Understanding politics

Published : 16 April 2013, 10:05 AM
Updated : 16 April 2013, 10:05 AM

I had heard the story from Professor Nurul Islam, the eminent Bangladeshi economist who was close to Bangabandhu and had served in his government as Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission, concerned about budget deficits, had drawn up a proposal to reduce subsidies on fertilizer. It had done the arithmetic carefully so that farmers would not be unduly burdened while significant budgetary savings would be generated. Bangabandhu was convinced about the economic rationale and so was his cabinet; but, when Professor Islam went for the Prime Minister's signature, the great leader asked for 24 hours time to think over the decision one more time. Next day, at the appointed time, Professor Islam went to see him and got the decision. Bangabandhu apologised and said he could not sign off; the political calculations did not match the economic logic.

Professor Islam assumed that Bangabandhu, busy as he was, must have spent no more than five minutes thinking about the policy proposal. But the professor had faith in his boss' political instinct and did not argue. Only later did he find out that, in those 24 hours, Bangabandhu had called up several people, from the small town workers of his party to members of his cabinet, from small fertilizer dealers in district towns to leading journalists in Dhaka city, asking about the possible ramifications of such a decision. The all-powerful leader did not take a decision arbitrarily but felt a need to sound out a wide range of people.

This anecdote tells us something important. There is much more to politics than what we imagine from outside. Political parties are not monolithic entities and leaders, no matter how powerful they are, rarely take decisions entirely on their own. It is thus necessary for all of us, who are interested in the politics of the country, to take a nuanced view of how politicians and political parties operate. Much of our discussions of politics, whether in TV talk shows or on the op-ed pages of newspapers, whether in our living rooms or on the pages of facebook, tend to be overly generalized and sweeping. This will not help us. Without a nuanced view, we will never properly understand politics. Without a proper understanding of how politics operate, we will never be able to shape it a desirable way. We may express our frustrations and give our sermons, we may provide our proposals and make our appeals. But all this will fall on deaf ears. Our ships will merely pass each other in the night.

So there are some important questions that we should be asking. Firstly, what are the different layers within a typical political party and how do these interact with each other? We have, for example, the heads of the parties, followed by the top-tier of leadership. There are members of parliament, district-level leaders, the village and small-town workers and the various fronts – the student and the labour fronts and the many professional bodies with links to the parties. What role does each of these layers play in decision-making? To what extent do the parties operate according to formally laid down rules and procedures, and to what extent is business done informally? When are decisions laid down arbitrarily by the top leaders; when are these the result of intense discussion and debate within the party structures? When does the dog wag the tail and when is it the other way round?

The horizontal layers I mentioned above represent one dimension. There are vertical silos too in the parties. And, just like in other organisations, there are many currents and under-currents. There are factions and caucuses, coalitions and cliques, loyalties and betrayals. There are newcomers and old-timers. There are people with money and there are those whose only assets are dedication and hard work. There are hot-blooded young workers and there are leaders seasoned by years of experience. There are people willing to give their lives and there are those who have learned the art of compromise and calibration. There is the call of the future and the legacy of the past.

How do these dynamics affect the way the parties operate? Let us assume there are some people who would have an advantage if the parties took parliamentary deliberations seriously, and there are those whose strength lies more in organizing street protests. It will not be surprising if the latter group will always want the path of agitation since that will enhance their standing within the party. Let us assume the leader of a party has tremendous clout within the organization.

Does it mean that, during important deliberations, she allows only perfunctory discussion and then announces a decision that she had reached even before the meeting had started? Or, sensing the way the wind is blowing, would she, at times, adjust her position and make concessions to others? When does a powerful leader adjust and when does she stick to her ground? When does she give her opinions explicitly and when are the signals subtle? No political leader, no matter how powerful, do not have unlimited political capital within their party. Good political leaders know when to spend their political capital and when to conserve it. They know when to accelerate and when to press the break.

Unfortunately, we don't know the answers to many such questions when it comes to the politics of Bangladesh. In some ways our political scientists and political commentators have failed us. Much of their writing has been on the general trends in politics; incisive analysis of what goes on within the parties is very rare. But that is not a problem with political analysis only. Most disciplines do not show much interest in institutional and organisational analysis. We do not know much either about how decisions are reached in government ministries and in large companies, how these institutions operate, what are the horizontal layers and vertical silos within them, how are incentives formed and organizational cultures shaped?

This failure to think beyond political parties as monolithic entities that move only according to the whims of all-powerful leaders, and take a more nuanced and dynamic view of things, is at the root of many of the frustrations we have with the political process. It is also a major cause of our impotency when dealing with politics. I have seen the frustration of economists when they see politicians in government taking policy decisions that benefit a 10% minority but harm the overwhelming majority. They wonder why their carefully crafted technical recommendations are ignored by the politicians. But often the problem is more with them than the politicians. There will always be political calculations behind the decisions of politicians. The trick lies in knowing how to influence the political calculations while not sacrificing the logic of economics. Politics is the art of the possible. If economists want to make things happen, they can't go by economics only; they need to understand how the political process works. Indeed, this is true of everyone who wants to influence politics.

Let me finish with another anecdote. Sometime back, an outgoing president of FBCCI was interviewed by a daily newspaper. He was asked if he had any regrets, anything that he had wanted to do but could not. The answer was in the positive – he had wanted to establish a good research capacity in the FBBCI but could not due to a lack of funds. This person, like most of his predecessors and successors, did not have problems raising funds for high-profile events organized in expensive hotels, with sumptuous dinners and lunches for hundreds of guests. These are events where the Presidents of FBBCI play host to Presidents, Prime Ministers and other dignitaries, and the news of which makes the top headlines in the media that day and the next. Pictures are splashed all over, quotes turned into headlines and egos satisfied. And, we are once again reminded that, in Bangladesh, our attention is on events, not pain-staking processes.

————————-
Syed Akhtar Mahmood works for an international development agency in Washington DC.