Bangladesh is The Economist’s Country of the Year for “toppling a despot” and “taking strides towards a more liberal government”. The Economist might need a reality check here. The aftermath of the ouster of the Sheikh Hasina regime has seen chaos in Bangladesh, and the country is far from being stable economically. Also, The Economist’s previous choices of Country of the Year have ended as total disasters.
The Economist is well aware that “Islamic extremism is a threat” and Bangladesh needs to repair ties with India and hold elections in time.
Its choice left many surprised and asking questions. And there are reasons for that.
The Awami League government of Sheikh Hasina was credited to having pulled millions out of poverty in Bangladesh through industrial development, especially in the garment sector. However, it is also true that the nexus of politicians with big business led to massive corruption that hit Bangladesh’s economy and a white paper by the caretaker government shows the extent of it.
The Hasina government also brought about 15 years of stability in Bangladesh that helped in economic growth. It is also true that civil society groups blamed Hasina’s government for enforced disappearances and human rights violations.
But how far is the enthusiasm of The Economist valid is the real question.
WHY THE ECONOMIST CHOSE BANGLADESH AS COUNTRY OF THE YEAR
“The winner is not the richest, happiest or most virtuous place, but the one that has improved the most in the previous 12 months,” The Economist argued. Like every year, five countries made it to the shortlist.
Syria was a late entrant, after the Bashar al-Assad regime was toppled, said the London-based news magazine. They ended up as the runners-up.
The others on the shortlist were Argentina, South Africa and Poland.
The Economist’s penchant for regime change, and what it views as “liberal” change, is evident.
“Mr Assad was easily the worst tyrant deposed in 2024. But the quality of what replaces him matters, too,” it said. It acknowledges that Syria “may fall apart”.
While declaring the winner, The Economist made the regime-change bias evident. “Our winner is Bangladesh, which also overthrew an autocrat.”
WHY PEOPLE ARE CRITICISING THE ECONOMIST’S CHOICE
A stable Bangladesh is not only an ask of its people, but also of people in India.
The attacks on minorities and jailing of leaders, like Chinmoy Krishna Das, who demanded the securing of minority rights, have made people sceptical.
“Improved in the establishment of Islamists or in increased persecution of minorities? Or is it because Yunus is a deep-state puppet installed in an undemocratic coup? But you like that. And specifically what ‘improvement’ has taken place?” asked US-based author Sankrant Sanu on X.
“What exactly is The Economist celebrating? Throwing a democratically elected government (who they named conveniently as a tyrant) or bringing in its stead a puppet of Islamic extremists unleashing hell on the minorities? Bankrupt of any journalistic values. Shame!,” P Karteek, Bengaluru-based founding partner of Java Capital, a pre-seed/seed venture fund, wrote on X.
Chairman of Dalmia Group Holdings, Gaurav Dalmia, posted, “I think it’s a very debatable choice”.
BANGLADESH’S GDP NUMBERS AND PROJECTIONS CONTINUE TO DECLINE
The economic situation of Bangladesh, about which even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and experts have expressed concern, is another big reason. Bangladesh is staring at a catastrophic economic crisis following the violent regime change in August.
Bangladesh risks plunging into an economic crisis in the coming days if the government fails to swiftly accelerate public and private investments, analysts told United News of Bangladesh.
The country’s post-Covid recovery has been hindered by high inflation, a balance of payments (BoP) deficit, and financial sector vulnerabilities. Real GDP growth has moderated to 5.2% in the fiscal year 2024, down from 5.8% in the previous year, and is projected to decelerate further to 3.8% in FY25.
The IMF lowered its October projection from 4.5%, from 3.8% for FY25.
Last week, IMF officials said Bangladeshi authorities requested roughly USD 750 million “to maintain macroeconomic stability and strengthen the country’s resilience to external shocks”, Reuters reported.
“The Bangladesh economy continues to grapple with persistent challenges and is facing emerging external financing needs,” the IMF official told Reuters.
Despite the regime transition, the domestic market continues to struggle under the sway of oligarchs, according to economist Hossain Zillur Rahman.
Inflation remains another concern, averaging 9.7% in FY24, with food and energy prices driving the increase.
HOW DID THE ECONOMIST’S PREVIOUS COUNTRY OF THE YEAR FARE?
Reacting to the nomination of Bangladesh as The Economist’s country of the year, banker-turned author Amish Tripathi highlighted that previous winners of the title, including Tunisia, Myanmar, Armenia, and Ukraine, met tough outcomes.
“In India, we have a term called ‘panauti’,” said Tripathi, using the Hindi word that roughly translates to bad omen, while sharing the list of countries.
“Please track what happened to those countries after they were recognised by The Economist as Country of the Year. 2014 Tunisia, 2015 Myanmar, 2018 Armenia, and 2022 Ukraine…,” he wrote on X.
Most of the nations who received the title from The Economist have faced significant negative consequences, either on the political front or financially, bringing unrest.
While Tunisia saw political instability following the assassination of opposition leader Mohamed Brahmi, which sparked widespread protests. Myanmar, the Country of the Year in 2015, saw an escalation of the Rohingya crisis right after that. In years to come, the Asian nation is wrapped in a violent civil war after the democratic government of Aung San Suu Kyi was toppled by the military junta.
Colombia, the 2016 title-holder, signed a historic peace deal with guerrilla group FARC, but the initial referendum rejection led to delays and revisions. Today, as the civil war is far from over, 8.4 million Columbians are living in conflict, according to a Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) report from August.
Armenia, in 2018, underwent the Velvet Revolution, a peaceful protest movement led by Nikol Pashinyan, which resulted in Prime Minister Serzh Sargsyan’s resignation over “corruption and incompetence”. The revolution, followed by the twin shocks of the Covid-19 pandemic, and losses in the war with Azerbaijan, and most recently a refugee crisis in 2023, has burdened the economy.
It’s not that the title of ‘Country of the Year’ by The Economist inherently invites crises and threats, but the track record of previous winners does raise eyebrows about the London-based magazine’s choices, their criteria, and apparent lack of foresight.