The recent events of national crisis emanating from the anti-quota movement and consequent loss of lives, followed by widespread arsonist attacks and destruction of public properties and critical infrastructures by a vested group, are perhaps an eye-opener. As we advance towards a smart Bangladesh, our reliance on the information technology and the internet becomes pervasive. It is perhaps an unfortunate coincidence that the global disruptions of the internet leading to banking, airline and other crucial service outages was accompanied by a larger disruption in Bangladesh, arguably due to the decision of keeping the internet shut down by the government. Following the events of organized hooliganism by the vested quarter to destabilize the country, the Government kept the country’s internet connectivity with the rest of the world, and the in-country network within Bangladesh, closed for six days, leading to a sense of panic and massive loss and sufferings caused by the unavailability of internet-based services.
Two explanations were provided by the highest authority, according media reports: a. Internet infrastructure was sabotaged by vandalism orchestrated by anti-government arsonists who burnt down data-centres and transmission cables of key establishments, including fiberoptic cable-cuts in at least 40 places within the country; and b. The government apprehended nationwide terrorist vandalism using the internet-based technologies and communication modes, and therefore they shut the internet down.
While both explanations have elements of truth and logic in them, the consequential sufferings of the common people were unprecedented in recent memory and could be described as monumental, at the least. Perhaps no other major crisis begged a response of such staggering proportions from the ruling government in recent years, when a coordinated internet outage and curfew with a shoot-to-kill orders were in force. Albeit, the government’s timely actions averted bigger disasters and created a sense of relief among the people. Looking back, curfews were frequently used during anti-autocratic movement in the nineties. During the current government’s tenure in the last three terms, curfews were hardly used, and the deployment of army to aid the civilian administration armed with a shoot-to-kill order was a novelty for the relatively younger generations, who did not have a chance to experience our national movements in the past.
Supposedly, the Internet outage has been a new element in this crisis management protocol. During the initial years of mobile telephone, the then care-taker government used mobile phone outage tactic to rein in election hooliganism. Now that we have become used to the internet and internet-based technologies in the intervening years, the internet outage tactic, not surprisingly, became the latest addition to the arsenal, which presumably was designed to preempt episodes of terrorism or vandalism in any unpredictable location.
Admittedly, this perhaps needs an introspection. The policy makers and the highest authority may have done their own analysis of the situation, however, if we are to remain disconnected from the global internet traffic and be paralyzed by lack of availability within country, then the idea of national security becomes moot.
Bangladesh has traversed a long way, and we aspire to be a smart nation in the future. The people in their right mind would expect that it is the duty of the government to ensure continued operations of the critical infrastructures and devise appropriate pathways to ensure such security in a time of crisis.
The national defense and security network not only aims to protect infiltrators from a foreign source, but also deters and tackles threats emanating from within the national borders. The curfew and the army deployment created an environment of relative calm and reduced the risks arising from the threats of terrorism and vandalism; at the same time, the country also experienced the shock and disruptions from a coordinated internet shut-down by the government, which the government was supposed to protect it in the first case. While the government successfully prevented the continuation of more destruction and vandalism, which this time went beyond any earlier precedents, the internet outage evidently led to massive sufferings and loss for economy and the people. The whole country and the common people became hostage and paid the steep price of the internet outage. The colossal price of lost trade and commerce, and mental peace may take a long while to heal back.
Can we necessarily justify such an element in the crisis management strategy?
One may raise the question how justified was the internet outage when there was curfew in force aided by active army troops on the streets armed with a shoot-to-kill order.
Just to rehearse the memory, recall the likely breadth of the repercussions: utility services introduced prepaid meters over the years, banks ran their systems on the internet backbone; we were advancing to a cashless future which critically depended on the internet, all government services and private businesses, international trade infrastructure, power system, health services infrastructure and name any other service, the entire economy had been designed over the years to depend on the internet-based technologies. The entire ICT sector and the knowledge-based economy of the country critically depends on the internet. Naturally, these were the unwanted but predictable casualties of the internet outage.
The questions arise: was it really inevitable that internet could not be allowed, even in a limited form, and was it necessary that the internet remained unavailable to the common public and the government offices? Should we focus on building alternative resilient networks to grapple with such emergencies? It then follows: how are we thinking of safeguarding critical infrastructures in times of national security crisis?
Certainly, our crisis management strategies should also include disaster recovery, continuity of service and resilience protocols that would likely ensure that such disruptions of basic services are prevented during the time of any national crisis or emergency. We must have an efficient crisis management strategy to protect our critical infrastructures and appropriate mechanisms in place to address vulnerabilities. The government may consider enacting a separate act or regulations such as Critical Infrastructure Information and Protection Act, to designate, carry out regular risk assessment and data-sharing among public and private infrastructure providers, and ensure protection of the essential services from evolving threats, which may work in tandem with other current legal provisions. The national security apparatus is supposed to protect the critical infrastructures, such as power, internet back-bone, major highways and communication modes and keep services open for the benefit of the common people; whose everyday life is now very largely dependent on the internet connectivity and internet-based technologies, directly or indirectly.
Are we going to have more episodes of such reaction from the government in a time of crisis? It probably would give a very negative signal to the international business community in branding Bangladesh as a place to do business. The people of the country place a lot of confidence in our army and the civil defense who would be capable of tackling the security emergencies in such times when the entire nation is in a state of curfew and the security forces have shoot-to-kill order. We must not allow a likely situation of vulnerability when a group of hooligans, or any unnatural event, can place the entire country hostage by committing crimes such as burning down data-centres and transmission cables.
The arsonists and hooligans who destroyed the critical infrastructures had a larger agenda: they tried to destabilize the country and to dethrone the government, piggybacking on a popular and well-intentioned student movement. Their aim was to project that Bangladesh is a failed country under the present government. Certainly, they did not do that out of love of the country and they do not represent the minds of the people. They also do not enjoy the mandate from the common people for their heinous and destructive actions. Only a vested group with their motivated interest could carry out this unimaginable destruction and force the common people to pay the price for their organized mayhem. Fortunately, the people of the country are resolute with their will to emerge from the crisis and are moving on with everyday life.
Our vision for the smart Bangladesh should therefore encompass the strategies to safeguard our critical infrastructures and mitigate crisis keeping the critical infrastructures operational for the people. The recent episode also raises another cause of concern: it is perhaps not only the physical damages of the critical infrastructures that are at risk, any cyber-attack from a local or foreign source can also cripple the nation leading to a complete shut-down of trade and commerce and basic necessities.
Are we ready for this?
Abdullah Al Masud is an economist with interests in emerging technologies and policies.
