--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Isha Khan <bdmailer@...> wrote:
>
> *The Economist story: A simple insult or a warning?*
>
> by Afsan Chowdhury
>
> The Economist of London ran a story in which it said that the Awami League
> won the last election with the help of Indian advice and bags of cash.
> Unless there is smoking gun evidence against the allegation, this story will
> be considered one of the bottom points of journalism anywhere.
>
> It is so stupid a comment that one is forced to think that this couldn't
> have been allowed unless some royal conspiracy is being hatched to
> destabilise Bangladesh or the British press has finally caught up with the
> mindset of the Dhaka street media. Or are things more awkward than we think?
>
> The Economist of London really seems to be running nasty on this story.
> Bangladesh's official rejoinder was printed in its Asian blog and not its
> printed edition. Of course, an Economist editor has said that this is
> because the story was received so late that week. One will have to see if it
> gets the printed treatment in its next edition. If not, there seems to be
> some reasons for concern because how can any Western media outlet be so
> blatantly offensive and non-professional in its work?
>
> Unless of course, it is part of a larger smear campaign as the FM Dipu Moni
> has suggested. If that is so, one must identify the reasons why this very
> public insult and a risky one at that has been delivered.
>
> Any speculation that the rejoinder was not published on the printed pages
> because it was so badly drafted and terribly written is not true.
>
> It is no secret that Bangladesh under Hasina is close to India. There is no
> shame in that; in fact it is welcomed. Countries like ours cannot survive on
> their own and need friends. Our war effort in 1971 was full of friends so
> why should we cringe now after 40 years? What has been in the air for a
> while is that, while Bangladesh can claim to be anti-terrorist in action,
> its spirit is not of the kind the West feels close to.
>
> Two positions have greatly strengthened its perception of Bangladesh; its
> actions on Grameen Bank and trashing of micro-credit as fraudulence when a
> powerful section of the West has embraced it as a pro-poor initiative and
> Bangladesh's position on the CHT and the rights of the indigenous people
> which the West supports.
>
> The world is convinced that Hasina went after Yunus on the basis of personal
> miff. It may not be so but a reading of media reports and politicians'
> statements on how bad Yunus was and how great Hasina was and how she
> deserved a prize made the anti-Grameen tirade a bad case of official denial.
> The attempt to trash micro-credit which is considered an effective tool of
> poverty alleviation through entrepreneurship and supported by economists
> everywhere including in Bangladesh made the government seem more bent on
> revenge than having common sense.
>
> The government came out in a poor light with the message to the West that it
> was not looking at economics and poverty alleviation with scientific eyes.
> This action alienated that powerful section of the Westerners including
> those at the policy level. While many in Bangladesh felt insulted by the
> kind of statements made by the West supporting Yunus, it is possible that
> such noises were a reflection of the kind of miff the West felt in reality
> about the entire matter.
>
> At the moment, the West is very unhappy with the present government's
> position on the CHT and indigenous people issue and the kind of treatment it
> has meted out policy wise. While many have dismissed the matter in
> Bangladesh, it is a serious one in the West where it is thought to be a
> critical part of the human rights framework.
>
> By taking an uncompromising stand on the identification of the CHT people as
> Adivasis/indigenous people and sticking to descriptions prescribed by Sheikh
> Mujib in 1972, it came out looking as anti-minority, particularly of the
> indigenous people variety. Its nose thumbing of the UN on the matter was
> disastrous policy stance at its best and the idea that such actions have no
> repercussions was diplomatic blindness at its worst. In just a year,
> Bangladesh has picked up a bad reputation internationally as anti-poor,
> anti-minority and not willing to have a conversation with the West on
> matters it considers serious. Thinking it will not have repercussions is not
> a smart thought.
>
> But does Bangladesh have a positive record when it comes to running smear
> campaigns on its own? Here is what a news analysis in the Daily Star which
> sharply criticises the Economist magazine also has to say; "But at the same
> time may we remind the government that it should also refrain from any smear
> campaign like the one done against an unnamed editor by the defence adviser
> to the prime minister. Or say, like the one against founder of Grameen Bank,
> Muhammad Yunus."
>
> Bangladesh government must come out of the kind of shell it thought existed
> in the `70s and participate in a more realistic world where it is neither
> the only source of wisdom nor the opposition the only fountain of criticism.
>
> There is speculation already in Dhaka's air that the position may put some
> stress on peacekeeper hiring which it seems is a product of pure nervousness
> but it also shows how deeply connected we are to the West in our search for
> stability. *A huge army that has no work at home except `taking over
> government' should always be kept busy abroad. It is all the more needed
> since many of them have lost huge money in the stock markets and aren't
> feeling very relaxed nowadays. This implies that our political system is
> based on conditions over which we have little control. The last things we
> need are experiments.*
>
> Bangladesh can't claim to be pro-Western when its actions are so obviously
> against Western sentiments. The present government must be far more careful
> about whom it pleases and whom it doesn't and how it does so. Just as the AL
> and BNP leaders are ruthless when it comes to dealing with opponents, so is
> the West and it would be childishness to be naïve about that.
>
> Mere friendship with India may not be enough to preserve peace. If a
> magazine like the Economist can trash Bangladesh so obviously and in
> disregard of its journalistic principles, imagine what the Western
> governments are capable of doing.
>
> The Economist article should become a test of our resolve. Should we just
> let it go or pursue it to the end? It is such a great opportunity to prove
> the Western media as stupid as some of our own. On to the defamation courts,
> please.
>
> http://opinion.bdnews24.com/2011/08/12/the-economist-story-a-simple-insult-or-a-warning/#more-2339
>
------------------------------------
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/