Pity the man in the street !
PITY the man in the street for he knows not whether he is coming or going. He is being force-fed so many official versions of the same happenings that he can no longer decide what or whom to believe or, indeed, trust. Constantly bombarded by myriad media channels each playing its own tune, he can hardly opt whether to succumb or to plug his ears. Meanwhile, the world around him appears to be crumbling to pieces, while the powers that be keep on insisting on more of the same.
It is not such a bad idea to look over the shoulder every once in a while. A look over the shoulder at recent history may thus be in order. Some time after the Iraq adventure, the then President of the sole superpower, speaking at the United Nations, had exhorted the world at large to “continue to fight terrorism”. Despite the stalemate in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Great White Chief was intent on giving the world more of the same. How much can the world take before it comes apart at the seams was the question that came to everybody’s mind!
President George W. Bush (remember?) also gave expression to his confidence that ‘the current financial market crises in Wall Street’ would be duly overcome with his proposed 700 billion dollar rescue operation that, he claimed, would be enacted in the “urgent time-frame required”. He asserted this with the somewhat cryptic but ominous remark that, “Our economies are more closely connected than ever before and I know that many of you here are watching how the United States government will address the problems in our financial system.” What followed at the bi-partisan meeting on this rescue operation put it on hold for the time being. But, President Bush was not the man to heed sane counsel.
Needless to say, the man in the street had difficulty suppressing his misgivings. Where was the vaunted 700 billion dollars going to come from? Or was it going to be a repeat of the greatest default in the history of world finance – the de-linking of the dollar from the gold standard? Going by past record, the Third World was destined to be on the receiving end.
President George W. Bush, conveniently quoting from the Charter of the United Nations that sets forth “the equal rights of nations large and small”, had also vowed to keep supporting former Soviet Republic of Georgia’s “territorial integrity”. He added, somewhat grandiosely, “Young democracies around the world are watching to see how we respond to this test. We must stand united in support of the people of Georgia.” The man in the street, nevertheless, would earnestly like to believe that the “territorial integrity” of states other than Georgia would be equally dear to the leadership of the superpower, once again in the light of the relevant provisions of the United Nations Charter.
In his turn, the, then, Defense Secretary of the United States Robert Gates, while somewhat inexplicably referring to “the success we’ve had against al-Qaeda in Iraq”, had made the somewhat preposterous claim that “the greatest threat to the homeland lies in western Pakistan”. Sounds familiar, does it not! This somewhat open-ended statement had understandably added to the woes of the man in the street. In the first place, the man in the street wondered why the distinguished Defense Secretary had chosen to mention Pakistan in conjunction with Iraq? Secondly, did the honorable Secretary honestly believe that the deliberate devastation of Iraq’s infrastructure had helped his country’s fight against terror? And would this not be classed as an attempt to cover up the evident shortcomings in the Afghanistan campaign?
So much for the over the shoulder look! The recent happenings around the world are not only not reassuring they promise more of the same. The Prime Minister of our neighbouring state, while out on a diplomatic binge, appears intent on fanning the flames. Instead of working for a secure and peaceful future for the region, the accent appears to be on more of the same. From all appearance, he looks more intent on attempting to fish in, rather than pour oil on, the troubled waters of the region!
Meanwhile at home, the serious difference of opinion between those who consider that the war on terror is “our war” and those who think otherwise has continued. If anything, it appeared to be gaining in intensity by the day. The man in the street is not bothered with semantics; all he wants is peace in his homeland. And he is deeply concerned about the price he may be expected to pay. Prices of all necessities and services continue to rise by the day. Where is it all going to end? Is there no remedy against this virtual scalping? What happened to the merry band of planners and economists of yore, who revelled in thrusting macro and micro statistics down common people’s throats? Is there no redemption in sight? Why is there no consideration for the pensioners and the fixed income lot in our planning?
Be that as it may, it must be recognized that the hapless man in the street has long forgotten about such niceties as children’s education and the like. He is today more concerned about where the next meal is going to come from, given the galloping inflation. Would it not be realistic to ask whether the present is a pointer to a future in which he may be reduced to eating grass? But, in the circumstance in which even grass may not be easy to come by given the assault on green areas by the construction mafia, pity the Man in the Street!
— The writer is a former Ambassador and former Assistant Secretary General of OIC.
