That emotion is the cause of lack of real education. The Europeans got their democracy after many years of enlightenment, it's a learning curve both for the people and those of the leadership. A peasant from the hinterland can suddenly become fortunate and rich but does not become cultured overnight. A good example might be the Chinese.
I just read in wikipedia that his burial ceremony was in Islamabad. Are you sure he was buried in India?
A vague memory; I could well be wrong, I wasn't reading for that detail or for any other detail. At that time, it was a feeling of respect for a genuine hero who had passed away. That he was Pakistani was a minor matter.
That's a good point you make. Let me shed what I think personally.
Bangladesh's lack of a properly functioning democracy isn't something to be worried of at the moment. For that to be implemented, we need a matured, tried-and-tested, visionary system in place. This includes not only an efficient administration but only socio-economic and literacy development, fields in which we still have catch-up to do. As Bangladesh does not have such a system in place, any concept of democracy will be polluted and misused. True democracy thus works in countries like Switzerland and other more 'experienced' nations.
This also indicates why Hasina, despite of all her flaws, should continue and take us through this transition phase and complete all our major projects. Once all the current political crop retires/passes away, young & educated bloods will take over gradually leading the change.
Look at the massive strides we made, given we are not even 50 years old as a country. Lets take a chill pill! The trajectory is only upwards.
Two points.
First, I think we were lucky, in India. I think that with all his faults, and they were many, Nehru, in his striving to match the British standard of political behaviour, and in attempting to maintain a superior standard of integrity and neutral behaviour without interfering with the administration, gave us a brilliant head-start. Much of what we enjoy today is the whittled-down remainder of a very high standard. In saying that, I remain painfully aware of the various faults and distortions that crept in even with that effort.
Second, I think that in India, we have achieved a nice balance of administrative integrity and electoral awareness of its rights and privileges, and its willingness as an electorate to act in its own interest, and to be ruthless with bad performance by a party in power.
That's a good point you make. Let me shed what I think personally.
Bangladesh's lack of a properly functioning democracy isn't something to be worried of at the moment. For that to be implemented, we need a matured, tried-and-tested, visionary system in place. This includes not only an efficient administration but only socio-economic and literacy development, fields in which we still have catch-up to do. As Bangladesh does not have such a system in place, any concept of democracy will be polluted and misused. True democracy thus works in countries like Switzerland and other more 'experienced' nations.
This also indicates why Hasina, despite of all her flaws, should continue and take us through this transition phase and complete all our major projects. Once all the current political crop retires/passes away, young & educated bloods will take over gradually leading the change.
Look at the massive strides we made, given we are not even 50 years old as a country. Lets take a chill pill! The trajectory is only upwards.
On another front, I also think that Pakistan, as she was originally constituted, was singularly unlucky, with Jinnah's towering figure being removed before things had really settled down - in contrast, we lost Patel in more or less the same time frame, and we saw distortions creep in due to Nehru's pre-eminence and the failure of his colleagues to challenge him regularly and systematically. Not to be hostile, but to achieve a proper balance of different opinions as a foundation of policy-making.
When successively, Ghulam Mohammed, and then Iskandar Mirza fished in troubled waters, and used the confusion due to Jinnah's guiding spirit being abruptly removed, and Liaqat Ali Khan's most untimely assassination, to push their own utterly selfish agenda, the way was paved for the steadily weakening democracy in Pakistan. By transmission, in Bangladesh as well.
Add to that the pattern of pre-Bangladeshi East Pakistan politics. People forget today that the dominant voices in that time was the fading voice of Fazlul Huq, the disappearance of Suhrawardy, and the greater and greater importance of Maulana Bhashani. The Maulana was a frightening figure for Indian observers, with his combination of Islamic fundamentalism and leftist populism. He was also strongly anti-Indian. In that context, with East Pakistan showing the same mix of populism and general civilian unrest against the administration that was on display under the CPI(M) in neighbouring West Bengal, it was the same picture from Delhi and from Islamabad. It was NOT unique to what was later Bangladesh, and those Pakistani commentators who are doing somersaults and aerial vaults about the particular duplicity of Bangladeshis and their combination of disloyalty to Pakistan and failure to be good Muslims need to remember that this was about Bangladesh. It was about specific sections of a country's population becoming more and more alienated from the central administration of that country. Religion had little or nothing to do with it. Language had a lot to do with it, as ONE of the causes of alienation, NOT as a prime reason. The stupidity of the centre, and its artery-hardened sclerotic response to regional dissatisfaction, was a major reason.
Finally, Yahya's decision after the elections, and Bhutto's utterly selfish behaviour were the prime reasons for the formation of Bangladesh.
