Governance in SL diagnosed as grave

IMF technical assistance report reveals systematic and severe governance weaknesses and corruption vulnerabilities across State functions

• IMF technical assistance report reveals systematic and severe governance weaknesses and corruption vulnerabilities across State functions
• Corruption vulnerabilities are exacerbated by weak accountability institutions
• Impunity for misbehaviour enjoyed by officials undermines trust in the public sector
• Stresses behaviour of top officials reflected a consensus that corruption paved the way for the economic crisis
• Acknowledges “Aragalaya” and calls for role of civil society in demanding accountability
• First-ever exercise lists 16 immediate and short-term measures to address key corruption issues and strengthen governance

The first-ever Governance Diagnostic Assessment (GDA) on Sri Lanka compiled by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has revealed widespread systematic and severe governance weaknesses and corruption vulnerabilities across State functions, with particular macroeconomic impact.

The report stressed the appalling status impacted budget credibility; expenditure control; public investment management and control of spending); public procurement; management and oversight of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs); transparency of revenue policy and the integrity of revenue administration; the governance and legal frameworks of the Central Bank; the application of financial sector regulations; and clarity and security of land ownership and the integrity of the judicial sector.

“Corruption vulnerabilities are exacerbated by weak accountability institutions, including the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery and Corruption (CIABOC) that have neither the authority nor competency to successfully fulfil their functions,” stated the GDA, which the IMF compiled in response to a request from the Government of Sri Lanka.

It said current governance arrangements have not established clear standards for permissible official behaviour, acted to deter and sanction transgressions, nor pursued individuals and stolen public funds that have exited the country. Regular civil society participation in the oversight and monitoring of Government actions is restricted by limited transparency, the lack of platforms for inclusive and participatory governance, and by broad application of counter-terrorism rules.

“These weaknesses and vulnerabilities highlight several broader governance themes that need to be addressed for planned reforms to be sustained. Problematic structural issues that shape governance dynamics include the compromised independence of key governance institutions, critical gaps in the legal and regulatory infrastructure for managing and overseeing public resources, limited fiscal discipline and transparency, and a disorganised regulatory and legislative process that provides for insufficient review and engagement,” it said.

It was pointed out that minimal progress has been made in integrating modern information technology into public sector operations and public-private interfaces, or in linking information to detect and correct inefficiencies and improprieties. These governance features form the basis for the substitution of informal mechanisms of control for rule-based systems of accountability for performance and integrity over an expansive State.

“The impunity for misbehaviour enjoyed by officials undermines trust in the public sector and compounds concerns over limited access to efficient and rule-based adjudication process for resolving disputes,” the GDA revealed.

💬 “The recommendations coming out of this diagnostic will contribute to the formulation of governance and anticorruption policies and programs, improvement of the legal and institutional frameworks, as well as governance and anti-corruption reform measures agreed to in the Staff Level Agreement for an Extended Credit Facility Arrangement for Sri Lanka,” the GDA report stressed.

The report highlights immediate and short-term measures to address key corruption issues, as well as structural reforms that require more time and resources but are essential to strengthen governance and initiate lasting change. A list of “priority” recommendations is provided below. They primarily focus on measures related to critical risks, including addressing gaps in existing legal frameworks and the public provision of essential information for oversight and monitoring. Priority recommendations are explored in more depth in the subsections of the report, which also contain more extensive recommendations, including structural and institutional measures to achieve more transparent and efficient governance that operates with integrity and in accordance with the rule of law.

The recommendations are designed as a coherent approach to improving governance through a focus on clarity of authority and responsibility for core functions; financial and operational independence of essential accountability and law enforcement institutions; transparency in government practices and performance, especially relating to the planning, spending, and accounting for the use of public funds and assets; inclusive, accessible, and rule-based means to enforce private agreements and challenge official behaviour; and efficient mechanisms for making information public and holding organisations and individuals to account for their performance and behaviour.

The IMF report said the combination of short-term actions to deliver concrete and observable improvements and long-term structural initiatives to change how the public sector functions in Sri Lanka is essential to achieving the social and economic aspirations of the country.

It acknowledged that comprehensively addressing governance weaknesses would require medium – and long-term initiatives, significant resources, and prolonged efforts, including support from Sri Lanka’s international partners.

“The recommendations coming out of this diagnostic will contribute to the formulation of governance and anticorruption policies and programs, improvement of the legal and institutional frameworks, as well as governance and anti-corruption reform measures agreed to in the Staff Level Agreement for an Extended Credit Facility Arrangement for Sri Lanka,” the GDA report stressed.

The report noted that widespread and persistent popular protests in 2022 over the behaviour of top officials reflected a consensus that corruption had paved the way for the economic crisis. The subsequent resignation of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in July 2022 emphasised that addressing the crisis required changes in governance as much as changes in economic policies. The role of civil society in demanding accountability carried an equally important message about the drivers of change.

The report acknowledged that President Wickremesinghe has announced that his Government is “committed to implementing anti-corruption practices through a Government mechanism that emphasises accountability.”

☝

Zelenskyy wanted to make Ukraine’s defence sector into a “large military hub”

Ukraine tempts Western arms producers with plan for ‘large military hub’

Incentives available to partner with Ukrainian manufacturers as Kyiv looks to create ‘world class military products’.

AJ 1 Oct 2023

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has announced plans to expand the country’s domestic defence industry through partnerships with Western weapons manufacturers, in a bid to increase supplies for its counteroffensive against Russia.

Speaking at the opening of the International Defence Industries Forum, Zelenskyy said he wanted to make Ukraine’s defence sector into a “large military hub” where military equipment and weapons could be built and repaired.

“Ukraine is in such a phase of the defence marathon when it is very important, critical to go forward without retreating. Results from the front line are needed daily,” the president told executives representing more than 250 Western weapons producers.

“We are interested in localising production of equipment needed for our defence and each of those advanced defence systems which are used by our soldiers, giving Ukraine the best results at the front today.”

Zelenskyy said that air defence and de-mining were his immediate priorities. Ukraine also aims to boost domestic production of missiles, drones and artillery ammunition.

The foreign ministry said Ukrainian producers had signed about 20 agreements with foreign partners for joint production, exchange of technology or supply of components to make drones, armoured vehicles and ammunition. It did not identify the companies.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who spoke by video link during the forum after visiting Kyiv earlier in the week, threw his weight behind the initiative.

💬

• 250 Western weapons producers.
• 20 agreements with foreign partners.
• “There is no defence without industry.”
• Several leading Western arms makers  Germany’s Rheinmetall, United Kingdom’s BAE Systems have  plans to team up with Ukrainian producers.
• NATO threw his weight behind the initiative.
• Ukrainian officials see the development of the country’s domestic defence industry as a potential boost to the economy

“Heroism alone cannot intercept missiles. Ukraine needs capabilities, high quality, high quantity, and quickly,” Stoltenberg said. “There is no defence without industry.”

Ukraine retook the southern city of Kherson in November last year, and began a long-awaited counteroffensive in early June to try and recapture other territories seized by Russia, which launched its full-scale invasion of the country in February 2022.

Kyiv has reported advances in several directions and liberated more than a dozen villages since but Moscow still controls about 18 percent of Ukrainian territory.

Ukraine’s allies have provided financial and military support worth tens of billions of dollars to help it push back Moscow’s forces.

Ukrainian officials see the development of the country’s domestic defence industry as a potential boost to the economy, which shrunk by about a third last year as a result of the war.

Several leading Western arms makers including Germany’s Rheinmetall and the United Kingdom’s BAE Systems have already announced plans to team up with Ukrainian producers.

Ukraine will create new incentives to draw Western defence investment and establish a special fund, through dividends from state defence resources and profits from the sale of confiscated Russian assets, to support new technology development, officials said.

“It will be a mutually beneficial partnership. I think it is a good time and place to create a large military hub,” Zelenskyy said during a separate meeting with weapons producers from the United States, the UK, Czechia, Germany, France, Sweden and Turkey.

Recently appointed Defence Minister Rustem Umerov said Kyiv had to do everything possible to produce all the necessary military services and products in Ukraine for the needs of its army.

“Our vision is to develop world-class military products,” Umerov said.

SOURCE: NEWS AGENCIES

Washington Wakes Up to Harsh Reality Amid Ukraine Proxy War

 

25.09.2023 Author: Brian Berletic https://journal-neo.su

Long gone are Western headlines heralding Ukraine’s NATO-trained and armed forces and the prospects of them able to “sweep Putin’s conscripts aside,” as former British Army Colonel Hamish De Bretton-Gordon claimed in an article published as recently as June this year.

As Ukraine’s offensive forces broke across extensive Russian defenses all along the line of contact from Zaporozhye to Kharkov, the realization that Washington, London, and Brussels underestimated the Russian Federation economically, politically, diplomatically, and most importantly, militarily and industrially, began to set in.

Russian Military Production Grows, Western Stockpiles Dry Up 

Today, different kinds of headlines now appear across the collective West’s media.  The New York Times recently reported in an article titled, “Russia Overcomes Sanctions to Expand Missile Production, Officials Say,” that Russia ammunition production was at least seven times greater than the collective West.

The same article acknowledged that Russia had increased its tank production two-fold and was producing 2 million artillery rounds per year, a number that is larger than the combined planned expansion of shell production of the US and European Union some time between 2025 and 2027. Not only is Russia out-producing the West, it is producing weapons and ammunition at a fraction of the cost of Western arms and munitions.

As Russian military industrial production expands, producing more tanks, artillery, cruise missiles, and ammunition for the ongoing special military operation in Ukraine, Ukrainian forces find their sources of arms and ammunition drying up.

The BBC would report in a recent article, “Poland no longer supplying weapons to Ukraine amid grain row,” that:

One of Ukraine’s staunchest allies, Poland, has said it is no longer supplying weapons to its neighbour, amid a diplomatic dispute over Kyiv’s grain exports. 

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Poland’s focus was instead on defending itself with more modern weapons.

While both Poland and the BBC attempt to frame the decision as motivated by growing tensions between Poland and Ukraine, the reality is Poland had a finite amount of expendable arms and ammunition it could send Ukraine, and it has expended those stocks. This leaves a much smaller number of more modern systems Poland has acquired for its own defense. Neither Poland nor its foreign arms suppliers produce weapons and ammunition in the quantities required to sustain Ukrainian forces on the battlefield, meaning that should Poland continue supplying Ukraine from this point forward, it will eventually find itself “demilitarized.”

Other nations are failing to deliver much anticipated weapon systems. This includes the ATACMS ballistic missile Ukraine has demanded from the United States for months now, and despite claims of its arrival being imminent, Reuters in a recent article has ruled them out once again ahead of the Pentagon’s next assistance package.

Germany’s air-launched cruise missile, the Taurus, has also failed to turn up in additional assistance packages. Bloomberg in its article, “Germany Plans Additional $428 Million in Military Aid to Ukraine,” noted that Berlin is still weighing “a multitude of political, legal, military and technical aspects,” before finally sending any.

It should be noted that neither missile, along with a wide array of other so-called “wonder weapons,” has any prospect of changing the outcome of the fighting in Ukraine. While the missiles, if delivered, will result in tactical victories for Kiev, they will have little to no impact on the fighting strategically.

What remains of Western military assistance to Ukraine is inadequate amounts of ammunition, older and/or increasingly inappropriate armored vehicles including relics of the Cold War like the Leopard 1 main battle tank, and “training” for Ukrainian soldiers conducted in compressed timelines producing entirely unprepared soldiers almost certain to perish within days of arriving at the battlefield.

The US-led proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is unsustainable, and it appears many in the halls of power across the collective West are coming to grips with that.

Delusion Persists

However, elsewhere in the Western media, a deep sense of delusion is still reflected in articles that, despite admitting Ukraine’s failures, believe a “rethink” of Ukraine’s military strategy could help win what is obviously transforming into a “long war.”

For example, The Economist in its article, “Ukraine faces a long war. A change, of course, is needed,” admits the long-anticipated offensive “is not working,” but goes on to demands more offensive and defensive capabilities for Ukraine, including additional air defense systems and “reliable supplies of artillery,” both of which objectively do not and will not exist in the necessary quantities Ukraine requires for years to come.

At one point in the article, The Economist insists on Europe “beefing up its defense industry,” apparently oblivious to the lead times involved in doing so being measured in years – years Ukraine does not have.

The collective West apparently realizes their plans are failing to end the war in their favor sooner rather than later, but appear unaware that the “long war” they now realize awaits them is beyond their capability to fight by proxy or otherwise. The proxy war, designed to “extend Russia,” is now making Russia stronger militarily and industrially. At the same time, the conflict and the sanctions the West imposed on Russia are serving as a catalyst for other nations to pivot away from the US-led unipolar world and instead invest in a multipolar alternative, fearing that eventually the West may target them in a similar manner.

It is clear that the harder the collective West attempts to place Ukraine in a stronger position at the negotiation table, the weaker Ukraine and its Western sponsors become. The longer this conflict continues, the worse it will be for Ukraine and its sponsors. For the collective West, winning their proxy war is impossible militarily and industrially, but accepting this reality appears equally impossible for the collective West’s leadership psychologically.

Brian Berletic is a Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”. 

To Many Americans, Government Dysfunction Is the New Normal

 

NEWS ANALYSIS

To Many Americans, Government Dysfunction Is the New Normal

As the nation teetered on the brink of a shutdown, its citizens were largely focused on other things.

As the nation’s capital seemed to be barreling toward another debilitating federal government shutdown this weekend, America, well, did not exactly seem to be on the edge of its collective seat.

Judging by Google search trends, at least, Americans in the days leading up to the shutdown-that-wasn’t were more curious about who shot Tupac Shakur, who might win “The Golden Bachelor” and who would claim the giant Powerball jackpot. Even National Coffee Day 2023 generated more searches at one point than the possible government shutdown.

Those are probably not signs of public confidence that the nation’s leaders would somehow avoid plummeting off the cliff at the last minute, even though, surprisingly, they did. Instead, they may indicate that America at this point assumes that Washington actually will go over the cliff, because that is what Washington does these days. After all, the 11th-hour congressional deal that kept the government open lasts only until mid-November.

America, it seems, has come to expect crisis. In an era of disruption and polarization and insurrection, with a former president facing 91 felony counts in four criminal indictments and a sitting president facing an impeachment inquiry and a House speaker facing a possible move to oust him, the country has grown accustomed to chaos in the capital. Dysfunction is the new normal.

“For the average American outside the Beltway, these hiatuses of governing are looked at as nothing new, unfortunately,” said G. William Hoagland, who spent 33 years in the federal government, most of it as a senior budget official for Senate Republicans.

Government shutdowns are a modern phenomenon, and a measure of how fractious the capital has become. While Congress occasionally failed to pass spending bills on time in the past, it did not result in wholesale closures until President Jimmy Carter’s attorney general ruled in 1980 and 1981 that without congressional appropriations, nonessential functions had to cease. That took place several times under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, but often for just a few hours or days or over a weekend, when it was hardly noticed.

The seismic change came in late 1995 and early 1996, when House Republicans set off back-to-back shutdowns during a budget fight with President Bill Clinton, resulting in a popular backlash that made such tactics politically radioactive for nearly 18 years. Since 2013, however, Presidents Barack Obama, Donald J. Trump and Biden, it seems likely, have all confronted the threat of multiday shutdowns, making them seem almost routine.

💬 America, it seems, has come to expect crisis. In an era of disruption and polarization and insurrection, with a former president facing 91 felony counts in four criminal indictments and a sitting president facing an impeachment inquiry and a House speaker facing a possible move to oust him, the country has grown accustomed to chaos in the capital. Dysfunction is the new normal.

“That is a big part of the problem,” said former Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri. “Dysfunction and chaos are now in the political bloodstream, and therefore folks aren’t calling or emailing D.C.” to register objections with their representatives. “They see this as part of normal, polarized, partisan politics in Washington.”

What made this prospective shutdown different from those that came before was that it was less a fight between Democrats and Republicans than a fight between Republicans and Republicans. Speaker Kevin McCarthy lost control of his narrow majority and was pressed toward a shutdown by a handful of hard-liners who defied him, forcing him to turn to Democrats to avoid it.

In the days leading up to the Saturday midnight deadline, Mr. Biden’s White House tried to stir up public opposition to what it dubbed the “Extreme Republican Shutdown" by blitzing out a string of statements emphasizing the consequences: how it would cut off food assistance for impoverished parents, hinder efforts to fight fentanyl trafficking, delay disaster recovery and suspend paychecks for troops.

Yet as absorbed as Washington was by the game of political chicken, there has not been much of a popular uprising or even much complaining from the elites on Wall Street, who normally worry that a government shutdown could damage the economy. The financial markets shrugged off the threat. The Dow Jones industrial average closed on Friday 1.3 percent down for the week, while the S&P 500 was down about half of that.

The only way that might change, according to political veterans, is if a shutdown lasted for a prolonged period of time, suspending food assistance for millions of low-income mothers and children, closing national parks, delaying air travel and forcing more than three million civilian and military government workers to go without pay. “It will take an extended shutdown, when people really begin to feel pain, to see the political blowback on the Republican House members that are playing this irresponsible game,” said Ms. McCaskill.

Former Representative Carlos Curbelo, Republican of Florida, said “a small minority” of his party had no problem trying “to wreak havoc on the institution” and would continue to do so unless there was a political price to be paid.

“Financial markets and most Americans have become numb to the drama; however, swing voters tend to punish these unnecessary spectacles,” he said.

A survey by Monmouth University showed that voters, by a 2 to 1 margin, preferred their representatives to compromise rather than stick to principles if that led to a shutdown. But even though this weekend’s showdown was precipitated by a small cadre of far-right House Republicans, it was not clear from polls who would be held accountable.

Another survey, by YouGov this past week, showed that 29 percent of Americans blamed House Republicans for the standoff, compared with 14 percent who pinned the blame on House Democrats and 13 percent who named Mr. Biden — in other words, almost evenly split between both parties. Nearly a third considered everyone equally at fault.

💬After all, the 11th-hour congressional deal that kept the government open lasts only until mid-November.

“When you ask the American public if they want compromise, they say yes,” said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth poll. “But when you ask them who they will vote for,” he continued, they stand by their party, believing that it’s the other side that isn’t compromising.

David McLennan, a political science professor at Meredith College in Raleigh, N.C., and director of the university’s poll, said the cascade of once-rare eruptions in Washington — shutdown, impeachment, criminal trials, internal revolt — had fed into a broader sense of disenchantment with the direction of the country that has seeped down to the state level. He calls it a “contagion effect.”

“There is no demographic group where the majority of people think things are going well in the country,” he said. “Partisans, Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters all think things are going poorly.”

Maya MacGuineas, president of the bipartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said the public had become so inured to disarray in Washington that it had lowered the bar for what it would accept.

“Our expectations have plummeted, and we have become dangerously numb to the failures of our government,” she said. ”It gets increasingly difficult to see how we turn this around and maintain our role in the world. The only way it can change is if we make demands of our leaders that are driven not by more outrage, but by a desire for the country to become more united.”

=================

Peter Baker is the chief White House correspondent for The Times. He has covered the last five presidents and sometimes writes analytical pieces that place presidents and their administrations in a larger context and historical framework.