I don’t think President Nicolas Sarkozy is funny anyway. He wants to measure the prosperity of France by measuring the degree of happiness of the French citizens. A very innovative idea based on the mindset of a truly caring statesman. In fact every nation strives for economic and social prosperity to make its people happy. The French president says that the traditional way to measure prosperity with cold statistics never tries to measure the real happiness of the citizens. The rates of economic growth must reflect in the lifestyle of the people at home and outside. Piling up of money in the banks and a surging stock market hardly touches the real people’s lives. Sometimes these statistics are deceptive and not based on realities. This is a unique and novel idea if people’s degree of happiness could really be measured. As Bertrand Russell observed that human happiness is a matter of mind not of things. In philosophical terms the idea of happiness is an illusive phenomenon and subject to many variations. It will be impossible to determine what really make a person happy, is it money, love or something else?
   A bagger at the end of a day when he sits before his meal his happiness knows no bound. A millionaire’s unhappiness with a sinking stock market is like a hell for him. We can safely say that a luxury house, an expensive car, a beautiful wife or a lovely child may not be enough to make a person happy unless that person knows what happiness is.
   Akbar Hussain
   Canada

The prime minister and the managers of Dhaka’s traffic deserve our ‘felicitations’ for giving us a ‘clean street’ through their operation code named ‘Operation Clean Street’. I am not sure whether this was meant to be a joke they wanted to pull on the people for if it was their intention, then they must have had sadistic pleasure out of this operation for in this nearly one month, Dhaka’s traffic has given the citizens of this unfortunate city, an insight into hell.
   I am not sure what inspired the prime minister and her men to pull this stunt on us. This stunt was like pouring salt into the wound for Dhaka’s traffic was a nightmare before this so-called operation. The prime minister’s insensitiveness was visible when she added to this misery by moving to attend her daily iftars and the roads she used, became parking lots! It is not just the prime minister and her traffic administrators and controllers added to the miseries on the road; the common users, particularly the drivers of the heavy vehicles contributed their fair share turning Dhaka’s traffic insane. Distances that can be covered in minutes took hours in cars and busses.
   We hear the government is calling the military to straighten the traffic. What a shame? As a sufferer on Dhaka’s roads, I would welcome the army if they can straighten things out. I am sure they can. But then before taking this decision, we would like to see Dhaka’s traffic commissioner who boasted that he would be able to control Dhaka’s traffic on TV interviews to come before us and apologise for his utter and total failure. With him, all his staff should also be packed and shown the door.
   It is true that a lot of Dhaka’s problem with traffic arises from the lack of roads and road space. However during this insanity we are witnessing with Dhaka’s traffic, we are also witnessing an utter and total inability of those controlling Dhaka’s traffic to even comprehend what the problem is, let alone give us a solution. In fact, they are contributing to compound the problem.
   We welcome the military to control Dhaka’s traffic out of desperation but at the same time we demand that these inept and incapable guys in Dhaka’s traffic management should be taken to task. The prime minister should do this for her own sake because they led her to give the people a false sense of hope through the stunt they named ‘Operation Clear Street’ that has lowered her image with the citizens of Dhaka.
   Rashed Ahmed
   Gulshan, Dhaka

It is heartening to note that Bangladesh is preparing its case to support its claim and successfully dispute the already-submitted claims of Myanmar and India in UN. Obviously, such preparation does call for time which is understandable.
   In arguing its case for a justifiable negotiated settlement Bangladesh must point out that most of the riches of the Bay of Bengal (whether on sea or seabed) is due to the mighty rivers flowing through Bangladesh which support the micro-organisms in the ecological chain for such riches, and as is rightly claimed in the report (New Age 16 September) the flow of the rivers and that of the continental shelf is North-South and not East-West (except may be very far down the Chennai coast of India).
   A simple test of the lay of the continental shelf would be where the shelf ends and drops down to the sea bottom. If the vertical walls of such a trench run (on average) East-West then the shelf itself must run North-South, otherwise vice versa.
   Another point to raise with the UN is the dire survival necessity of the people of Bangladesh due to global warming (which was unknown when the present law of the sea was adopted), and rise of sea level, which makes a mockery of the term ‘coastline’ or baseline as was defined in the law of the sea for a country like Bangladesh.
   Because of all these factors, a rough guess at an equitable settlement to a layman like me seems to be two thirds of the resources to Bangladesh, and one third divided between India and Myanmar.
   Engineer Shafi Ahmed
   London, UK

This is a work of fiction; any links with facts and realities are purely coincidental though some may say that this is what happens in reality in Bangladesh. Let us say, that the government plans to erect a fifteen storied office building. The Public Works department prepares a budget for the project; which is approved by the government and the work starts. To begin with a sub-soil investigation is done, to ensure that the design has all relevant soil data needed for the proper design. This soil test report goes to the Public Works Design department and here the fun and games start!
   Let us suppose that as per the designer’s calculation, the building foundation, based on the soil test report needs say 200 (cast-in-situ) piles of 24 inch diameter to support the building dead and live loads, and for that, each pile needs to be 120 feet deep below ground. This basic data is squirreled away, and the official design drawings and specifications prescribe 200 numbers of 24 inch diameter piles, but this has to be 180 feet deep.
   During pile driving which is all underground and a very dirty noisy and messy job, the piles are actually driven up to 120 feet deep. May be a few are 180 feet deep if these come under some boss’ direct supervision who are not in the gravy train loop. The reinforcements and the concrete are all pored to the safe 120 feet depth. However the piling contractor bills for all piles and materials on the basis of 180 feet depth. Since it is as per design and specification, the bill for piling and the materials for the piles are duly passed. The extra amount billed by the contractor (180-120) feet for pile driving and all materials needed (cement, sand, stone shingles and reinforcing steel rods) for the 60 feet of non-existent piles are merrily shared by the contractor and the Public Works Department people involved in the job! Assuming that the cost of the building foundation was to be taka 18 crore then easily 20 per cent of this amount which is taka 3.6 crore is shared by say 100 people, each being paid according to his status in a disciplined verbal and established protocol.
   The same exercise starting from design and specifications is repeated in casting beams, columns and all necessary concrete work, as well as brick work and all other ancillary works needed to complete the building in all respect. Every thing progresses smoothly and the building is fully ready. Meanwhile, quite a few pockets have gained around taka one crore or something like that. The grateful contractor too is happy, meanwhile the building too is structurally safe, and as per design parameters; though not as per the official design and specifications. After all, as we say, you can fool some people all the time while making money as the sun shines!
   SA Mansoor
   Dhaka

Increasingly students are evincing interest in learning a foreign language. The reason — knowledge of local languages is far from being adequate, whether for higher education or for job prospects in a globalised world. Cutting across academic disciplines, students must start to realise the advantage of learning at least one foreign language in the recent years. For many, knowledge of a foreign language is an ‘extra asset,’ especially when it comes to employment avenues. While French is the favourite for many students, languages including German, Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, Italian and Russian also find several takers.
   A cross-section of senior academicians feel multi-lingual skills are imperative for students in the present-day scenario. From my own experience, as a student of Biochemistry at McGill University who have learnt Bengali, English, French and Spanish as part of the curriculum both in Bangladesh and in Canada, those are always advantageous for me and alike. Fluent in a number of International languages, I find French to be a vibrant language and loves the intonation.
   Bureaucrats, diplomats and other professionals are placed in various operations. Though English is spoken widely by those professionals, knowledge of a foreign language will facilitate better communication with them. Several students of engineering, medicine, tourism, international studies and social work are keen on learning a foreign language while languages are gaining popularity now. Multi-lingual skills are the need of the hour. More and more companies including call centres, banking and other multi-national companies are looking for candidates with knowledge of French. It is definitely an extra asset. Even Bangladeshi students aiming to pursue higher studies in medicine and engineering in France will learn the language. One of the primary reasons for students to learn French is their desire to broaden their career prospects. If students are looking at jobs abroad, it is essential to learn the language of the place. Any study in international relations calls for knowledge of foreign languages. For example, knowledge of Chinese language is important for a student of international studies if he/she wants to focus on China. They can collect information directly, as often translation in English leads to loss of some information.
   Every individual is at once the beneficiary and the victim of the linguistic tradition into which he has been born - the beneficiary inasmuch as language gives access to the accumulated records of other people’s experience, the victim in so far as it confirms him in the belief that reduced awareness is the only awareness and as it bedevils his sense of reality, so that he is all too apt to take his concepts for data, his words for actual things. Thought is the blossom; language the bud; action the fruit behind it. Quoting from Bertand Russell: By studying the principles of symbolism we can learn not to be unconsciously influenced by language, and in this way can escape a host of erroneous notions.
   Avik Sengupta
   Biochemistry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

As the world remembers the start of the Second World War on September 3, 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland, it may be worthwhile to recapitulate what it would have been if the United States joined the war earlier instead of waiting for two years for the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbour.
   When Britain and France declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939, the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill knew that Hitler could not afford to invade Britain because it would distract him from his principal objectives. From the very outset, Hitler made it clear about his two main targets: the communists and the Jews, both of whom he blamed for Germany’s misfortunes. Any invasion of Britain would have forced him to divert vast amounts of his military resources needed to conquer Soviet Russia. From his deep understanding of history, Churchill also knew that Hitler would face inevitable destruction in the vast wilderness of Russia and from the stubborn resistance of the Russians who defeated Napoleon’s Grand Army in the 19th century. Churchill also knew that Hitler would instead launch air attacks to knock out Britain from the war and he was prepared to meet the German threat from the air. The Royal Air Force (RAF) was ready with its Spitfire and Hurricane fighters and its indomitable fighter pilots. The rest belongs to history.
   Churchill was also hoping that the United States would join the war soon. Instead, the Americans waited for two years for the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbour in 1941. If America joined the war at the time of the German invasion of Poland, combined Anglo-American forces could have stopped Hitler at the tracks. There would have been no need for the Soviet Union to defeat Hitler and the East European countries could have escaped Soviet occupation in the name of liberation from the Nazis. With its German ally defeated, Japan would not have dared to attack Pearl Harbour and escaped the atomic bombs. But the Republican-dominated Congress before Pearl Harbour was rabidly isolationist and refused to join what it considered a war between European powers. The world paid for their procrastination.
   Mahmood Elahi
   Ottawa, Canada

Amid a widespread division among the Americans as to how they would engage in regarding their universal healthcare plan proposed by President Obama, both the pro and con camp-leaders screwing their nuts and bolts. Obama used his rhetorical magic, by delivering a speech at the Congress on 9th September 2009. Hardly had he targeted the Congresspersons but ordinary Americans. The speech was meant to win back flagging public support for his domestic policy campaign. He mentioned the 46.3 million Americans without health coverage, how healthcare costs drove thousands to bankruptcy in America each year and how the United States could not afford to continue spending 20 per cent of its GDP on healthcare. In the speech, he tried to reassure his audience that his plan was about security and choices, and he offered to work together with the Republicans willing to negotiate in a civil manner and present him with good ideas, while also pledging that his $900 billion plan would not increase the federal deficit. But he also stated firmly that he would not work with those who prefer to block the progress of reform with disinformation and panic tactics.
   Reports suggest that the speech was well-received in the United States. According to a CNN/ORC (Opinion Research Corporation) poll taken after the speech, two-thirds of respondents said that they supported Obama’s healthcare plan, whereas only 53 per cent had agreed with it a few days before the speech. There are a lot of admirers of Obama not only in USA but in the entire world, and they, believably thrilled by his performance. On the one hand, people delighted to see Obama bounce off the ropes and use his rhetorical talent to retake the offensive in this bitter debate. On the other hand, they’ve new reason to keep their fingers crossed that America might one day no longer be the only developed country in the world to not have universal health coverage. In times like these, when America’s president is burdened with a political crisis, talk is golden and the power of the word is part of the president’s might. At least that’s the case when one is as talented a speaker as Barack Hussein Obama. He succeeded once again in winning over his audience, and he was able to fundamentally restructure the American political scene.
   On the one hand, Obama finally explained to the people on the other side of the television screen exactly what is at stake. His monumental task is to comprehensively reshape America’s ailing healthcare system. But, from now on, his plan is the measure of all things. On the other hand, he stood before the gathered Congressmen and women and senators and told them straight to their faces that there is a new order in force. And in this new order, he said, there is no longer any place for the Republicans who have either been fundamentally opposed to his plan or just fought it with lies. With his speech, Obama has defined the new centre in Washington, at least for the next three months. And, in the future, he will only tolerate people around him who are willing to play and not be spoiling the game. Of course, this means that he will also immediately have to lock horns with people inside his own party.
   With his spirited speech before Congress in favour of reform Obama has once again taken the initiative. This comes after weeks of heated and sometimes hysterical debates in which people opposed to reform seemed to have taken the upper hand, in which Obama was noticeably absent from the debate and in which members of his own party fought among themselves. Dark clouds had gathered over Obama’s most important domestic-policy project. The American president has now succeeded in dispersing some of these clouds, but he hasn’t won over all the sceptics in his own camp. He has yet to bring together the majority he needs. After Obama’s memorable appearance on Capitol Hill, one thing has become crystal clear. Bipartisanship will not be the trademark of the Obama presidency. The style of conflict between the Democratic president and the Republican opposition has now reached a new harshness. Obama is convinced that his plan is the right one. And, despite his claims of the opposite, in reality, he will not tolerate any dissent. In public, his opponents say that they are willing to compromise, but in reality they are determined to obstruct his plan. It was evident by the demonstrations held in America on 12th September after the speech where some people turn out with placard like ‘Obama is Socialist’ or ‘Stop Socialism.’ That is not a good starting point, and it shows how America continues to be divided.
   In his spirited speech before Congress, Obama showed that he is clearly determined to push through his healthcare reform package. At the same time, it also shows that he has decided to get much more personally involved in the effort. The president is prepared to bet more political capital on his most important reform project regardless of the continued high risk that he will fail to attain his goals. Obama would not be the first man in the White House to get a bloody nose while trying to turn the fractured and inefficient American healthcare system inside out. The success or failure of American healthcare reform will also decide how strong Obama will be in other important legislative projects and how much of his political agenda he will be able to implement. If Obama fails to meet his goals with his very first big task, the next three and a half years are going to be very protracted.
   Sirajul Islam
   Shyamoli, Dhaka