Frustration, a good catalyst for change
15 Jan, 2008 
76 Comments · email
· print
I can fully understand our Crown Prince’s frustration with the government and officially welcome him into our ranks, the ranks of I would say the majority of Bahrainis whose only recourse to their frustration is to habitually bang heads against solid walls of stasis and fear of change. To the government, they think that they are simply doing their job, to the rest of Bahrain, we once again recognise yet another missed opportunity to progress.
The cost is huge. It is truly a matter of life or death to this country. What is amazing is that for 40 years or more we have been on a downward spiral which almost got us to the state of a forgotten backwater, when those around us have been enjoying the fruits of their foresight. Yet, when we get someone who wants to effect real change, he and his sincere ideas for progress find inordinate opposition.
It is as if they are saying that change, whatever it is, is not welcome in this country.
Labour reforms, educational reforms, economic reforms as well as political reforms have all but died in the last few months. We are at a stage now of lethargic existence. ‘Who cares’ is a phrase oft repeated by all and sundry.
From the heydays of 2001 when enthusiasm for welcome change and new beginnings was palpable. When a Bahraini walked tall in the streets and wore a beaming smile welcoming an expectant and inclusive future is all but been destroyed now. It is a state that one is forgiven in believing that it is completely stage-managed: ‘Get the people so frustrated in order to kill every single spark of enthusiasm for this country and its people’.
The proof of this condition is quite plain to see: frustration is the norm, torturers continue to walk amongst us with impunity, sectarian hatred is rife and its perpetrators continue to go unmolested – in actual fact they continue to be promoted and enjoy complete immunety from accountability, the dangerous policy of demographic change goes unabated, transparency is opaque at best and corruption has escalated. Almost all international metrics about this country have deteriorated and there seems to be no will to correct them.
This of course translates into public unrest. People have become so frustrated that they now believe only complete change will correct the situation. 2007 saw some 113 demonstrations a lot of which turning violent. These resulted in imprisonment, hospitalisation and even fatalities.
Parliament continues to exacerbate the situation even further. They have not considered any action beyond narrow sectarian parameters. They have even abrogated their intrinsic responsibility of oversight by habitually refusing to utilise one of their constitutional tools to question ministers due to nothing more than sectarian considerations. Their role has been limited – willingly – to publication of press releases castigating people for using their constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of expression!
The country is directionless. It is in dire straights and requires a good captain to step up on deck and take control of the rudder to navigate it out of these turbid waters.
I believe that our crown prince, with his amply demonstrated leadership qualities and commitment to the country, is the right person to lead this change. He has shown that he can take criticism with an open mind, is inclusive in his approach by eliciting and acting upon views even from the opposition as we have witnessed through his various reforms workshops. He is young and tenacious with a clear vision. He should be given an honest and unfettered chance to push that vision and ideas through.
Click to listen to the Crown Prince’s interview with Turki Al-Dakheel at FIKR6Arabic :: mp3 :: 38 minutes
His frustration has obviously been brewing for some time. The evidence of which was during the recent FIKR6 conference in Bahrain where to everyone’s surprise (and other’s chagrin) he digressed from his planned opening remarks by appending a passionate and clear appeal to the people to show the leadership that we are frustrated with the state at which we find our country. He went further and encouraged everyone to highlight government meddling and its hindering of necessary projects. “Get your voice to the leadership” was a resonating call in halls filled with intellectuals and decision makers.
He amplified on this call even more during his interview with Turki Al-Dakheel where he boldly pointed out that a government’s main job should be limited to three things: Defence, Security and Justice.
He was time and again harassed by the interviewer who rightly pointed out that this is not he case at all in any Arab government, but the prince was adamant in his belief. He time and again affirmed his vision that he wants Bahrain to go in this direction. He seemed to not have any doubt in his mind that this is the way to go. This is the ultimate vision he is working toward.
Those remarks, so publicly expounded, must have shaken a few cradles. His efforts continued to be thwarted. But now, it seems he has reached a turning point. In a highly visible public gesture, he has notified the King of his frustration and laid the ball completely at the King’s feet. It is now up to the King to ensure that the government change and that the role of the Economic Development Board – which the crown prince heads – is affirmed in unambiguous terms to be the exclusive agency in charge of national economic policies.
That mandate has now been given.
What the effects of this clear mandate is, will become clear in the next few days and weeks. I just hope that those effects will be expedited by the removal of the gargantuan guardians of that wall of regression. New blood must be infused into a representative and forward looking cabinet to effect much awaited and desperately needed change.
The world does not wait for us to make up our minds and does not stand on ceremony either. It wants results and a clear indication that we mean business in a modern and transparent way; else, other markets are wide open to receive the world’s benevolence. We are very welcome to continue to reside in the quagmire of one of the last remaining backwaters in the world.
Redbelt,
This whole discussion is about the aspirations of a people, a nation, so it is primarily a human resources issue. Capital doesn’t need to be motivated or rewarded, it just needs to exist.
I’ve been trying to remember when I wrote a post about the points you raise about cheap labour. Something to do with how Bahrain has felt the effects of this kind of outsourcing way before the rest of the world. I’ll dig it out and link it when I get the chance because it was one of those rare moments I was coherent and not misinterpreted on mahmood.tv.
As far as I’m concerned, you’ve hit the nail on the head.
Ammaro,
All of your points are correct. No disagreement other than my disobedience of your order to not generalize.
I’m repeating myself and probably boring the pants off people, but anyway … the closest thing I have to kids of my own are my Bahraini nephews and my Bahraini half-brothers and sister. I want them to grow up productive, stimulated by what they do and above all happy.
If that is to happen things have to change. Real effective change will mean admitting some unpleasant things. I could be very wrong but I still feel that general comparisons between the different strata of the work force of Bahrain, the different strata of the expat work force and the different strate of the work force in other nations can be instructive. I’ve made the point elsewhere that expatriates put up with more here because the money they make can go home with them and do a lot more than it can here. Hey, maybe that is all that need be considered.
Oh, but I’ve only been living and working with all kinds of people here (on and off) since 1986. And I’m only a foreigner. What can I know, eh? Jeez, why did you even bother to read this far?
Not related to this posting, but I think your international audience would love to hear your opinion on these stories, about the GCC countries investing in other Arabic economies.
First a response to Annony’s comment that:
“This whole discussion is about the aspirations of a people, a nation, so it is primarily a human resources issue. Capital doesn’t need to be motivated or rewarded, it just needs to exist.”
That’s just plain wrong. Investors deploy their capital where the incentives and rewards are greatest. That can often be in direct conflict with the needs of the host country, community, or workers but that is the way it goes. Capital has seniority in the food chain. To think otherwise makes the same mistake as those poor illeducated parliamentarians who are talking about a capital tax on foreign investments…..Let’s just say it once and very simply: capital=jobs. No ifs or buts. If they want to broaden the tax base, and improve welfare they can start by imposing a properly structured VAT that will penalise “excessive consumption” and subsidise staples.
Second, the fixation with jobs is largely a product of 15 years of economic underperformance and social inequities. The real issue – the challenge raised by the CP’s revolutionary move – is whether there will now be a dismantling of the existing political-economic nexus and its replacement by a different (not necessarily better Mr. Working Man, not necessarily worse Mr. Businesman) order. What we are looking at is a management overhal of the country. If it happens, the buck stops with the new management and that might entail some of what Clinton & his policy wonks called “tough love”.
We shall see.
Annony
“This whole discussion is about the aspirations of a people, a nation, so it is primarily a human resources issue. Capital doesn’t need to be motivated or rewarded, it just needs to exist.”
Really? even Karl Marx would not agree with this idea. Anyway Astro has answered you very adequately.
Unfortunately the aspirations of the majority “the nation, a people”(and I hope I am not generalising) is for a comfortable government job. The work ethic for many of the new job entrants is on average poor, with high absentism being more the norm than the exception. Many feel that they are owed a living. I know it because I have and am experiencing it.
On the other hand, there is is no point in blaming these youths, when they are the product of an educational system that has deteriorated over the past 25 years, and unless the student is exceptional, or just as importantly his parents drive her/him to excellence, is unequipped for modern life. You have classes that are too big, teachers that are demotivated or in many cases incompetent, many parents, particularly from the lower wrungs, uninterested and governmental ministers that are more interested in appearing in the newspapers to talk about their bogus achievements. The educational system is decrepit, while the Labour system is confused.
The employment problem has nothing to do with HR departments, and for that matter even foreigners. The greatness of some societies is they take the best elements and integrate them. Look at the US, Canada, Australia or Canada or for that matter most of Europe. What have we done other than “nationalise” illiterates and hangers on. Why not have a policy that states who we want as assets to this country?
As Astro wrote, it has to do with 20 years of substandard economic performance, with any productive sector being milked for all that its worth. Our businessmen, were and, are shy to invest in their own country, and if they were to do something it would only be for the short term, not disimilar to our youth. They prefer to invest anywhere but in their own backyard.
We have a parliament that is the nearest thing to lalaland – talking about handouts, pushing their narrow religious and ethnic lines, without a care about how this country goes, or any meaningful contribution to the Big Issue.
We should take a page off Dubai and Singapore, small states but great in ideas. Leaderships who have a vision and are willing to carry those ideas out – what they have done is give their people that value added dimension, rather than snap, AS WE DO HERE, at anything but the causes of this malaise.
Thank you Sadek for adding some cogent support. Hope we don’t sound like a love-in here…
Fundamentally, the problem is the majority of the populace have 3rd world productivity and 1st world tastes. And because the economy is unproductive, people are always looking for the short-cut, the payoff, the quick deal. Hey, if it works for the management why not for the common man.
I always find it odd that in my business there are people earning $1mln p.a. – all earned and probably underpaid – who agonise about buying a 2nd hand 5yr old car or a new shirt when young Khaleejis (not just Bahrainis, but our neighbours are better paid) splash out on on bling new cars, phones, watches, and clothes – just to parlay the illusion of success. You then watch them drown in a sea of debt as they struggle to pay off the consumer loans once their lack of productivity prevents them from achieving the returns they needed to pay off those loans.
People need to realise that this generation, and the two after it, will have to forgo a lot to catch up for two decades of underperformance. Jam tomorrow folks, so that your grandchildren can live a good life. That means more savings, less consumption.
Lack of vision = lack of ambition. I note with amusement that while the debate on GF is about stopping the haemorrage, the CEO of Emirates is on the record as saying that their target market is the 4billion (yes BILLION – a but over the top but you get the idea) people within 8 hours flying time of Dubai airport. Somehow, a few more daily flights to Riyadh, Shiraz, Kuwait and Trivandrum don’t fall into the same league. Not so much niche strategy as nihilistic. But then again, its too late. That race is won. Better to pack up and use the resources elsewhere.
Folks: this gap in ambition isn’t even funny…. But people like us need to focus on positive thinking, helping shape the debate on what ought to be done to expand the pie rather than explain why the pie is small and how unfair it is that someone else is getting more than us. Is that asking to much.
Astro,
It’s the investors who seek reward, not the capital itself. Capital is managed and directed by people. Investors – last time I checked – are human. As far as I’m concerned this is still a people-focussed issue. All you are really doing with the business-school jargon is highlighting the differences in goals between foreign investors and local workers. This is all obvious, but it doesn’t solve the problem. As the workers are the majority and the ones who need motivation and reward the most, they are of more interest to me as somebody living in Bahrain. The ultimate resources are human: creativity, entrepreneurship, endeavour. That’s where change will come from. A population geared to working hard and creatively by a reward system that is credible _will_ attract foreign investment in the long term.
Sadek,
I disagree with what you’re saying. You’ve gone much further than I have in negative criticism of the Bahraini workforce. Let’s see if you get as much flak as I did. I shall watch this space …
One of the biggest problems that Bahrainis face is the unfair competition from guest workers.
The guest workers work harder and are paid less. This is the case everywhere not just in Bahrain and the reasons are clear; the guest workers need the money more desperately than the locals, have limited choice, are there for a limited time and so forth. This you will find it in California with its Mexicans, in Germany with its Turks, in the UK with its Asians and of course, in the Gulf. That is human nature and probably will not change.
What however, could be changed is to make these guest workers compete on equal terms with the locals and make the local market more restrictive to guest workers. That I am afraid is lacking in Bahrain. This is something that the CP tried to do but sadly his proposals were watered down to such an extent that it is unlikely that they would deliver the desired results. Perhaps the government could now make it much harder to employ expatriates.
As long as the competition is not fair businessmen would continue to prefer to hire guest workers.
As for Bahrainis well I do not think they are different from people anywhere else. Reward them well and they will work harder. Train them right and they will deliver. Some of the biggest companies in Bahrain are almost entirely staffed by Bahrainis. Talk of Alba (aluminum), Bapco (oil), Batelco (telecom) and National Bank of Bahrain (banking). These are all very successful companies and their staffs are over 90% Bahrainis. You do not hear of these saying the education system in Bahrain is crap. You only hear this from the businessman who wants to hire cheap guest workers!
Folks, based on Annony’s valid rebuttal I think we need to refine the focus a bit.
Annony: its not a simple dialectic of foreign capitalists vs. local workers. It’s capital vs. labour, foreign vs. domestic capital, foreign vs. domestic labour, high-skilled vs. low-skilled labour, public sector vs. private, and substitutable vs. essential jobs. That’s a kaleidoscope of interests (i.e there is no “majority”) even before you get to to the fractured government or the sectarian and political differences in the parliament.
To paraphrase that old Walrus Lenin: Who governs? For whom?
A small country cannot keep out the hostile forces of global change forever, simply ride the wave. No matter which way we go from here there will be losers. How we deal with them is going to be interesting. Even in the much touted Singaporean model (which by the way folks works so well partly because it is a disciplinarian police state where you conform to the ideal or else, compared to which pre-reform Bahrain was some Pacific idyll) there are some clear losers – ask the Malays, including the former ruling Sultans whose descendants now work as taxi drivers and dockworkers.
It’s not all milk and honey. A few eggs need to be broken to make an omelette. The question is, who has the authority to decide who those eggs are.
I like omelettes
Can somebody tell me what criteria they use at BMMI to determine if you are muslim in regards to buying alchohol which is forbiden.
Scrambled eggs anyone?
Scrambled eggs anyone?
Blah, more jargon. I don’t like this Gordian Knot you’re tying me up in! Start with the people, for goodness’s sake, and put capital second.
Oh, and well done Sadek. You said what you said without getting what I got. How’d that happen? Iz it coz I is outsider?
Annony
I am afraid I did not get what you were saying, ” You said what you said without getting what I got. How’d that happen? Iz it coz I is outsider?”
Either speak in plain English, and if unable, write in Arabic. And please stop hiding behind this psuedo “oh Gosh, dont give me jargon, but let me use it instead”.
Annony
“Start with the people, for goodness’s sake, and put capital second.”
Let me throw a new idea at you and “Nine” (and which does not conflict totally with what both of you are pressing for) – intellectual capital. Intellectual capital is what is important, and that’s what we should be striving for. Infact if you tried to stretch yourself a little bit and read some modern developmental economics, you will appreciate the importance of this element. In addition to the traditional ingredients of Labour (people), land and capital, its innovation and technology that are now the main contributors to any modern economy (and employment).
We are missing out (because of a second rate educational system,etc) and if we continue down this path it will soon become immaterial if we have foreigners in our labour force or not. As a small oil-less economy and resource poor economy we will become immaterial, with fewer jobs and infact our people become migrants (already we are experiencing it).
I agree with Astro lets break some eggs and the reforms (in their entirety, and carried out) are probably the best hope we have to move out of this rut.
Annony,
Who’s the outsider? And who is not?
Sorry, Sadek, I most certainly was not trying to hide, but I guess I was playing with language in a silly way. Strictly speaking, I was using satire not jargon. Have you watched Ali G? I thought my words would be seen immediately as mildly self-deprecating humour.
I was referring to the fact that you could say those things about Bahraini workers and not get the same drubbing from Mahmood and Ammaro as I did when I wrote about my experiences of working in Bahrain.
I’m finding your economics jargon a little cold. Intellectual capital is not a new term to me at all – I used to work in advertising.
By the way, the proper definition of “intellectual capital” refers to an asset that yields intellectual property rights.
However, as it is commonly (erroneously) used by all those venture capitalists, dotcom gurus and pop-economists of the late 90′s, it’s an unpleasant, category-blurring term in that it bundles intangible human qualities, the divine fire of creative inspiration (as others have expressed it) and human awareness into the same sphere as other merely physical resources. Every discipline has its weakness. Economics seems to condition its practitioners to treat people as mere things. I’m getting scared that somebody is going to quote that fluff-head Thomas Friedman at me and I’m going to have to log off and daydream about light artillery in order to recover.
Still, if “intellectual capital” is what it takes to get through to the fat cats, then I guess “intellectual capital” it is.
Actually, I’m warming to the term as I begin to imagine it’s uses. It’s a very useful way of inserting human resources into the economist’s mind-set without using labour, which people in this region see as derogatory, and entrepreneurship, which is seen as narrow.
But Bahrain’s problems are those of many countries. I still think we should be the ones to come up with a new approach, a completely different way of addressing these problems that would make the people of the world sit up and notice us. All this economist talk is pulling us into a system that we should be looking at critically and daring to challenge. Surely there are people out there who can imagine better ways! I wish I could.
Och, don’t take to too hard laddie. try putting yourself in my shoes for a bit and see how you feel!
I’m not knocking you down, not at all, I have come down harder on Bahraini workers and their ethics. What I was trying to demonstrate by my response is that it is no good generalising although I recognise that sometimes that is the only way of getting a point across.
c’est la vie
I’ll leave the blue-sky thinking to the advertising “creatives”…
Question now – in order to make that omelette – is what are the benchmarks for change, and who will be held accountable – and by whom?
Right now, I see a lot of pots (and pans) looking for one black kettle.
Annony
I did like Ali G (alias Baron Cohen), and found him hugely entertaining. Burat wasn’t too bad either, although offensive in many ways, nevertheless I cannot (neither should you as a piece of free advise) bank on him for economic directions or advise.
Economics has been called the “dismal science”, and thus “cold”. But our problems have to seen in an objective fashion and around these realities something should be crafted.
If you wish to learn more I suggest you do a google on the subject “new growth theory”, one of the main propounders is a Stanford professor called Paul Romer.
Jocko,
In reply to your posting #62
“Can somebody tell me what criteria they use at BMMI to determine if you are muslim in regards to buying alchohol which is forbiden.”
I have been informed that all the booze companies will not sell to anyone wearing a thobe. If the person is in ‘western’ dress then there are no problems. If in a thobe, then they are ‘obviously’ Muslim and will not be served.
That is why you may see other entrepreneurial folks (often Indian) standing outside the booze company shops taking orders for ‘believers’ who don’t want to, or can’t be seen to venture into the liquor stores. . . for a small fee, of course.
I
Sadek,
Mr Cohen was not a source of advice, just a source of bad slang.
Thanks for your advice though. I’m sure it’s well meant and I shall have a google of this chappie over the weekend.
s’ok, mahmood. i’ve worn similar shoes in my time