Examining the costs and benefits of corruption in developing countries

1.7.2012   By Nabaz Shwany — Special to Ekurd.net  

Nabaz Shwany, Blogger and Freelancer

July 1, 2012

Corruption is a phenomenon that public good uses for private gains. It happens in both private and public sectors. In term of government it’s defined as “the sale by government officials of government property for personal gain”. Also, it can happen in different ways and in different level from different positions and different countries, but this phenomenon is mainly widespread in developing countries. Even though, corruption is a worm within the body of society and cancer to economic and political development; but it can also be used as the cure for some people to sustain their life and maintain their economic advantages.

The major coast of corruption is increasing poverty and social and economic disparity because some officials take the control of the country resources and exploit public instead of distributing on society and creating job opportunity to their people. Because of corruption, Child mortality and hunger endangered the life of millions. In Angola, 1 out of 5 children die before they reach their fifth birthday and more than half of population lives with $1.5 a day. Hence, corruptions create social class and widen the gap between wealthy and poor and it causes further problem. For instance, the corrupted people send their sons and daughters to the world best universities, and other cannot even support their children to complete primary education. So, not only in terms of finance, but corruption creates disparity in education and other aspects of life. Moreover, corruption distorted the economic growth in developing countries and decelerates the paces of reconstruction and rebuilding. It’s the main obstacle of investment and discourages business. Resource curse is another cost of corruption. Most of the developing countries have massive oil reserve and other natural resources, but that oil created more problem and conflict rather than bringing prosperity for people. For instance, in Angola and Nigeria, oil is the main source for conflict, plus corrupted politicians monopolized oil industry and misappropriate public funds which created bourgeoisie and widespread poverty.

The most dangerous effect of corruption is when judiciary is corrupted. Law and justice is the base for development, justice, and civil society, but in developing countries corrupted people uses law to justify their illegal behaviors. For instance, In Burma when there is legal cases “Payments occurs to get a case registered, to get it lodged in court, to get it heard as scheduled, to receive copies of documents, to secure a conviction or acquittal, to get the case accepted on appeal, and so on”. Furthermore, in other developing countries there are many cases that government officials cooperatewith gang groups and Mafias. For instance, in Iraq they steal and sell petrol in black market, mostly ministers, Parliament members and other government officials involve in this business. Also, in Sudan officials support gang groups instead of exciting law and justice and encourage them to kill innocent people and steal public resources. That is clearly happening in Darfur were hundreds been killed by pro-government militias. Further, its also argued that in Colombia and Mexico officials have direct relationships with drug trailer to get certain concession without considering their moral responsibility and side effects on public.

Lacks of health care, education, school, infrastructure, social protection, regulation, routine are primarily consequences of corruption in developing world. The corrupted government experience shortage in budget. Besides, government is unable to provide education and schools particularly in rural areas. Other infrastructures like electricity, water supply, high ways, rail ways, sewage and so on. Thus, government unable to sustain, support and enhance the living condition. Also, corruption destroys love and patriotism. In the corrupted countries, people have no respect and trust to their government and have no desire to protect their countries from external threats. In contrast, they weaken their government and act accordingly as we have seen in the corrupted Egypt and Tunisia where people toppled their autocratic corrupted governments.

For the benefits, corruption can be used as a method to unite different political, ethnic, religious, and economic groups. Regardless to their differences, when there is corruption, conflict actors and people with different opinion and different political background come together and uphold their relationships in order to preserve their economic advantages. Thus, corruption is the key player in managing the problems in developing countries. Another advantage of corruption is transferring wealth and capital from upper class to the lower class. It can help people to find alternative way to secure their lives. So, some people can simply survive through corruption. It was three weeks ago that I asked my friends from Somalia whether he become corrupted if he takes position in the future or not, he honestly said “yes, without corruption, you wouldn’t survive”. So, we understand that corruption has advantages for some and poor people may get their share from the country revenue. I have seen solders and government employers who become rich through corruption and grossed large amount of money within a very short time. Obviously, solders and employers in check points and government administrations especially those that have relationship to the people’s daily live can easily get money with coordination to other officials who mostly back them in case they have been caught. So, straightforwardly corruption helps to be rich swiftly.

Nepotism is another aspect of corruption that can be seen in developing countries. Perhaps, when you have a cousin in one of the government administrations, this person may find place for most his/her family members and through them to others. So, it can help to drop unemployment rate in developing countries. On the other hand, corrupted person can promote their position by giving bribes and kickbacks. That happens especially during the elections in developing countries. The candidates will try to steal money from public and redistribute their wealth on their supporters and buy their votes. This illegal dealing has mutual benefits for both sides. To justify corruption, www.ekurd.net Andrese Rune argues that individuals are more likely to make their decisions to be corrupted if they sought the benefits will exceed the coasts (Rune, 2011, p.24). So, what he means is if the benefits larger than costs it would be okay to do so. In developing countries the organizational culture and government administrators don’t respect their client. They treat them in a very harsh and disrespectful way. Though, when you pay bribes or when you use connection, you will gain favorable treatment, cut bureaucratic corners or to bribe their way to contracts in order to enhance competitiveness and gain market shares or other business advantages.

Giving Bribes also work effectively in both private and public business. In developing countries the bureaucracy is so weak to fulfill the demands of people. Besides, there are large scales of routine and red traps, employers are not abiding by their duties and make things difficult to their clients. However, bribery and corruption will facilitate things. In the other word, you will get what you have paid for in a very short time and without any difficulties. In business perspective, corruption could motivate investment. According to the International Crises Groups, bribes were given to the insurgent groups in Kabul to guarantee security insurance for the development projects. So, here it can help business and continuing private and public activities. You pay an amount of money to terrorist or trouble makers group in regard to achieve security to maintain your project and apply your development programs. This is one way to run business appropriately.

In a nutshell, corruption is more dangerous than HIV, Malaria and terrorism. It causes many problems. The coasts of corruption are many but the major disadvantages are poverty, inequality, child mortality, budget shortage, destroying economic development and infrastructure, mistrust between government and people, discouraging business and investment, misusing natural resources, lockage of public service, deregulation, weak bureaucracy and weak rule of law. However, for some people it has benefits. Corruption can solve ethnic and religious conflicts and persuade conflict groups to get closer. Besides, it helps to redistribute wealth and equalize social class and reduce unemployment rates. In addition, people can be rich so fast without taking any hardness and efforts to do so. Due to the high routines and managerial problems in developing countries, people cannot do their works easily in government bureaucracy, but through bribes, kickbacks and other corruption means, they can get things done.

Nabaz Shwany, Bachelor in Politics and International Relations at the University of Kurdistan-Hewler. Currently, he is a Master student at the school of Government and International Studied, Public Management Department, University of Utara, Malaysia.  Nabaz Shwany is a regular contributing writer for Ekurd.net, May 10, 2012.

Copyright © 2012 Ekurd.net. All rights reserved

“The Principles of Democratic and Non-democratic Government”

Nabaz Shwany

Nabaz Shwany, Blogger and Freelancer

November 18, 2009

Democratic and non-democratic government is a very significant topic that discuss among politician and people. Both terms have different definitions and components that argued by scholars and politicians. Democracy is a Greek word originally means ruling by people or exercising political power by people (Bobbio, 2006, p.133). According to the Stanford university, democracy definition is “a method of group decision making characterized by a kind of equality among the participants at an essential stage of the collective decision making”(Stanford University, 2006) and it has some types like direct, representative, and deliberative democracy. On the other hand, “non- democratic government are the government that have not linked to the people and the process of ruling” (Ellen, 2002, p.166). Thus, means that people are not governing themselves in any form of non-democratic system like authoritarian or dictatorship. Democratic and non-democratic governments are two oppose forms of government and each of them has their components and distinction. This paper will try to explain their distinctions and components.

First of all, in democratic system people are participating in political and decision making process without considering their race, color, physical ability such as Scandinavian countries. They are able to decide on their destiny directly or through their representatives. Each individual have their votes and these votes are effective and able to change decisions. There is no lumber on their choice and government can not mobilize citizens to pro-government relies; in contrast people are being mobilized by themselves or non governmental organization to put a pressure on the government. However, in non-democratic regimes people are not participating in political process and they were restricted by central body. The government has absolute powers over its citizens and nobody have a right to freely participate in election, decision making process and so on. The government dominated everything and every activity within the territory of its sovereignty. Furthermore, the government has an authority to practice some policy to mobilize people for particular purposes like demonstrating against some countries or the activity of opposition parties or to show of that their government is representing their dignity and choices (Allen, 2002). For instance, the former Iraqi regime restricted people from voting and the government banned any anti governmental actions, tortured and jailed people especially women and mobilized people to pro-government demonstrations against the USA and Israel (Lasky, 2006).

In democratic régimes the leaders and those who are governing country are elected by the community. The head of the state has not inclusive power, but there are some limitation on his/her authority that defined by the constitution. This constitution written by some expertise and passed through democratic and freely referendum that people directly voted for like Denmark, Australia, Estonia, Germany, Uruguay after the authoritarian regimes in 1946 (Schiller, 2009, p. 7). The authority circulated among the government apparatus like parliament, president and prime minister and decisions are collective. Likewise, there is a political pluralism and multi-party system that competes to achieve the majority of parliament seats and no one of them can control government. Parties are competing on the base of public goods, political reconciliation and values rather than monopolizing power (Dixon & Senese, 2002, p. 550).Though, in non democratic system the country governs by a small group of people whether they are individual, military, family or one dominant party (Allen, 2002, p.170). They absolute power and use it to their self interests and through this they achieve their personal desires. Fore example, in the dictatorship regimes, one individual on the top level decide on the destiny of millions of people without considering their likeness and wishes such as Hitler and Mussolini. Here, the president or prime minister doesn’t elected by people but they come to power through military coup or revolution. Also, in some places the government governs by the dominant family or tribes. The family gives the priority to its members and neglects other people to participate in the process of governing, also they use country’s resources and dominate the economy. This is very common in monarchy systems especially in Arab countries like Saudi Arabia, Oman, and Bahrain. Controversy, one of the other features of non-democratic system is governing country by the Military, in this case “Human rights and democratic freedoms may be severely curtailed by the government” and the election is controlled by the government and opposition parties can not win or get the majority of votes due to the military intervention as Myanmar, Nigeria and North Korea (James et al, 1999). Finally, in some countries one party controlled the whole country and there is no alternative or opposition inside the government like communist countries such as North Korea, China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam (Slater 2003, p.98)

In democratic system, government is a guardian to human rights protection and providing the best life condition to its citizens. The minority groups whether they are Religious group or ethnic group are living in the safe environment without government intervention to confine their activity and repressing them. Besides, they are participating in political process and their rights guaranteed from any threats by majority or any attempts to undermine their identity. However, in non-democratic regimes minority rights is absolutely under threatens of majority and the government exercise a tyranny and enmity policy toward them. They can not practice their religions beliefs and took part in political activities. In contrast there are many limitations on their freedom and most of the times they are in hazard because of majority groups that controlled the government apparatus such as Iran that authoritarian regime targeted Azeri, Kurds, and Bloch. In some countries the minority groups can not express their identity, speak and study in their language but all of these are controlled by the government, and they should admit the government regulation like Turkey which violated the right of millions of Kurdish minority and doesn’t give them a permission even to speak and study in their language (Democracyweb, 2008). Besides, in such non-democratic system government arrest politician and human rights activist, also jail them with out trial as Tibet in Chine. 

Individual liberty and free press are basic components of democratic system. People in democratic government express their opinion and make their choices. Furthermore, they can choose their religion belief, political ideology, sexual statue whether they are gay or lesbian and etc. In addition, they have organizational rights and they are able to create an organization and work independently. Also, their rights defined by the law and nobody can assault their freedom. Also, the government encourages more personal autonomy and support individual self-governing. Besides, they have a freedom of speech and press. People contribute in healthy democracy and create a good government, economic development and political accountability (Freedom House, 2009). However, in non-democratic government individual liberty and freedom of speech is diminished. There is no choice for individual and the government imposes political ideology and belief on them. Anybody who disobeys would face penalty, and there is no freedom for homosexuality. Besides, only those organizations permitted that work for the benefits of the regime. In addition, medias and newspapers are affiliated to the government institutions and publish articles that serve the government interests otherwise any contrary opinion is strictly forbidden. 

In democratic system there is a freedom of market and trading (Sewell, 2003). The government promotes private sectors and people can make their business and exchange their goods like the USA and liberal democratic countries. Nevertheless, in non-democratic regimes markets are monopolized by the government. There is no space for private sectors and competitive market is diminished and this lead to economic disorder which directly effects on the citizens life. 

Equality and rule of law are the crucial components of democratic government. Democratic government looks at its citizens in one eye and tries to enhance the standard of their living equally. Also, “each person has an equal say to determine the common legal, political and economic institutions that they live under” (Stanford University, 2009). Controversy, in democratic regimes law is superior and government should obey its legislature. Everybody is equal and treating equally and the executive should abide by. The law is defined every citizen’s acts and reflect their interests. But, in non-democratic regimes the government makes disparity among its citizens, maybe support certain people or social class and serve them, simultaneously neglect others. Alternatively, there is a weak rule of law and doesn’t play a vital role and undermined by the oppressive government. Moreover, the government may pass a law or procedure that doesn’t reflect people’s interest like Kurdistan when parliament passed a law of polygamy without asking people which was not in favor of women (Ahewar, 2008), but they tolerated under the pressure of religious groups.

All in all, the democratic system is about decision making and people’s participating in governing. It has components like collective decision, electoral participations, political pluralism, multi party system, minority rights, free markets, individual liberties, freedom of speech and organizational rights. But in no democratic regimes people are not self-governing and human rights and individual freedom is under threatened. The government and leaders are repressing minority groups, opposition parties and create inequality among their citizens. Besides, head of the government has a complete power to make any decision and law. Free media, newspaper and organizational activity are prohibited, also markets and economy is dominated by the government. 

Bibliography:

Ahewar, 2008. Campaign to stop polygamy in Kurdistan-Iraq. (updated December 19, 2008). Available at:  http://www.ahewar.org/eng/show.art.asp?aid=671   [accessed May 2, 2009]

Bobbio N., 2006. Democracy and Dictatorship. 2nd ed. Cambridge CB2 UR, UK: Polity Press 

Christiano T., 2006. Democracy. (Updated Jul 27, 2006). Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/democracy/    [accessed May 4, 2009]

Democracy web, 2008. Majority Rule/Minority Rights: Country Studies – Turkey. Available at: http://www.democracyweb.org/majority/turkey.php   [accessed May 5, 2009]

Democracy, Disputes, and Negotiated Settlements. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol. 46, No. 4, pp. 547-571. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3176190   [accessed May 7, 2009]

Ellen G., 2002.  Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to Political Science.  “Comparative 

Freedom House, 2009. Freedom of the Press. Available at: http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=16   [accessed April 22, 2009]

James et al (1999). Militarized Nondemocratic System vs. Burma. (Updated October 9, 1999) Available at: http://www.burmalibrary.org/reg.burma/archives/199910/msg00808.html   [accessed April 28, 2009]

Lasky M., 2006. Iraqi Women under Saddam. (Updated 24 April 2006). Available at: http://www.alterinter.org/article170.html   [accessed May 5, 2009]

Politics I:  Governmental Systems, Democracy and Non-democracy”. 148-176

Schiller T., 2009. Direct Democracy in Modern Democratic Evolution. Available at: www.tfd.org.tw/english/docs/Report_03_DM_P_03_14.pdf   [accessed May 4, 2009]

Sewell P., 2003. Mixing Free Market, Minority Domination and Democracy Results in World On Fire. (Uploaded February 10, 2003) Available at: http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=929   [accessed May 9, 2009]

Slater D., 2003. Iron Cage in an Iron Fist: Authoritarian Institutions and the Personalization of Power in Malaysia. Comparative Politics, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 81-101. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4150161    [accessed April 8, 2009]

Kamalism and the Hypocrisy of AKP Dimmed Kurdish-Turkish Relationship

Nabaz Shwany — ekurd.net 

April 7, 2012

Nabaz Shwany, blogger and Freelancer 

Nabaz Shwany, Blogger and Freelancer

The relationship between Kurds and Turks ruined since the establishment Turkish Republic by Mustafa Kamal Ataturk in 1923. Since then the problems and the gaps between the two nations has been widened and left many casualties for both side. The establishment of this state was based on hatred and discrimination which made both side to get rid of each other. The root of the problem is Mustafa Kamala Ataturk and Turkish nationalists rather than Kurds, because throughout history Kurds never wanted more than their rights and that was Turks who occupied Kurdish land.

Kurds in northern part of Kurdistan have the problem of Identity that has been taken by Turkish regimes. To prove this point we can refer to the article 66 in the Turkish constitution which states “everyone bound to the Turkish state through the bond of citizenship is a Turk. The child of a Turkish father or a Turkish mother is a Turk.” Here, we can easily accuse Turkish government for all the grievances between Kurds and Turks. 

On the other hand, Kurds couldn’t stand to be exploited and insulted by Turkish nationalists and the government. They chose their own way of struggling soon after new Turkish state founded. So, since then they strived for their rights and the most serious upraising was leaded by Sheikh Sa’id Piran and Said Raza, but Turkish government used all its forces to abandon those and any other Kurdish movement in northern part of Kurdistan. In the Kurdish city of Dersim, Turkey massacred 40 to 50 thousand Kurds and tried so hard to undermine Kurdish Identity. Moreover, the government Turkified every aspects of live and doesn’t left anything in the name of Kurds, the name of the cities and villages were changed to Turkish. In such circumstances, compromising and coexistence not only impossible, but the term of compromising and coexistence has been deleted in Turkish and turkey dictionary.

After the September 1980 Turkish coup d'état, Kurds tried their luck another time and started fighting against Turkish regime to attain their rights. This movement leaded by a group of Kurdish Youth Activists and Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan (Apo). They created Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and struggled for independent and demanded Kurdish national and cultural rights. Soon the PKK became the dominant Kurdish organization and political party among Northern Kurds and was the most sever Kurdish movement for turkey. In 1984, the PKK started guerrilla warfare against turkey. Hence, the results of the war left over 40 thousands of civil and military casualties. Further, Hundreds were departure, thousands has been arrested, houses were distracted and more than 2000 villages have been vanished. For that reason, the relationship between two ethnic groups downturned as a whole. The foundation of the PKK gave another shape to the Kurdish movement in this part of Kurdistan and awakened Kurds people to demand their rights.

Now, the PKK guerillas sheltered in the mountainous areas of Qandil, which is located in Kurdistan Region, approximately 50 km south of turkey, Kurdistan, and Iran tripoint. This creates a new problem between Turkish government and the KRG. Turkey has been asked the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) many times to take action against the PKK camps in Qandil and dismiss them. However, the KRG refused any attempts toward military solution for this giant issue and asked both sides to solve their problems through negotiation and dialogue. Those issues got worst during the Turkish election in 2008, when Turkey military intervened to KRG for fighting the PKK Freedom Fighters. However, Turkey was highly condemned by the international organizations, KRG and central government for crossing the Iraqi sovereignty. Surprisingly, after AK party that leads by Racab Tayp Erdoğanwon the election, they created a so called new climate for solving Kurdish issue in Turkey and normalizing its relationship with KRG.

The AK party presented a strategic project “opening toward democracy” for solving the issue of Kurdish people in Turkey. Even this has confronted many challenges by secularists and nationalist forces like MHP and CHP, or in the other word the Kamalists, but Erdoğancould come up with conclusion that Kurdish issue must be solved in Turkey. At the beginning, this developed the relationship between Kurds and Turkey within Turkey and KRG, Turkey on the other hand. However, the attempts were not serious and thought the Turkish Prime Minister play a foxy game with Kurds to attract Kurdish voters. 

Kurdish Political parties and amongst DTP at that time welcomed this steps and wished Justice and Development Party (AKP) enthusiastically solve Kurdish problem in Turkey. However, few weeks after Erdoğan’s project released, the pro-PKK, DTP closed and 23 of its member were banned in political activities for five years by the national court of turkey for their supports to separatist according to court. Ahmed Turk a leader of DTP was one of them who smacked by a Turkish nationalists in Samsun after his banning. This is again made Kurdish people to go on the streets to condemn Turkish authorities for disrespecting Kurdish leaders. Many people were jailed and wounded after serious riots in Kurdish cities. So, by analyzing recent political environment in Turkey, we can figure out that Kurdish issue is still remained unsolved and Erdogan plan has been failed to fulfill its goals. 

Erdoğanis trying to deceive Kurdish people by saying something and acting in reverse. The most clear example hypocritical politics of Erdoğanis the recent Turkish oppression in the name of KCK which resulted in arresting 8 thousands Kurdish politicians, journalists, human right activists and many others for having connection with the PKK. Also, the Kurdish Peace Democratic Party and its members which has 36 MP in Turkish Parliament faced many obstacles by the Turkish government and in many cases Turkey uses courts to accuse them for having links with terror. So, the problems between Kurds and Turks remained intake. 

Even though, the relationship between Kurds and Turkish to some extent improved in the last few years, but in conclusion we can say there is still tension and disagreement. Nationalists (MHP, CHP) are still strong in in Turkey and refuse any rights for Kurds, but all in all the political dimension is in the best of Kurds. To solve the Kurdish issue, turkey must first admit Kurdish rights without any preconditions and has to change constitution. With having the constitution which denies the existence of Kurdish people,www.ekurd.net the tensions would never settle. Kurds, after the Turkish bombardment of Qandil and killing many civilians in Kurtek and Roboskey, Turkey left no hopes for Kurds to solve their problems through peaceful negotiation and strengthen their relationship.

On the other hand, in term of the KRG, the Kurdish government wants to play a positive role by advising both sides for peaceful negotiation. The KRG is now trying to improve its relationship with Turkey. Turkish prime minister, the minister of foreign affairs and many Turkish diplomats visited Kurdistan to normalize relations. Kurdish government gives a special insight to Turkey; because Turkey is an important country for KRG that helps its economic growth. Besides, the stabilizing security in this region depends on the Kurds-Turks relationship. None of them can deny others, because both parts are complementary for each other’s. Since Turkish companies achieve the major share of the foreign direct investment in Kurdistan, any clashes between Kurds and Turksput serious threat son these companies and both side loose their interests. Maybe it suffers Turkish economy more than the Kurdistan Region because there are many other foreign companies’ wishes to replace Turkish companies with better quality.


All in all, the recent events in Turkey tell us, there are still many obstacles in the road of peace between Kurds and Turks. It’s true that Kurdish case passed to the new stage and there are hopes for retaining their basic rights. However, if AKP fails to overcome obstacles, the situation may explode. AKP must have a vivid and direct policy toward Kurds because the current situation in Turkey takes Kurds-Turks to more clashes and further tension. The KCK operation is the most serious issue that may explode anytime and would result in popular uprising among Kurds. Of course in case of upraising Kurds in other parts of Kurdistan supports their brothers. So, it’s not in the best of Turks and Turkish regime to behave in such ways while none of the authoritarian regimes ever ruled for life. By arresting Kurds, closing political parties, newspapers, magazines, turkifiying Kurdish cities, the Kurds-Turks relationship never retain to the healthy relationship. We are living in the age of globalization, the time of ethnic cleansing and exploitation passed away. So, turkey if insists on the same rhythm it would pass away just like sick man or old man (Ottoman Empire). Its inevitable and not arguable, Kurdish issue in turkey has to be solves before taking a new era which may results further tension. Turkey has to find a peaceful solution for the Kurdish issues and consider their ethnic and cultural rights. Fighting is not the best alternative for Kurds, neither Turks, but Kurds cannot wait until the end of life if the Turkish government doesn’t have ear to listen. The Kurdistan Regional government can play its major role in settling problems and put more pressure on Turkey to solve Kurds issue, in regard to the Kurdish side; Kurds are seriously wishes to solve their problems through negotiation but not Turks as a big brother. Also, the KRG can convince the PKK to further concentrate on negotiation. Lastly to evaluate Kurds-Turks relationship; I can say there is a dim relation of Kurds-Turkey and there is possibility to shift in an expected direction.

NabazShwany, Bachelor in Politics and International Relations at the University of Kurdistan-Hewler. Currently, he is a Master student at the school of Government and International Studied, Public Management Department, University of Utara, Malaysia.  For eKurd.net, April 7, 2012.

Copyright © 2012 ekurd.net. All rights reserved