That disdain again
You don`t say!
Darius Nakhoonwala
What happens in the neighbourhood is a legitimate concern of leader writers. But amazingly, only a few newspapers chose to write about the developments in Bangladesh. The two great exponents of foreign policy - Indian Express and Hindustan Times - both kept quiet. And those that did write, with one or two exceptions, were as offensively patronising as the British.
The general view was clear and unanimous: what is going on in Bangladesh is a cause for serious worry. The Telegraph said it best. "A complete lack of trust between the government and the opposition has long made the country`s democratic system almost dysfunctional, irrespective of which group has been in power." The Hindu was scathing about Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. Her "authoritarianism and reactionary manoeuvring" it said, have "created a dangerous stalemate in Bangladesh." The Pioneer said, " This blunder has destroyed her last vestige of credibility."
Only the Deccan Herald outlined what the reader would be interested in knowing - what might happen next there. "There are worrying signs that the military might step in. Reports suggest that the President is considering calling in the army... There is a danger that such an invitation will encourage the armed forces to assume a larger political role." It added further that "the bickering is providing a boost to Islamist parties." The Asian Age was more cryptic "If the stalemate is not resolved soon, Bangladesh may once again slide into political instability and chaos."
So one way or another, India has a problem. That much is clear, which makes it all the more surprising that the Indian Express and the HT didn`t comment.
Except for the Hindu, no one took sides in what is an internal matter. But the Mount Road fire-breather was clear about whose side it was on. "Her (Khaleda Zias) tenure having run out on Friday night, she should have given up all thought of fresh skullduggery… she has in desperation resorted to undemocratic scheming… is an unconstitutional and inflammatory act." Wow!
It then advised the Awami League, the main opposition party, to keep a "cool head". I thought a cool head is what the editor of the Hindu needs.
The Telegraph, a mainly Bengali paper, took a similar but more restrained line. "The latest chaos, though, is the handiwork more of the government of Ms Khaleda Zia… choice of the head of the interim government betrayed a design to subvert the spirit of the constitution. Her nominee, although a retired chief justice of the Supreme Court, had once been an advisor to her own Bangladesh Nationalist Party. Worse, she insisted on her choice despite the opposition`s firm — and justified — refusal to accept it."
And see how patronising the Pioneer was. "Politics in Bangladesh is saturated with so much corruption, nepotism and gangsterism that political parties are collapsing under the collective burden of these vices. Sheikh Hasina may appear to straddle the moral high ground at the moment, but Bangladeshis are as familiar with her brand of misgovernance as they are with Begum Zia`s poor performance."
Is India much better, Sir?