Touchy subject, but important none the less. I wonder what are people’s opinions on the crown prince? Good job, lousy job? Hopeful/fearful future? I so far cannot make up my mind.
Sure, if this was an open fully democratic country he would have no chance. However, all we can do is we try to get the best given the reality we are living in. So, given that the rule is hereditary, and given that pretty much one new ruler comes around every generation, is it possible that we haven’t done too badly?
I’m not so sure….
First, lets count his virtues. From what I hear, it is said that he is quite hard working and very driven. He know what he wants and he tries to get it happen. He also has had a good education and he’s been exposed to life in other countries in the process. His Arabic, although not as good as his English, does put a lot of nidoers to shame, which is commendable. Thank god we don’t have someone like King Abdullah of Jordan, who barely can string two words in Arabic together (has anyone seen his coronation footage, when he was taking the oath? Absolutely disgraceful). He also knows that the priorities lie in the Economy, which is smart. I’m sure the recipients of the crown prince scholarship fund are pretty grateful for that as well. Finally, he does have that aura of freshness and new blood about him and what he does.
However, it’s not all so rosy. There are also a lot of points which raise a lot of ifs and buts about him:
1. He is rumoured to have annexed and sold large swaths of the sea around muharraq for himself (7 by 7 km squared plot apparently, with his father acquiring a similar sized one). Of course not a single dime was paid for this land, while it’s monetary value is priceless. This is not to talk of all the environmental damage it’s reclamation has/will cause and the associated jobs lost by fishermen. This has made him acquire the unflattering nick-name of Salman Bahar (Salman of the sea). It does also place doubt on his constant claims of fighting corruption and laying down the rule of law in the country.
2. He seems to have an absolute infatuation with the “white man’s burden”, particularly in the way that consultants have been brought in to redraw everything in Bahrain, from the labour market to the education system to the health system. Anything of any importance is siphoned off to some consultancy firm shrowded in mystery with very little input from locals.
3. The guy has some pretty zany ideas, but it doesn’t seem that he cares much about what people say about them. According to many people, he is opinionated and believes whatever he thinks is right no matter what other people may object.
4. This is probably the most important for me. He has made it pretty clear on many occasions that he is a neo-liberal when it comes to economic policy. That is, his vision for the economy is driven by neoliberalism. Now that is pretty scary.
There are many other points to consider as well. Over the next few posts I’ll try to put down my thoughts on some of the above issues and many others. In the mean time, what are people’s thoughts on him?
February 7, 2008 at 2:35 am |
Nido,
I agree with you completly. While the Price has some virtues (he is definately better than his counterparts), his neo-liberal economic policy is problematic. His economic reforms only serve to increase the divide between the rich and the poor which will ultimately have a negative impact on the stability of Bahrain. In addition, the focus of development in Bahrain right now is on real estate. Real estate brings quick profits but does nothing to actually improve the Bahraini economy. There is also a focus on services. The economies of first world countries are moving toward becoming service economies. However, it in important to have the backbone of industry to do that. We don’t have that in Bahrain. Instead, our economy is divided between oil (a diminishing natural resource) and the service sector. Both are unstable.
February 7, 2008 at 10:42 am |
I for one am very supportive of the CP. He is laying grounds for things to come, which is invisible to the common man. I was lucky enough to participate in some of his programmes and I understand it’s objectives. It’s ground work.
As for consultancies, it is common to bring in consultants who actually did similar jobs before. I mean, while we may have very good people in education, how many or who reviewed and criticises education and training on a nation wide level?
This contract is given to a British group for example because this is something they do for the UK for several years.
Having the ability and having done it before several times are two different things my friends. Zany ideas is just what we need. While it is safe and acceptable to swim with the current, any change relies on the zany ones who swim against the currents. read history, many examples.
Finally, he is one of the very few royals who adheres to rules and systems. I heard from a friend he once stood in line in a hospital to be admitted, my friend was the doctor on duty that night.
Any foreseeable hope I have for Bahrain lies with this man.
February 7, 2008 at 1:48 pm |
Hi Mariam,
I. Agreed! I’ll have more to say on it in the next post.
I guess it’s obvious that i disagree with you redbelt! Where is it exactly common to offshore your economy off to consultants? Certainly not anywhere in the developed world, or anywhere with semblance of a democracy and checks and balances. Can you imagine France offshoring off it’s whole education or employment policy to be done by Mckinsey? You think that will go down well in their parliament and public? The only place in the world where this “trend” is happening is in the Middle East.
As for zany ideas, sure history is filled with bold interesting ideas that worked out, but it is also filled with many zany ideas that backfired badly. Look how well Mary Antoinette’s suggestion that they eat cake worked out. I ‘m not sure which type these fall in.
As for rules and systems, I think the complaint that he’s (allegedly) decided to annex a massive area in the sea nearly the size of muharraq shows how doubtful that is.
This is why I’m actually very worried of how Bahrain might be left over when we go through with these ideas.
February 7, 2008 at 7:51 pm |
well, i dont think you’ll find anyone with all good qualities; everyone has their good and bad side.
the whole obsession with white people ideas is stupid. they have no frickin idea how our society runs, and therefore you get a lot of things screwed up along the way. theyre not even necessarily the best, just white.
i dont mind the zany ideas, its always good to try new things. and the opinionation part just means hes a pretty damn strong leader. im sure he listens, just not very openly.
as for the neoliberalism concept, i think it can work perfectly in a small country such as bahrain, if applied in the right way. sure, we will have some losers in the short run, but over the next 20 or 30 years, bahrain can flourish overall. i think he’s weighing out the advantages vs disadvantages. sure, he has a lot to gain from it as well, but i think us, the people, have much to gain too.
February 8, 2008 at 3:49 am |
the cp seems like a nice enough guy with some good intentions (let’s give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the rumours of him buying up the sea and the like). But when it comes down to it, he offers nothing really new.
He talks about growth and development, when what is really needed is empowerment and human rights. And he fails to realize that economic reform is of no use unless it is tied to political reform. His labour reform plan mentions little about the most important issue — labour rights.
Anyhows, more disturbing is this eagerness among certain people to view him as a saviour for all of Bahrain’s problems. Neither Salman bin Hamad, or any other individual will solve anything until people start demanding — and seizing — power for themselves.
February 8, 2008 at 12:58 pm |
chanad– completely agree with you, especially the last point. although I can’t see how something as massive as buying up 49 squared km of sea is going to go unnonticed. In this case it does seem there is a strong hint of there is no smoke without fire.
ammaro- i agree with you on the first point but not the last point. I can’t see how pure neoliberalism is good for this place, especially as it has a pretty bad track record elsewhere and isn’t exactly geared well towards oil rich countries.
February 8, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
Just a few quick thoughts on this
- as a person, it’s attractive to see this handsome future ‘king’ through the eyes of hope and desire and to give him benefit of the doubt. I can’t help feeling he lacks political gravitas and charisma, I can’t see anything particularly pioneering in what he does relative to the pace of change in the world. But again, his job must be difficult in having to manouvre round a domineering uncle, a complacent father and regional geopolitics. Who is to really know the extent to which father-son political-economic roles have been diminished by the uncle if that inter-dynamic is indeed true. Does it matter? The outcome of all their policies has been to enshrine an protect their kinship, rule and wealth.
- the CPs desire to normalise relations with Isreal, “the day is not far when you could visit us and we could visit you” is pretty worrying.
- the misguided belief that the EDB can consider effectively labour market policy in isolation from the wider economic or political context, or employment in isolation of redistributive wealth policy, or training the labour force in isolation of educational policy and so on. Focusing on one without looking at the other is like ignoring the elephant in the room.
- As a beneficiary, the CP’s neo-liberal ideals are not just an ideological indulgance but a underpin a firm agenda to promote and encourage massive land development projects in the most vulgur and exploitative form of capitalism I have yet to witness. In the absence of democratic regulation and accountability this takes the country down an uncertain economic path full of further corruption, bottlenecks, further inflation, unsustainable economic growth. In the absence of any strategic 10 or 30 year plan, it appears to be ad-hoc and ‘we’ll fix it as we go along’ type of strategy and people do not feel stakeholders or take ownership of the development process. People are supposed sit around and wait for the crumbs to fall off the dining table or wait for the ‘rising tide to life our boats’ while rising inflation erodes their income.
oh yeah and welcome back!
February 8, 2008 at 7:48 pm |
BB:
Thanks!
Agreed.
The Israel thing is awful, and don’t expect any redistributive policies coming. Neoliberalism has no place for that. If anything expect an even more yawning gap. However, apparently the EDB’s plan is to link educational reform to the labour market (apparently they’ll come as part of the same package). I’m just not sure about what will be recommended in the education reforms. We’ll have to wait and see.
Also, yes, teh neoliberalism we are witnessing is also the worst type you can get. It’s based on land grab and “finance and banking”. Nothing much that is value producing is made whatsoever. No industry, no manufacturing etc. It’s mainly financial and land speculation. I have a post on that lined up.
And welcome back to you too!
February 14, 2008 at 12:00 am |
Ammaro,
Efficiency through privatization is only achieved in a competitive market. In the case of public utilities, there is no competitive market because public utilities are natural monopolies. If you look at the recent studies, you will see that there is very little evidence proving that the privatization of natural monopolies leads to efficiency gains. The arguement for prvatization of public utilities has more to do with it costing the government less and with the fact that governments are not specialized in running public utilities.
Another thing to realize is that its not all about efficiency. Something maybe efficient but it can be detrimental to the public welfare. There is a tradeoff here. Most developed countries are willing to make that tradeoff when it comes to a lot of things but would rather not when it comes to things that are essential such as healthcare, education and public utilities.
February 14, 2008 at 12:00 am |
oops.. this was meant to be under the sale of bahrain