IN so much as a good thing going has started to sputter, the current state of our national affairs is comparable to this comic situation. A man is pulled by the hair on his head, only to find that he couldn't retaliate because his assailant was bald. We are victims of a similar disappointment.
At the end of twenty months going on twenty-one, the government which raised our hopes is trashing them. What can we do to this government? Not even ask it to step down, since it's ready to quit in less than four months.
A fundamental question arises: Can anyone take over this country in the name of change and leave it worse than it was found? For those who need to know, this is the harm that has been done. When antibiotic fails to kill all of the bacteria it targets, the surviving bacteria become resistant to that particular drug. These bacteria are called superbugs, which quickly learn to withstand antibiotics and perpetuate a cycle in which increasingly powerful drugs are required to treat infections.
The hodgepodge of the last twenty months is going to leave us with the superbugs. It will make change immensely more difficult in future, because the resistance to change will be stronger every time.
Perhaps, it has even turned back the clock. It has taken us so far forward that we are going to spend a great deal of our future recovering the distance we went ahead from the past. It's likely that much of the ensuing debate will be whether this country has been made better or worse during the two years of this caretaker government. No questions asked for the things made better. What about the things made worse? Who is going to take responsibility for them?
While these questions blow in the wind, can this government simply pack up and go? True, it had come to power with good intentions. True, it had come to fix our problems and save us from a disaster. True, it had come to clean up the mess that made our politics unbearable. But can it leave us just like this in the middle of nowhere? Can it abandon us on a rebound course, where everything condemned twenty months ago looks imminent?
Bob Woodward writes in The War Within, excerpts from which appeared in The Washington Post, that Donald Rumsfield was fond of using a bicycle seat analogy to describe the US strategy in Iraq. This is how it goes. The Iraqi forces should be trained to assume responsibility for the security of their own country and then the US should "take the hand off the Iraqi bicycle seat" to let the Iraqis ride on their own.
This is an apt analogy for what this government came to do. It wanted to reform the political parties, fight corruption and hold fair election to drive a culture of responsible politics. The ultimate objective was to take us to a stage when our politicians would learn to "ride the bike" by themselves.
Perhaps, it will be argued for years to come as to what has actually happened. Why this government went from the sublime to the ridiculous? What has happened to the exuberance it showed at the beginning? Why is it callous closer to the end? Why is this flip-flop? Why is this government rushing to fold its tent?
But the overriding question of all is whether this government can quit without taking responsibility for its failures. What about those who ran this government and enjoyed the perks of their respective offices? Are they not accountable for not delivering what they promised? Are they not accountable if they are going to leave things as bad, if not worse? Who do we blame, should there be resurgence of corruption? Who do we blame if we return to October 2006 after two years of innovative government?
Well, there are provisions to correct mistakes in real life. Doctors are sued for wrong treatment. One can claim compensation for property loss. We can take others to court for hurting our reputation. Manufacturers recall defective goods. Shops give refund on erroneous sale.
But what about those who give us false hope, and then leave us stewing in our own juice? How do they compensate for the mistakes or failures if we are going to live with the consequences?
It must be understood that a nation's fate isn't for target practice, and there is no free trial in nation building. One must be consequential and take credit or criticism for which there is no second chance or guessing. When the lives of millions are involved, it can't be a walk in the park or day of picnic. Between bluffing and bungling, a line of accountability must be drawn.
Where are we going to draw that line for this government? If it came to inject accountability into our politics and failed, the least it can do is show some accountability as it goes out. It can tell us that it failed or why it failed. It can say it's sorry. We are an eternally forgiving nation. We shall listen, and we shall forgive.
Is that accountability important for us? German philosopher Hegel argues in the Philosophy of Right that punishment always remains imprisoned in the repetition of vengeance. We need this nation to heal and reconcile. Before that we need to punish or pardon. Our lesson from history is the trial of the war criminals. We shouldn't let another cycle of vengeance run its course.
In the movie Brokeback Mountain, Ennis del Mar tells his lover: "If you can't fix it Jack, you gotta stand it." That gruesome message reverberates through this unfortunate land. The only way to explain it is that we are going through the mercury retrograde, unless somebody feels accountable and tells us what happened.

Mohammad Badrul Ahsan is a columnist for The Daily Star.