A Positive Socio-Political Atmosphere:
A Necessary Condition for Effective Development
(An
Open Memo to the New Maldives
People are excited about the outcome of the election and it is easy to forget that effective development can happen only in an atmosphere conducive for meaningful action that enables positive outcomes. I believe that most blunders of our recent past have been largely the result of: i) the lack of courage and foresight on the part of the person elected to the Office of the President to choose the right path/action; ii) sacrificing the interest of the nation to cater for personal egos, the craving arising from a feeling of insecurity and lack of self-confidence; and iii) the lack respect for the spirit of the times and behaviours arising from that lack.
Three interrelated areas can be identified that encompass the above shortcomings:
Three interrelated areas can be identified that encompass the above shortcomings:
### policy
and/or action that will increase the chances for jeopardizing our independence;
### lack of
respect for the spirit of people’s choices in 1932 and 1968, and behaviour thereof; and
### basing public
policy on one’s limited thinking
and not facing the responsibility to improve.
Elaborated below
are aspects of these areas and policy conducive to rectifying these failings.
One: Policy/Action That Can Jeopardize Our Independence
Taking
refuge in Indian Embassy by those who hope to hold high office (Yameen,
Nasheed, others) during the disturbances in our political milieu is also among
the kind of action that will lead to similar undesirable outcomes – for such
action will invariably obligate a price for the services rendered, and given
that most of those who undertook such action don’t have own assets to make
payments, the easiest path would be (as is usually the case) to give concessions
on our strategic interests! The nation should not be made to pay
with its independence for benefits received by individuals for any
reason! Under the circumstances, given
that currently there is such an
obligation which would in all likelihood be paid by such concessions that would
endanger our long term independence, I suggest, however unpleasant the proposal
may come across, that the debt be paid by a means that will not jeopardize our independence
in the long term – as leasing an island on the usual terms for resort
development. This is a better option than
deceiving ourselves by pretending that a price that would otherwise endanger
our independence will not be paid for that deplorable lack of foresight!
For those
in the know, engaging in the development process while the nation is headed for
its virtual demise is like trying to arrange deck chairs of Titanic while the
Captain is adamantly keeping its bearing towards an immense ice berg; their outcomes being foregone conclusions.
Two: Lack of Respect by Those in High Office for
the Spirit of the Times – represented, in particular, by the declarations by the people in both
1932 and 1968 to forego the hereditary monarchy and to let “their affairs be conducted
among themselves by mutual consultation” (The Koran 42:38). Yet the elected heads of state and senior officials
appointed by them are deliberately disrespectful
to those declarations! A good example of
this attitude is the policy by the Government, which has become sacred standard
for our media: those even in the lowest rungs of Government would
“vidhaalhuvaanee” while anyone outside it, even those scientists respected globally
such as Albert Einstein, would “bunaanee” (to maintain the pretence of fairness
and thus help instil the idea in the public mind, it is applied to anyone in
any government). This self-serving scheme
of belittling those not working in governments and thus by inference bestowing upon
themselves a “hollow haibathufulhu” was begun by Mr Gayyoom, which his
successors, both Mr Nasheed and Dr Waheed, pursued with zeal, since it benignly
served their psychological needs, which has to do with covering up their inability
to perform their jobs satisfactorily, as if a “hollow haibathufulhu” is a
substitute for incompetence! I reminded Mr
Gayyoom repeatedly of the damage self-serving/aggrandizing behaviours (which
blatantly violate the spirit of the declarations by the people in 1932 and
1968, and, importantly, spirit of the times we live in
today in which getting thing done calls for participation of a wide range of
people, be they in or out of the Government) beget the nation, but to no
avail! (See attached “Preamble” and “Attitude
Change”) The flattering image such behaviour
creates seems more important than pursuing the nation’s best interest!
We should understand
that such self-aggrandizing attitudes belonged to a past bygone era – the era
of the hereditary monarchy. An essential difference between then and now is
that then everything in the nation was at the disposal of “Radhun” or
“Ranikamanaa.” Accordingly, values systematically
inculcated in the public were characterized by servitude; ass-kissing behaviour
being a core element of this milieu. Even
a strange dialect was invented to set them apart from the rest! Such policies were easy to implement in the
prevailing poor conditions then, as the means of survival for many were thru Government. The importance of people’s declarations of
1932 and 1968 is that they have made the past era obsolete. And economic development has loosened the grip
of the Government, reducing its control over the masses. Yet it is those self-serving
values that are being instilled in the public thru the media by our democratically elected Governments – as
if we’re still in the days of the monarchy and getting elected/appointed to
office gives them similar rights!
Even the
root cause of incidents of “police brutality” can be traced to this self-aggrandizing
attitude of the Government. Humans are by nature aggressive, which tendency is kept under automatic check by the societal
values inculcated in them aimed at living in a harmonious society. We should remember that values influence attitudes and behaviours at subconscious/unconscious levels, and thus it will be in vain that one can try
to pursue a behaviour that is in conflict with one’s values. Thus when values instilled in the members of
the police force in effect say “those in the government are the important people
and the rest are nobody,” it is those values that become internalized in them, and
their behaviour would reflect those values.
Thus the motto “Protect & Serve” that decorates the uniforms of the
members of the police force becomes just a decoration, and a misleading one at
that. High moral standards implied by
“Protect & Serve” cannot
be inculcated in members of the police force while the Government is adamant on
inculcating contradictory values in the public at large, of which individuals
of the police force are members, and thus the police force will not be able to pursue its moral
responsibility as it ought to. Inappropriate
and undesirable values instilled in people would inevitably lead to
correspondingly inappropriate and undesirable behaviours.
Building a
better society (which is what development is all about) cannot happen if the
prevailing socio-political atmosphere is characterized by inappropriate self-serving
policies. At a basic level, development implies
the pursuit of a condition that is perceived to be better. This cannot happen if people, particularly those in the Government
responsible for getting things moving in the right direction, are
unable to talk about the situation frankly, without being apprehensive of
damages that might occur to them if they did.
The way things are now in our volatile circumstances created by party
politics and insecure rulers, the focus of most of those at senior levels of the
Government is to adopt behaviours that will secure their jobs, and with good
reason: recent events have shown that there is no guarantee to job
security. Adopting a self-preserving
stance would not be difficult at all for a people brought up in an ass-kissing
culture! Actually, it is nothing new,
but has been much aggravated recently by our new-found “democracy” and party
politics. Guess what happens to their performance
if they are unable to think beyond holding onto their jobs, if the path for their
productive interaction with colleagues and others is choked by the
system! This is the new reality in our fast-changing
world when we are in urgent need to find solutions to conditions that are fast
becoming obsolete!
It is clear
that the sociopolitical atmosphere pervaded by self-serving/aggrandizing attitudes by Government is not conducive for meaningful
development to take place. Therefore, if such development is desired, it is necessary for the Government to
bring the values and behaviours it pursues and propagates in line with the
realities of the times, not to mention declarations made by the people in both
1932 and 1968.
Three: Basing Public Policy on One’s Limited Knowledge
and Adamant Refusal to Learn: Part of
this problem lies in that public/development policy is broad, multifaceted, and
intertwined on the one hand, and on the other that the specialized education
one can obtain through the world education system is only partial and thus
limited. Add to these limitations the intricacies arising from the local
context and the complexity of policy formulation becomes enormous. (This problem is not limited to the Maldives
Given the many
areas comprising of development policy, the flawed conclusion most people jump
to is this: “If policy involves so many specialities, then we’ll get people
knowledgeable in those areas to discuss the issue among themselves and they’ll
come up with the right policy.” It may sound
like systematic thinking, but the approach will not work (even if adopted,
which people usually don’t but rely on some person’s self-proclaimed pseudo-knowledge). To understand why it will not work, we need some
facilitative background.
We all
understand that the ability of a physician (as medical doctors are called
nowadays) to cure an illness depends on how well he or she had mastered the
profession of medicine, besides the availability of required facilities and
medications. Similarly, the ability of a
structural engineer to do a good job depends on his or her mastery of that
profession. The physician understands
his/her profession and the engineer understands his/her profession. We all know
that much. Here is the tricky part most
people find difficult to comprehend: neither
the physician nor the engineer has
any meaningful knowledge about the other’s specialized area, thus neither can speak meaningfully with the other about
either medicine or engineering. And it is the same
story with, say, an economist and a sociologist, or a financier and a
psychologist, and so on. In short, those
specialized in all areas are
in the same boat: they don’t have a common language to talk meaningfully with another person of
a different
specialization. Thus getting people of
different backgrounds together is a useless endeavour. In fact, it is a highly misleading endeavour, as we are usually under mistaken
belief that gathering people of different specializations can produce viable
development policy and thus go about adopting the outcomes of such processes as
valid policy. We are faced
with a difficult dilemma here: those of different specializations cannot converse meaningfully with
others in a different field,
while policy making involves many specialized fields and is highly complex.
But the
problem can be overcome if a single individual has mastered, or at
least has acquired the basics of, the central areas of development planning;
this will enable the integration of fragmented and disjointed info into a
coherent and meaningful synthesis. And
that is precisely what I had done over
the past 24 years, by sacrificing, basically, all else. Having gained sufficient background by 1999, I
suggested to Mr Gayyoom that I acquaint those involved in the Government policy
process (those at technical levels of the ministries involved and Cabinet and Parliament members
– those involved both in formulating/implementing
plans and in deciding on them)
with the basics of development. But he
could not see the need for such an endeavour. Having tried repeatedly to convince him of the crucial importance of that
endeavour to get things moving in the right
direction, and failing, I took the issue to the Parliament, with equally deplorable
results. Attached is the letter I sent to
the MPs, individually, in April 2005, labelled “Majlis Letter One”; attached is
also a summary of that letter which I later sent to Mr Gayyoom, labelled “Last
Explanation.”
To help move policy in the right
direction, I am
willing to undertake such an explanation to the members of the new government,
along with those of the Parliament; not that it will make them experts on
development (in any case, I can provide only
the basics of the most central aspects) but it will help guide their discussions along technically viable
lines; current discussions being not only ineffective but actually misleading. If the
endeavour is deemed worthwhile, two vital points need be noted: i) for
best results, the presentation should take place before people get busy formulating any kind of plans; for
changing the direction (insights gained through the presentation will make a real difference to
their thinking; it is not just a talk show) after
efforts start gaining momentum will be most frustrating and thus unwelcome; and
ii) the presentation overheads are in need of a major revision, which will take at least three weeks to
complete, and I must start revising them ahead of that time, which requires my
being informed of a decision in time so that that schedule can be kept.
It should be
clear that neither adopting
surmises nor getting people of
different specialities together can produce valid
policy; some such “policy” being worse than none at all – for reasons given,
such policy is likely to lead us in the wrong direction, as can be seen by past
blunders that resulted thru similar
processes. Therefore if better outcomes are desired, those engaged in the
process (both in formulation/implementation
of plans and in decision making) must have an understanding of the
basic concepts; otherwise they will not do any better than blind Yehya trying
to catch crows! (By the way, some of the
basic concepts dealt with in my presentation are not at all clear to those who
have been engaged in teaching development for a lifetime!)
Conclusion
The
preceding has made it abundantly clear that the attitude and mindset of the
person elected to the Office of the President, and those of the senior officers
appointed by that person to high office as well as members of the Parliament,
are crucial factors that can hinder (or
facilitate) development. Rather than
adopting right policies, the trend to-date has been to wipe successive blunders
under the carpet and eye-wash the public.
For
example, economic growth happens when money coming from outside a region facilitates
creating new economic activities in the region.
Thus growth in the Maldives Hotel
School Sun Island
More importantly,
we are all aware of the damage done by politicians’ misguided actions – like the
growth of foreign workers to more than a third of our population within just 20
years due to wrong dual policies of the Government regarding both population
and education, when the right policies were clear; the continued congestion of
Malé arising from the repeated wrong policies
(thinking in every round “This time
we’ll catch the crow!”) when the right policies are clear; leasing
strategic assets to foreigners, particularly Indians, which will most likely
jeopardize our independence; and so on. Current
“policy making” is more akin to the age-old adage “moyaehge athah kandieh
dhinun …” – they just don’t know what the hell they are doing!
On the positive side, the above also has given us a good
idea of the improvements that can happen if those in high office acquired
the courage to change their attitudes and behaviours – by being aware
of the damage they are inflicting on the nation and learning to behave responsibly,
than being driven by self-interest above all else. Mustering
such courage will most likely lead to opening the door for adopting the right
policies.
On reflection, since the urge of the rulers to set themselves apart from the people and control them by placing them under their thumbs arises from their craving for respect, it is ironical that they can't comprehend that by respecting people as human beings and citizens with inalienable rights, they can achieve that end! This is not only the spirit of the declarations of the people in both 1932 and 1968, it is also the spirit of the times we live in. In today's complex world in which education is specialized and without any common language for discussing issues, betterment can happen only if people can interactively surmount limitations arising from it by exchanging ideas without the fear of persecution; measures to create barriers and perpetuate ass-kissing attitudes will certainly stifle such efforts and force them to regress to destructive self-preserving behaviours.
On reflection, since the urge of the rulers to set themselves apart from the people and control them by placing them under their thumbs arises from their craving for respect, it is ironical that they can't comprehend that by respecting people as human beings and citizens with inalienable rights, they can achieve that end! This is not only the spirit of the declarations of the people in both 1932 and 1968, it is also the spirit of the times we live in. In today's complex world in which education is specialized and without any common language for discussing issues, betterment can happen only if people can interactively surmount limitations arising from it by exchanging ideas without the fear of persecution; measures to create barriers and perpetuate ass-kissing attitudes will certainly stifle such efforts and force them to regress to destructive self-preserving behaviours.
********************************************
Preamble
Preamble
(From personal letter to President Gayyoom on November 16, 2002)
Please
recall: In the first letter I wrote to US Government trying to
obtain a scholarship (Oct 1987) I stated two sides to the development equation: a
technical/practical/pragmatic side and a personal/political/leadership side, as
follows:
The specific sequence of actions that could be taken towards making it happen (getting the situation moving on a positive track towards
desired goals) starts with an awareness of intricacies and dimensions of the
situation (the technical side of the equation) together with a
sincere and strong political will (the leadership side).
Central
to leadership is that it is different from mere ruling. Positive leadership is backed by technically
viable thinking. It leads people
towards national goals, not self-destruction. (That’s where we are headed, on a
roller-coaster.) Leadership is based on
the reality of the world we live in (it has its built-in nature/rules; it’s not
dependant upon what someone might think it is).
In SE & EAsia, for example, it is positive leadership that is behind
every success story, while in South Asia it is the
lack of such leadership (“democratic” or otherwise) that keeps peoples in
misery. It’s leading, not merely ruling
(by consensus or not), that makes the difference.
Significantly,
it is the thinking that is not rooted in the nature and realities of
both the epoch we are living in and our small and fragile country that blocks
the path of viable policy, and thus constitutes a prime cause of why things go
wrong. And the more things go wrong, the
more important appearances tend to become.
This is a never-ending vicious circle.
Correcting current political thinking is therefore vital
if we are to break this vicious circle and put things on the right track.
********************************************
Attitude Change
Attitude Change
(From personal letter to President Gayyoom on December 16, 2006)
................................................
To reiterate what has
been said many times over, I believe that we cannot get things on the
right track before we manage to get the basics/fundamentals
right.
Among the basics is
respect for the spirit of the twin declarations made by the people of
this country – in 1932 to adopt a parliament and a constitutional monarchy in
lieu of a hereditary monarchy, and subsequently, in 1968, to adopt the republican
form of government. But I believe such
respect is not reflected in the behaviour of a person holding the Office
of the President going in front of the Parliament whose members are elected by
a direct
vote of the people of this country, and addressing them in the “ahuren bunaa”
language. And, as I have mentioned sometime
back, such behaviour reflects a blatant lack of respect not only for the people
of this country but also for the very office you are holding – this is not to
mention its reflecting a lamentable lack of awareness of the nature
of the world we are living in today.
This deplorable state is further aggravated by the demand for respect for
one’s own self, forgetting the fact that respect for a person holding your job is
deserving to the extent of one’s doing a commendable job, which includes,
among other things, facilitating the nation to tread the right path, instead of
neglecting a long-deteriorating situation and refusing change.
As can be inferred from
the above paragraph, among the basics are also, on the one hand, understanding
the nature of the world we are living in (and that we are only at a juncture on
a timeline continuum) and, on the other, adopting attitudes and behaviour that
are in harmony with that reality. Aspects
of this reality include the facts that we are a nation of small and fragile
islands; that our population is a small and dispersed one; that we have a very
small economy; and due to these (and other related factors), that we cannot
adopt attitudes/behaviours that we see elsewhere. But these realities cannot be faced while the
foremost priority of the head of state is about building a personality cult!! Take a second example: that of TVM and VoM
reciting “Raeesul Jumhooriyya” immediately after the mention of Allah!! Is this a proclamation of your quasi-divinity!?
There is no scope for feigning innocence
here, if only for the many times I pointed out that you choose what is more
important: either your own grandeur or interest of the nation (interests of one
are in conflict with those of the other), and you have very clearly shown by
your behaviour what your choice has been to-date!!
Changing such improper attitudes/behaviour is,
therefore, a necessary condition
for the situation to be able to transform in the right direction. And without changing such misguided attitudes/behaviour as
a starting point and restoring the spirit of the above-mentioned
twin declarations towards creating a sociopolitical climate conducive for positive/fruitful
outcomes, we just cannot realize the much-needed policy changes integral
to setting the situation right on the path of achieving broader national goals.
Most societal problems
don’t
resolve by themselves. When
neglected/ignored (wiped under the carpet), they tend to manifest in other
forms, each feeding on others; current unrest is illustrative of this. Each situation thus tends to expand in scope
and intensity – with the ultimate result of the collapse of the whole
system. And things just don’t
happen automatically when committees or new ministries are created and
fancy (but irrelevant) names are given them every other year, or when lofty
speeches are made from stages – as if Allah Almighty is commanding from on
high!! For an insight into how things
get done in today’s dynamic world (identifying root causes of problems, and
finding viable and holistic solutions that are sustainable), see p #3, pa #2 of
the paper titled “On the Nature of Planning” – on the mini-CD I sent you. ........…
********************************************
********************************************
Anyone skeptical of my concerns about Indian territorial interests in theMaldives might want to examine the coin below
and compare it with the map below that. A nation as paranoid about territory as India
The line separating the northern territory of the Maldives from India is indicated by the dotted line highlighted in purple above the label "Eight Degree Channel." Compare this with the extent to which to which the dots on the coin protrude down into the territory of the Maldives. (Also please note the coin's top area: the Kashmir region as well as the area bordering China: it is what India considers to be its territory.) (I also have several atlases that came through Indian sellers stamped with proclamations to the effect that the maps in them are "neither correct nor authentic.") A nation as obsessed with its borders as India and makes a fuss about any map that does not conform to its version of the borders does not go about doing this kind of things by mistake. It is possible that the guilty party is the Indian Mint and that the authorities merely turned a blind eye to the issue. And there are coins bearing dates of numerous years, not only 1998, in current circulation.
********************************************
********************************************
Anyone skeptical of my concerns about Indian territorial interests in the
The line separating the northern territory of the Maldives from India is indicated by the dotted line highlighted in purple above the label "Eight Degree Channel." Compare this with the extent to which to which the dots on the coin protrude down into the territory of the Maldives. (Also please note the coin's top area: the Kashmir region as well as the area bordering China: it is what India considers to be its territory.) (I also have several atlases that came through Indian sellers stamped with proclamations to the effect that the maps in them are "neither correct nor authentic.") A nation as obsessed with its borders as India and makes a fuss about any map that does not conform to its version of the borders does not go about doing this kind of things by mistake. It is possible that the guilty party is the Indian Mint and that the authorities merely turned a blind eye to the issue. And there are coins bearing dates of numerous years, not only 1998, in current circulation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.