Future of governance : Ramesh Shrestha

With the end of WW-II and gradual de-colonialism, countries gained independence allowing them to move on with their traditional system of governance, which lasted only till the end of communism in Europe. The Eastern European countries released from the grip of the Soviet Union adopted democratic governance of western Europe. The weakening of communism also forced the non-western world to undergo ‘reforms’ with a push to adopt democratic governance. As a result, traditional forms of governance in all mid and low-income countries with the exception of few feudalistic countries such as North Korea slowly vanished.

It took several wars and conflicts spanning centuries for the western countries to settle for democratic governance of the post WW-II. How easy or practical would it be for the mid and low-income countries to switch to the prescribed democratic governance in such a short time? Besides, the idea of democracy appears to be under serious alteration over the past three decades with the newly enshrined idea of liberalism and neoliberal economy at its heart. There was no justifiable rationality or a review to affirm its suitability in relation to local economy, administrative structure or suitability with local socio-cultural environment. Neither was there a public referendum anywhere to get public opinion before embracing neoliberal governance.

The reforms in governance also have become a prerequisite for all bilateral and multilateral assistance and loans from the international lending institutions such as the World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF). This new form of governance required a change in the leadership style in countries according to the mould prescribed by the western institutions. The leadership training module that came out of western universities with a motto of ‘win-win’ simply became a prank as we are finding out now in recent years.

Resentments

The idea of democracy and freedom are always welcome but there appear to be numerous factors confounding for real democracy and freedom to flourish. The liberal economic policies including deregulation and privatisation of public services and public properties have trespassed the governance system. The end result is that democracy has become a governance by the rich for the super rich instead of governance by the people for the people. Many countries have privatised many public services and some countries have even contracted out security services to private entities. The influence of the private sector has transformed many public services into business such as health care and provision of drinking water. The traditional domestic system of governance and moral values simply collapsed under pressure from privatisation. There is no more a sense of service in the governance system.

Countries with reserves of natural resources from Papua New Guinea in the East to Panama in the West have surrendered their national resources to western companies under various pretext. In all such enterprises profit has taken precedence over the people. The public in general resent such domination by powerful countries which influence and distort their governance, economy and even local ethnic harmony. People are also fully aware of hypocrisy and double or even multiple standards practiced by the West but they are not able to voice their concerns for fear of retaliation. This seems to be changing slowly as seen in public demonstrations in West African countries and in Panama in recent months.

The push back by Russia and People’s Republic of China against the idea of Rule Based International Order and the perineal dysfunctional Security Council where voices of poor countries were never heard may have given strength to West African countries and Panama to go to streets against the exploitative nature of multinational companies in their countries. People have realised that political liberalism, multilateralism, and economic liberalism which constitutes the main theme of liberal democracy-based governance is not benefitting the majority of people. People are beginning to lose faith in their governments in most countries.

Is it possible to reform?

Liberal values in itself are not bad. Everyone loves and benefits from equality, freedom and rights, which are the bedrock of liberal democracy. The problem is their selective application and distortion by the individuals and institutions which have skewed their values depriving the marginalised and underprivileged people. The system has created an environment where some are more equal than others and some are more freer than others and some have more rights than others. What is happening in Gaza is a perfect example.

Academicians might ask if we can reform the existing forms of governance or could it be replaced with something else? But given the authoritative power which has pushed liberal democracy and neoliberal economies around the world, backing out or finding a substitute will be seen as defeat. Countries could independently revert back to their domestic system of governance while keeping some of the policies of current governance systems that they consider suitable subject to the countries willing to take some risks such as blocking of credits from international institutes such as IMF and WB or even sanctions, a popular tool.

How will AI impact governance?

The technological development including the application of AI in governance is here to stay. We are entering into an unknown sphere of governance where application of artificial intelligence (AI) in public services will be playing a major role. What will be the nature of governance in coming years with the AI taking the centerstage? Advancement in cyber technology has already made inroads in many public and private sectors such as working online and job replacement with automation. But the intervention of AI will be much more decisive.

The AI cannot replace the art of diplomacy in governance in dealing with the public and the private sector partners. As countries cede decision making authority to AI at different levels of governance humans will lose control of governance. The AI systems will have the capacity to process all administrative information and will decide based on the information fed to the system. AI lacks empathy and is not meant to be a compassionate decision maker. As a result, the decisions made by AI in the grey zone of governance could become a problem. It is as if AI is our new colonial master where mistakes made by the colonial masters are acceptable.

The public-private partnership has put many countries at a disadvantaged end where the public institutions are being squeezed by the private sector. As AI is solely governed by giant private sector, the governance and the public sector will be at the mercy of tech giants. It will end the human aspect of governance where people could be left cut and dry. It is already difficult to speak to individuals in hotlines. On many occasions you have to prove that you are not a robot before you sign in to the system. Is it the sign of our future governance? The AI is not bad. It is built to facilitate people’s work. It is the wickedness and indifference of human beings on how AI is applied for profit which makes the AI look bad.

Can AI be regulated? In theory, yes, but in practice it is a lost cause even before we start to develop a framework of regulation. In future governance will be like Tesla, a self-driven car which will make decisions based on how the information is fed to the system. When something does not work, blame the system, not the government or the leaders. Exponential growth in cyber technology and expansion of AI without strict regulation will be a threat to the future of life on earth. The future of governance is thus completely unknown!

Read more articles by Ramesh by clicking here
Or contact Ramesh at ramesh.chauni@gmail.com