihadist savagery and intermittent military intervention. Extrajudicial killings and torture of individuals by the security forces have for been issues in Bangladesh under both progressive regimes and military governments. These issues become politicized when the security powers and legal executive are used to smother resistance from rival parties and the press. Obviously, it is a controversial issue whether the security forces and are acting in the interest of the nation or for personal gain.