Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Op-Ed «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The observance of International Women’s Day today raises once more the issues which have perennially dogged Bengali women over the years. While it will not do to ignore the reality that women in this country have made significant progress, especially since the liberation of the country, it remains a reality that in a number of ways women by and large remain in a straitjacket. And these are women we happen to be focusing on in all areas of life and especially in the middle class and poorer sections of society. But, first, let the point be noted that the enactment of such laws as those related to repression on women has in an important way signalled the refusal of Bangladesh’s society to accept complacence any more where it is a matter of women’s rights. The law has served as quite a deterrent to the depredations women have been suffering from in the country. But even as we say that, we remain acutely conscious of the many forms of harassment women remain subjected to in such places as the home and the workplace. There are whole groups of women, educated as well as academically backward, who continue to go through verbal and physical abuse at the hands of their husbands almost on a regular basis. And what adds to the problem is the fact that many of these women, either out of fear or a sense of humiliation, choose not to report the abuse. That is a sign of how much more needs to be done to inspire confidence in women about the ability and readiness of the state to provide them with the security they are in need of.
   It is in the workplace that women continue, in a very large number of instances, to go through pain and suffering on a number of accounts. In such areas as garment units, it is regularly women who, in their terribly emaciated state, continue to work long hours, often without availing an opportunity of a national holiday, and return home only to sleep awhile before another day dawns. That would not have affected public sensitivities so much were it not for the fact that there are garment units whose owners invariably fail to clear the dues of these workers, to a point where on such religious occasions as Eid these workers have little option but to take to the streets. There are other problems, such as those related to sexual harassment in the workplace. It is an issue that the general public may not know much about, but it is there all the same. Those who go through it may confide in their friends about their ordeal, but do not expect them to report such incidents and end up losing their jobs. The upshot of it is that women in Bangladesh are still in need of a strong security net, in terms of legality, that will make it hard for anyone to exploit them for sexual purposes. But perhaps we are wasting our words? Perhaps what has been happening at the political level around the matter of women’s representation in Parliament is a pointer to what really ails the country? Be that as it may, the thought that must go out today is that there are still the long miles women need to traverse if they mean to occupy the place that is rightfully theirs in the broad social structure. Put simply, the rights of women cannot be ensured as long as there are still people around who believe that it is all right to have a pretty, well-dressed young woman holding a tray with a pair of scissors on it, ready for the moment when a pompous man will inaugurate a new enterprise through cutting the ribbon before him. It is a situation where women are still treated as commodities in a yet male chauvinistic society.
   We wish we could say that everything is all right for women in this people’s republic. The fact is that it is not. That is the point we must all bear in mind as we observe International Women’s Day this year.

The Taiwan story

The Chinese government’s plans to enact an anti-secession law have naturally led to much comment around the world. It is not too hard to understand why Beijing needs, or so it thinks, such a law. The way in which politicians in Taiwan, including President Chen Shui-bian, have been going around bandying the idea of Taiwan being in a position to declare independence has predictably aroused the ire and concern of the rulers in Beijing. Ever since the nationalist Chinese regime of Chiang Kai-shek fled to Formosa, or Taiwan, in the face of the communist take-over of the mainland in 1949, Mao Zedong and his successors have considered Taiwan a renegade province. But one thought which united the communists and the nationalists was that China (and that included Taiwan) was one single, indivisible country. Chiang ruled in Taipei believing all the while that his government would relocate to Beijing some day. In similar fashion, Mao and his followers kept up the hope that one day Taipei would come back in from the cold.
   And along the way, some rather funny things happened. For a long number of years, the communist regime in China was treated as a pariah by the West, especially the United States, so much so that Beijing was not permitted to take its place at the United Nations. China was out of the nationalists’ grasp, but the seat for China was till 1971 occupied by Taiwan. But then began the process of change. Or you could say that when France’s Charles de Gaulle recognised the government in Beijing in 1964, the year in which Mao and Zhou En-lai impressed the world through exploding an atomic bomb, the process of change began. In any case, Richard Nixon went to China in February 1972. The rest is history. Given that such is the story, given too that Hong Kong has gone back to China, it makes little sense to argue, as its former leader Lee Teng-hui does, that Taiwan has never been part of China. That is playing truant with history.

In a way, you can say that the assassination of Rafik Hariri in Lebanon has been a blessing in disguise. Lest that sound insensitive, let the matter be clarified here. It is that history has generally run along courses people have never been sure about. Although men and women have spent long days and nights mulling over the way history takes shape, they have not quite been able to predict the ultimate path or form history will take. Examples are rife about the many twists and turns history has taken in its movement forward. Rumania’s Nicolae Ceausescu tried to quell discontent in his country in 1989 and then found that his last rally in Timisoara was the perfect reason for the final explosion. He did not survive. In Bangladesh, the Pakistani junta thought that an unleashing of genocide would cow the Bengalis into submission and a renewed oath of loyalty to the Muslim state. It turned out to be quite the reverse, as the whole country went forth into a war for national liberation. In America in 1968, President Johnson was clearly looking forward to a second term in office when Eugene McCarthy’s unexpectedly strong showing in the New Hampshire primary scuttled all his plans. The Yugoslavia which Josip Broz Tito forged all by himself began to disintegrate soon after his death in 1980. And what Mikhail Gorbachev saw as the beginning of political and economic reform in the Soviet Union in the mid-1980s ended up with the socialist superpower falling apart by the early 1990s. 
   It is this kind of historical observation which helps people to understand the fresh opening we experience today in Lebanon. Since the mid-1970s, when the country plunged into civil war caused by all its Christian, Muslim and Druze militias and factions (a war that was to last fifteen years), Lebanon has been something of an unquiet place. In the early 1980s, the presence of Yasser Arafat and his Fatah guerrillas created a situation where the Palestinians seemed to be in control of the country. That prompted the Israelis to move in, with the ultimate terrible consequences. The PLO was forced to move out to Tunis. And then there came the outrage of the massacre at the Sabra and Shatila Palestinian refugee camps, all perpetrated by Falangist guerrillas with the active support of then Israeli defence minister Ariel Sharon. On top of everything, it was the Syrian army which then decided to move in. It swiftly took control of the northern part of the country and in no time was calling all the political shots in Beirut. With 14,000 of its soldiers stationed in the country, and with its own band of loyalists among Lebanese civil and political society, the Syrians have over the years spread their dominance into every part of the Lebanese body politic. Lately, however, it was Rafik Hariri, a businessman-turned politician and former prime minister, who openly began demanding that the Syrian forces leave the country. That was in response to the flagrant manner in which the Syrian government twisted Lebanese political arms to have the constitution amended for President Emile Lahoud, a Damascus favourite, to be elected to a new term in office. 
   The consequences of the Hariri murder are now all over the place. The global community has quite rightly echoed the demand of the Lebanese people that Syria remove its forces from Lebanon in order for Beirut to regain its sovereignty in a truly meaningful manner. On the streets, the people of Lebanon are busy engaging in what they think will be an ultimate revolution on the pattern of the changes that have occurred in Europe in recent years. That has forced Syrian President Bashar Assad to talk of a redeployment of his troops and of their relocation to the Bekaa valley. But that will not be enough. Eventually, Damascus will need to be pushed into a situation where all its soldiers must go back home. 
   The death of Rafik Hariri could thus turn out to be a catalyst to real change in Lebanon. 
   
   Balance of power
   The Chinese government has just gone for a more than twelve per cent increase in its defence budget. That has caused worries in the West, especially in the United States. But when everything is considered, it makes sense for Beijing to bolster its defences at a time when the United States happens to be running the show virtually all by itself on the global stage. Since the demise of the Soviet Union, there has been nothing called a balance of power in terms of geo-political strategy. While one may not dismiss the notion that socialism as epitomised by the Soviet Union just might make a return someday, one does have to admit that at this point a counterbalance is a huge requirement for the international community. Given the fact that America and the European Union have already established for themselves a secure political and economic base, given too that NATO is yet out there despite the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact years ago, it makes sense for countries like China, India and even the hard-pressed Russia to take all those steps which will increase their importance as regional and eventual global powers. The Chinese and Indian economies have been growing at a phenomenal pace. Militarily, the two countries remain powerful symbols of influence in the Asian region. It is thus here that a new balance of power could be struck. The leeway which Washington has enjoyed around the world in terms of expanding its influence, especially after September 11, clearly needs to be checked if the power of the neo-cons in America is not to dog future generations. 
   As to the question of whether or not socialism as ideology and as policy can make a return depends on how fast the pace of social impoverishment is in the poorer regions of the world. But let note be taken of the fact that there are indeed signs of hope coming from places like South America, where lately there has been an upsurge in favour of having left-wing governments. In Brazil, Chile, Venezuela and now Uruguay, there are now presidents who have been committed leftists all their lives. Under these men, there is something of renewed hope for people all over the world that socialism as a way of life, as a moral principle, is yet alive if not exactly kicking. And, of course, that wily old survivor Fidel Castro has for two entire generations carried the torch forward. When he passes from the scene, it will be important for his successors to watch out for any trouble. The trouble may come from Cuban exiles waiting in Miami since the late 1950s to take Havana with American military help. John F. Kennedy may have dithered over the Bay of Pigs in 1961. That is hardly any reason to assume that George W. Bush, America’s most trigger-happy president in memory, will hold himself back from pushing on to Cuba once news comes through that Castro has died. 
   
   Malaysia deportees
   The Malaysian authorities have been arresting and deporting a very large number of illegal foreign workers from the country. That was surely the right thing to do. Included among these illegal foreign workers are a very significant number of Bangladeshis, many of whom are now back home. A lot of them were forced to take refuge at the airport in Kuala Lumpur as a way of avoiding arrest. A rather peculiar part of the story is that a number of Bangladeshis who have arrived back home have complained about the Bangladesh mission in Kuala Lumpur. One of them apparently wanted to speak to the country’s high commissioner in Malaysia. He was upset that the high commissioner did not speak to him and that an officer at the mission hung up when he called. The question is: what does the high commissioner have to do with a host country’s move to deport illegal aliens from its territory? 
   The more important point here is for the authorities in Bangladesh to go for investigations into the matter of how so many Bangladeshis have been working illegally in Malaysia. The manpower agents or agencies which sent these hapless people to Kuala Lumpur in the first place need to be brought under the purview of intelligence operations with a view to nabbing the culprits behind the scandal. The sooner it is done, the better for all of us.
   Talleyrand can be reached at editorial@newagebd.com