The Big Picture
Davos Diaries: The West is not working

Davos Diaries: The West is not working

In Davos, there is an over-arching sense that the West failed. Are India, China doomed to repeat the same mistakes?

Munizae Jehangir January 30, 2011

As I attend speak to various members of the 2,200 business elite, top politicians and journalists who have gathered at the annual World Economic Forum at Davos there is a sad realization in the air: the West is not working.

The global polarization between the haves and have-nots is taking its toll on progress and if the Western world seeks to move forward it must bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.

Former President of the United States Bill Clinton addressed a gathering here. He said:

"My concern is that businesses and governments in this difficult environment will see the meeting of the Millenium Development Goals as optional, as something that they can cut down on...We have to be concerned about inequality in the world and find a way to integrate shared progress into our reality. The 21st century belongs to a lot of countries but the world will be better if America remains a positive force and so we have to be able to (be) economically stable."

Clinton was obviously referring to the emerging markets here in the East, like China and India, who have put their best foot forward at the World Economic Forum.

Framing itself as ‘Inclusive India’ the country has over 100 delegates at the forum.

Most of the best parties at Davos are sponsored by rich Indian businessman and the closing night of the World Economic Forum will be an Indian soiree as well.

On the other hand, the Pakistanis are few and mostly placed on panels like ‘The Security Agenda of 2011.’

The only prominent Pakistani at the WEF is Imran Khan who keeps hammering the same point:

“The present government is morally corrupt; the time is ripe for a Tunisian like revolution; the war on terror is a failed strategy and peace will immediately come to the region if NATO troops leave Afghanistan.”

The reaction to his emotional plea has been: “You are being naive Mr. Khan, problems are far more complex.”

And indeed they are.

Leaders at the forum have also come to the realization that the West has gone terribly wrong by supporting regimes for short-term benefits.

If real progress is to be made the Western world must provide a helping hand to under-developed nations and individuals (an idea that the architects of ‘India Inclusive’ have yet to grapple with).

While emerging markets celebrate their successes in consumerism the West is realizing it’s failures. Will India and China markets learn something from the mistakes the old powerful world made?

WRITTEN BY:
Munizae Jehangir A special correspondent for Express 24/7 who co-hosts current affais program 'Platform'. She is currently reporting from the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necassarily reflect the views and policies of the Express Tribune.

COMMENTS (16)

Amer | 13 years ago | Reply @Munizae: Nice blog! I guess you could write another one to tell us about the different prespectives people had on Imran Khan's comments etc. @Ravi: Do people like you have anything constructive to say? EVER? At least she's trying to make valid points here.

Vidyut | 13 years ago | Reply I don't know the ground situation there, but from the sound of it, the LEAs would find it very difficult to deal with the Taliban. More so, LEAs are local and very vulnerable to infiltration in a people that are already disillusioned with the government. Better would be what you guys finally did in Swat - getting forces that are not local. The Army seems the only entity equipped to do that. I think the biggest thing is to find a way to question everything. Then you will start getting answers that will help you decide. Question the government, question the Army, question the Mullahs, question the Taliban. Most importantly, question everything you are supposed to unquestioningly believe. Another big thing I think could help is banning personal arms. Its half the fight won if an angry man doesn't have a gun to fire. To whatever extent you can. Sure, there will still be illegal arms and stuff. But at least you will have got rid of some. You can increase the number as you go on. It will also help law enforcement if guns are illegal, because then it becomes really easy to spot the terrorist. It becomes easy to arrest people for the possession of arms itself rather than go in to mop up after a few people are dead. And it isn't so bad. I have never seen a gun up close like most Indians. I don't think we are missing anything. If anything, we are actually safer, because then people are forced to find less fatal ways of sorting out disputes.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Vidyut | 13 years ago | Reply True. As we are learning at great cost in human trauma with the Maoists and Kashmiris. You need a political solution. You need long thinking, responsible choices that you stick with no matter how tough it gets. I don't think all these solutions will work, unless you can remove the support for the extremists within the thinking of the common man. The text books in school are a huuuuuge culprit. They tell a lot of lies in order to set up India and the west as enemies. Once the hate is seeded, it becomes very easy for the extremisis and jihadists and what nots to exploit it. If you really want to save Pakistan, it needs to be publicly admitted that India didn't attack Pakistan, does not want the country destroyed. America has also provided tremendous support and aid to Pakistan from its very birth. It is supporting a fragmented Pakistan at great cost. Once these two villains are not villains anymore, the jihadi literature loses its power. Who would want to risk their lives to attack something that hasn't done them harm? A vast difference from feeling compelled to save the lives and honor of your loved ones. This is a war of thought. You can't remove extremism without removing the persecution complex driving it. If someone is stalking you and your loved ones to kill, you'd be crazy not to make it a priority to destroy that person and ensure the safety of your loved ones. But what if you are not being stalked? Then who is profiting from making Pakistanis believe it and sacrificing their lives and the lives of others? Frankly, Saudis are part of what has brought Pakistan to its knees. They have exported a whole load of extremist propoganda for their own purposes, turning the country into cannon fodder. They have discouraged democracy in favour of dictatorship. I don't see what advantage you imagine Pakistan would have in involving them. The way forward I would imagine lies in supporting democracy however you can. Corrupt or not, call politicians to task, but don't overthrow governments. Democracy improves itself if you give it a chance. Not overnight, but steadily one small thing building to the next. If it keeps getting sabotaged, then the country keeps getting used. Just stick with Zardari and Gilani. They can't last for ever. You don't like them? Vote for someone else next elections. Insist on the rule of the law. So many criminals don't get investigated, caught, proscecuted or punished. Insist on it. If you as a people can make enough noise and insist on justice for small crimes, it will develop the courage it takes to confront big things. Just see India. We had scams coming out of the woodwork this year. Corrupt politicians, corrupt judiciary, corrupt corporates, all kinds of problems. They weren't something new that happened this year only, but with years of suffering corruption, but demanding justice where we could, people started taking these things more and more seriously and investigating and confronting and asking for accountability. On the face of it, it looks like India is a horrible country. In reality, we are finally going up against the big problems the country has - openly - and calling people to task instead of shrugging and saying "oh these politicians are like that only" My two cents.

Hassan | 13 years ago | Reply @ Vidyut, the first step is to ask ourselves if there is another strategy, if there is then we should work towards exploring that avenue. Terrorism cannot be won over by military means alone, military use is a shock tactic to used in short spurts to complement the law enforcement agencies. we have been using the Army within Pakistan with abandon and since 2004, they have not been prepared for this kind of warfare and we have not been able to dislodge the enemy. As soon as the army clears one area the militants come back because of the vaccum that exists in the state machinery to help return that area back to normalcy, so this menace needs to be fought at mulitple levels across various fronts and that includes addressing the root cause and to deal with the worst proponents of terror i.e the taliban. So the first step is to withdraw from Afghanistan, negotiate with the taliban and include the Saudis and Pakistanis which are two of the biggest benefactors of the Taliban regime, next step is to address the lack of social and economic justice exisiting within Afghanistan and Pakistan. Equip the LEA's to deal with terrorism and not the army. Reform the judical system to tackle and address terror related cases in a speedy manner. The last two pertinent to Pakistan. I am open to other suggestions if you would like to share!!!!!

Vidyut | 13 years ago | Reply @Ravi: He does speak of the Pakistani presence of which Imran Khan is a part. As far as I know, he isn't Indian. I fail to see the point you are making other than being patronizing. @Sher Khan Interesting insights, though I guess not specifically about this event. @Hassan You bring up something interesting about experience and the possibility of looking at alternatives, though frankly, I agree with the response he got. Its terribly naive and makes assumptions of results that cannot be rationalized through what he suggests. The stakes are high and its not like either the world or Pakistan can afford to say "oops! it didn't work" on a total reversal of strategy and free reign to the Taliban. They had that in Afghanistan, remember? And it didn't sound like something to aspire toward.

Hassan | 13 years ago | Reply @ Sher Khan, The argument that Imran has not held an adminstrative position is really without merit he is heading the board at SKMH which is an administrative position, which ones on our current politicians have held Administrative positions before they ran for public offices? We have started and engaged our armed forces on the false pretext of the war on terror being a very complex issue, its not that complex at all. The Western and Pakistani Strategy at dislodging militants has failed miserably now we are in a war of attrition where the enemy bleeds us not only in direct battles but also through our innocent citizens. This morally corrupt and inept goverment cannot and will not be able to address this issue. Imran has a different idea could be a wrong idea but we are so rigid in our ways that we refuse to understand that there could be an alternative startegy.

Selina Gilani - Relationship | 13 years ago | Reply I find this article amazing. Great Work. But i think it is not the complete picture you are trying to draw. Elaboration is required.

A Chowdhury | 13 years ago | Reply Can you come up with a part 2 of this article, thereby explaining those complicated situation which may be faced by the emerging economies ?

Neeraj, India | 13 years ago | Reply Munizae Jahangir, Short but excellent write-up. I saw you on NDTV many a times, reporting as their local/resident reporter, on Pakistan's internal politics and other related events, but, had no idea that, you can also comment on economics, a subject known as 'dry'. In your brief summary on the Davos summit above, you have correctly identified the flawed approach of the developed world towards the poor countries in the past and also, rightly, warned the emerging economies of committing the same folly. You are absolutely right in doing so, because, going by the simple economics, a rich village business man, cannot continue with his business and stay rich, if his consumers become so poor that they loose their buying power entirely, resulting in a negative impact on his own business. Therefore, it is in the interest of the village rich, to help the poor and make them capable enough, to generate sufficient wealth for themselves, so that the poor can retain their capability to buy the wealthy villagers' goods and services. This is a win-win situation for both and is a key to the world peace and prosperity. The only complaint that I can lodge with you is that, you could have elaborated a bit more on this complicated issue known as world economy, a tough thing to grasp for your readers indeed. Otherwise, it was a brilliant writing. Keep it up.

Nadir El-Edroos | 13 years ago | Reply Is it the West that is not working? Or the Anglo-American model of unregulated markets that have failed? Germany is doing quite well, while Scandinavian states remain an enviable model of a welfare state across the world.

tahir | 13 years ago | Reply How problems are more complex?you did not mention as you don't know.In Pakistan,you know English you become a well paid Journalist whether you have any idea or even basic about the issue or not.Pathetic....

Ravi | 13 years ago | Reply god... A pakistani news portal.... A pakistani Journalist............ And pakistan not even named once in this article... all india india india(Six times to be precise) Taht shows pakistans obsession with india... shame shame..............

parvez | 13 years ago | Reply Munizae I am a fan and loved the way you have managed to cut through all the bs that must happen at events like Davos and give us a vivid picture.

Sher Khan | 13 years ago | Reply I find this post a little shallow, the context in which munizae is talking is specifically political...in terms of economics the challenge is a two way street. Pakistan's own domestic economy is worth 130 billion dollars yet we have the most billionaires in the third world. The issue is the war, economically for all first world countries...when your expenditures reach a certain point things have to be cut domestically which is what happened in America. That meant that education and other development related things also had to be short-changed. Saying that though, in countries like Pakistan were there is little to know economic strategy even if the war was not occurring your economic situation would have been dire. Responsibility has to be taken to create viable markets for the needs of the consumer. As for Imran Khan who has never really held a real administrative position in his life rather just fund-raised, fails to see that there are needs for a developing country each of these needs can be turned into a viable industry which leads to job growth and most of all economic growth. This can be done through heavy reforms. He is saying that the peace will come to the region if the foreign troops leave that is a debatable idea. Currently, Al-qaeda control major areas in orakzai, every month the army does a cleaning operation of the road to north Wazirisation and more and more evidence is showing that the TTP is not attached to the Afghan Taliban. The government has failed to look long-term by giving such safe havens to militants and allowing of the creation multiple illegall economies which take away from the countries private economy. It was this same concept that tore apart the Tribal System and has detached balochistan. Economics always trumps politics... and that is why 60 percent of Pakistan is ungoverned... I wrote this in the Daily Times- in my article Sir the militants have multiplied: Throughout history, mercenaries or militant outfits have been used as a security advantage for the state. Going back to the time of the Romans, barbarians were used in the army as a strategic advantage. To combat the possibility of disruption in public life, these barbarians would be kept on the outskirts and were not allowed to enter Rome with arms. When the barbarians were integrated into Rome, some problems occurred. The barbarians were then given federate status, which placed them above Roman law by not having to pay taxes or give up their arms. These federate troops fought under their own command and were not subject to the Roman Army’s training. Fed with clothes, weapons and shelter, the barbarians left Rome susceptible to an internal attack. This by many is seen as one of the reasons for the decline of Rome. Like Rome, in Pakistan too the establishment has created accepted roles for militant groups in society that are separate from the common citizen. As a strategic advantage in places like Afghanistan and Kashmir, militant groups are put into the grey area of policy making. The hangs-ups of these policies create two very important issues: one is that these organisations remain rogue non-state actors and secondly they are not integrated into the public sphere with the same rules as the common citizen. Also, since their economic interests are separate from the state, their connection to Pakistan is further detached. That means that the militant interest in Pakistan flourishes only if the government meets their common interest.

Shahbaz | 13 years ago | Reply A nice piece, Its about politics as well as economics need to impose such policies & major drawback is the lack of sincere leadership......

S. Ali Raza | 13 years ago | Reply Great.. does this author have a name?

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Davos Diaries: The West is not working

FOLLOW US