Cultural, Economic, Human Rights, International, Life as it is, Political, Religious

Mind-boggling Saudi mendacity

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia portrays itself as the holiest place in the whole of Muslim world of 54 sovereign states and claims to be the custodian of two most sacred mosques in Islam. But the reality cannot be furthest from such exulted claims. The country is bereft with corruption, misogyny, brutality, inhumanity, deception and downright criminality. No country in the whole world can match or even come close to Saudi Arabia’s egregious claim of virtuosity and the reality of unfettered criminality.

Let us scrutinise Saudi Arabia’s activities in modern times and the havoc these activities are creating worldwide. To do so, we have to start from the roots of Saudi Arabia, its barbaric activities, its total absence of humanity and its criminal use of religion for political purposes. Overall, this country wants to gain prominence and supremacy at the back of religion and to do so, nothing is off the table.  

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia came into being in 1932 when Abdulaziz ibn Saud managed to beat his rival, Ikhwan in the battle of Sabilla in 1930 with the covert support of Britain and named the country after his family name, Saud. In other words, the country became the possession of the Saud dynasty. The country and the people were extremely impoverished at that time. But as luck would have it, in 1938 vast reserve of oil was discovered in areas close to the Persian Gulf by a British oil company. As petrodollars started pouring in, the country prospered, despite blatant corruption. The oil revenue in 2019 was $202 billion, despite oil price being less than half of what it was a year ago.

Saudi Arabia’s objectives with its vast oil wealth rests on two main planks: (i) legitimising and securing the rule of ibn Saud over the country and (ii) gaining undisputed supremacy in the Islamic world by eliminating any vestiges of dissent to their Sunni sect from other religious sects in Islam. Needless to say that Islam, being the political religion, readily lends itself to use overtly and covertly to achieve the above mentioned objectives of the Saudi Sunni dynasty.

When Abdulaziz ibn Saud conquered Riyadh in 1902 by sheer brutality, he realised that the fractious regions of desert lands of Arabia could only be brought together under his control if the overarching umbrella of religion was established – an uncanny resemblance of what Prophet Mohammed felt some 1400 years earlier. He revived an alliance drawn between Mohammad ibn Saud (the founder of 1st Saud dynasty) and the preacher Abd-al Wahhab in 1744 whereby ibn Saud and his heirs pledged to protect the Wahhabi dynasty from the prevailing animosity towards it in exchange of retaining the proprietary right over this Wahhabi ideology by the Saudis. This Wahhabi ideology mirrored the original teachings of Islam as encoded in Salafism, but with more vitriol and viciousness.  It suited Abdulaziz ibn-Saud and his band of warrior Islamicists very well to use Wahhabism/Salafism as a tool to impose autocracy in the name of Islam. Thus, Islam became truly a political-military religion.

What ISIL/IS did in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere reflect in totality the Wahhabi ideology which Saudi Arabia propagated and promoted. Few beheadings by IS in camera of ‘infidels’ might have shocked the world; but in Saudi Arabia beheadings of human beings on offences like adultery, apostasy, heresy, insult to prophet Muhammad etc. are almost every day affair. These are all done in Saudi Arabia legitimately under the Sharia Law. That the brutality of Sharia Law conflicts with the Human Rights Provisions to which Saudi Arabia had signed up to does not bother them an iota. Law is what suits the interests of the ruling class in Saudi Arabia; not something that conflicts with their interests.

It may be mentioned that the political Islam, reflecting the Bedouin culture of 7th century in the deserts of Arabia, lends very good helping hand to those bigoted men. As per religion, women are not to be treated equal to men. In fact, in matters of inheritance, a daughter is exactly half of a son. A woman cannot divorce her husband at all in Islam, but a man can divorce his wife by pronouncing ‘divorce’ words three times. If a woman is raped, it is always the fault of the woman – on the grounds that she might have aroused sexuality in the man and hence she is the one to be punished. Many hundreds of migrant women workers in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Countries are punished every year by long term imprisonment, severe lashing or even beheading when their masters happen to rape them. For fear of their lives, these women workers remain silent. But if they become pregnant, they have to face brutal punishment as prescribed by the Wahhabi ideology.

Saudi Arabia’s other objective is the global domination of Sunni Wahhabism. As the King of Saudi Arabia is the custodian of two holiest mosques in Islam, Sunni domination is effectively his domination. The war in Yemen that is going on from 2014 is due to Saudi Arabia’s attack on Houthi rebels who are mainly Shias. Saudi Arabia had been bombing various parts of the country to kill Houthi rebels and any fatality of innocent civilians were regarded as collateral damage. More than 233,000 civilians have died until the end of 2020 due to the Saudi-led coalition attacks on Yemen, according to UN Humanitarian Office. Millions of children are now facing serious malnutrition and death due to diseases.

Saudi Arabia and its cohorts in the Gulf Cooperation Council (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia) had been funding and fuelling the discontent among the Syrian people against the Alawite regime of Bashar al-Assad. Alawite belongs to the Shiite sect of Islam, which Saudi Arabia regards as the enemy of Sunni. Other Shiite denominations such as Ismaili, Zaidi, Baha’is and Ahmadiyya are Wahhabis/Salafist enemies. Sufi had been declared non-Muslim. ISIL/IS had been killing these apostates under their occupation, unless they accept Sunni ideology straightaway.

Saudi Arabia is the root of most of the evils, if not all, of the world today. Most of the attackers of the World Trade Centre in New York in 2001 were Saudi fundamentalists. The untold misery of millions of people in Syria, Iraq and other places were due to Saudi inspired rebellion against established regimes. Despite that, the country did not feel any compassion to offer refuge to the dispossessed war victims, although the country has hundreds of billions of dollars and vast unused tracts of land. Saudi and other Wahhabi regimes in the Middle East gave the Fatwah that women (and even girls over 10 or 11) would be required to wear face veil (hijab) and all body veil (burqa) as part of the religious requirement. And now hundreds of millions of women round the world wear these attires, although there is nowhere in the religious books that they are mandatory.

In 2018, a Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi who worked for the Washington Post had been killed in Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. He advocated liberalisation of strict Wahhabi doctrine in Saudi Arabia and in the process became an enemy of crown prince Mohammad bin Salman. When Khashoggi went to Saudi consulate in Istanbul to collect his marriage certificate on 2nd October 2018, the death squad was waiting for him. He was murdered, his body was chopped up into pieces and then dumped into the well of the Consul General’s home just across the road. They also enacted an elaborate ploy as one look-alike Khashoggi leaving the consulate through the back door. When Khashoggi did not come out of the consulate hours later, his fiancée (a Turkish national) started enquiring, the Saudi Consulate said at first that they knew nothing about Khashoggi’s whereabout and when she contacted high level Turkish officials, then they said he had left through the back door and produced the video clip to support it. That was a complete fake as reporters found that the imposter was wearing different shoes and different tie. The Turkish government investigated the case and found that Khashoggi had been brutally murdered inside the consulate. Two weeks later, the Saudi government said that he was killed in a fight. Yesterday, the American Intelligence report produced in 2018, which was stopped by Donald Trump’s orders, had been made public and that showed that he was murdered inside the consulate by the direct orders of crown prince Mohammad bin Salman. For over two years, the Saudi government had been lying and deceiving the world and Donald Trump was complicit with it.      

There is a humourous saying which asks, when do you know that an Arab is lying? The answer came, when he opens his mouth.

  • Dr A Rahman is an author and a columnist
Bangladesh, Cultural, Economic, Human Rights, International, Literary, Religious

International Mother Language Day

Language is the most important and principal method of communication between humans and only language sets us apart from other animals. Yes, animals do communicate by making noises, by the sign language or by body language. But we, the Homo sapiens, had taken the method of communication to a higher level by inventing language comprising letters, words, punctuation etc in structured forms to convey our feelings by oral and written methods.

Thus, language confers us our mode of expression, our identity, our existential experience. We inherit it from our mothers, almost through umbilical cord – like blood, like nutrition. We develop our tongue like our mothers’ and that is why it is called the mother tongue and the language is called the mother language.

So, when language is challenged, the very identity is challenged. That is what happened immediately after the creation of Pakistan in 1947. The Two Nation Theory (TNT) propounded by Allama Iqbal in 1930 and supported by Mohammad Ali Jinnah to fork out a separate Muslim State called Pakistan in India was the beginning of Political Islam in India. The low-level sectarianism that had existed in India for centuries had been uplifted to communalism and patriotism by the support of the opportunistic Muslim and Hindu politicians.

The Indian subcontinent had been divided into India and Muslim Pakistan in August 1947. The province of East Pakistan comprising 55% of the whole country’s population was totally Bengali speaking, whereas West Pakistan having 45% population had Punjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi as well as Urdu speaking people; with Urdu spoken by about 7% population.

The fault line between the two provinces appeared in less than a year after partition when Mohammad Ali Jinnah declared in a speech on 21st March 1948 at the Race Course in Dhaka that Urdu would be the only national language of this nation. It was an injustice of monumental scale. It was an attempt to rob the mother language of 55% of the people and impose Urdu in the name of Islam.

The students from university level downwards felt betrayed and humiliated. Only a few months ago they spearheaded the creation of the Muslim State on the assumption that two provinces would be self-governing with their own culture, own language. Even Sheikh Mujibur Rahman went to Guwahati, Assam in 1946 with more than 500 students from Calcutta to campaign in the plebiscite in Assam for Pakistan. Now they were at the brink of losing their language, their identity!

The students’ movement started to grow; low level local protests merged into sub-district and district levels. From 1948 to 1952 students’ grievances and anger were palpable and at the boiling point. They felt that they had been made to jump, at the urging of the politicians, religious leaders and above all their parents, from frying pan to fire!

The students took a decision to observe the Language Movement Day on 21 February, 1952 throughout the whole province and Dhaka University students took the lead. The government declared Section 144 of the Penal Code in Dhaka and banned all assemblies of more than five people. But schools, colleges and universities were left open and so assemblies of five or more people were inevitable. The government of Pakistan wanted to teach a brutal lesson to the arrogant and disobedient students and thereby to the people of the province!

The students started gathering at the Dhaka University Arts Faculty campus in the morning of 21st February. They wanted to express their demand that Bengali should be one of the national languages of the country. Slowly and cautiously, they emerged through the main gate of the campus and turned left towards the Dhaka Medical College. They had no weapon of any sort and had only placards. Hardly the front the demonstration moved 100 meters or so, the waiting police at the edge of the campus opened fire on the students. Five students died almost instantly with blood spilling over the street and more than 17 students were seriously injured. In less than five years of creation of Pakistan, the students had to pay with their own blood for the sins of their forefathers (and their sins too) for opting for a Muslim State!

First Shaheed Minar in Dhaka in 1952

A day later the university students along with medical college students started building a monument in memory of their fallen students at the side of the road, which was only a stone’s throw away from the campus, and it was completed on 23rd Feb. The police came and with all their brutality desecrated the memory and demolished the monument. It was an insult to the memory of martyred students and an all-out onslaught on the people of East Pakistan. However, a few days later, on 26 February, 1952 the editor of local Bengali newspaper, Daily Azad, inaugurated a new monument within the compound of the Medical College and it had been named as the Shaheed Minar – the Martyrs’ Monument.

The government of Pakistan eventually accepted Bengali as one of the national languages of Pakistan, when the National Assembly adopted it on 7th May 1954. In Pakistan’s first Constitution in 1956, Bengali and Urdu were given the status of national languages under Article 214.

But what led to the bloodshed of students on the street of Dhaka could not be swept away any more. The constant denigration of Bengali culture and language by the Pakistani government, economic subjugation, employment disparity etc added fuel to the fire of language movement. On 26th March 1971, Pakistani military junta launched an unprovoked attack with full military force on civilians and the Dhaka university students and teachers to teach another lesson. The hitherto tenuous link of Muslim fraternity between the East and West had then broken down completely and after nine months of brutal war, Pakistan surrendered and Bangladesh achieved liberation on the 16th of December 1971.

Thus, Bangladesh became the first and only country in the world that fought for and gained freedom to preserve the mother language. In recognition of the unique sacrifice that the Bangladeshis made to establish Bengali as the national language, UNESCO had assigned 21st February as the International Mother Language Day. This day is celebrated throughout the whole world, wherever Bengalis are. The Bengali language is the 5th largest language in the world and is spoken by nearly 275 million people – Bangladesh (162 million), West Bengal (100 million) in India and the diaspora of Bengalis in the world (13 million). The top five languages are: 1. Mandarin Chinese (1051 million); 2. English (510 million); 3. Hindi (490 million); 4. Spanish (420 million) and 5. Bengali 275 million. Bengali is also one the culturally richest languages in the world, enriched by Rabindranath Tagore (Nobel Laureate in Literature in 1912), Nazrul Islam, DL Roy, Atul Prasad, Bankim Chandra and many more.

  • Dr A Rahman is an author and a columnist

Bangladesh, Cultural, Human Rights, International, Literary, Political, Religious

Religion and Morality

Religious scholars and even some philosophers lay claims that religion and morality are intricately intertwined; without morality religion would be baseless and without religion morality would be without foundation. The main purpose of religion is to impart moral values to mankind. When religion instils morality, humanity sees the true value of life, unbridled beauty of life and the majestic creation; without morality humans would lead a life in depravity.  

All these high-sounding, mouthful preaching of the religious scholars may appear to have deep inner meaning; but one must appreciate that religion has no unique claim on morality. In fact, most of the religions embody in practice just the reverse – sectarian, antagonistic and insular codes for the followers of a particular religion. These basic traits of a religion are against the very grains of morality. To appreciate the inner discord between religion and morality, let us look at the meaning and essence of morality.

Morality fundamentally embodies the ‘corporate rule’ – the rule embracing cooperation among the people of the community, the society, the country and beyond. The corporate rule that brings benefits to all in a cooperative way – for all, not for just the few – is a moral imperative. In the terminology of the game theory, it can be stated that morality inherently offers more than zero sum. If an attribute brings benefit to some people at the cost of others, then that attribute may be called zero sum issue and that has no moral underpinning. For example, when government taxes the rich to help the poor, that may be considered a good political decision, but not a moral issue. On the other hand, if an attribute brings benefit to everybody, equally or proportionately, without harming any particular section, that can be viewed as a moral decision. For example, giving free education to all within a country or free medical care at the point of need may be considered moral undertaking. Morality brings benefit to everybody and hence it is viewed as offering more than zero sum.

Morality maybe considered to have seven basic strands and these are: Family, Group, Reciprocity, Heroism, Deference, Fairness and Property. Human beings being social animals tend to live together in the family and the inherent desire of fair, equitable and cooperative distribution of benefits drawn collectively among the small bubble of Family members constitutes the first strand of morality. The morality of the Group is an extension of that of Family issue. What can be shared and sacrificed within the wider circle of the group, beyond the family, is the Group morality. The morality of Reciprocity is that if one person helps another person at the time of need, it is a moral imperative on the recipient to reciprocate the initial help at the right occasion. It helps both the initial giver and the recipient when it is needed most. Heroism is that strand of morality when one carries out a task to help others even at the risk to himself. The morality of Heroism is not to earn the plaudit of heroism, but an impartial attempt to help others. An example of it can be given as, recently when a Chinese man fell into a river in Shanghai and was struggling to save his life, a British diplomat (aged well over 60) instinctively jumped into the river and pulled the man to the shore and saved his life. This is the morality of Heroism – without any expectation for any reward or plaudit – pure desire to help others in need. Deference implies submission or yielding to judgement of recognised superiors or higher officials and thereby maintain harmonious relationship in the society. This is an important part of morality by maintaining corporate culture. Fairness comes as an essential element of morality as without it the whole corporate rule would breakdown to chaos. What is right, what is true, what is wrong etc should be established with Fairness as part of morality. And finally, Property offers the morality of maintaining one’s right to own and maintain property and possession. As a proverb says, An Englishman’s home is his castle. It is morally right that he should be allowed to live in his own home in a safe and dignified way and that is part of morality.

All of these strands, singly or collectively, offer the spirit and essence of morality. Morality is not only ethically justifiable but also beneficial from evolutionary point of view. Individual genes may exhibit selfish behaviour, but when it comes to the welfare of the whole survival machine (the whole body), morality encompassing corporate rule plays a dominant role. A moral society encourages a code of conduct where all the people may live comfortably, equitably and in dignified ways.

Now the big question is what role does religion play in maintaining morality or corporate rule? To answer this question, one has to trace back what role religion plays traditionally. The basic premise is that a religion inherently wants to establish its superiority and supremacy over other religions – as religions are competing against one another. This very basic competitive strand goes against the grain of morality of corporate rule. One religion does not accept or tolerate another religion’s theological stand and that is evident by their mutual antagonism and centuries of fighting. So, there cannot be a universal morality applicable to the whole society comprising various religions. The morality of cooperation, reciprocity, fairness, property etc may be applicable to people within a particular religion, but they may not be extended to people of other religions.  

So, in a theocratic state having people of many religious affiliations cannot get morally justifiable rule. Morality becomes subservient to theocracy or may even be abandoned in favour of theocratic dogma, as in many Islamic states and even in India at the moment. The claims by the religious scholars and leaders that religion is the custodian of morality and without religion morality would disappear are absurdly ludicrous and without any basis. Religion is detrimental to morality, as religion is sectarian whereas morality requires corporate rule. Therefore, one can say religion is amoral, not immoral.  

Almost all philosophers, psychologists, evolutionary biologists, writers, thinkers, scientists and so forth have expressed views that morality is not a good bedfellow to religion, in fact just the opposite. Their dislike to associate religion with morality had been expressed in many different ways and one particular area where their abhorrence was expressed firmly against religions when assessed against the perceived punishment and reward as depicted in religious books.

The British philosopher and polymath, Bertrand Russell, Nobel Laureate in literature in 1950, expressed his revulsion against religion when he said, “Religion is based mainly upon fear, fear of the mysterious, fear of defeat, fear of death. Fear is the parent of cruelty, and therefore it is no wonder if cruelty and religion have gone hand in hand.”

Albert Einstein, Nobel Laureate in Physics in 1921, said, “If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed”.

Christopher Hitchens, a British intellectual, said, “Human decency is not derived from religion; it precedes it.” 

Thus, religion and morality do not go hand in hand in the modern society. The Secularism within the Constitution may provide the rightful place for morality overriding communalism and sectarianism of various religions.

Dr A Rahman is an author and a columnist

Bangladesh, Disasters - natural and man-made, Economic, Environmental, Human Rights, Life as it is, Political

COVID-19: Pauperisation of the Poor

South Asian Network on Economic Modelling (SANEM) conducted a survey late last year to appraise the socio-economic condition of families in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic. The findings of the survey contain enough negatives to alarm the policymakers and the concerned citizens alike.

Bangladesh

According to the survey findings, the proportion of Bangladesh’s total population living below the poverty line has doubled from 21.6 percent in 2018 to 42 percent in late 2020 and the proportion of extreme poor tripled from a mere 9.4 percent to 28.5 percent over the  corresponding period. The pandemic has caused serious economic hardship, especially for the poor, all over the world. But such a mammoth slippage is unfathomable, especially when the country achieved nearly 4 percent growth last year compared to negative growth posted by most South Asian countries.

The findings raise serious questions about the efficacy of the government’s recovery packages in reaching the population in dire need of government assistance. The population living marginally above the poverty line or in poverty are always vulnerable to slip into one level down at the slightest sign of any economic instability.

Our policymakers should keep in mind that no degree of economic growth is fulfilling if its benefits fail to reach the downtrodden masses.  Development, no matter how glittering it appears, carries little value to the poor unless its benefits trickle down to them in some form or other. Else, they feel left behind as then they only see the glitter of development but not its benefits.

Moreover, such a substantial spike in poverty level may derail Bangladesh in its journey to achieve middle income country status. Apart from maintaining the required per capita Gross National Income (GNI) level, which it likely will, the country must also maintain the threshold level in one of the two other criteria, the Human Assets Index (HAI) and Economic Vulnerability Index (EVI) criteria, in the next triennial review to be held in 2021. Only then the chances of Bangladesh being recognized by the UN as a middle income country in 2024 will remain alive. Otherwise, there will be, at a minimum, three-year delay in Bangladesh achieving middle income status unless the UN relaxes the conditions due to the pandemic. 

As of today, the chances of Bangladesh slipping below the threshold level on both counts appear real, demanding immediate pragmatic measures to counter them.

Now the question arises, what went wrong with the government’s relief packages. Why did they fail to deliver the desired benefit to the population in direst need? Was sufficient resources allocated for the vulnerable population in the relief packages? Did the mechanisms used for the delivering the resources to the target beneficiaries work? Well, the time has come to look seriously into the foregoing questions as a first step to mitigate the suffering of the people living below or hovering around the poverty line.

Understandably, the major goal of the relief packages is to keep the economic wheel rolling at a time of unprecedented difficulties caused by the pandemic. It’s common knowledge that preventing the consumption level from rock bottoming is pivotal to succeed in achieving this goal. The following measures may help the country in improving the poverty situation as well as giving the economy a boost:

1) Delivery of increased food and cash resources to the population in dire need;

2) expansion of agricultural grant or loan, as appropriate, to subsistence farmers; and

3) enhancing employment opportunities via increased assistance to small and cottage industries.

Both cash relief and cash freed through food relief will help increase purchasing power of the target population enabling them to buy more manufactured consumer goods, essential for steady economic recovery.

Much thought should be given on formulating the best possible path of achieving speedy economic recovery. The path on which poverty alleviation and economic recovery walks hand in hand. A path on which each complements the other.

It is heartening that the country has attained the economic capacity to make it happen. What’s needed is due diligence to develop necessary plans and programs and their effective execution.

ASM Jahangir is a former Senior Program Manager of USAID/Bangladesh.

Cultural, Disasters - natural and man-made, Economic, Human Rights, International, Life as it is, Political

USA – Failed States in all but name

The United States of America (USA), the self-proclaimed custodian of democracy round the world as well as being the mouthpiece of freedom of speech and freedom of opportunities is in chaotic and disgraceful state now. What happened at the Capitol Hill on the day (6th of January) when the Joint Congress session was set to confirm the election result and endorse the incoming president was not only shocking but also shameful. Even more shocking was that the sitting president under the pretext of “Save America” was about to destroy the very foundation of American democracy by declaring that “we will never concede”. What the incumbent president meant was that he would never concede to the defeat in the presidential election that took place on 3rd of November 2020. Lawless behaviour of an existing elected person, let alone the president of the country, could not be more pronounced than what the world had witnessed on 6th of January 2021 at the Capitol Building.

America had been traditionally quick off the mark in condemning any violation or presumed violation of democratic principles and practices anywhere in the world (exceptions were those countries which kowtow America blatantly). The countries like North Korea, China, Russia (bar during Donald Trump’s presidency), India, Iran, Bangladesh, Pakistan, some Middle Eastern countries, most of Africa and South America had faced severe criticism and condemnation of the American state, when they had to quell illegal or inconvenient demonstrations against the states or perceived democracy. Bangladesh in its liberation war against Pakistan in 1971 had faced the condemnation and almost the military might of America state in the form of 7th Fleet, but the 7th Fleet was not used as the war came to an end, thanks to India, before the Fleet could reach the Bay of Bengal. Iran was perpetually under the American threat and antagonism ever since the time of overthrow of Shah of Iran, an American stooge, in 1979 and no amount of compliance and adherence to the rule of international law by Iran would remove American threat and highhandedness. The Chinese government is being condemned by America at any possible opportunity for “re-educating Uighur Muslims” away from Islamic brainwashing. 

On the other hand, Israel violating more than half a dozen UN resolutions over a number of years for developing nuclear weapons had none, zilch adverse response from America. Saudi Arabia butchering a Saudi journalist in their Istanbul Consulate and then dumping the severed body in the well within the Consulate office had been told by Donald Trump’s government that there was no concrete evidence to condemn Saudi Arabia! Duplicity could not be starker than this.

But, as it is said, what happens abroad has a reflection at home. If America thought that they can preach and enforce democratic principles abroad, and practice at home the opposite of democracy, then they are blatantly wrong. Rampant inequality, total lack of fairness, social justice, subjugation of black and Hispanics etc at home had been endemic in American society. ‘Black lives matter’ is an outward expression of frustrated black lives in America.

Donald Trump, a self-proclaimed billionaire, became the champion of the deprived, disadvantaged and social outcast people in the country by his deceitful campaign of ‘draining the swamp of the capital’. He tapped into the underlying discontent of the citizens against the establishment, against the rich and against oppression. Although he is a significant part of the oppressor, he manoeuvred himself as the leader of the oppressed group by populist and nationalistic slogans like ‘Make America Great Again (MAGA)’, ‘America first, America first’. In addition, he gradually brought the fascist, racist, fanatics and nationalistic groups into his wing and thereby creating an electoral base of extremists. And Republicans, seeing his strong electoral base of almost blind supporters, had to kowtow to his wishes and demands.

But America had serious historical problems too. Since the discovery of the land in the 15th century, called America, people from Spain, Portugal, Britain, Germany, Scandinavia and so forth had emigrated to that country and systematically exterminated the original inhabitants. So, mass extermination was not new to the ancestors of the present inhabitants of America. Since then, black people from Africa had been brought in by the tens of thousands to do the menial tasks of building the country. As they were brought in, literally chained in the ships, they established their homes in America. The slavery was abolished in 1865, but the fruits of that abolition were not fully transferred to them.

About a year ago, when blacks were protesting in Charlottesville, North Carolina, against the killing of unarmed black men under the banner “Black lives matter”, they were suppressed with heavy hands. On the other hand, the white rioters invading the Capitol Building on 6th January were not stopped by the police, although joint session of the Congress was in progress to confirm the election results. Difference in the treatment of two groups of people could not be starker.

Voices from the invading mob of Capitol Building were ringing out, “we fought for our independence in 1776, we fought the civil war in 1860s and we will fight again. We will fight the civil war. Stop the Steal.” The voices were clear and strident. But the problem is, fighting against whom, seeking independence from whom? The incumbent president was directing the operation. Is it not an implicit declaration of civil war against the blacks, Hispanics and other immigrants?

America has serious structural problems too in the political field. Although Blacks obtained freedom from slavery under “Emancipation Proclamation” in 1863, there is still “three-fifth clause” meaning blacks are only 60 per cent of whites; that is reflected in the electoral voting system. In other words, five black men and women are counted as three white men and have three votes. This was the compromise that was made after the abolition of slavery to give adult franchise to the erstwhile slaves. The education of blacks is well below par with the whites. Yes, the blacks are doing well in sports and games as well as in pop music etc, but they are not racially integrated in the mainstream of America. Even a short visit to America will make that abundantly clear – this is the black neighbourhood and that is the white neighbourhood, I was told in the tour of the city when I visited the University of Virginia a few years back.

Obviously, American blatant proclamation of being the leader of the free world upholding freedom of speech, democracy etc and the treatment of blacks in America throws up sharp duplicitous behaviour. Any disconnect will have repercussion at home and abroad. Iran already said, “What a failure the Western democracy is and how fragile and weak its foundation is.” Russia said very poignantly, “US electoral process is archaic, does not meet modern standards and is prone to violations.”  With all these shortcomings, any attempt to pretend otherwise is bound to fail.

Years ago, Noam Chomsky, the most prominent thinker at the present time in America, had pointed out the blatant abuse of power and the assault on democracy in the country and gave the verdict that America is a “failed state”. It is not so much on economic and technical grounds, but on social, political and moral grounds. In this day and age, any duplicity is going to be flashed around, at home and abroad, and that is not a very flattering outcome for America.

–           Dr A Rahman is an author and a columnist.