& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Should we go easy on the Two Ladies?

FARID BAKHT
POLITICS is highly personalised here. If we cannot find a king, we look for a queen. That explains the style of governance. Presiding over affairs. Gliding through an administration, never getting a grip on matters. Strategy is an unknown word.
Why do we keep focusing on the Two Ladies? Just because they hold the title of leader does not mean they actually hold the reins of power. We don't really believe they decide our fate, do we? Even if they think they do.
A businessman-cum-politician explained to me what the game is all about. He said, Bangladesh is like a plane about to take off. Everything is in place. The seat belts are on. However, the crew cannot get the plane off the ground. Looking out of the window, they see the ladies holding on to each wing, pulling it back. Naturally, each Lady is on either side of the aircraft since they cannot possibly stand next to each other. The solution was left unsaid but the implications are clear.
I think this is a little unfair to the two ladies who have been manipulated all through their political lives. They try their best to rule autocratically, but are they ruling or are they following bad advice, whispered respectfully in their ears? How else can you explain the opposition shooting themselves in the foot with hartal general strikes? One can imagine an 'adviser' whispering in her ear: "Madam, we need to call a hartals, otherwise they will think we are weak." To which, the response is: "Yes, Let's."
Meanwhile, in the palace, another adviser will be explaining: "The newspapers all belong to the opposition. Madam, the people are with you. The newspapers are creating an artificial crisis about bombs and food prices, they are trying to ruin our image, but grambangla will vote you back in. Forget about the Tues-day/Wednesday group."
A twist in the tale
If we want to insist on sticking to personalities, especially women, I could say we have been concentrating on the wrong "two ladies." Two other ladies have a decisive role in the immediate political map of Bangladesh. Christina and Christine could come up with up with a very different
state of affairs.
I have no idea why one (Rocca) has decided that a superpower can do without an ambassador who is known as a South Asian expert. It was not his command of Bangla that got him his posting -- it was his extensive experience with India and more. The transition has not been smooth. It is taking forever. Usually, one finds a replacement before one asks the incumbent to move on. If the expert really was promoted, then Bangladesh must still be seen as a backwater banana republic where no one wants our equivalent of bananas, namely our reserves of natural gas. That also does not square with the story of an imminent Islamic challenge and 500 exploding bombs.
From time to time, the Court of St. James can do without a US Ambassador or be sent a generous car dealer as a reward for hefty Republican Party donations. Ambassadors hardly matter there. Not so in far away South Asia.
Perhaps history could give us a clue. Thirty years ago, there seems to have been a disagreement between an
Ambassador and other agencies on how to bring about political change in Dacca. Then, the hawks overrode the dovish Ambassador, ensuring that the "project" was on. Chile's Allende in 1973 was followed by Bangladesh's Mujib two years later.
This is not 1975 and we have a democratically elected regime now. Still, who knows what is in the pipeline (no pun intended!).
The other lady presides over the macroeconomic policy and planning of this country and is not averse to discussing the state of bad governance in public. Analysis and recommendations from the Country Director of the World Bank emailed back to Washington will be critically important in the months ahead.
Look out for the phrase: "We can (or cannot) do business with X."
The world is more complicated and is not dependent on the whims of one of two individuals, though they may hold influence. So, let us move away from focusing on two or more ladies, theirs or ours, and instead think about the underlying factors.
The next eighteen months may be the most crucial period in a generation. If this political class thinks it can buy the next elections and put the rest of us through another five years of dithering, incompetence, and robbery, they might want to think again. Geopolitical actors, multinational companies, and aid agencies are exasperated and getting bolder by the day. For somewhat different reasons, local industrialists, consumers, and intellectuals are fretting too. Discontent is rising on all sides.
Despite the tamasha about which practice is "best" for staging an election (if we assume there is going to be an election), it will not end there. No losing party will accept the result. The election result will have to be "enforced" if it is going to stick.
Far more important issues are in play, way above the heads of one or two individuals. I, for one, am not bothered about the name of my next queen.
The author is a freelance contributor to The Daily Star.