Making the possible impossible

Photo: RAJ ANIKAT_DRIK NEWS

The curtain has finally fallen on the saga of Padma Bridge Project with the World Bank (WB) loan. The WB president's remark at a discussion in Washington reiterated the global lender's unambiguous stance that Bangladesh must carry through the probe into the allegation of "corruption conspiracy" regarding the bridge project to get the loan.
This, in effect, was a response to Finance Minister AMA Muhith's bid to meet him for expediting the loan processing for the bridge. And the WB chief's comment actually precipitated the government's countermeasure by way of a letter to the Bank seeking withdrawal of the earlier request that it had made for the loan.
But why was this step necessary at all?
Was the World Bank president's stance unforeseen? Has not the Bank been pressing the government for the graft probe long before cancelling the loan agreement on June 30, 2012? And did not the finance minister a day after the loan cancellation tell the Jatiya Sangsad (parliament) that "there has been no misuse, corruption or irregularities in the Padma Bridge Project" and that "the World Bank statement has humiliated the whole country…"?
And everyone knows about how the government looked for alternative sources of funding, like Malaysia, while at the same time whipped up patriotic zeal over the issue and mobilised domestic funding.
Why was it then necessary to lick the dust and again approach the same global lender to reconsider the loan, agreeing to comply with its demand for conducting probe into what it termed "corruption conspiracy?"
The World Bank appointed an external panel to review the graft probe in its last letter to the Anti-corruption Commission (ACC), which made it clear that they would consider the probe as fair only when all their conditions were met without exception. In this respect, they picked no bones about their "unhappiness" over excluding the former communication minister from probe.
So, why should the government, now, mind when the World Bank president only reiterated its demand for completing the probe according as it has been wanting all through to qualify for the loan?
The government's responses to the emerging issues throughout the entire period -- from bringing the graft allegation by the bank to actual cancellation of the loan contract, to agreeing to WB panel's, reviewing the ongoing probe by ACC to the Panel's questioning the fairness of the probe (as the former communications minister remained beyond the grip of the law) and finally to WB president's comments in Washington -- did not reflect any sign of maturity.
On the other hand, at every step it betrayed its unprofessional attitude, ineptness, immaturity and inexperience. As a result, we are again back to square one. And ultimately by getting out of the loan deal, in such a manner, has the government been able to vindicate the finance minister's earlier claim that there had been "no corruption in the Padma Bridge project?"
Clearly, the government's action was a face-saving measure. And to put a brave face on WB's regrets, the government has revived its old patriotic fervour that the bridge will be built with its own money.
At the same time, the government is also claiming that it will explore other sources of financing from donors such as JICA, IDB, as well as the governments of Malaysia, China, India and so on. But learning about the government's letter to the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) have also withdrawn their funding commitments.
So, the possibility of approaching these two large alternative donors has also evaporated. How far Malaysia, China, or India will get involved in the bridge project is anybody's guess.
The net achievement so far is that after wasting an opportunity, we have treaded into total uncertainty. A project that has been a popular demand since the 90s and given a go during the military-backed caretaker government, and which later became the ruling Awami League's election pledge, and the preparations for which started at the inception of the present government, has fallen flat at its penultimate year in office.
What was at stake that pushed the government so far as to even seek withdrawal of the loan request that it had made to the World Bank?
Are the common people convinced of the government's dealing with the global lender and its final decision to withdraw the loan request? They are not.
On the contrary, they are flabbergasted about the way it has botched up the entire issue. They are finding it hard to accept that the dream bridge of some 30 million development-hungry people of the south-western districts of Bangladesh, and which was within sight of realisation, has been made difficult.
And now they are being told that the bridge construction work will start in two moths!
The grand failure should at least remain as a lesson for the future governments: No government can succeed by placing partisan interests before the nation before national ones.

The writer is Editor, Science & Life, The Daily Star.
E-mail: [email protected]