When the Nato forces intervened in Kosovo to save the Kosovars from the genocide by the Serbs the Russians were not happy, and the Nato intervention had to take place without UN sanction, though, later, UNSC authorised stationing of Nato forces in Kosovo. The invasion of Iraq by the US, though not an appropriate example of morality at its best, did free the Iraqis and the neighbouring Arabs from the erratic behavior and muscling of Saddam Hussein.

But in the case of Burma, the military rule spanning over decades, and the internment of Aung San Suu Kyi for years together, have not produced international reaction to right the wrongs being done to the Burmese people by the military junta by denying the people their inalienable right to choose their rulers. UN sanctions prohibiting issuance of visas to the henchmen of the junta, and denying financial benefits to them, just have not worked. Asean and neighbouring countries continue to deal with the Burmese government for their own selfish ends. The Japanese appear to favour engagement over coercion in dealing with the Burmese authorities.

This essay is not about Burma or Milosovic but about the conditions that are necessary for people to engage in participatory democracy. It has to be clearly understood that casting a vote once every four or five years cannot be the be all and end all of democracy.

This exercise, which is expensive (e.g. US), or time consuming (e.g. India), is aimed at providing certain services (social goods) to the people, and must have a structural mechanism to overthrow those people who are unable to make good the promises they made at the time of election.

One could think of the recall vote that exists in California, under which the voters can recall their representative from the assembly if they are not satisfied with his/her performance. The recent events in Bangladesh have amply proved that lack of accountability of the government, and lack of democracy within the political parties, can lead to catastrophe. That was averted at the eleventh hour through the proclamation of a state of emergency in the country.

The question to be asked is how we reached a state of nihilism, understood through Nietzsche's explanation of devaluation of highest values due to secularisation of society. The events of the recent past have shown that our politicians had put their trust in the ethic of absolute end, i.e. the end justifies the means, condemning the society to political and moral impotence. In our case, nihilism resulted from conscious rejection of moral values.

The task of basing our society on moral principles, not those grounded in any particular religion or sectarian belief but the ones people have believed from time immemorial, will not be easy. Given the fact that to accelerate our economic development a degree of capital accumulation would be necessary, which may not necessarily be done through legal ways (Joseph Kennedy's accumulation of wealth during the Prohibition period in the US readily comes to mind), may give rise to contradiction between strict observation of the laws and the necessity of capital accumulation for furtherance of economic development.

The description, by Yeves Menay (La Corruption de la Republique), of corruption as: (1) violation of social rules and norms, (2) secret exchange among political, social and economic markets, (3) illegal access given to individuals and groups to the process of political and administrative decision making, and (4) resultant tangible benefits to the parties involved in the transaction, is essentially correct.

In effect, corruption establishes clientalist relations between the government and the economic elite, to the exclusion of Amartya Sen's contention that development is a fundamental right of all people living in a society.

One must, however, accept the fact that all men are not born equal and, as in Marxian terminology, poverty stricken people have nothing to sell but themselves, as opposed to the wealth of the few that increases constantly; the fundamental premise remains that in a free market economy there would be employers and employees who are expected to have fair contractual relations.

In this equation the government would have a prominent regulatory role, to keep in check the insatiable thirst of the capitalists to make as much profit as possible. Even if Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" in terms of socio-political evolution has not yet been reached, the defeat of communist ideology and incessant globalization have put countries like Bangladesh, a chronicle of underdevelopment at best of times, in a situation where the country with built-in disadvantages has to compete with others who are already far better placed than it is.

Therefore, we have to weigh carefully the advantages and disadvantages of practicing liberal democracy, which has effectively meant "missing people" after the elections are over in Bangladesh, vis-à-vis a transparent and accountable democracy under the eyes of regulatory institutions that would call the aberrant to account whenever corruptive and collusive faults beyond the threshold of tolerance are detected.

Indeed, there are gaps in such a road map because of the inherent contradiction between growth and egalitarian distribution of social goods. But when hard choices have to be made, one has to concede in some areas to gain in other areas. Only Bangladeshis, and Bangladeshis alone, should make the choices, as these would not only affect their future but the future of the coming generations as well.

Kazi Anwarul Masud is a former Secretary and Ambassador.