Failed State Index


 Fund for Peace has published its six annual failed state index recently. The failed state are identified based in 12 indicators under three contexts such as Social, Economical and Political. Bangladesh, according to this index places at no.19 and others south asian countries places in Afghanistan in no 7, Pakistan in no.10, Sri Lanka in no.22, Nepal in no. 25, Bhutan in no. 48, Maldives in no.81 and India in no. 87. Highest score has gone to Somalia, places in no.1 failed state. According to this index, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal stands at alarming (alerts)situation;  Bhutan, Maldives and India at warning situation. For making a comparison, here, we have put the index of USA (159) and UK (161) stands in moderate situation and Netherlands (169) and  Norway (177) stands on sustainable situation.

Corruption Index of  Transparency International (TI) is used to mobilise the people of least developed countries (LDCs) against power parties as well as national governments  which creates destabilised situation and political turmoil in most of the cases. It creates a space  for another parties to intervene in internal politics and govenanace of poor state.  The Failed State  Index is another serious tool which could used in the same purpose. 

Funds for Peace wrote her history as follows:

The fragile nature of interdependence among nations, threatened by four lethal world conditions — overpopulation, unequal distribution of resources, deterioration of the environment and the chaotic status of human rights — is the context in which The Fund for Peace must operate.

Peace as the mere absence of war is not a sufficient objective. Our projects — whether they inform the American public about a crisis, testify before Congress on U.S. policy, or publish reports about dangerous arms races — confront issues that arise from the fact of interdependence and the conditions that threaten cooperation among nations. It isn’t enough, however, to note these conditions and to say vaguely that we are doing something about them.

The Fund exerts two principal efforts to affect decisionmakers. First, it promotes scholarship to define problems and to provide competent answers. Second, it uses the knowledge and information it obtains to participate in debates and inform the public of the facts.

It cannot be emphasized too strongly how much these two efforts — scholarship and public engagement — go together. The Fund’s primary task is to correct conditions that threaten human survival through a combination of scholarship and active civic education.

Every LDCs have a lot of difficulties and as a citizen of these countries, we should try to build a national political will among the political parties, peoples and government. Sometimes the hidden agenda of some intellectual works hinder to create a peaceful atmospheres for developing a common understanding of national development. So, we should analyse these popular tools and for these purpose, this article just indicate the indicators and results for justifing the judgements. 

Ranking of Failed State Index (Focus on South Asian Countries):

Rank Country I-1 I-2 I-3 I-4 I-5 I-6 I-7 I-8 I-9 I-10 I-11 I-12 Total
1 Somalia 9.8 9.9 9.7 8.5 7.7 9.5 10.0 9.9 9.9 10.0 10.0 9.8 114.7
3 Sudan 9.0 9.8 9.9 9.0 9.6 7.0 9.8 9.5 9.8 9.7 9.5 9.8 112.4
7 Afghanistan 9.3 8.9 9.6 7.2 8.4 8.3 9.8 8.9 8.8 9.9 9.1 10.0 108.2
10 Pakistan 8.3 8.6 9.6 8.3 8.8 6.4 9.1 7.5 8.9 9.5 9.6 9.5 104.1
19 Bangladesh 8.9 6.9 9.4 8.4 9.0 8.0 8.5 8.0 7.6 8.0 8.9 6.5 98.1
22 Sri Lanka 7.5 9.3 9.8 6.9 8.5 6.1 9.0 6.6 8.5 9.2 9.2 6.1 96.7
25 Nepal 8.3 6.8 8.7 6.0 9.3 8.5 8.0 7.4 8.7 8.1 8.4 7.2 95.4
48 Bhutan 6.5 7.5 7.9 6.8 8.7 7.5 7.4 7.2 8.4 5.5 7.7 6.2 87.3
81 Maldives 6.5 6.5 5.2 7.0 5.2 6.7 7.2 7.3 7.5 6.3 7.4 6.0 78.8
87 India 8.3 4.9 7.3 6.7 8.9 5.0 5.5 7.0 6.0 7.1 6.0 5.1 77.8
159 USA 3.1 3.7 3.3 1.0 5.3 2.9 3.0 2.3 4.0 1.4 2.5 1.5 34.0
161 UK 3.2 2.8 4.3 1.9 4.7 2.5 1.8 2.2 2.3 2.6 2.9 2.4 33.6
169 Netherlands 2.9 3.1 4.7 2.1 3.3 2.5 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.4 2.0 27.0
177 Norway 1.9 1.6 1.3 1.1 2.2 2.3 1.0 1.3 1.5 1.1 1.1 1.9 18.3

 SOCIAL INDICATORS

1. Mounting Demographic Pressures

  • Pressures deriving from high population density relative to food supply and other life-sustaining resources
  • Pressures deriving from group settlement patterns that affect the freedom to participate in common forms of human and physical activity, including economic productivity, travel, social interaction, religious worship
  • Pressures deriving from group settlement patterns and physical settings, including border disputes, ownership or occupancy of land, access to transportation outlets, control of religious or historical sites, and proximity to environmental hazards
  • Pressures from skewed population distributions, such as a “youth or age bulge,” or from divergent rates of population growth among competing communal groups

Points under Indicator 1: Somalia (9.8), Sudan (9.0), Afganistan (9.3), Pakistan (8.3), Bangladesh (8.9), Sri Lanka (7.5), Nepal (8.3), Bhutan (6.5), India (8.3), USA (3.1), UK (3.2), Netharlands (2.9) and Norway (1.9).

Highest demographic pressure occurs in the southern least developed countries due to natural causes. This could not be a common indicator for LDCs and rich countries. That why, this could not also be an indicator of failed state. Bangladesh as well as other south asian countries and african countires mountings highest points while Netharlands and Norway mountings lower points under this indicator which have made south asian and african countries as failed state! This is totally injustice! 

2. Massive Movement of Refugees or Internally Displaced Persons creating Complex Humanitarian Emergencies

  • Forced uprooting of large communities as a result of random or targeted violence and/or repression, causing food shortages, disease, lack of clean water, land competition, and turmoil that can spiral into larger humanitarian and security problems, both within and between countries

Points under Indicator 2: Somalia (9.9), Sudan (9.8), Afganistan (8.9), Pakistan (8.6), Bangladesh (6.9), Sri Lanka (9.3), Nepal (6.8), Bhutan (7.5), Maldives (6.5), India (4.9), USA (3.7), UK (2.8), Netharlands (3.1) and Norway (1.6).

We know the history of African War as well as Afganistan where have a direct influences of United State of America and United Kindoms as well as other European Countries. Trade of Arms is the major causes of these war which mounting movement of refugees and mountings the highest points under this indicator. Bangladesh has a negligable movement of refugee. Although Bangladesh have natural calamaties, but it never create humanitarian turmoil or violence. Bangladesh mountings points 6.9 under this indicator, which should places Bangladesh in no.19 in this index!  

3. Legacy of Vengeance-Seeking Group Grievance or Group Paranoia

  • History of aggrieved communal groups based on recent or past injustices, which could date back centuries
  • Patterns of atrocities committed with impunity against communal groups
  • Specific groups singled out by state authorities, or by dominant groups, for persecution or repression
  • Institutionalized political exclusion
  • Public scapegoating of groups believed to have acquired wealth, status or power as evidenced in the emergence of “hate” radio, pamphleteering and stereotypical or nationalistic political rhetoric

Points under Indicator 3: Somalia (9.7), Sudan (9.9), Afganistan (9.6), Pakistan (9.6), Bangladesh (9.4), Sri Lanka (9.8), Nepal (8.7), Bhutan (7.9), Maldives (5.2), India (7.3), USA (3.3), UK (4.3), Netharlands (4.7) and Norway (1.3).

South Asian Countries mountings highest point under this indicator. We know the history of black lived in USA, but USA mountings a lower point under this indicator. We should re-examine this indicator again, which would make USA is a failed state, not the South Asian Countries!

 4. Chronic and Sustained Human Flight

  • “Brain drain” of professionals, intellectuals and political dissidents fearing persecution or repression
  • Voluntary emigration of “the middle class,” particularly economically productive segments of the population, such as entrepreneurs, business people, artisans and traders, due to economic deterioration
  • Growth of exile communities

Points under Indicator 4: Somalia (8.5), Sudan (9.0), Afganistan (7.2), Pakistan (8.3), Bangladesh (8.4), Sri Lanka (6.9), Nepal (6.0), Bhutan (6.8), Maldives (7.0), India (6.7), USA (1.0), UK (1.9), Netharlands (2.1) and Norway (1.1).

Bangaldesh mountings points 8.4 under this indicator. We should re-examine it again.

ECONOMIC INDICATORS

5. Uneven Economic Development along Group Lines

  • Group-based inequality, or perceived inequality, in education, jobs, and economic status
  • Group-based impoverishment as measured by poverty levels, infant mortality rates, education levels
  • Rise of communal nationalism based on real or perceived group inequalities

Points under Indicator 5: Somalia (7.7), Sudan (9.6), Afganistan (8.4), Pakistan (8.8), Bangladesh (9.0), Sri Lanka (8.5), Nepal (9.3), Bhutan (8.7), Maldives (5.2), India (8.9), USA (5.3), UK (4.7), Netharlands (3.3) and Norway (2.2).

We should examine the commitments of rich countries on MDGs along with the poverty, inequality situation.

6. Sharp and/or Severe Economic Decline

  • A pattern of progressive economic decline of the society as a whole as measured by per capita income, GNP, debt, child mortality rates, poverty levels, business failures, and other economic measures
  • Sudden drop in commodity prices, trade revenue, foreign investment or debt payments
  • Collapse or devaluation of the national currency
  • Extreme social hardship imposed by economic austerity programs
  • Growth of hidden economies, including the drug trade, smuggling, and capital flight
  • Increase in levels of corruption and illicit transactions among the general populace
  • Failure of the state to pay salaries of government employees and armed forces or to meet other financial obligations to its citizens, such as pension payments

We could work on this indicator. Knowlegeble persons are requested to fill this gap.

POLITICAL INDICATORS

7. Criminalization and/or Delegitimization of the State

  • Massive and endemic corruption or profiteering by ruling elites
  • Resistance of ruling elites to transparency, accountability and political representation
  • Widespread loss of popular confidence in state institutions and processes, e.g., widely boycotted or contested elections, mass public demonstrations, sustained civil disobedience, inability of the state to collect taxes, resistance to military conscription, rise of armed insurgencies
  • Growth of crime syndicates linked to ruling elites

We can work on it.

8. Progressive Deterioration of Public Services

  • Disappearance of basic state functions that serve the people, including failure to protect citizens from terrorism and violence and to provide essential services, such as health, education, sanitation, public transportation
  • State apparatus narrows to those agencies that serve the ruling elites, such as the security forces, presidential staff, central bank, diplomatic service, customs and collection agencies

Analysis needed???

9. Suspension or Arbitrary Application of the Rule of Law and Widespread Violation of Human Rights

  • Emergence of authoritarian, dictatorial or military rule in which constitutional and democratic institutions and processes are suspended or manipulated
  • Outbreak of politically inspired (as opposed to criminal) violence against innocent civilians
  • Rising number of political prisoners or dissidents who are denied due process consistent with international norms and practices
  • Widespread abuse of legal, political and social rights, including those of individuals, groups or cultural institutions (e.g., harassment of the press, politicization of the judiciary, internal use of military for political ends, public repression of political opponents, religious or cultural persecution)

Analysis needed???

10. Security Apparatus Operates as a “State Within a State”

  • Emergence of elite or praetorian guards that operate with impunity
  • Emergence of state-sponsored or state-supported private militias that terrorize political opponents, suspected “enemies,” or civilians seen to be sympathetic to the opposition
  • Emergence of an “army within an army” that serves the interests of the dominant military or political clique
  • Emergence of rival militias, guerilla forces or private armies in an armed struggle or protracted violent campaigns against state security forces

Analysis needed???

11. Rise of Factionalized Elites

  • Fragmentation of ruling elites and state institutions along group lines
  • Use of nationalistic political rhetoric by ruling elites, often in terms of communal irredentism, (e.g., a “greater Serbia”) or of communal solidarity (e.g., “ethnic cleansing” or “defending the faith”)

Analysis needed???

12. Intervention of Other States or External Political Actors

  • Military or Para-military engagement in the internal affairs of the state at risk by outside armies, states, identity groups or entities that affect the internal balance of power or resolution of the conflict
  • Intervention by donors, especially if there is a tendency towards over-dependence on foreign aid or peacekeeping missions

Analysis needed???

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s