Search results

En-gendering security is as much a political exercise as it is a methodological one. An earlier paper ( Ahmed, 1995 ) flagged the limits of positivism in understanding woman's state of insecurity in a world informed and dictated by masculinity or what could be referred to as the purush jat. The critique was done by taking recourse to dialectics, of a kind that had its roots in the works of Hegel and Marx. However, after two decades, I see the limits of the effort, particularly when it comes to addressing the dialectic of gender relationship and the disempowered status of women in South Asia. This is not because Western dialectical method is at fault (which surely has a tendency of harbouring determinism) or because the utopias put forward by the Hegelians and the Marxists, although qualitatively different in nature, have foundered and transformed into living dystopias, but more because of a serious appreciation of the diversity in dialectics, including the contributions of the Chinese and Indian dialectics over the centuries. Put differently, approaching woman's state of insecurity from the standpoint of yin-yang relationship and/or prasangika can make a far more meaningful contribution to the task of demystifying masculinity and ensuring women's rights. En-gendering security in South Asia otherwise requires not only reimagining dialectics in the light of its diversity but also making the methodological quest local, indeed, related to the lived experience of the South Asians.

Arab Awakening or Arab Spring has caught the imagination of many and has been a subject of intense discussions both at home and abroad. But then what impact did it have outside the Arab world, indeed, in places which remains related to it theologically, economically, socially, gastronomically, through ideas and dogmas such as Bangladesh? Will the impact be limited to politics or will it include the religious discourses as well? Will it boost the economy or see a decline? What about the Bangladeshi diaspora in the Middle East-will it play a different role and contribute to the economic and social discourses back home now that the Arab world is on the way of experiencing greater freedom? Will it transform the religious discourses that have lately infected Bangladesh? Or, will the spirit of the Arab spring be used for narrow political goals? Answers, however, may not be as easy as the queries. The article will try to explain as to why that is the case.

The idea of South Asia is both old and new and so is the issue of regionalism in South Asia. In this respect one could talk about regionalism in South Asia not only from a political standpoint but also from the standpoints of economic, social, cultural, psychological as well as civilizational. Humans after all are multiversed beings and South Asians, civilizationally speaking, have tried to remain as such, although the advent of colonialism and modernity or colonial modernity did numb them a little, often making them forget what had united them and what had divided them. But this is as much a methodological issue as it is a theoretical one, supplementing the statist understanding of South Asia with what could be best regarded as post-statist or focusing on the lives and livings of the South Asians. Regionalism in South Asian otherwise may not be promising when it comes to South Asians being political or homo politicus, but this may not be the case when it comes to South Asians being cultural or homo culturicus or for that matter, psychological or homo psycholigicus. And there lies the prospect for a new approach to regionalism in South Asia.