That impassiveness is a reflection of “going through the motions” was clear by the looks on the faces of our latest distinguished visitors to the Rohingya refugee camps.
If it takes nearly a for the UN secretary general and the World Bank president to “see for himself” what is one of the worst human tragedies of recent time, someone somewhere needs a shove in the back.
The comment by the British undersecretary for foreign affairs took the cake when he suggested that “world opinion” must be rallied. Yes, minister, but if all media, including the BBC, has covered the issue in depth -- and the BBC team even won a prize for reporting on the issue -- what further opinion needs to be canvassed?
The fact of the matter is that geo-politics won over human massacre and suffering, just as it did in Serbia, Croatia, and our very own Bangladesh in 1971.
Whether by design or not, India did not argue the case for the trial of the 390-odd Pakistani officers for their crimes against humanity. They weren’t on our side this time around, as is the case with China, Russia, and the US.
And, due to the inherent kindness of our prime minister, a war that many wanted, was averted, and over half a million mouths are being fed from our scant resources.
It’s just as well that Bangladesh is so hospitable. Germany’s coalition government was on the verge of being split over their refugee issue. The Bangladeshi diaspora living abroad, so quick to take to the streets on trivial political issues that have little international connect, have failed to lobby their MPs or congressmen or local politicians.
They couldn’t muster up the idea of street protests or even a seminar. So much for a knowledge-based society.
Even local media interest in the Rohingya crisis has waned. None of our talk show hosts have tried to get an interview with Aung San Suu Kyi for her first-hand views, let alone repeatedly ask questions regarding progress on the repatriation deal.
Bangladesh being a role model for development rings hollow given the alarming disappearance of our “friends,” so much so that the term invites redefining. From an opinion-building phase we would seem to have to move on to a “we’ve landed up with half a million people we don’t need and Myanmar doesn’t want.”
Whether a case in the International Court at The Hague is warranted needs scrutiny. Because this is, for all practical purposes, a peaceful form of getting land to house people that are homeless.
That is being arranged as we know, but does that create grounds for a workable solution of sorts?
The time is not too far when the patience and hospitality will run out and be replaced by apathy and social unrest.
That’s something no one can afford.
Mahmudur Rahman is a writer, columnist, broadcaster, and communications specialist.