Straf - Corruption in CEE
By: Dr. Sam Vaknin
"After the Rain - How the West Lost the East"
Here for Information about "Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited"
READ THIS: Scroll down to review a complete list
of the articles - Click on the blue-coloured
Bookmark this Page - and SHARE IT with Others!
This material is copyrighted.
Free, unrestricted use is allowed on a non commercial basis.
The author's name and the address of this website must be incorporated in
any reproduction of the material for any use and by any means.
TO SEARCH THIS SITE, FOLLOW THESE STEPS :
1. Click here to find a specific word or subject: "Search My Site"
2. Click the blue-coloured
name of an article to reach a specific article
and then use your browser button to search for a specific word
|Join our mailing list!
Enter your email address below,
then click the 'Join List' button:
|Powered by ListBot|
The views presented in this article represent only the personal opinions and judgements of the author
The three policemen barked "straf", "straf" in unison. It was a Russianized version of the German word for "fine" and a euphemism for bribe. I and my fiancée were stranded in an empty ally at the heart of Moscow, physically encircled by these young bullies, an ominous propinquity. They held my passport ransom and began to drag me to a police station nearby. We paid.
To do the fashionable thing and to hold the moral high ground is rare. Yet, denouncing corruption and fighting it satisfies both conditions. Such hectoring is usually the preserve of well-heeled bureaucrats, driving utility vehicles and banging away at wireless laptops. The General Manager of the IMF makes 400,000 US dollars a year, tax-free, and perks. This is the equivalent of 2,300 (!) monthly salaries of a civil servant in Macedonia - or 7,000 monthly salaries of a teacher or a doctor in Yugoslavia, Moldova, Belarus, or Albania. He flies only first class and each one of his air tickets is worth the bi-annual income of a Macedonian factory worker. His shareholders - among them poor and developing countries - are forced to cough up these exorbitant fees and to finance the luxurious lifestyle of the likes of Kohler and Wolfensohn. And then they are made to listen to the IMF lecture them on belt tightening and how uncompetitive their economies are due to their expensive labour force. To me, such a double standard is the epitome of corruption. Organizations such as the IMF and World Bank will never be possessed of a shred of moral authority in these parts of the world unless and until they forgo their conspicuous consumption.
Yet, corruption is not a monolithic practice. Nor are its outcomes universally deplorable or damaging. One would do best to adopt autilitarian and discerning approach to it. The advent of moral relativism has taught us that "right" and "wrong" are flexible, context dependent and culture-sensitive yardsticks.
What amounts to venality in one culture (Slovenia) is considered no more than gregariousness or hospitality in another (Macedonia).
Thus, we are better off asking "qui bono" than "is it the right thing to do". Phenomenologically, "corruption" is a common - and misleading - label for a group of behaviours. One of the following criteria must apply:
(a) The withholding of a service, information, or goods that, by law, and by right, should have been provided or divulged.
To have a phone installed in Russia one must openly bribe the installer (according to a rather rigid tariff). In many of the former republics of Yugoslavia, it is impossible to obtain statistics or other data (the salaries of senior public officeholders, for instance) without resorting to kickbacks.
(b) The provision of a service, information, or goods that, by law, and by right, should not have been provided or divulged.
Tenders in the Czech Republic are often won through bribery. The botched privatizations all over the former Eastern Bloc constitute a massive transfer of wealth to select members of a nomenklatura. Licences and concessions are often granted in Bulgaria and the rest of the Balkan as means of securing political allegiance or paying off old political "debts".
(c) That the withholding or the provision of said service, information, or goods are in the power of the withholder or the provider towithhold or to provide AND That the withholding or the provision of said service, information, or goods constitute an integral and substantial part of the authority or the function of the withholder or the provider.
The post-communist countries in transition are a dichotomous lot. On the one hand, they are intensely and stiflingly bureaucratic. On the other hand, none of the institutions functions properly or lawfully. While these countries are LEGALISTIC - they are never LAWFUL. This fuzziness allows officials in all ranks to usurp authority, to trade favours, to forge illegal consensus and to dodge criticism and accountability. There is a direct line between lack of transparency and venality. Eran Fraenkel of Search for Common Ground in Macedonia has coined the phrase "ambient corruption" to capture this complex of features.
(d) That the service, information, or goods that are provided or divulged are provided or divulged against a benefit or the promise of abenefit from the recipient and as a result of the receipt of this specific benefit or the promise to receive such benefit.
It is wrong to assume that corruption is necessarily, or even mostly, monetary or pecuniary. Corruption is built on mutual expectations. The reasonable expectation of a future benefit is, in itself, a benefit. Access, influence peddling, property rights, exclusivity, licences, permits, a job, a recommendation - all constitute benefits.
(e) That the service, information, or goods that are withheld are withheld because no benefit was provided or promised by the recipient.
Even then, in CEE, we can distinguish between a few types of corrupt and venal behaviours in accordance with their OUTCOMES (utilities):
(a) Income supplement
Corrupt actions whose sole outcome is the supplementing of the income of the provider without affecting the "real world" in any manner.
Though the perception of corruption itself is a negative outcome - it is so only when corruption does not constitute an acceptable andnormative part of the playing field. When corruption becomes institutionalised - it also becomes predictable and is easily and seamlesslyincorporated into decision making processes of all economic players and moral agents. They develop "by-passes" and "techniques" which allow them to restore an efficient market equilibrium. In a way, all-pervasive corruption is transparent and, thus, a form of taxation.
This is the most common form of corruption exercised by low and mid-ranking civil servants, party hacks and municipal politicians throughout the CEE.
More than avarice, the motivating force here is sheer survival. The acts of corruption are repetitive, structured and in strict accordance with an un-written tariff and code of conduct.
(b) Acceleration Fees
Corrupt practices whose sole outcome is to ACCELERATE decision making, the provision of goods and services or the divulging of information. None of the outcomes or the utility functions are altered. Only the speed of the economic dynamics is altered. This kind of corruption is actually economically BENEFICIAL. It is a limited transfer of wealth (or tax) which increases efficiency. This is not to say that bureaucracies and venal officialdoms, over-regulation and intrusive political involvement in the workings of the marketplace are good (efficient) things. They are not. But if the choice is between a slow, obstructive and passive-aggressive civil service and a more forthcoming and accommodating one (the result of bribery) - the latter is preferable.
Acceleration fees are collected mostly by mid-ranking bureaucrats and middle rung decision makers in both the political echelons and the civil service.
(c) Decision Altering Fees
This is where the line is crossed from the point of view of aggregate utility. When bribes and promises of bribes actually alter outcomesin the real world - a less than optimal allocation of resources and distribution of means of production is obtained. The result is a fall in thegeneral level of production. The many is hurt by the few. The economy is skewed and economic outcomes are distorted. This kind of corruption should be uprooted on utilitarian grounds as well as on moral ones.
(d) Subversive Outcomes
Some corrupt collusions lead to the subversion of the flow of information within a society or an economic unit. Wrong information oftenleads to disastrous outcomes. Consider a medical doctor or an civil engineer who bribed their way into obtaining a professional diploma.
Human lives are at stake. The wrong information, in this case is the professional validity of the diplomas granted and the scholarship (knowledge) that such certificates stand for. But the outcomes are lost lives. This kind of corruption, of course, is by far the most damaging.
Unfortunately, it is widespread in CEE. It is proof of the collapse of the social treaty, of social solidarity and of the fraying of the social fabric.
No Western country accepts CEE diplomas without further accreditation, studies and examinations. Many "medical doctors" and "engineers" who emigrated to Israel from Russia and the former republics of the USSR - were suspiciously deficient professionally. Israel was forced to re-educate them prior to granting them a licence to practice locally.
(e) Reallocation Fees
Benefits paid (mainly to politicians and political decision makers) in order to affect the allocation of economic resources and materialwealth or the rights thereto. Concessions, licences, permits, assets privatised, tenders awarded are all subject to reallocation fees. Herethe damage is materially enormous (and visible) but, because it is widespread, it is "diluted" in individual terms. Still, it is oftenirreversible (like when a sold asset is purposefully under-valued) and pernicious. a factory sold to avaricious and criminally mindedmanagers is likely to collapse and leave its workers unemployed.
Corruption pervades daily life even in the prim and often
hectoring countries of the West. It is a win-win game (as far as Game Theorygoes)
- hence its attraction. We are all corrupt to varying degrees. But it is
wrong and wasteful - really, counterproductive - to fight corruption in
CEE in a wide front and indiscriminately. It is the kind of corruption
whose evil outcomes outweigh its benefits that should be fought. This fine
(and blurred) distinction is too often lost on decision makers and law
enforcement agencies in both East and West.