Friday, September 7, 2007
I don’t expect that you’ve heard about what is happening in Bangladesh. It’s a far-away Middle Eastern country that doesn’t harbor radical Jihadists, so there is no real reason for the United States media to cover it. But you should know. It’s a big deal, especially if you are a college student and have any interest in social justice. I can’t blame you for being in the dark. After all, it seems only the BBC is covering it. It doesn’t even make the New York Times, much less the University Daily Kansan. No one ever seems to notice a country in utter turmoil halfway across the world, unless the people of that country happen to have white skin and speak Midwestern English. Certainly not the Kansan. God forbid we should question the media gatekeepers who keep us firmly entrenched in our fake American dream.
But enough about the sad state of the media in America. Here is what is happening in Bangladesh right now: In January, after years of corrupt government, a popularly-backed military government was installed in a coup. A state of emergency was declared and all protests and political activities were declared illegal. (Starting to see where I’m going with this one?) But it didn’t take long for the only people allowed to think for themselves, the students at Dhaka University in the capitol city, to realize that yes, we are the only hope of the poorest country on earth and yes, there is something terribly wrong with this situation. There were military barracks on campuses everywhere; big brother was constantly watching. “Students and ordinary people are demanding an end to the state of emergency, an end to this atmosphere of fear,” said Anwar Hossain, secretary general of Dhaka University Teachers Association. (BBC.com) The straw that broke the camel’s proverbial back was a fairly innocuous incident two weeks ago that involved five students being roughed-up by police. But, even in Bangladesh, word gets around fast and students soon took to the streets to protest the military’s presence on the sacred ground of academia.
Student protests quickly turned into full-scale rioting. And, everyone knows, when students riot, the police had better riot back. And they did. In force. Thousands of soldiers with machine guns showed up at campuses across the country. A curfew was imposed on five major cities, and all colleges and universities were shut down, the students forced to leave their dorms. Hundreds of arrests were made, including faculty. You think your life sucks? Imagine that you are sitting in class in Wescoe when the door is kicked in by a National Guard officer (or maybe an ROTC trainee) who then cuffs your 63-year old Professor and shoves him out the door for “conspiracy to protest.” A Kansan photographer who is covering the scene is physically and verbally abused, and when she refuses to leave is arrested herself. Now place yourself in a, no, the, third-world country and imagine that the previous summer has seen some of the deadliest flooding in recent history and your country is run by an army general with dictatorial inclinations who keeps putting off free elections. Is it difficult to imagine? It is for me. This is life in the bubble. We have it too easy.
So who’s to blame for the situation in this far-away country? The British envoy blamed the Bangladeshi opposition party for instigating the students, the students blamed the corrupt military for denying them freedom, and the government blamed the dismal economic and political situation that has been going on in Bangladesh ever since it was partitioned from Pakistan in 1971. Ever-vying for the title of poorest country on earth, Bangladesh redefines the term “impoverished.” Ever heard of George Harrison’s Concert for Bangladesh? Yeah, it’s the same one.
It is a fascinating situation, and tragic. It jolts us out of our make-believe world in which the worst thing we have to worry about is a midterm or which party to attend next weekend. It also, however, shows the collective power of a group of people, particularly students, when they decide to take a stand against something they see as wrong. It makes me wonder - what might happen if we stood for something? No one really knows what a group of people so populous and stubborn and idealistic and energetic as college students could accomplish if they actually wanted something and did whatever they could to accomplish it. The students in Bangladesh, in their collective will, realized that they held an enormous power in their hands. Their protests are actually threatening to take down a strong military government. It is something that is completely foreign to us in Kansas. Personally I would hope that we would choose do something positive and unique, like eradicating AIDS or global poverty. But there is also a good chance that we will choose to use the power given to us for petty politics, to fight amongst ourselves, to slowly die in a bog of our own narcissism. I have seen it happen over and over. It is up to us to decide if we are going to unite for something positive, and if we will unite for anything at all. It is certainly within our power.
Petterson Prairie Village junior in English.
Mallot and Haworth Halls, two of the larger ...
1 comment
Mallot and Haworth Halls, already two of the ...
1 comment
It was the symmetry of this sidewalk that ...
1 comment
Texting while driving is the cause of many ...
1 comment
Comments
linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...
Although your topic is good and I respect you for bringing up this issue, it would be more believable if you hadn't referred to Bangladesh as a Middle Eastern country: it is not.
September 7, 2007 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
stereotypebe (anonymous) says...
While you are technically correct that Bangladesh isn't located within the geographical confines of the traditional Middle East revolving around Palestine, I believe that this in no way diminishes the believability or relevance of the issue. Bangladesh, being east of the Indian subcontinent but west of Southeast Asia, would probably be considered "South Asia" (or, the middle of the East) along with Pakistan and India. But it is fundamentally different from these two countries and, for our purposes, even though it is not an Arab state, could easily be considered along with the volatile nations of the Middle East in the American consciousness. Perhaps an uncapitalized "middle east" would have been more appropriate. I hope you can still get something out of the article despite this.
-Mark
September 7, 2007 at 12:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...
Yes, you're correct. I shouldn't have said it was not believable. It is a good article and the points are important and I thank you for mentioning it. I would say that Bangladesh is in South Asia. For me the Middle East is East of Egypt and Southwest of Iran...pretty much the Arabian Peninsula and maybe Iraq.
September 7, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tonym9428 (anonymous) says...
Bagledesh really isn't different from it's two south asian neighbots, india and pakistan, as you claim. All three of these nations, along with nepal and sri lanka, possess similar demographic, socio-economic, and political traits. Furthermore, don't forget that Bangledesh used to be eastern pakistan, and only emerged as Bangledesh after Western Pakistan incited broad dissent. And lastly, Bangledesh, like most of the nations in south asia, is hampered by numerous ethnic and political splinterings. This can caused numerous situations of conflict, strife, and political upheavel. So it is very innacurate to state that Bangledesh is fundamentall different from it's south asian neighbors.
September 7, 2007 at 5:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
los (anonymous) says...
Dear Mark,
I must insist, along with the other comments, that Bangladesh cannot possibly be considered part of the Middle East. Please look at a map. Notice that Bangladesh is sandwiched in between India, Nepal, Bhutan and Myanmar.
If Middle east applies to any country in the Middle of the East as you seem to point out in your logic, then Turkey and Turkmenistan should be part of your region.
To the person who said that the Middle East includes Egypt, please look at a map as well. By your standard, Sudan should be the Middle East as well. It shares the coast line with Egypt and the Arabian Peninsula, with the Red Sea separating them. In fact, Sudan was part of Egypt before as was Bangladesh of India.
I liked your comparison of the situation in Bangladesh with a hypothetical one in KU.
September 8, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
los (anonymous) says...
Oh, on Egypt. Unless you consider every East Saharan country part of the Middle East, forget about Egypt.
September 8, 2007 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
stereotypebe (anonymous) says...
Wow. People will never cease to amaze me with their wildly irrelevant nitpicking on trivial words. Quite an adventure in missing the point.
September 8, 2007 at 5:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
linguo_the_grammar_robot (anonymous) says...
More nitpicking-
I am the one who mentioned Egypt but I said east of Egypt. I don't consider it part of the middle east.
September 9, 2007 at 9:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bipolarmama (anonymous) says...
here's the point (x)
here's a few readers (missing)
September 9, 2007 at 12:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bipolarmama (anonymous) says...
pardon: to the grammar robot:
here are a few readers (missing)
September 9, 2007 at 12:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )