Owner of collapsed factory caught at Bangladesh-India border

Sohel Rana arrested trying to flee the country.

The owner of the Rana Plaza factory complex, which collapsed on Wednesday killing almost 400 people, has been arrested on the border between Bangladesh and India.

Since the collapse, there have been waves of demonstrations in Banglaesh. Factory workers marched on Thursday and Friday, prompting an unscheduled two day "holiday" over the weekend in the country's garment factories, in the hope of calming tensions. But this morning, there has again been a mass walk-out, reports the Australian:

Local police chief Badrul Alam put the number of protesters at more than 15,000 while a local television network, Private Independent, reported that a number of vehicles had been torched, including an ambulance.

Police responded with rubber bullets and tear gas to bring the unrest under control.

Evidence is starting to filter through about how Sohel Rana, the owner of the complex, was able to run standards into the ground. As the Financial Times reports:

A local politician, he used his influence to circumvent building regulations in order to extend a complex rented out to factories making clothes for cut-price store brands such as Britain’s Primark.

The FT's blistering leader argues strongly that retailers should consider themselves responsible for the conditions in their factories, and that "it is no longer enough to claim that occasional factory inspections and contracts bristling with conditions entitle a retailer to the title of ethical trader".

But while focus in Britain is on the retailers who enable the abuses, in Bangladesh, it is on Rana himself. His flight has been a national political issue, the paper writes:

Jahangir Kabir Nanak, junior minister for local government, told reporters Mr Rana had been returned to the capital by helicopter after a nationwide manhunt. The factory owner appeared on local television news looking confused and dishevelled in the hands of security officers.

If there is a silver lining, it is that it appears that the saga will lead to improvements in conditions for the country's nearly 4 million garment workers. Pressure is being applied, internally and externally – and the sight of thousands of the labourers taking what is, in effect, co-ordinated industrial action is a powerful motivator for change.

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Donald Trump's inauguration signals the start of a new and more unstable era

A century in which the world's hegemonic power was a rational actor is about to give way to a more terrifying reality. 

For close to a century, the United States of America has been the world’s paramount superpower, one motivated by, for good and for bad, a rational and predictable series of motivations around its interests and a commitment to a rules-based global order, albeit one caveated by an awareness of the limits of enforcing that against other world powers.

We are now entering a period in which the world’s paramount superpower is neither led by a rational or predictable actor, has no commitment to a rules-based order, and to an extent it has any guiding principle, they are those set forward in Donald Trump’s inaugural: “we will follow two simple rules: hire American and buy American”, “from this day forth, it’s going to be America first, only America first”.

That means that the jousting between Trump and China will only intensify now that he is in office.  The possibility not only of a trade war, but of a hot war, between the two should not be ruled out.

We also have another signal – if it were needed – that he intends to turn a blind eye to the actions of autocrats around the world.

What does that mean for Brexit? It confirms that those who greeted the news that an US-UK trade deal is a “priority” for the incoming administration, including Theresa May, who described Britain as “front of the queue” for a deal with Trump’s America, should prepare themselves for disappointment.

For Europe in general, it confirms what should already been apparent: the nations of Europe are going to have be much, much more self-reliant in terms of their own security. That increases Britain’s leverage as far as the Brexit talks are concerned, in that Britain’s outsized defence spending will allow it acquire goodwill and trade favours in exchange for its role protecting the European Union’s Eastern border.

That might allow May a better deal out of Brexit than she might have got under Hillary Clinton. But there’s a reason why Trump has increased Britain’s heft as far as security and defence are concerned: it’s because his presidency ushers in an era in which we are all much, much less secure. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.