Print: 28 Oct 2025
The catastrophic crash of a military aircraft into the Milestone School and College building in Dhaka not only caused tragic loss of life but also left a deep scar on the nation’s collective consciousness. The horrific scene unfolded in front of students, teachers, and staff during school hours. This was not merely a technical failure or an accidental disaster; rather, it starkly revealed the limits of our disaster preparedness, mismanagement, and reckless negligence.
The physical pain of those who died or were injured, including students and teachers, is real. Equally, the entire nation is deeply wounded mentally. Disasters do not come with warnings, but how to respond is the responsibility of the state, society, professionals, and every citizen. In this context, the question arises: can we truly consider those who show eagerness instead of responsibility, arbitrariness instead of accountability, or incompetence under the guise of help, as responsible?
This heartbreaking incident has laid bare the fragile, unstable, and questionable nature of our state technical safety systems, emergency rescue and medical preparedness, and even the behavioural responsibility of citizens and professionals. A military aircraft flying over a city is not just a ‘drill’; it reflects shortsightedness in defence policy and limitations in citizen safety concerns. One must ask: why could such a risky drill take place in a densely populated area surrounded by an educational institution teeming with students? How effective were the safety protocols? How prepared were we to respond promptly or save lives after the accident? Most concerning of all is the behaviour of our political, administrative, and professional leadership in this critical moment. These questions demand not only scrutiny regarding this disaster but also a reevaluation of the social contract, accountability, and ethics of leadership at the core of state governance.
The purpose here is not to raise conspiracy theories or confuse public opinion with blind arguments; rather, it is to create a constructive space for learning from this horrific reality where, instead of evasion, we take responsibility and find ways to prepare better for the future. Within this framework, two issues deserve special attention. First, the exact identification and corrective action on the significant gaps in our national disaster preparedness. Second, ensuring that political leaders, professionals, administrators, and media personnel act with responsibility, conscience, and professional ethics during disasters—an urgent demand of our time.
The foremost point is that in disaster moments, the right to be foremost at the scene belongs only to specially trained forces capable of conducting rescue and service operations—such as fire services, civil defence, police, and health workers. However, in reality, the opposite was seen. Political leaders, media personnel, and curious general public transformed the accident site into a chaotic spectacle. Some streamed Facebook Live, others took distressing photos, and some broadcast the gruesome scenes live, which not only hampered rescue work but also endangered the victims. This ‘competition of presence’ confronts us with a harsh truth: we have yet to educate ourselves in the basic civic and professional responsibility.
Disaster presence is not enough; the sensitivity to timely withdrawal is a crucial social virtue. The rescue operation needed coordinated steps by trained forces from the start, but their falling behind in the chaotic crowd proves that civic manners and disaster awareness remain at rock bottom. This is what Albert Camus termed a ‘crisis of conscience’ where people’s presence becomes part of the problem rather than the solution.
Responsible journalism is a foundation of any democratic and humane society. Reporting news is not merely conveying information; it tests ethics, empathy, and humanity. But the media and social media response after the Milestone tragedy was a cruel spectacle. Uncovered photos of dead and injured children, horrific videos of burnt classrooms, live interviews with crying students, and close-ups of suffering children in hospital beds — all these flagrantly violated ethical boundaries and severely damaged the nation’s mental health.
The internationally accepted journalistic principle of ‘do no harm’ was completely forgotten here. The repeated broadcast of such images under the guise of public awareness challenged journalistic ideals and undermined professional oaths. What we got was not information but collective trauma imposed on the nation. As Michel Foucault described, this is a ‘visible power’ commodifying human vulnerability and misery. Have our media and social platforms become a reflection of cruel curiosity instead of responsibility?
Most distressing and deeply troubling was the presence of political and administrative figures at the accident and hospital sites without any institutional or practical necessity. This was not mere sympathy but irresponsible self-promotion and egocentrism severely damaging humanitarian and professional decorum during disaster times. Medical science teaches that burn patients are at extreme risk of infection, yet the crowded presence of political leaders and activists in burn units turned treatment environments chaotic and hazardous.
More sadly, some present were medically trained professionals familiar with the fundamental medical ethics such as ‘do no harm’ and infection prevention, but they neglected both their knowledge and ethics for political gain. This raises a grave political question: when political self-promotion overrides professional responsibility, how safe can state discipline and citizen security remain? Machiavelli spoke of managing politics with practical wisdom, but we must remember that when that wisdom serves fleeting power displays rather than public welfare, it becomes dangerous. The core inquiry here is: if, during life-saving struggles, political and administrative officials turn their presence into a spectacle, how fragile is the future of state morality?
As a state, a nation, and a society, it is time for self-criticism. We know past disasters cannot be undone, but preparing the future is our moral duty. National disaster management requires not just military strategy or technical capacity but also a solid foundation of humanity, ethics, and structural readiness. Citizens might ask: do educational institutions have specific disaster management plans? Were immediate rescue, primary treatment, and especially psychosocial counselling for children and adolescents ready after the accident?
The answers to these questions will shape future safety frameworks. Most urgently, political leadership, professional bodies, administration, and civil society must now face a hard mirror of self-examination. Socrates said, ‘An unexamined life is not worth living.’ Likewise, a disaster-prone society that fails to self-assess will only invite repeated calamities. If we do not question ourselves now, take responsibility, and prepare for the future, the devastation that follows any major disaster will be unimaginable.
---------------
The writer is a Visiting Faculty, University of Roehampton, UK.
Email: [email protected]
For all latest news, follow the Daily Sun's Google News channel.
Disaster Response in Bangladesh: Responsibility or Recklessness?
The catastrophic crash of a military aircraft into the Milestone School and College building in Dhaka not only caused tragic loss of life but also left a deep scar on the nation’s collective consciousness. The horrific scene unfolded in front of students, teachers, and staff during school hours. This was not merely a technical failure or an accidental disaster; rather, it starkly revealed the limits of our disaster preparedness, mismanagement, and reckless negligence.
The physical pain of those who died or were injured, including students and teachers, is real. Equally, the entire nation is deeply wounded mentally. Disasters do not come with warnings, but how to respond is the responsibility of the state, society, professionals, and every citizen. In this context, the question arises: can we truly consider those who show eagerness instead of responsibility, arbitrariness instead of accountability, or incompetence under the guise of help, as responsible?
This heartbreaking incident has laid bare the fragile, unstable, and questionable nature of our state technical safety systems, emergency rescue and medical preparedness, and even the behavioural responsibility of citizens and professionals. A military aircraft flying over a city is not just a ‘drill’; it reflects shortsightedness in defence policy and limitations in citizen safety concerns. One must ask: why could such a risky drill take place in a densely populated area surrounded by an educational institution teeming with students? How effective were the safety protocols? How prepared were we to respond promptly or save lives after the accident? Most concerning of all is the behaviour of our political, administrative, and professional leadership in this critical moment. These questions demand not only scrutiny regarding this disaster but also a reevaluation of the social contract, accountability, and ethics of leadership at the core of state governance.
The purpose here is not to raise conspiracy theories or confuse public opinion with blind arguments; rather, it is to create a constructive space for learning from this horrific reality where, instead of evasion, we take responsibility and find ways to prepare better for the future. Within this framework, two issues deserve special attention. First, the exact identification and corrective action on the significant gaps in our national disaster preparedness. Second, ensuring that political leaders, professionals, administrators, and media personnel act with responsibility, conscience, and professional ethics during disasters—an urgent demand of our time.
The foremost point is that in disaster moments, the right to be foremost at the scene belongs only to specially trained forces capable of conducting rescue and service operations—such as fire services, civil defence, police, and health workers. However, in reality, the opposite was seen. Political leaders, media personnel, and curious general public transformed the accident site into a chaotic spectacle. Some streamed Facebook Live, others took distressing photos, and some broadcast the gruesome scenes live, which not only hampered rescue work but also endangered the victims. This ‘competition of presence’ confronts us with a harsh truth: we have yet to educate ourselves in the basic civic and professional responsibility.
Disaster presence is not enough; the sensitivity to timely withdrawal is a crucial social virtue. The rescue operation needed coordinated steps by trained forces from the start, but their falling behind in the chaotic crowd proves that civic manners and disaster awareness remain at rock bottom. This is what Albert Camus termed a ‘crisis of conscience’ where people’s presence becomes part of the problem rather than the solution.
Responsible journalism is a foundation of any democratic and humane society. Reporting news is not merely conveying information; it tests ethics, empathy, and humanity. But the media and social media response after the Milestone tragedy was a cruel spectacle. Uncovered photos of dead and injured children, horrific videos of burnt classrooms, live interviews with crying students, and close-ups of suffering children in hospital beds — all these flagrantly violated ethical boundaries and severely damaged the nation’s mental health.
The internationally accepted journalistic principle of ‘do no harm’ was completely forgotten here. The repeated broadcast of such images under the guise of public awareness challenged journalistic ideals and undermined professional oaths. What we got was not information but collective trauma imposed on the nation. As Michel Foucault described, this is a ‘visible power’ commodifying human vulnerability and misery. Have our media and social platforms become a reflection of cruel curiosity instead of responsibility?
Most distressing and deeply troubling was the presence of political and administrative figures at the accident and hospital sites without any institutional or practical necessity. This was not mere sympathy but irresponsible self-promotion and egocentrism severely damaging humanitarian and professional decorum during disaster times. Medical science teaches that burn patients are at extreme risk of infection, yet the crowded presence of political leaders and activists in burn units turned treatment environments chaotic and hazardous.
More sadly, some present were medically trained professionals familiar with the fundamental medical ethics such as ‘do no harm’ and infection prevention, but they neglected both their knowledge and ethics for political gain. This raises a grave political question: when political self-promotion overrides professional responsibility, how safe can state discipline and citizen security remain? Machiavelli spoke of managing politics with practical wisdom, but we must remember that when that wisdom serves fleeting power displays rather than public welfare, it becomes dangerous. The core inquiry here is: if, during life-saving struggles, political and administrative officials turn their presence into a spectacle, how fragile is the future of state morality?
As a state, a nation, and a society, it is time for self-criticism. We know past disasters cannot be undone, but preparing the future is our moral duty. National disaster management requires not just military strategy or technical capacity but also a solid foundation of humanity, ethics, and structural readiness. Citizens might ask: do educational institutions have specific disaster management plans? Were immediate rescue, primary treatment, and especially psychosocial counselling for children and adolescents ready after the accident?
The answers to these questions will shape future safety frameworks. Most urgently, political leadership, professional bodies, administration, and civil society must now face a hard mirror of self-examination. Socrates said, ‘An unexamined life is not worth living.’ Likewise, a disaster-prone society that fails to self-assess will only invite repeated calamities. If we do not question ourselves now, take responsibility, and prepare for the future, the devastation that follows any major disaster will be unimaginable.
---------------
The writer is a Visiting Faculty, University of Roehampton, UK.
Email: [email protected]