Adverse visit reaction

Harm-ful and unintended reactions to medicines can occur at doses normally used for treatment, and that explains the escalation of political confrontation we have been watching in this country for last three weeks. Ever since US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Indian Finance-Minister-cum-presidential-hopeful Pranab Mukherjee visited Bangladesh in the first week of this month, political tension has heated up instead of cooling down. Like adverse drug reaction, it must be adverse visit reaction that their call for dialogue has backfired only to further deepen our political deadlock.
Why? Is it because BNP got buoyed by any assurance from the powerful visitors that it should stay the course of its unassuming movement? Or, is it the ruling party that got some kind of a green signal of having the blessings of two powerful countries in its heavy-handed crushing of a wayward opposition? I for one don't like to believe in either possibility, because our politicians have enough self-respect not to become clay in the hands of others and do as told. I say I don't like to believe, not that it cannot happen.
Why does it appear that both parties have revved up the conflict between them since the illustrious visits of the illustrious visitors? It could be coincidence. It could be collateral damage. It also could be causal scapegoat for an effectual mishap.
But could it also mean that our politicians have finally disabused themselves of foreign influence? Could it be that they have decided to go on their own in their power struggle despite exhortations from foreign powers to sit down and talk? If that is so, it's good news. As a nation we shouldn't mind the growing pains we have to suffer if that means we are coming of age and going to take our own decisions. That was the original dream of the fathers of our independence and the martyrs who died for it. Rain or sunshine, we wanted to be the masters of our destiny, and call our own shots!
Perhaps it may not be that simple to exert independence in a world increasingly asserting interdependence. And, foreign influence may not be so bad compared to foreign interference. Even the United States of America, which is most blamed for meddling in the affairs of others, cannot avoid foreign influence. Contribution to election campaigns of political candidates by foreign countries and corporates is often resented by the American people. As early as 1921, American journalist H.L. Mencken bemoaned: "In no other large nation of the world are there so many aliens, nor is there any other in which so large a proportion of the resident aliens speak languages incomprehensible to the native."
What does it mean? While foreign influence is unavoidable in an increasingly integrated world, it depends on a nation whether it wants to use that influence in its favour or against it. It has been a long-standing joke in this country that Bangladesh has all sorts of pro-foreign groups like pro-Indian, pro-Pakistani, pro-American, pro-Chinese so on and so forth, but it is hard to find anyone pro-Bangladeshi.
Perhaps this is a phenomenon unique to this country. There are rebel groups or militias in many Third World countries which are sponsored by their foreign benefactors. There are even politicians who are particularly known for being tilted towards "friendly" powers. It is no secret that oil companies and large corporates bankroll political campaigns to have their men in power positions to influence high-level policies.
India wants to woo the United States, and it graciously complied when asked to stop buying oil from Iran. Israel is often compared to a kid hiding in big daddy's pocket, namely the US protection. Myanmar has lived under the Chinese fold, until lately, when the United Stated and the United Kingdom have made an incursion through their success with Aung Sung Suu Kyi's democratic movement. Even the British people often resent the subservience of their prime ministers to American presidents. The British press taunted Tony Blair as George Bush's lapdog.
On that barometer, we are a notch above others. While others have national interest in mind when the small fish submits to big fish, our politicians are inspired by party or individual interests. I can bet no other country in the world has so many politicians who have foreign domicile as we have in this country! Our politicians buy homes abroad, get their children settled there, keep money in foreign banks, and are ready to leave anytime it's not safe or useful for them to live in this country. Their allegiance to foreign influence comes lock, stock and barrel.
Are we watching a reaction to foreign influence or a cover up for foreign interference? Neither is wrong if driven by national interest, but don't blame foreigners if our leaders become patsies to them.

The writer is Editor, First News and an opinion writer for The Daily Star.
Email: [email protected]