On World Bank’s comment
How can I express my satisfaction and frustration altogether? The godfather of most of the third-world leaders, the World Bank President, has made a perfectly correct comment that the conflict between the government and the opposition, and corruption are the root causes of all the problems in our country. I want him to know further that at the moment corruption, terrorism and almost all other curses of our society are flourishing because of the conflict which he mentioned.
The cause of satisfaction is that the World Bank has at least corrected its views on our country. Last year, it made the police and the lower courts responsible for the same problem, against which we published a protest (Page 1, The Bangladesh Observer, May 10, 2004). The reason behind my frustration is that our leaders may not even have the wit to listen to their godfather, on this issue.
MR Sadi
Dhaka
Food safety
In his letter on a safe food policy (August 16), Sohel from Dhanmondi raises some interesting and pertinent points.
He requests a safe food policy, and of course this is the first requisite for any business in the food sector. Without clear guidelines, how can a business operate? How does it know what is required? The second point he raises is the BSTI seal. No such seal should be required, and anyway it is simply impossible to seal all available foodstuffs. The important point here is that it is incumbent upon the business to ensure that it is using items of adequate quality.
His third point was the most telling. I cannot believe that the anti-adulteration team does not contain at least one food safety expert. It is utterly inconceivable that the government would condone the formation of a technical team with legal powers that did not contain such experts. Without knowledge of bacteriology, for example, how can the team possibly decide what is appropriate for any given process? I am sure Sohel is wrong, and that the team does include such appropriately qualified members.
With respect to his question concerning half-done foods and sauces that are to be reheated, no one should be prosecuted for using such techniques. The safety of the final product depends upon the last ‘critical step’, in which all hazardous ingredients and foreign matter are either removed or rendered harmless, for example, by pasteurisation.
The clue, as usual in Bangladesh, is training and resources allocated to knowledge and good practice. There are persons available who understand the science and technology of safe food, and qualifications are available. For example I have certificates from the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health (Advanced Food Hygiene) and from the Royal Institute of Public Health and Hygiene (HACCP Food Safety). I would be happy to assist Bangladesh in this matter, since public safety is at stake. You should contact me if you need help, I can recommend competent advisors.
I recommend training courses and certification to be commenced as soon as possible. No effort should be spared to ensure public safety. Human health and life is at stake. There can be no compromise.
Richard J Murphy
On e-mail
Nuclear weapons and domestic threats
With Iran and North Korea adamantly pursuing their efforts to develop nuclear weapons, one is tempted to ask: why do nations want nuclear weapons? To answer this question, one will have to ask another question: ‘Why don’t such advanced nations like Canada, Japan and Germany want nuclear weapons?’ All these countries are highly advanced and could have their own nuclear arsenals if they wanted to. Yet all these countries rejected developing any nuclear weapon and their highly advanced nuclear industries are directed toward only power generation.
The answer to the second question lies in the fact that all these countries, despite their participation in the last two World Wars, have basically resolved their domestic and international conflicts and don’t see any need for nuclear deterrent. They also don’t see the need to threaten anyone. They have also accepted the role of the United States as a guardian of international security.
India and Pakistan have not only failed to resolve their mutual conflicts, but they also face serious domestic threats to their security. Pakistan lost its eastern part because it tried to brutalise its own people. It now faces serious domestic threats in Baluchistan and NWFP. No nuclear weapons can protect it if it collapses from internal conflicts. We know how mighty Soviet Union, despite its largest stockpiles of nuclear bombs, collapsed from within.
As for India, it also faces serious domestic threats in Kashmir and eastern provinces. Although India has been more successful in facing domestic threats, the main threat to its security still comes from inside. Possession of nuclear weapons will do nothing in resolving the domestic treats to its security.
The same applies to Iran which remains a highly oppressive theocracy and developing nuclear weapons will not help the country in facing domestic threats to its security. As for North Korea, its tottering regime might collapse like East Germany any day whether it has nuclear weapons or not. Unstable countries like Iran and North Korea want nuclear weapons basically to terrorise their own unhappy people. The rulers of these countries are aware that their own people are extremely restless under their brutal regimes and nuclear weapons are basically aimed at intimidating their own subjects. The regimes which are willing to brutalise their own people cannot be trusted with such weapons of mass destruction. These regimes will have no scruples to use such a weapon against their own people if they face domestic revolts against their tyrannical rules.
As for the United States, the development of nuclear bomb there took place in the midst of World War II when it was suspected that the Nazi Germany was developing nuclear weapons. The nuclear weapons were used against Japan for several reasons. One of them was the apprehension that hundreds of thousands of American lives would be lost if the Americans tried to invade Japan. The Japanese surrendered only when they realised that they can be completely wiped out without any invasion.
However, there was also another reason why the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan. Dr Leo Szilard, Hungarian-born top atomic scientist involved in the Manhattan Project had left us an account of his meeting with Secretary of State designate and Chairman of the Senate Armed Forces Committe, James Byrnes, on May 28, 1945 (two months before the bombings): ‘Byrnes was concerned about Russia’s post-war behaviour. Russian troops had moved into Hungary and Romania. Byrnes thought that it would be very difficult to persuade Russia to withdraw her troops from these countries, and Russia might be more manageable if impressed by American military might. I shared Byrnes’s concern about Russia throwing her weight around in the post-war period, but I was completely flabbergasted by the assumption that rattling the bomb might make Russia more manageable. I was concerned that by using in the war against Japan, we might start an atomic armed race.’
America dropped atomic bombs on Japan in part to warn Russia, and Dr Szilard was right that it started a nuclear-arms race. However, we don’t know whether a hot war would have started instead of the Cold War. Russia might have been tempted to use its superiority in conventional forces to conquer Western Europe in the name of global socialism, if the Americans didn’t use the bombs on Japan and the awesome power of the atomic weapon remained unknown.
However, with the United States now facing a new threat from terrorism, nuclear weapon has lost its value as a deterrent. Terrorists can strike from within and only through elaborate intelligence and surveillance, terrorists can be thwarted. Nuclear stockpile can only provide the terrorists a tempting target. For its own security, the United States must now provide leadership to reduce the world’s nuclear stockpiles which are useless to provide any security against terrorism.
Mahmood Elahi
Ottawa, Canada
MAIN PAGE | TOP
|
|
