The very long and aristocratic appellation of Suja-ul-Mulk Hasim-ud-Daula Mir Mohammad Ja'afar Ali Khan Bahadur Mahabat Jung, through the passage of time, has reduced to a rather short “Mir Ja'afor” with a even shorter connotation – “the traitor”. He was a man of power, a general, who could have clipped the wings of British East India Company in 1957; if he did, the history of India, if not better, could have been different.
Yes, history has its funny way of taking revenge on its bad actors! Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonsson Quisling of Norway did not fare better, for he too abetted a foreign invader – Nazi Germany to be precise. At the fag end of Pakistani regime of General Muhammad Yahya Khan, a significant number of Bangalee joined different para-military outfits to help perpetuate the continuation of status quo; notwithstanding their rationale; they were on the wrong side of history and history took its revenge - “Razakar” is now synonymous with traitor or Mir Ja'afor or Quisling … Like Mir Ja'afor, this again can claim its origin in Bengal!
Undertone of words evolves with time; at time sophomoric banality gives way to unpropitious connotations. Razakar and Mir Ja'afor are words that lost innocence and morphed into a curse words very rapidly; however, it also possible that certain words, because of long association with nefarious people, can acquire nefarious connotations and eventually become curse words.
In his article “montri” meaning minister, Professor Jafor Iqbal alluded to the fact, that word “Montri” is now in danger of such sad metamorphosis. He wrote,
“The word Montri does not remind of anything honorable. I can't tell of an exact reason, but it must be the way, our history has unfolded over time. While growing up, I saw the Pakistani ministers roaming around clad in some unnatural garb (achkan). I can't think high of those “achkan-wearing' guys; of course excepting the occasion when a groom weras the same … After 1971, we noticed a new set of ministers with a new kind of ritualitic raiment – the Mijib Coat.
After liberation, we dreamt of a dream only to be undone by the hideous governing ny Awami League. By then, ours was a “shaheed poribar (family of a martyr)”. My mother and I paid visit to a number of ministers to realize our rightful rights; and in the process, they lost my respect … However, things worsened during Ershad regime, when ministerial portfolio were distributed to a coterie of kowtwowing imbeciles; even some thugs, I carefully evoided during by university days, were ministers. Akin to the words “potni and upo-potni (wife and concubine)” we began to internalize new terms – montri an upo-montri (minister and deputy minister!”
After liberation, we dreamt of a dream only to be undone by the hideous governing ny Awami League. By then, ours was a “shaheed poribar (family of a martyr)”. My mother and I paid visit to a number of ministers to realize our rightful rights; and in the process, they lost my respect … However, things worsened during Ershad regime, when ministerial portfolio were distributed to a coterie of kowtwowing imbeciles; even some thugs, I carefully evoided during by university days, were ministers. Akin to the words “potni and upo-potni (wife and concubine)” we began to internalize new terms – montri an upo-montri (minister and deputy minister!”
The word “minister”, any way, does not boast a very flattering pedigree. It has evolved from its Latin root meaning “servant”. In the utopian (at least in BD perspective) sense of democracy, ministers serve at the will of the Prime Minister, who in turn serves at the will of THE PEOPLE – the real master. And hence, ministers are nothing more than a bunch of servants, picked by the Prime Minister to help her discharge the service properly.
However, in my God forsaken home, ministers abound in dozens, and many of them seem to have no veritable function other than, like a troupe of minstrels, dancing around and singing one or two pangyric for their dear leader; and that's not all, we even had had minister with no portfolio for days and months. In addition, we had ministers, who remained a minister even after resignation and being AWOL for years …
Ministers are no minstrels who shall dance and sing and exalt the Prime Minister; they are given a portfolio of people's business that needs careful attention. They also have the solemn duty to provide thoughtful advice to the Prime Minister; in Bengali the very word “montri” means a person who provides “montrona (advice)” - are they doing it? Probably not …
It is said the during the regime last BNP-JI regime, some of the ministerial portfolios were sold for a price. I am not sure what transpired during the last 5+ years of Awami League, but the way Padma Bridge was held hostage by one single rich man, hearsay abounds. Aside from that, the number of cabinet positions seems too much for a country like ours; compare with that of the US, where there is only fifteen cabinet posts and five cabinet level administrators; or with that of the biggest democracy in the world where it has only twenty eight cabinet positions including the Prime Minister. Yet, the most important cabinet positions including defense, home and foreign affairs remains in the very busy hands of the Prime Minister. And, very often, we see the full ministers are incapable of making any decision on their own. No wonder, plethoric number is no panacea for anemic performance!
Performance aside, a large number of ministers, as per published and electronic news media are involved in careless uttering, illicit amassing of wealth, and wanton waste of public funds. It seems unreal that such thing can happen in a country like ours that can boast of international repute like BRAC and Grameen!
If my daily read of the newspapers is right, I bet, some day, the following fearful pronunciation of Dr. Jafor Iqbal can prove to be prophetic,
“I believe, if the ministers, do not change their way, some day, the word “montri” shall be used as a curse word, just the way “razakar” is being used for the lowly betrayers.”
No comments:
Post a Comment