& 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

Hillary Clinton's visit: NRB musings

Syed Saad Andaleeb
ON her recent visit to Bangladesh the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, urged all political actors to come together, engage in constructive dialogue, strengthen the roots of democracy, and build Bangladesh into a prosperous nation. She also commented on the state of law and order in the country that "any violence, disappearance or repression on civil society and press is contrary to democracy and rule of law." And she expressed satisfaction regarding the Bangladesh-US security dialogue, noting the importance of bilateral defense cooperation to advance peace and stability in the region.
Mrs. Clinton's words were largely consonant with the wishes and aspirations of a great majority of the citizens of Bangladesh, as well as the NRBs across the world. Similar words have resonated in the country over years, if not decades, from people of various walks of life and plentifully in the media. For example, in 2000, Rehman Sobhan wrote in the Journal of Bangladesh Studies: "It was at this stage, with elections imminent and the threats by the opposition to boycott these elections, that voices were raised around the country for some effort to try and bridge the gulf between the government and opposition. It was felt that a last attempt be made to mediate an agreement for bringing all parties together to work out a formula which would permit for a free and fair election."
Similarly, Bangladesh Development Initiative (BDI), a policy advocacy group of NRBs in the United States, organised a conference at Harvard in 2008 and articulated a six-point policy framework for sustainable economic growth and social progress in the country. In this vision it was stated that "the people of Bangladesh have also been historically deprived of democratic values and practices that have been replaced by despotic and dictatorial regimes. Re-establishment of democratic values must become a priority of the present government from the party, to the community and to the national levels."
Perhaps the powers-that-be will finally listen to the oft-repeated need to transcend animosities, foster cooperation, and enable Bangladesh to grow unencum-
bered. And if there is a perceptible change in their attitudes and behaviours, some credit must certainly be ascribed to the secretary of state and the significant influence of the United States that accompanies her.
The visit of the US secretary of state, however, raises the question: What was it all about? Largely, her diplomatic words lacked vigour and conviction in articulating a stronger relationship between the two nations. Indeed, the visit seemed mostly a missed opportunity to craft deeper ties and win the hearts of the people of the seventh largest nation on earth. Perhaps whirlwind visits are not conducive for substantive outcomes.
For example, the bilateral defense cooperation agreement between Bangladesh and USA that Mrs. Clinton mentioned is
of greater importance to the United States from a global strategic perspective, especially because of its implications for the containment of rising powers in the Asian region. How Bangladesh gains from the agreement needs greater clarification.
The secretary also met with the forerunners of microfinance. While the meeting seemed to reflect a very narrow interest, and may have even had a not-so-hidden message for the government of Bangladesh, alluding specifically to the achievements of the Grameen Bank, the secretary provided some assurance in the meeting about looking into providing duty free access to Bangladesh garment exports, a subject that the prime minister of Bangladesh had brought up earlier.
It is instructive to note that Bangladesh reportedly paid $652 million in duties to the US treasury last year on exports of $4.27 billion, an amount that rivals the foreign aid received from the US. In comparison, the United Kingdom paid duties of only $351 million on exports to America worth about $50 billion. Inequities such as these could have been cleared up during such an auspicious visit.
Further, many would have liked to see greater US effort to build a solid partnership with Bangladesh, albeit with mutual benefit in mind. For one, an important visit such as this could have been complemented with the accompaniment a team of potential investors, however exploratory their presence, to signal positive intent. Such effort could have resulted in creating a more exciting atmosphere for investments in the country and deepening mutual respect in the relationship.
Bangladeshis would have also liked to see greater commitment of the US to join Bangladesh's fight against poverty by addressing the growing disparity between the haves and the have-nots. Measures such as advancing education and healthcare to empower the downtrodden to over-
come the inequities would earn Mrs. Clinton much kudos. In fact, if such disparities continue to grow, its ramifications are ominous. A proactive policy to help Bangladesh reduce inequality and poverty is very much in the interest of the United States as it is likely to curb the growth of adverse dynamics such as militancy that can heighten insecurity not just within but also across nations.
There is also a general feeling within Bangladesh, as in other Muslim-majority nations, that the United States harbours anti-Muslim sentiments, especially within policy circles. This is reinforced by the US military presence in Afghanistan and other Muslim-majority nations, especially its use of hard power that results in killing and maiming of innocent civilians. Such incidents are reported frequently in the international media and deflate a sense of positive ambience towards the US that requires little elaboration. Here was an opportunity for Mrs. Clinton to stress that the war on terror is not a war on Islam.
And while the security threat faced by the US is real and substantive, generating a need to adopt strong proactive measures, there is also a serious need to
engage in constructive dialogue on this matter, especially about its origins, causes, and possible amelioration strategies. Sweeping this particular issue under the rug is not healthy and the US, as the country leading the war on terror, must pursue every opportunity to engage in constructive dialogue to show clear intent that it would rather divert its immense resources to more productive endeavours instead of wasting them in a drawn-out and draining state of conflict. A statement to this effect by the secretary of state would gain significant mileage.
Bangladesh also needs to develop its human resource base, infrastructure, energy self-sufficiency, and food reserves for the unpredictable effects of climate change. There were no reassuring words from the secretary of state on cooperation in such matters of vital interest to Bangladesh.
There was also some expectation that Mrs. Clinton would bring up the matter of water sharing, a deep concern in Bangladesh, during her passage through India. At the very least she could have broached the guarantees inherent in international laws. That did not seem to happen. Between principle (laid down by international law) and interest (the US-India bilateral relationship), interest seemed to weigh more.
Finally, in a globally connected world, people are aware of the travails of the United States, especially the political rancour and impasse that often hold up economic and social progress in that country. An election year can be especially revealing about the country's raw spots. Thus, when the secretary of state alighted on Bangladeshi soil and reminded its leaders about their intransigence in addressing the country's problems through cooperation, alluding to similar issues and difficulties in her own country may have made her statements more palatable and diplomatically more astute and persuasive.
When a rare and auspicious event passes through town, it leaves behind a variety of good things for the townspeople to savour. This event left the townspeople wondering what they really got.
The writer teaches at Pennsylvania State University and is with Bangladesh Development Initiative (www.bdiusa.org).