09-11-2021
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
TUESDAy, NOvEMBER 9, 2021
4
Acting Editor & Publisher : Jobaer Alam
e-mail: editor@thebangladeshtoday.com
Tuesday, November 9, 2021
Sustainable poverty
reduction
Many poor families in Bangladesh climb out of
poverty one year to slip back into extreme poverty
conditions in the next. Natural calamities like
floods, cyclones and river erosions increase the number of
the poverty afflicted or push them back into poverty after
they had achieved considerable success in getting rid of
poverty from their lives.
What can the policies be to conquer poverty on a
sustainable basis ? One way can be hedging the rural poor
with insurance policies to cover risks like crop losses,
damage to homesteads by floods, loss of poultries and
cattle, etc. According to media reports, a crop insurance
pilot project was about to be launched in a limited way. The
project would be funded jointly by GOB, Asian
Development Bank (ADB) and Japan.
But further developments on this project are not heard
nowadays. This project's outcome should be monitored
and, if found effective, should be replicated all over the
country. The small insurance policies can help poor people
at the grass roots from getting some financial assistance
directly at the time of their acute distresses.
Rural marketing systems may be improved so that rural
producers can sell directly to buyers at good value,
regularly, without having to sell to exploitative
middlemen at a loss. The overall availability of micro
credits to the poor must be increased with repayment
of the loans at substantially lower rate of interests and
on other easy terms.
Government will have to run special programmes to take
care of the needs of the victims of river erosion, monga
(periodic famine conditions in northern areas). It should
provide food and housing supports and create planned
employment for affected people under these special
programmes and operate them with some regularity.
Greater availability of energy and other means of
production in the rural areas that have the highest
concentration of poverty can also have a positive effect
against poverty.
The fastest results against poverty at the national level
can come from much increasing the rate of economic
growth. Economic growth creates jobs, earnings and
employment that have the most effect in reducing poverty.
But the economic growth is vitally dependent on greater
investment activities. The first requirement, thus, is to
create an environment more conducive to investments.
The creation of an investment-friendly environment in
the country is linked to a host of factors such as increasing
the availability of power and other forms of energy, long
term favourable and unchanging fiscal and monetary
policies of the government that create confidence for the
investors, improved law order conditions, upgradation and
addition to infrastructures supportive of investments,
prevention of smuggling, etc.
There was a time when landlessness which accompany
inevitably poverty and its attendant ills, affected a smaller
part of the Bangladesh population than today.
But the number of the landless ones is noted to be rising
in the country. People are forced to sell their last parcels of
ancestral holdings after falling into worse poverty
conditions in the wake of natural calamities ; river
erosion regularly leads to loss of homesteads and
croplands for a large number of people.
The ones without land join the ranks of the worst ones in
extreme poverty and the tasks of poverty alleviation
becomes even more difficult. According to one reliable
assessment, the number of the landless in the
population was 28 per cent in 1972 ; the number has
increased to 50 per cent at present. Bhumi
AdhikarParisad, an NGO, claims that the number of
the landless today is as high as 54 per cent.
Considering the links between landlessness and poverty
or the need to score better successes against poverty, it is
so important to put a hard brake on the process of
becoming landless. One way of doing it involves
distributing government owned lands, called khas lands,
among landless people. There is also a countywide
programme for doing this but it suffers from pervasive
corruption and neglect.
A report in this paper sometime ago highlighted that in
the Sylhet district about 53 per cent of the distribution of
khas lands remained pending while the 47 per cent of
those who received khas lands against their names were
undeserving persons.
Locally influential groups could get their target
persons to become beneficiaries in the settlement of
khas lands to the exclusion of ones who should have got
ownership rights over these lands in view of their
landless state and acute poverty.
In the cases of both undistributed and distributed khas
lands, unlawful squatters are in possession by using their
links to locally powerful vested interest groups.
The situation in Sylhet is symbolic of khas lands
distribution in other areas of the country. Clearly, the
report indicates the need to take action in two fronts : to
ensure that truly landless and very poor persons get
entitlement as well as effective possession of khas lands
and the eviction of undeserving people from their
current occupation of these lands.
Amputating Lebanon from the Arab world
The dismissive retort of
Lebanon's ridiculous Foreign
Minister Abdullah Bou Habib
to GCC proposals for addressing the
latest crisis was: "If they just want
Hezbollah's head on a plate, we can't
give them that." Healso ludicrously
blamed Saudi Arabia for Hezbollah
flooding the Gulf states with
narcotics. Such was BouHabib's
volley of abuse that he may need to
serve up his own head on a plate if
there is to be any hope of salvaging
this shattered relationship.
The logic of abandoning Hezbollah
and Lebanon to drown together, as
advocated by some Arab opinion
leaders, may appear seductive.
However, this would be disastrously
counterproductive. Gaza was
abandoned to Hamas; the economy
collapsed and people starved, but
Hamas entrenched its monopoly.
Gulf states disassociated themselves
from post-2003 Iraq, surrendering it
to Tehran. Arab abandonment of
Syria rendered it a hellish playground
for Iranian-Hezbollah-Russian
interests. Lebanon would be the
cherry on the cake for Iranian
dominance of the Arab world. And
once it is given away, wresting it back
will be no easy feat.
Hezbollah is Tehran's Trojan horse
for colonizing the Arab world. We
must dismantle it, not welcome it in.
The Houthis in Yemen thrived thanks
to Hezbollah training and support.
Hezbollah waded through a river of
Syrian Arab blood to maintain
Tehran's puppet in power, with
Hezbollah deputy leader Naim
Qassim now threatening to send
additional Hezbollah forces back to
Syria. Hezbollah leader Hassan
Nasrallah is the idol of thousands of
bearded Hashd thugs in Iraq - and
after their recent electoral wipeout,
Tehran wants Hezbollah to play an
even more direct role.
The international community is
wrong to consider Lebanon in
isolation. In the context of escalating
stakes in Iran's game of nuclear
brinkmanship, Hezbollah is just one
grants victory to Iran
of the cards in Tehran's efforts to
dominate the region, buttressed by
nuclear and ballistic weapons. If we
are to abandon Lebanon, we may as
well go the whole way and recognise
Ayatollah Khamenei as Supreme
Leader over the entire region.
Iran and Hezbollah made inroads
only because of the eclipse of Arab
nationalism - the belief that Arabs
should stand together locally and on
the world stage. From Jerusalem to
Sanaa, from Baghdad to Beirut, we
should treat every inch of Arab
territory as sacrosanct and worth
fighting for, particularly when UN
institutions, international law and
multilateral forums are under
sustained attack. Every scrap of
territory we relinquish only makes
our enemies hungry for more. With
the Arab world's mighty collective
resources, the challenges posed by
tiny Lebanon and hostile Iranian
encroachment should be well within
our capabilities.
Let's not rip our own heart out. The
Arab world without Beirut - without
the Lebanon of Khalil Gibran,
Mikhail Naimy, Fairuz - is
inconceivable. Generations of
Khaleejis flocked to Lebanon and fell
in love with the country and its
people, which is why so many are
blessed with Lebanese mothers! The
largely Kuwaiti-owned town of
Bhamdoun, near Beirut, is a
microcosm of this seamless
Lebanese-Khaleej relationship.
Generations of Arabs were raised on
Lebanese films and TV, art, music,
poetry, and boundless creativity.
Lebanon's cultural renaissance
since the civil war was achieved
BARIA ALAMUDDIN
FAN HONGDA
thanks to vast GCC investment. Its
economy thrived thanks to millions
of Arab visitors every year, with tens
of billions of dollars of investment in
banking, telecoms, media,
infrastructure, culture and the
military. Diaspora remittances
amount to about $7 billion a year,
$2.2 billion from Saudi Arabia alone,
and Lebanese assets in Saudi Arabia
are worth about $100billion. Eighty
percent of Lebanese fruit and
vegetable exports went to Saudi
Arabia until Nasrallah turned
Lebanon into a narco state.
This is not about gratitude, but
rather a hard-headed understanding
of the foundations of Lebanon's past
and future prosperity. The
transformation into an Iranian
appendage was always fated to fail.
Aside from lavishing funds on
Hezbollah, would - or could - Tehran
supply the merest fraction of Gulf
investment in Lebanon? The trickle
of Iranian tourists encouraged by
Hezbollah have minuscule spending
power compared with their Gulf
predecessors.
Other than in Houthi-land, where
George Kordahi is hailed a hero (his
family must be so proud!) Lebanon's
hapless information minister is a
nobody who once had a lucky break
via a Saudi TV channel. The problem
is infinitely larger than his bigoted
views. Virulent anti-Gulf propaganda
has been pumped out for decades by
Al-Manar and dozens of other Iransponsored
Beirut media channels.
The damage is entirely to Lebanon,
cutting off its nose to spite its face in
gratuitous self-mutilation against
Lebanon's Arab identity.
GCC political leaders and
intellectuals I speak to aren't so much
angry as puzzled and saddened. They
have lifelong ties with Lebanon and
instinctively desire to help. But how
can you assist someone who is
destroying themselves and doesn't
want to be rescued?
Lebanon's criminal leaders are
beyond redemption (not just
Hezbollah - kullun!), but Lebanon's
citizens - Christian, Shiite, Druze,
Sunni - are Arab to the bone. They
know where their interests lie. They
know what severing ties with the
Arab world has cost them. They all
have brothers, uncles, sons in Gulf
and Arab states, and so retain
intimate material and emotional
connections to the Arab world.
Lebanon is drowning but it is not
lost. Particularly with elections just
months away and a vigorous upswell
of progressive anti-sectarian
independents arising from the 2019
movement, there is everything to play
for. Hashd electoral losses in Iraq
demonstrate how public anger can be
translated into political losses for
Iranian proxies. In Lebanon,
Hezbollah's political dominance is
wholly reliant upon hollowed-out
Christian factions whose support
base has cratered.
Lebanese citizens who lost
everything are desperately looking
for a savior. Arab states can use the
elections to toss Lebanon a lifeline. If
citizens elect new and nondiscredited
leaders who can
marginalize Hezbollah then the GCC
will fully re-engage, while also
encouraging international donors
such as the IMF to refloat the
economy. This is a vision that every
patriotic Lebanese citizen can rally
around, simultaneously giving them
a reason to participate in the
democratic process, providing an exit
route from their hellish situation, and
sweeping aside these ridiculous,
hated figures who have dominated
Lebanese politics for decades too long.
Source: Arab news
The Palestine question cannot be viewed
through an old lens
Despite the fact that the Palestine
question has waned in importance in
the hotspot-ridden Middle East, it still
manages to attract some attention. Not only
do Palestinians, Israelis, and other closely
involved parties have differing perspectives
on the issue, but Chinese public opinion is also
becoming increasingly divided.
The Palestine question must be divided into
stages, taking into account the differences in
the characteristics of the issue at various
timeframes, in the sense that the present
cannot be viewed through the lens of the past.
The question of Palestine, which has
hampered peace in the Middle East for more
than a century, has its roots in the rise of
Zionism in the late 19th century. It can be
divided into three stages of development,
from its inception to the present: territorial
competition between Jews and Palestinians;
successive wars between Israel and the Arab
states; and Palestine's current claim to Israeliheld
territories for the establishment of an
independent state.
The United Nations Resolution 181 on the
partition of the Palestine Mandate, which was
issued on November 29, 1947, marked the
end of the first stage of the question of
Palestine. With the rise of the Zionist
movement and increased Jewish
immigration to Palestine, competition for
land between Jews and Palestinians became
more intense.
At the urging of the major powers, the UN
voted on the partition and the establishment
of a Jewish state and a Palestinian Arab state.
All Arab countries voted against the
partition, and when Israel declared statehood
on May 14, 1948, many of them waged war on
the new state in the name of defending
Palestinian interests. The Arab states were
adamant about standing up for Palestinians
because they saw Palestine as part of the Arab
world and Palestinians as part of the Arab
people.
As a result, the history of the Palestinians, as
seen through their eyes, can be traced back to
the Arab conquest of Palestine following the
rise of Islam in the 7th century AD.
Until the adoption of the UN resolution on
the partition of Palestine in 1947, Palestinians
were a people ruled by others, never having
established their own independent state and
severely lacking the capacity and ability to do
so. The Arab states' collective boycott and
Lebanon's cultural renaissance since the civil war was
achieved thanks to vast GCC investment. Its economy
thrived thanks to millions of Arab visitors every year, with
tens of billions of dollars of investment in banking,
telecoms, media, infrastructure, culture and the military.
rejection of Resolution 181 pushed the
Palestinians even further away from
establishing an independent and sovereign
state on that basis.
The First Middle East War began on May
15, 1948, the day after Israel was established
in accordance with UN Resolution 181, when
several Arab countries launched a military
attack on Israel under the banner of
defending Palestinian interests. This led to the
second stage of the question of Palestine, the
Arab-Israeli War, which ended with the Third
Middle East War in 1967.
When the First Middle East War ended in
1949, the land given to the Palestinians for
statehood by UN Resolution 181 was divided
among Israel, Transjordan (later renamed
Jordan), and Egypt. When the Third Middle
East War ended in 1967, Israel also took
control of Palestinian land that had been
occupied by Jordan and Egypt, worsening the
Palestinian situation even further. With the
defeat of the Arab states, the second stage of
the question of Palestine also came to a close.
Where war had failed to bring a solution,
Yasser Arafat, the leader of the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (PLO), made the
decision to pursue a path of peace with Israel,
bringing the question of Palestine to its third
stage. Arafat declared the establishment of the
State of Palestinian in 1988, despite the fact
that he had no physical control over the
territory, signaling to Israel that a peaceful
solution to the question of Palestine was on
the table.
After the Middle East Peace Conference in
Madrid in 1991, the Palestinian-Israeli peace
process became the primary means of
resolving the question of Palestine. Since
then, the core of the question of Palestine has
shifted to Palestinian demands for the return
of occupied Palestinian lands from Israeli
hands and for the establishment of an
independent state.
Since 1967, when Israel seized more than
6,000 square kilometers of Palestinian lands
in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the
Gaza Strip from Jordan and Egypt during the
Third Middle East War, these lands have been
the focus of Palestinian statehood claims.
After the Madrid Middle East Peace
Conference and ongoing Palestinian-Israeli
peace talks, the Palestinian National
Authority gained control of a portion of the
land from Israel, and the de jure sovereign
State of Palestine now administers 2,500
square kilometers of territory.
Despite the current perceptions of a few
countries, such as Israel and the US, the
international community continues to
support a two-state solution to the question of
Palestine (that is, an independent Israel and a
Palestinian state).
The Palestinian territory controlled by
Egypt and Jordan prior to the outbreak of the
Third Middle East War in 1967 is the basis for
the current Palestinian claim to statehood.
After the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference and
ongoing Palestinian-Israeli peace talks, the Palestinian
National Authority gained control of a portion of the land
from Israel, and the de jure sovereign State of Palestine
now administers 2,500 square kilometers of territory.
However, objectively, this is an unattainable
dream.
Israel will never give up East Jerusalem,
and no Israeli decision-maker will ever order
a withdrawal from the West Bank's Jewish
settlements against the will of 400,000
Jewish settlers. It is a matter of national
stability for Israel, and the careers of its
politicians are on the line, whereas no
international force is strong enough to force
Israel to withdraw from these lands; the
Palestinians are all the more powerless in this
regard.
The Palestinians must be more realistic
about the boundaries of their future state, and
the international community must fully take
this into account. The hitherto fragmented
Palestinian political forces need to unite as
soon as possible and define a realistic path
and objectives for the sake of their own
statehood.
Some nations and individuals blame Israel
for the current plight of the Palestinians, with
some even criticizing 19th-century Zionists for
returning to Palestine and establishing a
nation-state. The fact remains that one of the
world's most widely influential books - the
Bible - makes their case; not even atheists can
deny the enormous impact this tome has had
and continues to have on the world.
How can a Zionist ignore the Bible's
account of the Jews and their forefathers and
deny the connection between the Jewish
people and Palestine?
Furthermore, Israel is a state that was
established under international law and in
accordance with UN resolutions, and Israel's
occupation of Palestinian land is the result of
wars that the Arab states waged against it;
most of the territories were won from
previous occupiers of Palestinian lands,
namely Jordan and Egypt. The plight of the
Palestinians today is clearly not the fault of
Israel alone.
Third parties must have a more up-to-date
and objective understanding of the question
of Palestine. Because the two parties directly
involved - Israel and the Palestinians - are the
most important to a future resolution of the
question of Palestine, third parties should be
more mindful of their respective viewpoints.
For instance, what is the Palestinian
position on establishing a truly independent
state? How much land is Israel likely to give
up and what land will it give up?
In addition, what is the Arab states' actual
stance on the question of Palestine? Extraregional
third parties should also factor this
into their disposition toward the question of
Palestine, which is, after all, closely linked to
Arab states. What's more, despite its waning
international clout, the US continues to wield
influence over the question of Palestine that
simply cannot be matched by outside players.
Without these fundamental understandings,
simply supporting Palestine or Israel will not
be beneficial to the resolution of the question
of Palestine, and may even be detrimental to
the process. When a third party's approach to
the conflict becomes overtly biased toward
one side, it will undoubtedly undermine the
other party's desire to cooperate, causing
more harm than good to the resolution of the
question of Palestine.
Source: Asia times