Monday, 26 September 2011

Edward Said: A trembler of Western discourse


As the Palestinian authority seeks recognition of its statehood in the UN, the global community commemorates the eighth anniversary of the passing of Edward Said, who Robert Fisk characterized as Palestine's most influential political figure. Said was a staunch advocate of the 'one-state solution'. In 1979, he authored 'The Question of Palestine'. Said's political trajectory transitioned from that of a disinterested observer to an active participant, culminating with the Israeli-Arab War of 1967. From 1977 to 1991, he served as an autonomous member of the Palestine National Council. In 1991, he resigned from the council and continued his advocacy for Palestine as an independent critic. His most powerful tool was his ability to articulate his thoughts and ideas. Dialogue is a crucial and unavoidable component of Palestine's pursuit and endeavour for statehood. On this momentous day of the Palestinian bid, we are commemorating Said.

 

Edward W. Said, a Palestinian-American, was born in Jerusalem on November 1, 1935, and passed away on September 25, at the age of 67, in New York. In the year of Said's death, I encountered my initial encounter with him through an article penned by Prof. Dr. Sirajul Islam Chowdhury in the literary supplement of a Bengali newspaper. Only then did I discover Said's identity as an English literary character rather than being associated with any one language or nation? One year after his demise, I became acquainted with his revolutionary publication 'Orientalism' (1978) for the first time during my first year at the University of Dhaka. Unexpectedly, my pals, including Mujibor Rahman, who is pursuing an M. Phil degree at Delhi University, stumbled into a discreet admirer of Said-Foej Alom, a poet and postcolonial intellectual in Bengali literature.

 

Poet Alom demonstrated his determination to translate Said's highly influential work, 'Orientalism', into Bengali to communicate Said's ideas to audiences in Bangladesh. Following this release, the practices and studies of Said's literature established a strong foundation in this country.

 

Allow me to explain the significance of Said, regardless of any specific language or nation. Said is regarded as a trailblazer in postcolonial thought. Postcolonial philosophy encompasses more than just literature. This philosophical perspective is relevant to various fields of study, such as language, sociology, physics, history, painting, architecture, agriculture, and more. Postcolonial ideology motivates us to thrive based on our cultural heritage. It encourages individuals to overcome the long-standing effects of colonialism. It enables you to ascertain the authenticity of your tradition, literature, culture, and prevailing mindset throughout the pre-colonial era. It reveals how the colonialists caused significant distortions in these areas during colonial control. Postcolonial philosophy emphasizes the need to reclaim and preserve one's traditions from the influence of colonial distortions. Post-colonialism emerged after the publication of Said's 'Orientalism'. This movement delivered another significant impact following the disruption caused by Postmodernism in Western epistemology. However, numerous postcolonial philosophers argue that Said's work 'Orientalism' initiated the initial epistemic rupture in Western discourse.

 

Ngugi wa Thiong'o and Chinua Achebe, both hailing from Africa, as well as Ashis Nandy, Ranajit Guha, and Partha Chatterjee from India, along with Benedict Anderson, Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin from Europe, made significant contributions to the field of post-colonialism based on their perspectives and expertise. In Bangladesh, Foej Alom, Saymon Jakaria, Selim Al Deen, and S M Sultan were highly conscious in their use of post-colonialism in poetry, play, and painting, respectively.

 

Said's second significant publication is 'Covering Islam' (1981). This book examines the deliberate portrayal of Islam as a religion associated with terrorism by Western media. This is how Western media portrays Islam. This book also highlights the prevailing friction between the Eastern and Western regions about Islam, fundamental terrorism, and related matters.

 

Said's initial publication, Joseph Conrad and the Fiction of Autobiography (Harvard University Press, 1966), focused on an author with whom he perceived a sense of affinity. Originally from Poland, Conrad embarked on global travels and acquired proficiency in English later in life. In the subsequent year, Israel emerged victorious over the collective military of many Arab nations in the Six-Day War, which catalyzed Said's burgeoning political awareness. His literary works comprise 'The World, the Text, and the Critic' (1983) and 'Culture and Imperialism' (1992). He was said to have expressed strong support for the independence of Palestinians. He has authored several subsequent works on the topic of Palestinians' right to self-determination, including 'The Question of Palestine' (1979), 'The Politics of Dispossession: The Struggle for Palestinian Self-Determination' (1994), and 'End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After' (2000). He expressed strong disapproval of the former US foreign policy towards the Middle East, particularly the policy of 'war on terror'. He was referred to as the 'professor of terror' by a US-based magazine for assuming this role. Explosive devices were deliberately aimed at his office at the institution. Fortunately, Said was able to avoid the situation by being absent. Said exemplifies the archetype of a public intellectual. He authored a book and actively engaged in numerous civic endeavours. On the occasion of the eighth anniversary of his passing, I offer my sincerest homage.


This article was appeared on 26th September, 2011 in the Daily Sun. 

Friday, 9 September 2011

India's leadership and its implication for South Asia


India's leadership is much talked about now a days in South Asian politics. There has been a persistent and sharp contrast between South Asian states, as a whole, and India. Where a number of South Asian states are in a strained relationship with the West, India on the contrary is enjoying a bonhomie relationship. For last few months it has been receiving many world leaders at home with success. 'Incredible India', is truly proving its diplomatic professionalism in dealing with other states, even USA, to keep its national interest intact.


'Bandwagoning- Balancing'
The present India's foreign policy appears to be, to borrow a phrase from Robert Kaplan, 'Monsoon: Indian Ocean and Future of American Power', published in 2010, an 'ultimate paradox'. How does it constitute a paradox? Yogesh Joshi explained it well. He said that the Indian foreign policy is the perfect example of fusion of 'Bandwagoning- Balancing'. It is bandwagoning with the US for its national interest but, at the same time, balancing American power by professing its slant towards a multipolar world. India successfully convinced Mr. Obama to support its causes. During Obama's visit to Delhi he openly supported, for the first time, India's bid for permanent membership in United Nations Security Council. On India's persistence, it also agreed to help India obtain the membership of four important instruments of the non-proliferation regime -- the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Wassenaar Arrangement and the Australia Group.

How is India balancing against global powers? May be India is piggybacking on the US to reach global power status but she is not blind to the pitfalls of too much dependence. She may support the US leadership but, very much logically, not the US centered unipolar world. India strongly supports the idea of a multi-polar world order, most evident in the proceedings of multilateral settings such as the BRICS. India's warm relationship with the US does not, necessarily, mean that she will listen to the every exhortation placed by Mr. Obama. For example, India did not consider the bids of two US aviation giants for providing the Medium Multiple-Role Combat Aircraft to the Indian Air Force, though Mr. Obama exhorted India on this bid. We have seen how India was silent on United Nations Resolution 1973, brought against the Libyan government. India has been maintaining relationship with Iran at significant level. She supported Syria, the worst human rights abuser, in its candidature for the United Nations Human Rights Council. But it is relevant here to note that both Iran and Syria are at a draggers-drawn with the US. That's how India is 'bandwagoning' with the US but at the same time, 'balancing' against the US leverage.


Leadership in South Asia?
Hillary Clinton during her last visit to India in July, 2011, reiterated the ever increasing importance of India to the world and, of course, to the US. She said, "I can tell you that we are, in fact, betting on India's future. We understand that much of the history of the 21st century will be written in Asia, and that much of the future of Asia will be shaped by, most importantly, by the 1.3 billion people who live in this country." In that Chennai speech Ms. Clinton had some real gestures towards India besides some 'tall talks'. But why Washington is so enthusiastic about India? To this common question there is popular answer- because Washington wants to offset against China in Asia. In fact Washington seeks to create a bigger circle, Washington-Delhi-Tokyo, which may be extended with the inclusion of Seoul and Manila in near future.

But India's leadership in South Asia, as Ms. Clinton indicated, will be a tough call. Leadership in a region calls for some components. The aspirant state is expected to have good relationship with its neighbors. Does India have any trustworthy friend in South Asia? India has 'neighborly problems'. She has two nuclear armed, hostile states on two sides. One of her neighbors is war depleted and a breeding ground of insurgency. Bangladesh, another neighbor, changes its status with India with the change of governments. India also has `adequate' suspicion about Bangladesh. On the other, Nepal and Bhutan are the only two neighbors, upon whom India has more or less influence.

Ms. Clinton talked about the 'neighborly problems'. She expressed her anticipations that India would emerge among her neighbors as a 'benevolent leader'. She said, "…opening of India's markets to the world will produce a more prosperous India and a more prosperous South Asia. It will also spill over into Central Asia and beyond into the Asia Pacific region." At present, India is enjoying an economy of steady GDP growth ranging from 8 to 8.5. But does it really spill on her neighbors? From the perspective of Bangladesh, there are still many barriers including tariff and non-tariff barriers in trade between Bangladesh and India. In an updated statistics it is found that the trade gap between India and Bangladesh rose to $3.80 billion in 2010-11 fiscal year from $2.90 in the year before. Trade officials and businessmen talk about the standardisation of Bangladesh's exportable items by Indian authorities still remains a key. New Delhi is yet to make any tangible arrangement for removing the non-tariff barriers to trade that restrict exports of good number of items from Bangladesh to India despite, repeated assurances.

Besides trade issues, there are many other historically prolonged- unresolved issues between India and Bangladesh. Ms. Clinton didn't deny this grave concerns which are equally important for both sides. In her Chennai speech she said, "India also has a great commitment to improving relations with Bangladesh, and that is important because regional solutions will be necessary on energy shortages, water-sharing, and the fight against terrorists."

This has been the continued state of affairs between India and Bangladesh. This scenario does not differ very much in the aspects of India's relations with other neighboring states, with a couple of exceptions. India's leadership in South Asia requires resolving those issues first. India may enjoy a comprehensive economic and military power but that doesn't mean an easy and unabated leadership for her in South Asia. Many scholars opined that the problem is rooted in India's mindset. India's foreign policy is still revolving around Kautilyan discourse. India can bring a shift in her foreign policy and brighten the possibilities of leadership in South Asia.

This article as first appeared in the Daily Star on 10 September, 2011.