Parliament must debate, scrap US trade deal

It’ll be an understatement if the deal is described as a slavery deal. Because, it has left no room for autonomy.

Economist  Anu Muhammad

Bangladesh should immediately cancel the recently signed trade deal with the US because the terms and conditions of the agreement hardly protect the interests of the country, said noted economist Anu Muhammad yesterday.

The real loss to Bangladesh from the deal would be more than the Tk 1,500 crore annual financial loss estimated by research organisations, he said at a seminar on the risks of the US-Bangladesh trade deal organised by Ganatantrik Odhikar Committee, a left-leaning platform, at the Economic Reporters’ Forum auditorium in Dhaka.

It is not only the loss in revenue from the zero-duty benefit extended to American goods; Bangladesh will have to purchase some unnecessary goods from the US at higher costs, he said.

For instance, under the agreement, Bangladesh will have to purchase 14 aircraft from the American company Boeing.

Bangladesh’s trade with other countries such as Spain, Russia and China may be affected due to signing of the deal as the US does not have warm relationship with these countries, said Muhammad, also the chairman of the platform.

Nearly 70 lakh people may lose employment, particularly in the rural poultry, dairy and related industries, as these sectors will be severely affected by the deal.

“It’ll be an understatement if the agreement is described as a slavery deal. Because, it has left no room for autonomy. Autonomy persisted even in the colonial times, but here, it does not exist. It is an unjust and unfair trade deal.”

The deal was signed ignoring the norms of the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation, the free market economy and even without following the general rules of economics, he said.

“The economy will face a catastrophe if the deal is implemented -- although the foreign minister advocated in favour of this agreement.”

So, the elected government should take the deal to the parliament for wider discussion and ultimately scrap it.

There should be punitive actions against the persons involved in the signing of the agreement, Muhammad added.

The Tk 40.000 crore invested in local poultry and dairy sectors will be the highest affected from the deal, said Maha Mirza, a researcher and rights activist.

The American government gives $42 billion subsidy to its poultry sector, so Bangladesh’s poultry sector will not be able to compete as a result.

“The language of the deal is aggressive, as if the Lord is ordering the subordinates,” she said, citing the stipulation that Bangladesh will have to buy $15 billion worth of LNG over the next 15 years from the US.

It is a double-standard agreement and Bangladesh should cancel this agreement, she added.

“In the agreement, it is mentioned 130 times that ‘Bangladesh will have to’ but only six times that ‘the US will have to’ — this indicates that the deal was dominated by the US,” said Moshahida Sultana, an associate professor at the University of Dhaka’s accounting department.

The immediate past interim government cannot claim it as a success story as the deal will damage the economy, she said, adding that both Jamaat and the BNP were silent during the signing of the agreement.

Many issues are hidden in this agreement and all the issues have not been published yet, said Jyotirmoy Barua, a lawyer.

“The interim government has signed the agreement hurriedly and could not wait for the elected government. But the deal was supposed to be widely discussed in the Parliament before the signing.”

In the constitution, there is no provision of interim government, but it was formed under a special situation. So the deal needs to be discussed in the parliament under the elected government for finalisation, Barua said.

The local pharmaceutical sector will be heavily affected by this agreement, he said.

“This is a lop-sided agreement with strategic risks of mandatory import obligation, pressure on domestic industries and public health and food sovereignty risks,” said Golam Rasul, professor and chair of the department of economics at the International University of Business Agriculture and Technology.

Bangladesh must therefore examine this agreement not only as a commercial document, but as a long-term development commitment.

“Supreme Court ruling invalidates the deal’s legal foundation -- Bangladesh must not ratify an agreement built on a collapsed basis,” he added.