Doubts about genuineness of Reshma’s rescue lingers
Reshma’s rescue, which marked a great moment amidst a grave tragedy after the collapse of the Rana Plaza that killed more than 1,100 apparel workers and maimed and traumatised many more, has now become a source of confusion for people. Many now doubt whether the rescue of Reshma 17 days after the collapse was genuine. Major General Chowdhury Hassan Suhrawardy, the general officer commanding of the Bangladesh Army’s 9th division, who supervised the rescue operation, held a press conference on Wednesday to dispel doubts about it. However, confusion seems to linger. Newspaper readers, TV viewers and radio listeners might rather ponder over his request, which, in fact, sounded like a ‘threat’ to critics, ‘not to play foul with the army’, instead of looking at his ‘arguments’ to remove doubts about the genuineness of Reshma’s rescue.
Before we proceed further, we should recall the series of events that virtually intensified the confusion over Reshma’s rescue. Besides the pervasive sadness, the building collapse also served to highlight a very positive dimension of our society, its inherent humane passion, courtesy of the active participation of people irrespective of their political, religious and gender identities in the rescue operation. The ‘happiest’ moment came when the army corps ‘rescued’ Reshma alive 17 days after the collapse. People congratulated the army on the great job.
However, many eyebrows were raised when, at the concluding press conference, General Suhrawardy gave a partisan colour to the great rescue operation by way of mentioning the contributions of almost all the front organisations of the ruling Awami League, ignoring the contribution of those belonging to the opposition camps. Many conscientious citizens did not like such cheap politicking about a noble rescue operation, that too led by the GOC himself, who, otherwise, enjoys the reputation of being a professional soldier.
Then came the controversy over the genuineness of Reshma’s rescue. First, a TV talk-show host asked how the victim came out so fresh, in so neatly-pressed attire, from under the debris after 17 days. Neither the government nor the rescue managers came up with an answer.
Then, the on-line edition of a local Bangla daily newspaper published a ‘report’ claiming that Reshma’s rescue was a government-sponsored, stage-managed drama. Many people found the narrative ‘credible’, particularly in the context of the government’s credibility crisis, for the top government functionaries earlier denied the fact that the owner of the faulty building is a ruling party leader and that he had forced the workers to enter the building even after cracks developed in the building. Besides, the incumbents tried to pass on the responsibility for the crime to their political opponents.
Many remained confused. Meanwhile, following the controversy Reshma was, and still is, kept away from the media. Then two London-based newspapers, the Sunday Mirror and the Daily Mail, also claimed that Reshma’s rescue was a hoax.
Now General Suhrawardy claims that the recent media reports about Reshma’s rescue are false, and that they were published to ‘tarnish the image of the national army’, and asked all concerned not to ‘play foul’ with the army. The government needs to realise that ‘military threats’ would not remove the confusion.
Instead, it should present Reshma, un-briefed, for press queries to help remove the confusion. Meantime, for the right image of the army, the generals would be well-advised to behave like leaders of a ‘national’ organisation, instead of presenting themselves as partisan officers. It is of national interest.
Doubts about genuineness of Reshma?s rescue lingers
