Corruption, a Global Problem

While agreeing with the argument that corruption embodies a major challenge for developing and transiting economies and that the effect of corruption on their economic and political viability can be substantial, it is worth recalling, as suggested in the discussion of the financial crisis above, that the phenomenon also exists in the industrialized countries. Corruption represents a challenge, therefore, not only for developing and emerging economies but also for most countries of the rich world.

40

Thus, it is not a phenomenon which is peculiar to any continent, region or ethnic group. It cuts across faiths, religious denominations and political systems and affects both young and old, man and woman alike. However, this does not suggest that its magnitude is equal in every society, as overall levels of corruption (however defined) vary considerably. Nevertheless, this is an extremely difficult phenomenon to measure and the controversies that continue to trail the definition of corruption, also often come to the fore in the debate about its measurement.

When comparing corruption levels in different countries (for example through Transparency International‟s10

indexes and rankings or other studies conducted by international development organisations like the World Bank and IMF), the South is often presented as being more corrupt than the North (leading to the focus on poor governance and weak state institutions in Southern countries discussed in chapter one). It is important, however, to consider the ways in which corruption in North and South are inter-twined. Some authors such as Neild (2002) argue that Northern countries and their agencies (e.g. TNCs etc.) have long been accomplices in corruption in the South, encouraging it by their actions, rather than impeding it (Neild, 2002). Much is also made of the role of the colonial legacy in the instigation and dynamics of corrupt practices within Southern countries.

It may be useful here to explore some less traditional definitions of corruption which deal with phenomenon which might not be considered illegal and would frequently not be dealt with under the dominant definitions peddled by the international agencies. Returning to issues discussed in the previous chapter, it is interesting to reflect on the relative silence within the corruption literature on the Cold War „corruption‟ that supported dictatorships, destabilised democracies and funded political opposition in sovereign states against international law in pursuit of selfish interests (Slater 2007). The impacts of the actions of the United States in particular in destabilizing democratic governments for pursuing anti-American interests is not often a key talking point in global anti-corruption discussions. For instance, in the

10

Transparency International is the leading international Anti-Corruption Non-governmental Organisation, which mobilises people together from across the world to curtail the adverse effects of corruption on men, women and children throughout the globe. The TI was founded in 1993, and ever since, it has been playing a leading role in raising awareness and diminishes apathy and tolerance of corruption, by working with relevant players in government, civil society, business and the media to promote transparency different government sectors like elections, public administration, procurement and in business (http://www.transparency.org).

41

year 1953, a CIA backed coup in Iran restored the Shah to power in place of the democratically elected government of Mossadeh, because of the latter‟s support for the nationalisation of the Anglo-Iranian oil company, which was later restored to foreign Anglo-American ownership. This resulted in a 25 year period of severe repression and corruption (see: Kolko 1988). Similarly, in 1954, as a result of the concerns of the US-owned United Fruit Company over the land reform plans of the Arbenz‟ government, a CIA-supported coup in Guatemala overthrew the democratically elected government of Arbenz. This led to the consolidation of a military regime which led to a 40 year period of state terror, corruption, death squads, torture, disappearances and execution (see: Cullather 1999). Furthermore, it is surely not too big a step to see the US and British justifications for the invasion of Iraq as corrupt. The world was made to believe that Saddam Hussein possessed a highly dangerous body of weapons of mass destruction, some of which when fired could bring about appalling devastation within 45 minutes, and that Iraq had a relationship with Al Quaeda and shared responsibility for the atrocity of September 11, 2001 attack on the United States. Although these events may have generated a lot of concern and criticism from around the world, they clearly illustrate how powerful countries interfere with the political affairs of other sovereign nations. The point that I am seeking to make here, however, is that these forms of political corruption may have accounted for the death of several hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, including women and children in some cases, but are seldom criminalised or given serious attention within the anti-corruption debate.

In a similar vein, the role played by multinational firms, which is often classified as cross-border corruption, suggests that corruption is a two way street, involving both multinational firms from advanced countries and public officials in developing countries. Despite the passage of the US Foreign Corruption Practices Act (FCPA), which came into force about thirty years ago and the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention act, a significant change in overseas bribery practices by Northern multinational firms is yet to be seen. For instance, a survey conducted by the World Bank Institute, confirmed that the behaviour of OECD firms abroad remained extensively corrupt, shortly after the act came into force (Hellman et al, 2002). Thus, to suggest that the North is more corrupt than the South or the other way round may perhaps be related to what different authors understand as being constituted under the term corruption.

42

As Michael Johnston suggests, comparisons of corruption among different societies must inevitably encounter the problem of contrasting standards (Johnston 1996). Despite the ambiguity surrounding the definition of corruption, attempts to classify different incidences of corruption, as a way of comparing experiences, for example, are still worth examining in a little more detail. This is attempted within the next section.