David Cameron has a tendency to overestimate the UK’s standing and importance in today’s world. One can only hope that there was an attempt at humour when he used One Direction as an example of British achievements worthy of pride, to give the rest of his impassioned response to Putin’s jibe earlier in the year any shred of credibility.
His plans to renegotiate Britain’s role in the EU gave way to the sanctioning of a plebiscite on leaving the EU without thinking through the detrimental repercussions of such a split, to quell a backbench rebellion.
His plans for Syria remained a figment of his imagination after being rejected by his own parliament.
The latest episode of Cameron’s miscalculation, derived from pining for the days of the British Empire, comes in the shape of a hollow ultimatum to Sri Lanka. After weakening his hand and attending the Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Colombo without any hesitation or negotiation regarding Sri Lanka’s human rights record, he thought it a good idea to all but demand an independent inquiry into alleged war crimes while enjoying the island’s hospitality. President Mahinda Rajapaksa rubbished it defiantly.
The faux outrage of the world at Cameron’s prior indifference towards the alleged human rights violations overlooks the near 30 years of civilian massacres and ethnic cleansing, punctuated by high-profile assassinations carried out by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.
Sri Lanka’s government waged war against this organisation, not the Tamil people. It did not endorse discrimination. None of this is to pardon any abuses and atrocities that may have occurred or are currently occurring, but they are facts that need to be remembered whenever anyone expresses horror about the Sri Lankan government’s perceived inaction.
For better or for worse, it had turned to China to aid it in putting an end to the violent Civil War and crush the Tigers. The world’s largest country by population took the opportunity to exert its influence in India’s backyard.
It is no surprise, then, that the “Made in China” label that can cause Delhi, Washington, and London to break into a cold sweat now and again is held in higher regard than Cameron’s hypocrisy, coming from the “small island no one listens to”, in Colombo.
The nationalism and misplaced patriotism commonplace in Bangladesh forget that its problems since independence have never been addressed by or for its people. Foreign influence, both direct and indirect, have always prevailed.
It is why the US invites India to solve the Bangladeshi crisis. The end of the Cold War and subsequent, if not simultaneous, rise of Asian superpowers mean there has been a changing of the guards, that Bangladesh answers to new masters now.
India’s counsel will be heeded, its directives unlikely to be challenged by the US. The latter will argue that this is simply the latest episode of outsourcing. Whether it is a case of the US having enough on its plate to not bother with the relatively unimportant Bangladesh, thereby palming it off on India, or India being the dominant force in the region whose words are gospel, is immaterial insofar as the outcome is concerned. Everybody has a boss.
Those screaming themselves hoarse for change in Bangladesh need to play the game if they wish to realise their dreams. They, however, are novices who have not even entered the arena, whereas those who make up the deeply flawed established order are veterans of it.
The faintest of hopes comes from the knowledge that all seasoned professionals have to retire someday, but that may be clutching at straws. The government and the opposition, not the people, know the steps of the intricate and imperative dance of appeasing the foreign powers, of choosing the right boss to achieve their sole objective of being seated on the throne.
They gratefully accept the coveted crown of Bangladesh as the fief for being an obedient vassal. The lords, in their turn, care little for how their wishes are fulfilled so long as they are.
Known to the leaders, too, are the overriding principles of unilateralism, self-preservation, and self-promotion that dictate the actions of every single superpower, each constantly working to consolidate and extend its power.
Hence, Bangladeshi politicians are exponents of the very specific strand of Marxism that their foreign overlords apply as well: “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies,” said Groucho Marx.
