The New Nation - Internet Edition

New flood-tolerant rice

AS appeared recently in media, the country is likely to start commercial production of some new flood-tolerant rice varieties from next financial year if the government approves the release of four such varieties on completion of 'multi-location testing' (MLT) in the country. In view of the recurring floods almost every year, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute in cooperation with the Manila-based International Rice Research Institute has evolved these varieties of rice for plantation in the flood-prone areas. Introduction of new flood-tolerant varieties would help mitigate sufferings of farmers who have to replant paddy when floodwaters start receding from croplands.

BRRI experts are hopeful that farmers would be able to start production of flood-tolerant rice varieties from next year to prevent crop losses caused by flash floods and heavy monsoon rains. Floodwaters regularly engulf vast rain-fed lowland areas in Bangladesh causing huge loss to the standing crops and thus shortfall to foodgrains. According to IRRI expert David Mackill, not only in Bangladesh, floodwaters engulf vast lowlands in Asia and crops losses from prolonged submergence are estimated at around $1 billion a year. Under a programme taken up for Bangladesh and India, the IRRI has begun to multiply the seed from 150 grams of seed received from the institute in Manila in September last year. The new varieties developed through multiplication will survive under water for about two weeks.

Four flood-tolerant varieties so far developed came from implanting submergence-resistant gene under conventional breeding in four locally popular varieties collected from Bangladesh and India. Indonesia was the first country in Southeast Asia to introduce the flood-tolerant rice and China has expressed its interest to work with the IRRI. The IRRI-supported green revolution in 1960s and 1970s with high-yielding rice seeds is also working on drought-resistant varieties to deal with a world affected by global warming.

Preserving the heritage

NEWSPAPERS on Monday carried photos of the crumbling gate of the Ahsan Manjil, the nineteenth century grand mansion of the Nawabs of Dhaka. Similar photos recently highlighted the decaying conditions of some old but once beautiful buildings in the old parts of the city. Frequently, one comes across the sorrowful sights of buildings, structures and edifices-- the symbols of our cultural and civilised past -- gradually disintegrating or being torn apart by human greed. Such neglect of our history and heritage is simply unacceptable. Bangladesh is one of the few countries of the world with heritage and symbols of a civilised existence that dates back not hundred but thousands of years. The historical sites, monuments, objects and other artefacts ought to be among our proudest possessions to be treasured and saved from all kinds of stealers and human neglect. But it is a very unpalatable reality that many heritage sights remain utterly neglected throughout the country.

A seminar, held in the premises of the Central Public Library on Dhaka on Sunday, and attended by distinguished personalities from different fields, discussed the ways and means of saving our heritage. Indeed, more and more people's awareness is getting drawn to this issue. It was only from people's consciousness that invaluable artefacts of Bangladesh are protected from risks of being stolen from time to time. People's awareness about the heritage and artefacts are their best safeguards. The people love to see the precious possessions to be preserved and this enthusiasm needs to be sustained and sharpened to make demands on the government to take all out measures to save our heritage. All objects and structures of heritage value must be brought under government control for their maintenance and proper care. The government should also increase allocations in the national budget for this.

Pakistan needs pragmatic anti-terrorism strategies

Dr. M. S. Haq

Pakistan Television (PTV) telecast last evening (PST - 21 July 2008) prime minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani's address to a gathering of tribal leaders and tribal people at a place in the country's North West Frontier Province - NWFP. The prime minister, wearing the traditional dress, met those people and leaders, listened to their problems with patience, and delivered later a speech that could, in many respects, be considered as essentially timely, contextually and content-wise relevant, incentive-driven, apparently encouraging, substantive, pragmatic, and futuristic - as appropriate, among other things. The speech was delivered in an intelligent and skillful fashion.

One of the main thrusts of the speech was to seek more support, more help, more cooperation and more will power - than those at present - of tribal people and rest of Pakistanis, political parties, and others in pursuits of fighting the ongoing war on terror in a more united, decisive and effective manner - than the existing manner. Despite the call of unity by the prime minister through the speech, it now appears certain things did not come out either clearly or otherwise from that speech. For example:

One, whether or not the government will invite stakeholders - such as PML-Q and other opposition political parties in the national assembly and political parties outside of national and provincial assemblies - to the upcoming meeting on anti-terror strategies. The meeting is schedule to be held in Islamabad on 29th day of July 2008;

Two, whether or not president Pervez Musharraf will be a part of the strategy crafting process - what will be his role - in the foreseeable future - as the head of state when it comes to for example anti-terror initiatives and activities resulting eventually from those strategies? It may be mentioned here: the prime minister did, however, mention, among other things, in the speech something like president Pervez Musharraf's strong resolve for peace in Pakistan; and

Three, how to attract, harness and sustain further support and further cooperation of partners in the war on terror - including inter alia the US - against the backdrop of say, upcoming anti-terror strategies.

One of the concerns here is: the limitations - mentioned and not mentioned so far in the article - associated with the prime minister's unity call could, in a sense, be instrumental in inter alia promoting and sustaining more disunity than unity in the country, resulting in further destabilisation of Pakistan, per se. It is, therefore, expected the government will be able to deal with those limitations in a timely and proper fashion and in the greater and overall national interest, for an instance.

The prime minister's address brought along pieces of good news for people in terror and terror prone areas of Pakistan. They included inter alia and as appropriate: the establishment of a medical college and its operationalization from next year - 2009; establishment of a number of cadet colleges; immediate employment opportunities for about 20 thousand eligible tribal people; additional resources for energy sector developments; additional budgetary allocations; a sunni-shia conference for facilitating intra-faith reconciliation and harmony in tribal areas - the prime minister recounted in that respect the contribution of his ancestors (peace be upon them) - who had intra and inter-generational family connections with Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) - towards preaching and spreading Islam in this part of the world in a manner that was both peaceful and effective; and initiatives for integrating tribal people into mainstream national dimensions.

It will not be out of place to mention here: the success of outcomes resulting from those pieces of good news would depend on inter alia: how best and quickest Pakistan could deliver above outcomes to all concerned and build upon the resultant gains - enabling for example tribal people to take the full charge of their development processes in not too distant a future?

One thing I would like to point out here: prime minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani did not address directly his Pakistani sisters in the speech - he had addressed directly though, his Pakistani brothers. It could be that there was not a single female participant in the meeting or something else. But I am sure there were at least a good number of Pakistani women who had either followed the speech via the transmission of Radio Pakistan or other radio stations or watched the speech on PTV or other TV channels.

Taking into cognizance above and related considerations and the fact women rights are being brutally suppressed and abused by men (to whom it may concern) belonging to for example the tribal areas, I believe, it would have been more appropriate for the prime minister to address his Pakistani sisters in a diplomatic way like, those Pakistani sisters who were perhaps watching the ceremony on say, TV monitors at this (I mean, then) point in time.

The last word: we should rise to the occasion for protecting, preserving and promoting - at local, national, global and other levels - the equal right given to men and women in Islam and the equal right given to them by existing and pertinent legal, as well as other instruments. The Holy sayings and the Holy practices of Holy Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) with regard to the equal right of men and women - are clear, and are obligatory on the part of all concerned to follow, to practice and to promote. Let us work towards repositioning men and women in their rightful places in societies all over the world - be it Bangladeshi societies, Pakistani societies, Indian societies, Saudi Arabian societies, Sudanese societies, Afghan societies, Samoan societies or other societies - in a more wholesome, synergistic, pragmatic, innovative and result-oriented manner than that at present.

In that respect, it is expected visions, missions and activities of UN and other organizations active in above areas will undergo a BMR (balancing, modernization and rehabilitation) exercise on an urgent basis - with a view to making them (I mean, those visions, missions and activities) compatible with the changing local and global requirements in pertinent areas - under a continually increasing usable resources constraint.

Stating the obvious

Ramzy Baroud

For some folks interested in genealogy, tracing one's roots is a stimulating activity. It's immensely interesting and meaningful to learn where one's life started. DNA testing has made it possible to trace one's roots back many generations and there are even free web sites that can help users trace their family history based on a few simple clues.

Recent findings in my own personal history have been interesting indeed. The present task of tracing my family roots was inspired by a book project with Pluto Press, narrating the story of my father, as once a fighter from Gaza who died recently under tragic circumstances in the same refugee camp to which he was expelled, along with his family sixty years ago.

Just weeks into my research, I found myself stumbling into the details of a massacre, one that is conveniently overshadowed by the dust of the battle, the rigidity of academic research and the lack of media access of those who have survived.

And now, what started as a mere phase of my father's torn childhood in Palestine has morphed into being the core of my book's narrative.

My family came from the village of Beit Daras, one of the hundreds of villages destroyed by Zionist Jewish militias prior to the establishment of the state of Israel. Growing up in a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip, decades after the destruction of Beit Daras, I heard many stories of our village that now only exist in memory. The objective behind the story was hardly a calculated intent to ensure that we don't forget what has befallen us. It was a daily narrative that simply defined our internal relationship as a community.

The "Bedrasawis" - the collective name of those originated from Beit Daras - were often stereotyped as "large headed" - literally - and stubborn. Although we Bedrasawis protested the recurring accusation, we also shared unspoken pride in it. But that reputation of zeal and prowess was fostered by the dramatic events of 1948, during the Zionist drive to evacuate Palestine from its inhabitants.

Israeli historian Benny Morris, in his volume, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem, makes a couple of references to Beit Daras. Nothing notable, aside from the fact that a Haganah's unit, Givati, had shelled the village on May 10, 1948 "promoting the flight of its inhabitants."

But there is more to what took place in Beit Daras than Morris's footnote. Arab historians, Walid Khalidi, Salman Abu Sitta, among others, provided the story within a greater context. Still, documenting the history of anywhere between 400 to 500 destroyed Palestinian villages in one volume is not a simple feat, thus much of Beit Daras' history is lumped as one of many: the Zionists attacked on day such and such, the Arabs resisted, then fled, then the village was blown up to ensure that the inhabitants would not return.

As sinister as the above summation is, much is left untold. Peoples, faces, stories and families were torn apart, often never to meet again, along with the decimated village's 401 homes, two mosques and lone elementary school.

Those killed in the 'massacre of Beit Daras', according to Palestinian accounts, were 265, largely women, children and elders. The gender and age groups of the victims were not selective nor coincidental, but related to the nature of the battle, where the fighters of Beit Daras were engaged in fighting against successive Zionist army units, first involving militants from a nearby settlement, then Haganah forces and finally Givati units. The battle for Beit Daras was long and arduous, and duly mentioned in the writings of Jamal Abd Al-Nasser, the first president of Egypt, during his military service in southern Palestine, and of David Ben Gurion's War Diaries (1947-1949).

Morris's chronological research methods discounted the fact that although Beit Daras was located in southern Palestine - approximately 30 kilometers north of Gaza - the Zionist aggression to conquer the once peaceful village began earlier than the Givati's "Operation Lighting" (Mivtza Barak) of early May 1948, and that the village didn't fall for at least another month after the date he sketchily provides. Indeed, Beit Daras' strategic location, near important Zionist military hubs - located inside settlements bordering the village - and near the supply routes to the Negev, made it a target as early as March 16, and several times more in the same month; then, again, in April, and twice in May, and finally in June. Zionist losses were high and their attempts failed, time after time. There was much fury that a small village of roughly 2000 people would not surrender under intense bombardment. A single day of fighting resulted in the death of 50 Arabs, according to Ben Gurion's own account.

Um 'Adel is an 80-year-old woman who now lives in Gaza. Today she sells foodstuffs at a tiny and humble stand to help her family as they struggle to survive the siege on Gaza. She vividly recalls the events that lead to the massacre in 1948. It struck me how apolitical she was, and how, until this day, she is dumbfounded, not able to comprehend the dramatic events of those short months between March and June of 1948. Until now, she views the fight for Beit Daras based on a simple equation: They tried to take our land, and we fought them off until the end. "They (The Zionist militias) knew well that we, Bedrasawis would not go down easily.

They knew that their fight for that whole area was one battle, but to take over Beit Daras was another." As simple as the equation was, her confusion about the whole event haunts her until this day, and even now decades later, she is still baffled as to what happened and why the people of her village were betrayed. Beit Daras, lived up to its reputation of hard-headedness and tenacity, but many details remain murky, yet incredibly revealing and deserve more than a footnote.

One can only hope that the memory of the village survives without having to wait the authentication of an Israeli historian, which may or may not ever arrive. I know that I will do my part to make that happen. After all, I owe Beit Daras my (relatively) large head, and the tenacious spirit of my children, who carry the names of those who lived in Beit Daras, and died there.

60 years of celebrating human rights

Phillip Knightley

With the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights coming up in December, I've been reading about the man behind the Declaration, René Cassin. He was a Frenchman, a soldier in the First World War who nearly lost his life to French bureaucracy.

He enlisted in the South of France and then was wounded in the fighting at the Marne. According the French military law, soldiers who were wounded and who had a chance of survival had to be treated at the military hospital nearest to where they had enlisted, so Cassin was packed off on the long journey to the south of France.

He nearly died of his wounds on the journey and only the fact that a comrade-in-arms contacted his family who had the best available surgeon waiting to treat him, saved his life.

In the long period of recuperation which followed, Cassin had plenty of time to think and he devoted himself to considering the plight of soldiers who had been wounded or taken prisoner. Surely they should have some form of internationally recognised human rights.

Thus began the long trail that eventually led to the Universal Declaration in 1948, a document to which many contributed, including the Eleanor Roosevelt, the widow of the American President.

The declaration has expanded so that today the rights exist not only in theory but in practice and there are organisations to enforce it, including the European Court of Human Rights. Jay Winter, a professor at Yale University, who is working on a biography of Cassin, said who would have dreamed sixty years ago that a Spanish judge could issue a warrant for the arrest for violation of human rights of the former head of state of Chile, General Pinochet, that the warrant would be executed in Britain and the General would be detained pending trial.

But there are other areas where the evolution of human rights has fared less well, due mainly to the West's inability to practise what it preaches. This is revealed in the reluctance of Western governments to discuss the decision by the US government to defend the use of torture. Despite their history of condemning human rights violations, no Western nation has condemned the US government for Guantanamo.

And what about the way Western nations behave when they have to choose between human rights and defending their own interests. No Western country promotes human rights in Saudi Arabia; too many interests would have to be sacrificed in doing so.

Kishore Mahbubani, the author of "The New Asian Hemisphere: the Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East", says history teaches that sanction and exclusions have never succeeded in transforming societies. Engagement and dialogue over time lead to change. "The tragedy of 20 years of isolation of Burma has done no good, even though the politicians have felt good about condemning the human rights record of the Burma regime."

This is an example of the flaw in Western discourse - when presented with the choice of doing good and feeling good the West almost always chooses the latter because it costs less.

Engaging the Burmese generals will require political courage from Western politicians. They will have to justify it to their own people and pay the political price as a consequence. Mahbubani says, "To avoid risk, Western politicians heap praise on Burmese dissidents, lauding their courage, while simultaneously demonstrating their own moral and political cowardice.

"In December we will celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This may well provide an opportunity for the West to change course. Nothing can or will prevent it lecturing the world on human rights. But it could nevertheless learn to do something new: listen to the voices from the rest of the world." Well said.

(Phillip Knightley is a veteran journalist and commentator based in London)