Let parliament decide its fate

The interim government (IG), led by Nobel laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus, organised a clean and widely accepted general election on February 12 last. It deserves kudos on this account.
For its successor, a popularly elected government, the IG, however, has left behind at least three major irritants: move to appoint DP World as operator of the New Mooring Container Terminal in Chittagong, the proposed pay scale for government servants and the agreement on reciprocal tariffs (ART) with the United States of America.
The first two are now dormant, but have all the potential to resurface and create problems for the new government in the near future. The third one is alive and perplexing in view of the latest developments surrounding the deal.
At the fag end of its 18-month rule, the IG did a major disservice to the nation -- it struck a trade deal with the United States only three days before the general election. Instead of waiting for an elected government, it inked the deal that many believe amounts to surrender to US President Donald Trump's whims.
When Trump imposed a 37-percent reciprocal tariff on Bangladesh simultaneously with most other trade partners, the government, naturally, became deeply worried about losing Bangladesh's single-largest apparel-export market. Policymakers, justifiably, did initiate a dialogue with the US Trade Representative (USTR) office. Following negotiations, the US government had cut the RT to 20 per cent, and in the final deal, the rate was further reduced by 1.0 per cent. Bangladesh was not the only country to sign a deal. Many trade partners of the USA also gave in and signed deals that carry a number of non-disclosure clauses. Trump forced the signatory countries to agree on the import of US farm produce, aircraft, arms etc in exchange for entry of merchandise into the US market with or without duty. The world has never seen such arm-twisting trade deals.
In the deal it struck with Washington, Bangladesh promised to buy aircraft from Boeing, wheat, soybeans, cotton, oil, LNG etc worth billions of dollars, despite the fact that these imports would be relatively expensive compared to those purchased from traditional sources. The US also offered conditional zero-tariff access for Bangladeshi goods, RMG in particular, to its market. To get such a facility, the RMG items will have to be produced with US cotton and man-made fibre (MMF).
However, Trump's bid to impose higher tariffs on imports suffered a big jolt on Friday when the US Supreme Court ruled that tariffs imposed by the US President using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) were illegal.
Enraged by the court decision, Trump immediately imposed a 15-percent temporary surcharge on imports in two phases. He also promised to explore alternatives under his command to replace the tariffs that, according to him, the court has incorrectly rejected.
What will Bangladesh do now? According to the deal it has signed with the USA, Bangladeshi goods were to face a 19-percent tariff. Following the US SC decision, that tariff rate does not exist anymore. It will now be less, at 15 per cent (until Trump finds alternatives to raise tariffs to his liking).
If Bangladesh sticks to the deal, it will have to import US goods worth billions at higher prices. Grace point is that it will enjoy zero duty on RMG items only if those are made from American cotton and man-made fibre. It is unlikely that Bangladesh had done the necessary cost-benefit analysis before striking the ART.
Should Bangladesh now backtrack on the hastily done trade deal? What about other countries which have signed trade deals with Trump?
International analysts and legal experts, according to the Financial Times (FT), maintain that governments around the world are unlikely to renege on trade pacts signed with the US over the past year, despite the Supreme Court ruling. Quoting a top official of the International Chamber of Commerce, the FT said the deals signed with the US were not in imminent danger of collapsing, though the court ruling raised questions about their ultimate durability. Countries might also stay away from discarding the trade deals for fear of reprisal by Trump. The countries that until now have not signed deals with the USA are in a comfortable state, for they will count only 15-percent duty on their exports to the USA without any sort of binding.
Under the circumstances, the question agitating the minds of many is: why did not the IG wait for a couple of days to pass the onus of signing the ART with the USA onto an elected government?
It is no secret that incumbent foreign minister Dr Khalilur Rahman, who was the security adviser of the IG, played the key role in negotiations with US officials on the ART. Commerce Adviser Sk Bashir Uddin and Commerce Secretary Mahbubur Rahman did not have that much involvement in the core negotiations. In fact, Rahman did all the spadework. Only he can explain the reasons behind going too fast on signing the ART.
Since the BNP government will have to deal with the issue, it should seek to know from Dr Khalilur Rahman, whom it has inducted in the cabinet as foreign minister, the reasons.
It remains to be seen how the BNP government handles the ART issue.
Dr Khalil's inclusion as a member of the BNP government's cabinet has evoked surprises in the political circles and beyond. On May 22 last year, the BNP leaders, while briefing newsmen after their meeting with Dr Muhammad Yunus, demanded the removal of three advisers of his government. They were Mahfuz Alam, Asif Mahmud Sajib and Dr Khalil. Inclusion of Khalil in the BNP government cabinet, thus, caused many to raise eyebrows. None of the BNP top notches has so far felt the need to offer an explanation, notwithstanding the fact that their political opponents have tried to find a link between the BNP's victory in the February 12 polls and the induction of Khalil in the cabinet.
The country's Constitution (Article 145A) makes it mandatory to place agreements, on trade or otherwise, with foreign countries in Parliament through the President of the Republic. The past governments, in most cases, showed reluctance to comply with that constitutional provision. The new parliament, which is due to start business on 12th March next for the first time, should deviate from the past, discuss the ART elaborately and make a decision that would benefit the country.

Zahidmar10@gmail.com