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

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The prospect of face-to-face discussions between our two estranged former prime ministers, Bangladesh Nationalist Party chairperson Khaleda Zia and Awami League president Sheikh Hasina, has triggered widespread excitement and anticipation among the people. The plan to bring the two leaders together, which was first proposed by veteran lawyer Rafiqul Huq and later endorsed by the Federation of Bangladesh Chambers of Commerce and Industry, could, if brought to fruition, see the first meaningful dialogue between the two leaders since the end of the autocratic rule of former president Hussein Muhammad Ershad some eighteen years ago. It is very easy to explain, therefore, why the people of this country want so much to see these leaders sit down and have a substantive discussion. In the last eighteen years, the people have been witness only to the politics of violence and confrontation it is the aspiration of our citizens that a qualitative change in our political system will require the two top leaders to come together and work towards ending the tradition of acrimonious politics. Those who oppose the idea of a possible dialogue, therefore, espouse a position that runs contrary to the popular aspirations for a sound, competitive political process and the democratisation of the society and state.
   However, it is very important to point out that a meeting between the two principal figures in our politics alone will not bring an end to the animosity and culture of confrontation between the two rival political camps, much less bring a qualitative improvement in the nature of politics in our country. While a meeting between Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina may act as a symbolic start to the normalisation of relations between their rival camps, the confrontational nature of our politics will almost certainly continue till the major parties go through a process of democratic reorientation. Furthermore, it is unlikely that talks between top leaderships of the main parties will bear much fruit till certain historic political knots are untied. Hence, while bringing together Khaleda and Hasina may have symbolic value at this time, it will not automatically trigger the kind of change that we hope to see in our politics.
   Regardless of whether or not the two leaders ultimately do meet for talks prior to the upcoming general elections, we feel it is extremely important that they understand that the people of this country are looking to them to bring about a qualitative change in our politics by ending the culture of violence and confrontation. That will require that they take their parties through a process of internal democratisation and also that they show greater respect for democratic ideals and norms within the wider political arena. In order to do so, many in society believe that a face-to-face dialogue between them and subsequent public commitments of mutual tolerance and democratic conduct would help advance the cause of the people. Whether they will finally meet is up to them at the moment. But who knows? For their own sake, they may need to come together once again, as they did to oust the autocratic regime of General Ershad in the late eighties.

Earthquake preparedness an imperative

A series of mild earthquakes, experts say, may be the forerunner to a massive earthquake. Bangladesh has reasons to feel concerned at some predictions in this regard. While tremors of low magnitude in the hilly regions of Chittagong and Sylhet are almost routine, more recently the capital city and places around it have also experienced quakes. The intensity was mild or their epicentre was far away due to which no losses occurred but they carry dire portents. On Friday morning a mild earthquake measuring 3.3 on the Richter scale hit the country, according to a New Age report published yesterday. Being of low intensity it was not widely felt. On the previous day an earthquake of the magnitude of 5.9 shook the country. This was a moderate quake but no tragedy occurred because its epicentre was away in western Tibet. Last July a quake shook Rajshahi and some buildings in the city, including a hostel, were damaged. A major quake is said to be due in this region, since none took place in the last one hundred years. At present Dhaka has been listed among the world’s top twenty most quake-prone cities.
   When a destructive earthquake actually occurs, the country’s helplessness will be accentuated due to multiple reasons. Firstly, the present interim government gave a poor account of preparedness and skill in dealing with even such natural disasters as were predictable and familiar, like the recent flood and last year’s cyclone. The present generation has no experience of earthquakes. And an earthquake is a disaster which finds countries like China and Japan at a loss in rescuing victims and limiting the damage. Secondly, Dhaka is now a city of skyscrapers. We have no idea whether basic preparedness exists in the relevant government agencies and whether any simulation exercise is being undertaken. Consultations can be held with friendly countries that possess good experience of grappling with frequent earthquakes. Besides, as this country shares geological plates with neighbouring countries a regional interlinking as a part of preparedness will be in order.
   The seminal question is whether the disaster response agencies like the fire service possess all the necessary and advanced equipment. Rescue teams with advanced tools and the required mobility must be in a state of perpetual readiness to swing into action at any moment. We cannot afford to ignore our capacity to respond to such a disaster until it actually happens – the human cost will be too high.

The controversy reached a crescendo a few days ago, and beyond the Eid shopping hype, the detritus of the pandemonium can still be traced. In fact, as Eid draws near and the holidays set in, the common topic for argument, apart from the one involving the impending elections, will be the matter of a group of our cricketers who have been summarily branded as rebels for their decision to join the Indian Cricket League.
   Emotions regarding the matter are still very raw as most people have not wasted time in branding the players absolute traitors. Several newspapers carried articles denouncing the decision of the players to go and play in the ICL and even papers in their editorials have often taken the position from where the players just look like an avaricious bunch with no regard whatsoever for national pride.
   Now, interestingly, in most articles and features that have come out on the issue, we have hardly seen attempts to look at this tangled event from a wider or, even, a liberal perspective. And, therefore, in the majority of situations the players have been lambasted, mocked and ridiculed. But, did we take a pause to think and ask why a barrage of scathing criticism was launched against the players? Almost all the reports and the countless series of public opinion letters that were published focused on one side only – the dishonourable capitulation of the players to money and it was this that was, and still is, harped on without a break.
   Of course, we must not condone the abruptness with which the thing happened and the players should be blamed for taking such a decision suddenly. They should have realised that the sporting arena, which is layered thickly with conventional ideas, may not be ready for such a blast. And, that is exactly what happened. Our sporting arena loves to bask in high ideals though, in reality, how much of that is true needs to be investigated. But it’s safe to say that though there are dark areas in the whole structure, the top layer is always meticulously presented with all the right rhetoric. The fact is that when a player is in super form, he is fed with all sorts of patriotic lines and ideals, but the moment s/he sustains an injury, the sporting authority tends to lose patience with him/her fast. Maybe in cricket, the situation is a little better but in all other sports the moment you end up on the sidelines, the authority is hit by a bout of apathy. And, that’s exactly why so many of our talented footballers end their career with injury and a total feeling of indignation. There are many instances where a football player, after sustaining an injury, could not afford to pay for the expensive treatment abroad and had to fade away from the game. At that time the player needed hard cash to help him but those who once showered them with ideals conveniently disappeared.
   Coming back to cricket, the arguments against the point above may be that the cricketers who opted to play in the ICL are already wealthy and so, could have decided to reject the lure of more money.
   Now, that line, in a world where players are all about money, sounds too naïve. Accept it, players will always look for more earnings and that is never a bad thing because a player also has the right to become a millionaire and if possible, a billionaire. Ironically, when top international players switch sides for obscene amounts of money, we laud them, but when we are faced with such a situation in our own sporting arena, we swiftly don that ‘holier than thou’ cloak.
   And interestingly, when the ICL complication involving our players was splashed across the papers the recurring focus was always the demeaning selling of the players to mega bucks. And as days went by this ground was carefully ploughed to give the so called ‘revolt’ by the players a murkier dimension. But, maybe, to understand the whole problem we need to understand the finer layers of politics that involves ICL itself. The brainchild of Subhash Chandra, the owner of Zee Networks, and Kapil Dev, Indian cricketer and member of the Indian World Cup winning team in 1983, one of ICL’s aims was to allow cricketers from the remote areas of India to get a centre stage and come out in the open. India is a large country and it’s natural that a lot of talent lies in areas where the official scouts do not venture and one of the objectives of the ICL was to give these cricketers a platform to showcase their talent. Money was, of course, a main issue but let us put aside lofty ideals and ask a pertinent question - when is money not the issue?
   Kapil, a veteran cricketer revered all over India, was also slammed for being involved in ICL purely for money and his response was, ‘who would not wish to make money? In our country, everyone wished to work hard and enjoy its fruits.’
   Reportedly, ICL has been branded an ‘outlawed’ league because the Board of Control for Cricket in India feared that accepting ICL would undermine their authority and according to many, that is where the main bone of contention lies. ‘It’s simple – it’s just a tussle for power and the fear of losing authority,’ commented a cricket guru who was not quick to judge the local players and their decision to join the ICL.
   However, it does appear that the hatchets will be buried in India because already there are talks for some sort of reconciliation. The commercial sides, no matter how vulgar they appear to many people, can never be overlooked because today’s world of sports is not all about passion and ideals, it’s also about mega bucks and the undeniable truth is that sport is now a billion dollar commodity. People may rave, rant and throw tantrums but that’s that – it’s passion, glory and ideals wrapped in money.
   Meanwhile, West Bengal sports minister, Subhas Chakraborty, assured Eden Gardens for the Indian Cricket League (ICL) matches and a permanent practice venue in the state, protesting the Indian cricket board’s ‘high-handedness to turn everyone into stooges’.
   Speaking at the glitzy re-launch of Kolkata Tigers club after its takeover by actor Mithun Chakraborty and its rechristening as Royal Bengal Tigers, the minister said, ‘The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) wants stooges. They have misunderstood us. I have just ordered the additional chief secretary to give a formal permission to the IPL to hold the matches. Similarly, if the ICL approaches us, we see no reason for not allowing them to hold matches at Eden Gardens
   So, it seems that the ‘rebel’ league is now on its way to recognition and when this is happening, the continued ostracism of our players seems a little out of sync. In the last one month there have been countless letters filled with venom and our players, who formed Dhaka Warriors, the team to play in the ICL, were vilified beyond tolerance. But, when there is rethinking in India and about the ICL and its objectives, shouldn’t we also stop and look at things from a practical point of view?
   At the ICL, players will get the chance to be exposed to an international standard cricket league with a high level of competition and this will naturally help them in making their game better and as for their commitment to the national team, we do not see why they have to be barred from playing for their country just because they opted to play for ICL. Yes, like this writer said earlier, the way the mass exodus happened does not put the players in a favourable light and, for that they need to be blamed. The respectable thing would have been to talk about it in the open but now it’s useless to carry on with the blame game because if we look at the whole scenario without getting emotional, we see that by getting into impulsive arguments we have actually made our cricket world dirty and divisive. In addition, this whole episode has left a bad taste among the players too. Papers have unjustly sensationalised some aspects of the whole event and for that heroes became villains in a matter of minutes. That is not a good thing. A hero should always be a hero with the understanding that he/she is also human and not without common flaws.