>"Corruption! Corruption is our protection, corruption is what keeps us safe and warm, and corruption is why we win."
 
It seems as if this is a quote from GOI officer talking about all the states of India specially of the North East. The difference in this case, even GOI is corrupt.
RB
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 10:51 AM
Subject: [Assam] PAYOLA'S PAYOFF

The following article was published in Sunday's Houston Chronicle. Should US government let American companies run business overseas as European companies do or should they be held to higher moral (?)standards? Should bribery overseas be accepted as a cost of doing international business? If so, why shouldn't bribery in India be treated as legitimate also?
What do you think?
 
Dilip Deka
==============================================================================
Viewpoints, Outlook

Jan. 14, 2006, 6:37PM
PAYOLA'S PAYOFF
Legalize bribery? Yes, it's a fact of life
Quit penalizing U.S. businesses: Let them pay the cost of doing business abroad
"Corruption! Corruption is our protection, corruption is what keeps us safe and warm, and corruption is why we win."
Those lines from the movie Syriana — spoken by a Texas oilman character who thinks nothing of offering bribes to successfully do business in the Middle East — are supposed to provoke moral revulsion in film-going audiences.
They shouldn't. Not if you care about the United States being able to compete effectively in the global marketplace.
Here's the truth: Many countries with a long history of global business, including France and Germany, even permit bribes and gratuities to be tax deducted as a cost of doing business.
Like it or not, offering a bribe to gain a contract, speed up a procedure or ensure better service is a common and expected practice in the vast majority of the international business world.
Yet, under U.S. law, we make it a crime for an American businessman to do what is expected and common in a host country, literally forcing American businessmen to operate in the shadows if they want to compete.
Talk about moronic.
If it's OK to drive 95 miles per hour in the Middle East, and a Houston oilman visiting there does so, should Texas state troopers give a speeding ticket to him if they find out about it because you can't go over 70 on Houston freeways?
That's how goofy the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 is. It made giving gifts, money or anything of value to influence foreign officials illegal in countries where there is no objection to the practice.
The exasperation of a fictional Texas oil company owner over that act came through loud and clear in Syriana: "We've all got the foreign corrupt practices act committed to memory — I've got a copy of it taped to the wall of my head."
That 1977 act was amended by the Ombudsman Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, known as OCTA, which defined more specifically types of business acts not permitted under the law and provided for substantially increased fines for violations.
Together, those acts make it extremely difficult at best and impossible at the worst for the United States to be truly cross-culturally competent and location-sensitive; therefore, and perhaps unintentionally, retarding the development of American ibusiness internationally.
In 2004, it is estimated, U.S. firms lost more than 50 contracts worth $25 billion to rivals, such as the French and German corporations whose governments endorse business bribes.
A case in point is the story of a U.S. manufacturing firm that wanted to establish an assembly operation in Turkey. Located in a remote part of Turkey to stimulate economic development, the plant needed a railroad spur constructed so it could operate efficiently. The Turks expected a little something to grease their palms. But the Americans didn't fork over anything.
After three years, the spur still was not built, and the irked Americans sold the company to a German firm. Immediately after the sale, the railroad spur was completed. The Germans knew how to do business in Turkey.
An insidious side effect of these congressional acts is our cultural arrogance as we try to impose our values, our business practices and our way of doing things upon other countries. Imperialism with guns and troops is easily identified and countered.
Imperialism of values, such as these congressional acts, is treacherous because it is indirect, subtle, cumulative and destroys the sovereignty of countries.
The United States, in its cultural arrogance, was the driving force behind the 1997 international agreement called the Treaty On Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions.
The United States and 32 other countries, including Germany and France, signed the treaty. But the only way countries would sign is if the treaty was so watered down that it had no enforcement teeth.
So it isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
But that didn't stop the then-U.S. commerce secretary, William Daley, from putting a good moralistic spin his hard work when the agreement was signed: "This will level the playing field. For 20 years our companies played fair, and now the rest of the world will have to play by the same rules."
What a joke.
Bates is dean of the University of Houston-Downtown College of Business. Prior to arriving in Houston last summer, he was dean of the College of Business and Economics at the national university in the oil rich country of United Arab Emirates.


_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
_______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org

Reply via email to