Thursday, March 13, 2014
Public Corruption; The Dark Side of Social Evolution
As Professor Robert Neild from Trinity College, Cambridge University writes in Public Corruption; The Dark Side of Social Evolution (London: Anthem Press, 2002), “Rich countries and their agencies … commonly have been and are accomplices in corruption abroad, encouraging it by their actions rather
commonly have been and are accomplices in corruption abroad, encouraging it by their actions rather than impeding it….” (p.209). Specific problems he highlights include:
- The impact of Cold War corruption (supporting dictatorships, destabilizing democracies, funding opposition, etc);
- Firms from rich countries bribing rulers and officials from developing countries to gain export contracts, particularly in the arms trade and in construction (even justifying it by suggesting bribery is “customary” in those countries, so they need to do it to, in order to compete);
- The “corruption-inducing effects of the purchase, by the rich countries and their international corporations, of concessions in Third World countries to exploit natural deposits of oil, copper, gold, diamonds and the like.” Payments made to rulers often violate local (and Western) rules, keeping corrupt rulers in power, who also embezzle a lot of money away.
- The drug trade. Neild suggests that international law and national laws in rich countries that prohibit drugs may serve to “produce a scarcity value irresistible to producers, smugglers and dealers.” Governments and civil society in the third world are often “undermined, sometimes destroyed” by the violence and corruption that goes with the drug trade. “This is probably the most important way in which the policies of rich countries foster corruption and violence. Yet the effect on the Third World seems scarcely to enter discussion of alternative drug policies in the rich countries.” Legalizing drugs, a system of taxation and regulation, comparable to that applied to tobacco and alcohol might do more to reduce corruption in the world than any other measure rich countries could take, he suggests. (See this site’s section on illicit drugs for more on that aspect.)
=================================================================
Those who run a government that has a concession to sell will know that negotiation creates a strong incentive to the potential buyers to offer them bribes: they will know this from the point of view of the buyers, a sum that will only add a small percentage to, say, a billion dollar deal, will be worth paying in order to win the concession. Once negotiation is adopted as the means of allocating concessions, the dominant incentive is for bidders to engage competitively in the bribery of local rulers and fixers.
===================================================================
What Forms of Governance Are Likely to Be More Corrupt?
Corruption tends to be more prevalent in autocratic systems (where one person rules with unlimited authority), or oligarchies (rule by a small group of elites).
As Minxin Pei from the Carnegie Endowment clarifies, corruption does exist in democracies, but it “is fundamentally different from the massive looting by autocrats in dictatorships. That is why the least corrupt countries, with a few exceptions, all happen to be democracies, and the most corrupt countries are overwhelmingly autocracies…
That corruption is more prevalent in autocracies is no mere coincidence. While democracies derive their legitimacy and popular support through competitive elections and the rule of law, autocracies depend on the support of a small group of political and social elites, the military, the bureaucracy and the secret police.”
As Minxin Pei from the Carnegie Endowment clarifies, corruption does exist in democracies, but it “is fundamentally different from the massive looting by autocrats in dictatorships. That is why the least corrupt countries, with a few exceptions, all happen to be democracies, and the most corrupt countries are overwhelmingly autocracies…
That corruption is more prevalent in autocracies is no mere coincidence. While democracies derive their legitimacy and popular support through competitive elections and the rule of law, autocracies depend on the support of a small group of political and social elites, the military, the bureaucracy and the secret police.”
*** note - Police power vs Individual liberty which means that more security will generally cause less freedom!
================================================================
Bribery may be pervasive, but it is difficult to detect. Many Western companies do not dirty their own hands, but instead pay local agents, who get a 10 per cent or so “success fee” if a contract goes through and who have access to the necessary “slush funds” to ensure that it does. Bribery is also increasingly subtle.… Until recently, bribery was seen as a normal business practice. Many countries including France, Germany and the UK treated bribes as legitimate business expenses which could be claimed for tax deduction purposes.
— Dr Susan Hawley, Exporting Corruption; Privatisation, Multinationals and Bribery, The Corner House, June 2000
Conclusion:
Ultimately, citizens must be able to trust their governing institutions, and governing institutions should provide the security and services that citizens need. When corruption is rampant, there can be no trust, and security and services also suffer. Corruption tends to be endemic and most detrimental in states that are transitioning from one form of governance to another or fragile from violent conflict. And, trying to root it out too abruptly may lead to more violence and instability. Then again, if corruption is allowed to fester in those societies, strong and effective governance can be difficult to establish and social and economic development will be hindered.
With respect to the impact of corruption on peace building, practitioners wrestle with making difficult choices on when and where to tolerate corruption. As countries in transition struggle with stability, the ties among corruption, governance and peaceful development have come into focus. Growing understanding of fragile states and these ties have led to some new ideas and approaches in how outsiders can or should help.
These approaches span from helping to establish good governance to incorporating the power of civic involvement into their work. However, application of these ideas and approaches continue to be challenging in as many ways as there are complex conflicts and fragile states.
Certainly, peace builders—foreign and domestic; individuals, organizations, and
governments—have very important roles to play in addressing corruption and
establishing good governance in order to prevent conflict and strengthen regional and international security. We hope this study guide contributes to your deeper understanding of issues presented here as well as encourages innovation and involvement
