Padma Bridge resolves an incompleteness of a nation state

Why is Padma Brdige being compared with Hardinge Bridge? Is there any relevance of such a comparison? The bridge spanning from Ishwardi to Bheramara, named after Lord Hardinge, is certainly the first bridge over the river Padma, but it was a bridge that connected the British administration with central Bengal. This served to further extend the reach of the British colony over Bengal and exert its influence even stronger. Our Padma Bridge directly links the capital Dhaka with the country's midlands. The two bridges are different in name and purpose and of different character and approach.

In that sense, Padma Bridge has resolved an incompleteness of an independent nation state. The festive rally of Bangladesh's political leadership by air, river and bridge routes perhaps is a state celebration of that linkage between land and land. A large section of the country, on either side of the river Padma, has been directly linked with the national capital for the very first time. Jamuna Bridge came first in this regard, then there was Meghna and Brahmaputra. State integration became complete with the Padma Bridge. And Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League government certainly deserve to be felicitated as facilitators of this task.

A modern development-oriented state cannot be strong if there is any form of regional isolation. That is the long-term significance of Padma Bridge. This significance is not focussed on any particular party. While things may be different at present, in at the end of the day this will not deprive any party. But the question now is, how successfully will Dhaka be able to utilise this? Is Dhaka ready to meet and greet South Bengal? There will be a massive influx to Dhaka from the south. Is the rest of the country prepared to carry out business with the south, through Dhaka? Work is still incomplete on ensuring a smooth commute to the expressway leading to Padma Bridge, from Gazipur-Mymensingh and Chattogram-Sylhet. The railway line hasn't be set up along Padma Bridge yet either.

Bangladesh is actually a delta at the confluence of three rivers. Every area of land being linked means the country becomes larger and more compact. The people of any areas not linked with the capital don't even gain the benefits and facilities of a full-fledged citizen. This bridge firstly belongs to those to whom Padma is an intrinsic part of life, who have to wait helplessly at the ferry ghat whenever in need.

Politics can change, but the bridge will remain theirs. Thousands of people paid no heed to the rules and rushed onto the bridge in an outburst of their unprecedented joy. The people took ownership of the bridge. Innumerable stories were generated on the day the bridge was inaugurated. This was a momentous occasion.

But saying things like, "I didn't see the liberation war, but I have seen Padma Bridge," is inane and immature. It is like a child imagining itself to be equal to a mother. If the liberation war didn't take place, it is doubtful that there would be a Padma Bridge. And nothing, least of all a bridge, can compare to the immense sacrifice and bloodshed that led to victory in the war of liberation. So seeing Padma Bridge isn't the same as seeing the liberation war, it is simply seeing a consequence of the war.

Padma is a great river. Along with Brahmaputra, this river is Bangladesh's main artery of life. The moment Ganges travels east and takes on the name of Padma, it is there that Bengal, that is, Bangladesh, emerges. It is the vast contribution of Padma that has kept this land alive with food and shelter, despite all sorts of dangers and destruction. So the bridge built over the river, cannot be greater than the river itself. We can't just be engrossed with the bridge, forgetting about the river. Most of Bangladesh's rivers are ailing and afflicted.

In the days of independence, rivers were the symbol of the nation, nationalism and the country. At present, the bridge is the symbol of today's era of development. But the river is the real thing. Without rivers, everything is a desert. A bridge has no use in a desert. It must be seen in context of the river. Now along with the publicity, discussions on the bridge are being held too. The publicity will come to an end, but thoughts on the bridge will continue. Bridge literature is good too, but with a sane mind. If not, the opportunity for economic advancement created by the Padma Bridge, will not be utilised effectively. Misuse can certainly emerge.

The main misuse would be politicisation of the bridge. The mystic Lalon spoke of mighty mountains hidden behind the eye. We are also seeing efforts to hide issues of democracy, voting rights, human rights, corruption and money laundering, behind the arches of the bridge. The dust of development can't blind the people for long. The Awami League government certainly deserves credit for Padma Bridge, but that does not mean people will forget the pain of what they have not got, of what the country has been deprived. And anyway, Bangalis have a propensity to forget, some see this as 'ingratitude'. After he saves them from the turbulence on the river, they often forget the boatman.

In a country where a person hires a band for his own wedding even if he can't afford three square meals a day, it is only natural to have an overflow of festivity over Padma Bridge. That's the tradition of this country. Among these Bangladeshis suffering from bipolar disorder, one party is seeing Padma Bridge as a highway to heaven, while another section is despondent. And in the midst of these two parties gripped by mass hysteria, reality arises like the many shoals of Padma. Those shoals or river islands are the confidence of state competence. State competence is a vital issue and gives citizens political confidence too. It is a reply to anyone who looks down at the country with condescension.

But the river Padma is greater than the bridge. The river is drying up. Even in full monsoon, shoals are emerging. Padma's state is even worse in Rajshahi, deprived of upstream water. The bridge may bring about even more changes. But is Padma our enemy that we have to win victory over it? Of have to draw comparisons with the liberation war? The attitude of taking over nature, ruling over it, grabbing victory, is a problem that remains in our development thinking. Such thinking pits nature and humans in opposition against each other.

* Faruk Wasif is a writer and executive editor of Protichinta. He can be contacted at [email protected]