I have my doubts as to whether this is actually true, but this is hardly the point. The story is meant figuratively to suggest the potential danger of remaining impervious to small warning signals or gradual deterioration in a situation until it is too late.

Why would I bring this up in today's context? I wonder.

Count me as one who is not overly encouraged about the current pre-election scenario. I apologize in advance for my pessimism, for my cynicism, for my failure to get with the program.

Let us not be too hasty. Let us not jump to conclusions. Let us give the process a chance. This is what is counseled by the nation's wise men, our society's mandarins, the respectable centre, the establishment. They know best, after all. In Bangladesh we have always been rewarded for following such a patient, prudent course of action.

How could we possibly go wrong following such an eminently sensible path? Nothing to get excited about. Nothing to get upset about. Take a deep breath. The water is barely lukewarm. No problems.

Let us not draw any adverse inference from the decidedly dubious and non-transparent way in which the president was maneuvered into the post of chief adviser.

Let us not draw any adverse inference from the litany of untruths that accompanied the maneuvering or the fact that the constitutional process was not followed.

Let us not draw any adverse inference from the preposterous argument that where the constitution states that the chief adviser shall be appointed from "among the retired chief justices of Bangladesh" that this clause contemplates those chief justices who are dead as well as those who are alive.

Go ahead. Roll the phrase around your tongue a few times. Among the retired chief justices of Bangladesh. Sure, it is meant to apply to the dead as well as the alive. What could be more obvious?

Why would anyone have any reason to doubt the motives or designs of those who advance such a transparently obvious interpretation?

Even-handedness dictates that we treat the argument with respect, take it seriously. Let us keep an open mind. Let us give everyone the benefit of the doubt.

Patience. Let us see how the chief adviser goes about constituting his council of advisers. So now we move to the next step in the process.

Let us not draw any adverse inference from the fact that seven of the ten names were drawn from the list sent by the BNP and only two from the list sent by the AL.

Let us not draw any adverse inference from the fact that the first four names submitted by the AL were rejected out of hand and that no reason was given for their rejection.

This is not to cast aspersions on the final ten. I am sure that they are all fine and upstanding citizens. The ones on the list I know personally certainly are. But there are more than ten fine and upstanding citizens under the age of 72 in the country.

What would have been lost with a more even distribution between the two main parties, perhaps in line with the percentage of the popular vote that each received in the last election, if one feels that a 50-50 split would be somehow inappropriate for a body that is meant to be the embodiment of neutrality.

What would have been the problem with picking the top two choices from the list submitted by the AL? What, for instance, could possibly be the objection to ex-IGP Muhammad Nurul Huda?

And let us not draw any adverse inference at all from the fact that the key portfolios of home and establishment have been retained by the chief adviser himself.

Perhaps it is all coincidence. Perhaps it is nothing more than the luck of the draw, the roll of the dice.

Is it just me, or is getting warm in here?

So now we move to the next phase of the proceedings. Once again we must sit patiently and wait and see what steps are taken before we draw any kind of conclusion.

All right. I won't jump to any conclusions. I will make predictions instead.

The next immediate issue is the reconstitution of the Election Commission. This demand has been termed a "new" one by the BNP secretary general I think that tells me all I need to know about his honesty.

Suffice to say that the demand is neither "new," as the secretary general knows full well, nor is it only the demand of the AL. It also happens to be, among others, the editorial position of this newspaper and is in line with the recent findings of the visiting NDI delegation.

But once again we are set to enter the twilight zone. I do not see any way for the chief election commissioner to remain in place, but then there is the question of the rest of the body, especially the acceptability of commissioner Mohammad Zakaria.

Perhaps they will pull the old switcheroo. Then expect to hear the argument that perhaps Aziz has blotted his copy-book, but one cannot jump to conclusions about how Zakaria will comport himself.

Of course, the real problem is that even if both Aziz and Zakaria and everyone else are removed, there is no guarantee that they will not be replaced by someone even worse. It's a bit of a Catch-22 situation. If a preferred slate of names is submitted then they can be summarily rejected, but if a slate is not submitted, then the AL runs the risk of ending up with an even more objectionable commission.

I predict, with some confidence, that the steps taken to ensure the neutrality of the Election Commission will not be sufficient to placate the AL, or indeed, the general public. I could be wrong, of course. I hope very much to be. But I have a sneaking suspicion that I may be on to something here.

The early indications when it comes to the transfer of police and administrative personnel necessary to ensure a level playing field are not encouraging. But of course it is too early to jump to any conclusions. We need to wait and see.

So what then? Well, of course, since this is all speculative, it is really too early in the game to worry about such a dire eventuality. There's plenty of time. No need to rush to judgment. We can cross that bridge when we come to it.

Phew, it's getting hot in here.

Zafar Sobhan is Assistant Editor, The Daily Star.