Inu belongs to the JSD which is an alliance member of the ruling party led Government so his words are not coming from hostile lips. He has said in the parliament that the dithering of the Government on the lockdown issue raises concern that it is experiencing unease on the matter. It’s true that the GOB had seemed a bit uncertain about how to manage lockdowns. Not only has it been less than effective but it is not sure which is the right way to manage such measures. It is true that there is an unusual set of circumstances but that the GOB is not sure about how to manage uncertainties seems certain.
Three things are necessary for enforcing lock downs, which are generally considered useful though up to a point. It’s not a substitute for vaccinations but it can help create some space and time to help cope with the situation when it rapidly deteriorates. In the case of Bangladesh it has.
For effective lockdowns, the three definites are:
– An administrative will that is based on public confidence and capacity to enforce it legally, logically and effectively
– A bureaucratic machinery that is able to translate the gains of a lockdown and similar measures that the public experience as beneficial to it.
– A general public which believes that things will get better with various measures including lockdowns as they can cope with life and living during such lock downs.
The problem is that the bottom line has become the weakest and public alienation from public health policies is high. This has been on since the Covid pandemic began and the people in general now think such measures haven’t benefited them much. So the public is not a full partner with the GOB on public health measures. It’s here that the unease lies.
The Government hasn’t handled the pandemic well though many intentions and decisions were positive. However, the bureaucratic machinery that handles them is in all possibility out of their depths when dealing with such emergencies. It’s not their fault really because they have rarely dealt with critical situations and have lived a very protected life. They have had to face public scrutiny like this. This is not what they are used to doing so they have no way of knowing what to do.
They have some experience in dealing with floods but it’s a disaster that arrives on its own and leaves in its own time. There is no question of coaxing it to say goodbye. The virus is a inter0-active disaster as human behavior also influences it. Managing it means a level of skill and innovative capacity, our bureaucracy simply doesn’t have and never was asked to have. They were much better at managing political and similar crises but this is a way out of their job description. They have power but it’s a situation that requires skill and dedication no bureaucracy showed in the last half century.
It’s thus not a question of uncertainty around what to do with and how to manage lock downs but a bigger one of what to do with its own role as a facilitator of public goods. It’s too deep rooted to be resolved soon.
