Bloggers’ awareness shouldn’t be under estimated

RIPAN KUMAR BISWAS

ALTHOUGH so far, it has a small group of readership, but Bangladeshi officials took it seriously as its effect can be worldwide having an impact on present military-backed interim government.

The joint forces of Bangladesh, however later, gave the reason why they arrested Tasneem Khalil (26) on May 10, 2007, an editorial assistant of the Daily Star, a stringer for several news organizations, including CNN and representative of Human Rights Watch in Bangladesh.

He was detained due to his writing in the web logs about the random arbitrary arrests, torture, ill-treatment, detention, physical disabilities, psychological fear and panic, deaths in custody, deprivation of medical treatment, distortion and destruction of medico-legal evidences, concealment of the truth regarding cases of custodial torture, extreme suppression of the freedom of expression and absolute injustice to the victims by the administration of Bangladesh.

In addition, Khalil was involved with one of the report of Human Rights Watch on, “Judge, Jury and Executioner: Torture and Extrajudicial killings by Bangladesh’s Elite Security Force,” focused on abuses by the Rapid Action Battalion of Bangladesh.

Tasneem Khalil was released later, but is the present military-backed interim government really liberal to media even in web logs?

Web logging, or blogging, is the new kid on the media block, complete with its own, unique lexicon. The verb is to blog and the participant in blogging is a blogger.

A blog is simply a series of updated posts on a web page in the form of a diary or journal, often including commentary on, and hypertext links to, other web sites. Posts are in chronological order and can contain anything from simple text, to music, images and even streamed video.

Unlike the large media organizations, bloggers were unhindered by the normal journalistic standards of objectivity, balance and accuracy. This amateur output was raw, subjective and honest as people sought emotions, not detachment - finding solace and expression in the words of the thousands of blogs that sprang up.

If journalism is by definition the reporting of news in a fair, balanced and accurate way, then blogging is not journalism. But if the truth is that not all journalists and media outlets adhere to these principles, the distinction is less clear.

But blogs aren't as new as Bangladesh has experienced with such a detainee due to his writings in web logs. They have actually been around since the early days of the Internet.

Today's blogs, of course, are much more than that. In 1999 there were dozens of blogs. Now there are millions. Comments concerning human rights, social issues or politics in the web logs are now more subjective and reasonable like other form of journalism. So is it so easy to control the media which is almost open just a click away?

Like other journalists, bloggers in the world are not safe and arrested frequently due to their honest and strong comments.

Last year, Egypt arrested a number of bloggers who had criticized the government. Among them, Abdel Kareem Solaiman's, a former student of al-Azhar University, had been sentenced into prison for four years as he criticized the country's top Islamic institution, al-Azhar university and President Hosni Mubarak, whom he called a dictator.

Similarly, Christophe, a citizen of the city Puteaux that is close to Paris, France, didn’t like the way the city mayor was managing the city and spending the public money.

Hundreds of inhabitants of Puteaux was reading and commenting his blog everyday and many national newspapers talked about his blog. City management then tried to stop him for months and the mayor even sent him threats over the phone that he recorded and blogged.

Bangladesh has been under a State of Emergency since January 11, 2007. This is the fifth time has happened since the independence of the country in 1971.

Since the proclamation of the State of the Emergency has been imposed by the President of People’s Republic of Bangladesh, constitution of Bangladesh shall remain suspended including all fundamental rights.

Although restrictions on political activity have been imposed, but the government has asserted several times since emergency "no restrictions have been imposed on the media's freedom and functions."

US Ambassador to Bangladesh Patricia A Butenis also raised her voice for freedom of media from informal controls in her address marking the World Press Freedom Day at Dhaka on May 3, 2007 while administration of Bangladesh imposed a bar against Journalists to enter into the premises of special graft courts.

Practically, any government can’t work much better without freedom and functions of media as its citizen basic need to know the functions of government.

In absence of liberal democracy under present emergency rule in Bangladesh, it’s not a worth step to control or curb media from any point of view due to the big interest of its citizen.

As the bloggers reflect a big portion of citizen’s opinion honestly and emotionally without fear and taking any side of aisle, their awareness shouldn’t be under estimated. #

Ripan Kumar Biswas is a freelance writer based in New York. This article was contributed in May 13, 2007

Ripan.Biswas@yahoo.com

Should Bangladesh military-backed administration move its goal post?

DR. ABDUL MOMEN
A senior American official desires that Bangladesh interim government hold the national election before it loses its credibility and public support.

“Two years for a non-elected government is too long”, says Dr. Doug Telling, Professor of Government at the Framingham State College, Massachusetts. Echoing him the panelists have the consensus that ‘a free, fair and credible election’ must not take more than a year. They argue that the Bangladesh should hold its next general election in December, 2007. They further argue that a non-elected Emergency Government of Dr. Fakruddin Ahmed should hold the national election first and other local and mayoral elections be left for the elected government.

In fact, Dr. Fakruddin Ahmed took the oath of office with the goal to hold a free and fair election ‘within the shortest possible time’. Although 120 days have passed, the political parties have not been allowed yet to resume their activities or campaigning. Instead, the military-backed government is reportedly manipulating breaking up the major political parties of the country namely, the Awami League (AL) and the BNP. Initially it tried to capitalize the popularity of Nobel Laureate Professor Mohammed Yunus to float a new political party. Since that failed now they are reportedly trying with Dr. Kamal Hossain, a former Foreign Minister. Dr. Hossain is a reputed jurist but he lacks organizing ability. His Gono Forum did not flourish due to organizational weaknesses. Moreover, Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the largest and oldest grass root political party of Bangladesh is back in the country now and her popular support mushroomed due to government’s ill conceived policies and manipulated cases against her. Now it has become difficult for the AL leaders who were thinking of breaking away from the party, to try for setting up a new party. Therefore, the military generals led by Law Advisor Mainul Hossain have one option; to form the new party with the supporters of the BNP and the LDP, the breakaway faction of the BNP.

Such manipulation and breaking up of major political parties is against the concept of popular democracy and such technocratic adventures hardly succeed. President Ayub Khan of Pakistan once tried to reform political parties and he disqualified many veteran politicians. That did not work. General Yahya Khan presented 303 to end corruption but in vain. General Ziaur Rahman promised to make politics difficult and foisted a Party (BNP) from the Cantonment. Many opportunists joined his party and during the last five years they basically looted the country. General H. M. Ershad also tried to eliminate corruption and jailed and convicted political leaders and businessmen, all of whom flocked to his camp in course of time. For example, Ministers Maudud Ahmed, Murshed Khan and Saifur Rahman were all convicted by him once and exonerated later. He also sacked nearly 400 bureaucrats. However, his eight year rule earned the distinction of the most corrupt government and stayed in that position till overshadowed by the Khaleda-Nizami regime in the new millennium. If any political reform is to be effective and long lasting, it has to evolve within the political parties, not from outside or above.

The last few years’ struggle especially last 2.5 years for improving the politics of the country and end looting, in fact, created an atmosphere like that of the French Revolution to bring about ‘qualitative changes' in Bangladesh politics and in particular, major political parties. Therefore, the interim government should leave it with the parties and if they intervene too much, the hopes and sacrifice of millions would go in vain. That would be disastrous.

It is painful that although four months have passed, the Fakruddin government failed to provide a road map for the election yet. Since next election is their top priority, their goal post, they should have declared the election dates by now. Retired Brigadier General Sakhawat Hossain, an Election Commissioner, stated that none can hold the election in less than 18 months. That is a subjective judgment that has already been questioned by many at home and abroad. We can only remind him that the ingenuity of human beings has been unpredictable throughout history. Great economist Thomas Malthus failed to visualize that the food productivity due to technological advancement could outperform the population growth rate. His prophecy of a human disaster and famine therefore did not come true.

‘Closed minds’ hardly could visualize the creativity of human brain powers. For example, President Cleveland of the United States stated in 1905, ‘sensible and responsible women do not want to vote” or the founder of the Warner Bros Pictures Inc., that produced and distributed thousands of movies, Mr. Harry M. Warner stated in 1927, “who the hell wants actors to talk”. Nowadays, sensible women do vote and movie goers always like the actors and actress to talk.

A great scientist Lord Kelvin, then President of the Royal Society publicly stated in 1895 that “heavier than air flying machines are simply impossible”. It was impossible to Lord Kelvin, but not to Wright brothers. We are used to flying jets and planes that are heavier than air. Good news is that Lord Kelvin, however, did not put up barriers to scientific pursuits.

Commissioner Sakhawat Hossain who failed to clarify the allegation against him of misuse of 20,000 tons of rice yet may not be able to develop ‘correct voter list with photos’ and ‘election reform’ in less than 18 months. That does not mean that others can’t do. Preparation of voter list with attached photos must not take too long. Secondly, if it is linked to ID card preparation it may repeat the failures of the past. Both BNP and AL governments of 1990s manned by senior bureaucrats/technocrats like current ECs failed to do the job even after wasting billions of Takas. The draft reform proposals ‘on election process and rules, and prevention of electoral fraud and rigging have been taken from the Reform Proposals of the 14 Party Alliance’ and generally have been welcomed. The issue of registration process of political parties needs serious consideration by the political parties. But that is being prevented by the action of the CTG against indoor politics and their meaningless principle of no-contact with political leaders. Such will not improve ‘level playing field’ nor will create a congenial atmosphere for election. Such will only aggravate fear and uncertainty. Corrupt people and godfathers of terrorism must not be allowed a free field but the screening process should not be a witch-hunting exercise of unlimited duration. Great minds do make mistakes. However, if they have an ‘open mind’ and if they are honest and committed, they can correct themselves quickly as they did in case of Hasina’s re-entry.

Instead of breaking and weakening the political parties and their leaderships and changing the goal post, the interim government should concentrate their hearts and minds in holding the next general election by January 2008. Dr. Ahmed is a competent bureaucrat and his advisors are also competent. Therefore, instead of delaying the main task of holding a free and fair election, they should act together quickly. It is important to remember that they are the last hope for sustenance of multi-party democracy in Bangladesh and we all want them to succeed. Important element is if they lose their credibility, the alternative would be disastrous. Already, signs of doubts are looming and incidence of terrorism is sharply increasing in the South Asian region and under a non-elected government this may boomerang as had happened in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

People all over Bangladesh and friends of Bangladesh abroad welcomed the interim government on January 11, 2007. People also supported its initiative to punish the corrupt people and the looters. However, as they allowed Coco, former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia’s second son who is known as highly corrupt, as a ‘bargaining chip’ for Mrs. Zia’s exile, people did not like it. It is also strange that the Prime Minister who presided over the most corrupt and the most wicked government in the history of the country for five years, has not been charged with any misdeeds, nor have the cases of corruption against her withdrawn by herself been reactivated yet, neither Chief Election Commissioner Justice Aziz that spoiled nation’s hard earned money charged with yet. Dr. Iazuddin Ahmed, the current President was responsible for many evils and he has not been approached to solicit apology to the nation yet. People also do not like the government’s selective strategy of not apprehending corrupt people, especially former military officers and leaders and workers of the Jamaat-e-Islam party. There has been some lip service to the Muktijuddho but none of the Jamaat leaders that tried to cover up the notorious terrorists namely Bangla Bhai and Shayek Abdur Rahman have been apprehended yet, nor the instigators of the attempted murder of Dr. Humayun Azad of the Dhaka University. More importantly, the extra judicial killing by the RAB, a security force of the government, which is known as ‘state terrorism’, is continuing although at a reduced rate. Reportedly 80 people have been executed without due process of law within the last 120 days of the interim government. The RAB is the ‘judge, jury and the executioner’. This cannot be accepted by the civilized world. Dr. Ahmed's government has not yet tackled the issue effectively and it continues to hurt the image of the nation. No FDI is likely until such state terrorism and political uncertainty are over.

The nation’s economy is stagnating due to uncertainty and especially due to an environment of fear. The prices of essentials are increasing sharply making it difficult even for the middle class to make both ends meet. There are also disturbing news of changes and tension in the Armed Forces, who are backing the current Government and such does not augur well for political stability. Before circumstances take a bad turn the Fakruddin government must hurry the process of election. The development partners are getting nervous as they do not like to see the 3^rd largest Muslim country get destabilized and follow Pakistan, a headache for many. Therefore, no wonder that Nick Burns, US Under Secretary of State specifically desires the Bangladesh interim government to hold the national election ASAP before it loses its credibility and public support. #

Dr. Abdul Momen, a professor of economics and business management, Boston, USA Sylhet@Verizon.net. This article was contributed on May 11, 2007

The “anti-corruption” Trojan Horse

SHAHIDUL ALAM

STANDING in the grand parliament building in Karachi, built by his grandfather, veteran Pakistani MP Qamar Zaman reflected on the irony of it all. He had long campaigned against the militarization in Pakistan, but recent developments in Bangladesh worried Zaman. “They saw what went wrong in the Pakistani experiment and decided to fine tune it” he lamented. The election commissioner in India, SY Quraishi, repeated the sentiment. Bangladesh following in Pakistan’s footsteps was not something be welcomed. Kunda Dixit, in Kathmandu, talked of how the same blueprint was being used in all our countries. Despite the rhetoric of democracy, the militarization of South Asian countries was the flavour of the day. Aided by chaotic situations created by political mismanagement, the anti-corruption Trojan Horse brought in its deadly military content.As in Troy, the people had welcomed them with open arms. Years of mismanagement and corruption had worn down their patience. People wanted respite, regardless of where it came from. This was just the window the military needed. Not wanting to lose out on the lucrative UN placements, they needed a mask. The ‘neutral’ caretaker government was the perfect foil. The arrests of corrupt politicians, businesspeople and godfathers provided a much needed relief. Few worried about the flimsy, and sometimes concocted accusations used to reel them in. None dared to speak of the glaring omissions. Curbing media freedom took care of the main obstacle. The military or the Jamaat were strangely absent from the list. Amongst the largest and most controversial deals made during previous regimes were the MIG and the Frigate purchases. Yet neither had featured in the cases being investigated. “kaker mangsho kak khai na.” (A crow doesn’t eat crow’s meat).

After much foot dragging, and over two months of delay, a one member body was asked to probe into the death of adivasi activist Choles Ritchil in the most gruesome killing while in military custody. The Shadarghat launch disaster, in contrast, had three separate investigation committees ordered to submit reports within 24 hours. Choles on the other hand had resisted a multimillion dollar deal to take over adivasi land. It was a different ball game.

Tasneem Khalil (www.tasneemkhalil.com) was one voice that they had not been able to silence. His incisive, well researched investigations flew against the culture of silence that prevailed. Mahfuz Anam, the editor of the leading English daily, The Daily Star, had proudly told me, “In all these years, not a single story had been spiked.” That was some time ago. Things were different now. The story of military involvement that Tasneem had revealed was pulled back from the press in the last minute. A commentator on the roundtable at Drik on the 3rd May, International Press Freedom Day, had equated the Daily Star and the Daily Prothom Alo with a new political party. The newspapers had elaborate reporting on the US ambassador’s love for democracy and a free press. The Drik roundtable, featuring some of the bravest journalists working in the land, went unreported. The roundtable had discussed the military, the corporate deals taking place, the heavy hand of foreign countries. It talked of deals being pushed through in the absence of dissent. Tasneem had deliberately not been asked to speak. That would be inviting trouble.

That didn’t protect Tasneem for long. In my room in Shangri La Hotel in the early hours of this morning I received an SMS from a student. Tasneem had been picked up from his home. This is a risk that all journalists speaking against the state are prepared to take, but given what Choles Ritchil went through, this arrest is more ominous. A suicide note for an epitaph is too likely an outcome to let the system take its course. #

Shahidul Alam is a Bangladeshi photographer, writer and activist with a special interest in education, new media and ICT. He is the founder of the award winning Drik Picture Library and is currently the 2006-2007 Regent’s Lecturer at UCLA. Shahidul writes from Kathmandu where he is on assignment

This article was written at Kathmandu, May 11, 2007

Shahidul News: http://shahidul.wordpress.com/

Bangladesh journalist Tasneem Khalil arrested

• Men from an army intelligence unit were behind the arrest, Khalil's wife said
• The men took Khalil's passport, cell phones, documents, wife said
• Human Rights Watch's Asia director expresses extreme concern
• Khalil worked on HRW report last year about alleged torture by elite forces

(CNN) -- The Bangladeshi army arrested a Bangladesh journalist at his home early Friday for unknown reasons, according to his wife.

Tasneem Khalil writes for the Dhaka-based Daily Star and also works part-time for Human Rights Watch and as a stringer for several news organizations, including CNN.

Khalil's wife Sharmin Afsana Shuchi telephoned CNN to say that the men who arrested him were from an army intelligence unit.

In a statement, she said that four men in plainclothes identified themselves as belonging to "the joint task force." They refused to tell Khalil on what charges he was being arrested and cautioned him to be quiet "if you don't want anything else to happen," she said.

The men searched the house, took Khalil's passport and cell phones, two desktop computers and "all the documents, notepads, piles of paper, CDs and everything," she said. "They took it all away."

The men allegedly took Khalil to the Sangsad Bhavan army camp outside the parliament building in Dhaka.

The Bangladeshi army has detained thousands of people since declaring a state of emergency on January 11, Human Rights Watch said. Many of them have been tortured, the group said.

"We are extremely concerned about Tasneem Khalil's safety," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "He has been a prominent voice in Bangladesh for human rights and the rule of law and has been threatened because of that."

Khalil is a noted investigative journalist who has published several controversial exposes of official corruption and abuse, particularly by security forces. Last year, he assisted Human Rights Watch in research for a 2006 report about torture and extrajudicial killings by Bangladesh elite security forces, said HRW press director Emma Daly.

According to Bangladeshi human rights groups, the army has detained tens of thousands of people since a state of emergency was declared on January 11, 2007. A number of those detained are picked up in the middle of the night, as Khalil was, and then tortured.

In Bangladesh, security forces have long been implicated in torture and extrajudicial killings. The killings have been attributed to members of the army, the police, and the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), an elite anti-crime and anti-terrorism force. The Human Rights Watch report Khalil worked on, “Judge, Jury, and Executioner: Torture and Extrajudicial Killings by Bangladesh’s Elite Security Force,” focused on abuses by the RAB.

Killings in custody remain a persistent problem in Bangladesh. To date, no military personnel are known to have been held criminally responsible for any of the deaths.

Khalil was called in for questioning by military intelligence last week, apparently as part of the military’s campaign to intimidate independent journalists ahead of May 10, 2007, when the army’s three-month legal mandate for ruling under a state of emergency came to an end.

CNN and HRW have been in contact with Bangladesh's Special Envoy to the United States, Farook Sobhan, and other officials in attempts to find information about Khalil. Sobhan told CNN it was the first he'd heard about Khalil's arrest and promised to make inquiries. #

Judge, Jury, and Executioner: Torture and Extrajudicial Killings by Bangladesh’s Elite Security Force

POSTED: 1:10 a.m. EDT, May 11, 2007

Copyright 2007 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report

Bangladesh State Emergency An Opportunity

PROFESSOR MAHFUZ R. CHOWDHURY

FROM a political point of view, Bangladesh is currently undergoing dramatic change. The present caretaker government, which came to power on January 12, 2007 with the backing of the army after a declaration of emergency, was quickly perceived to have saved the country from the grave consequences of hostilities between the country’s two major political parties. Those hostilities had driven the country of over 140 million people almost to the brink of anarchy. During the two months prior to the takeover, the country had experienced unending riots and widespread demonstrations in which more than 60 people lost their lives, millions of dollars in property was damaged, and the economic activities in the country came to a squealing halt.

After coming to power, the present government not only brought an end to the crisis, it promptly undertook a number of key initiatives that the country had failed to achieve during the 36 years since it gained independence. These initiatives include the badly needed restructuring of the anti-corruption commission, reorganization of the election commission, and establishment of the rule of law by making the judiciary free from the executive branch. Having initiated or achieved such long awaited and cherished measures, the government earned praise from its citizens and the world. By every account, the government has so far done an outstanding job in accomplishing the main objectives it had set out to accomplish, though not without glitches.

One of the critical problems that Bangladesh had faced was massive corruption at every level of government. The world is aware that Transparency International had ranked Bangladesh the most corrupt country in the world for five consecutive years since 2000. Having assumed authority, the caretaker government unleashed a massive campaign to confront corruption head on. It soon locked up a number of influential state ministers, members of parliament, top businessmen, and other high officials, who were known to have extorted enormous amount of money and land, and to have even expropriated vast amounts of relief materials intended for the poor. The government also succeeded in putting the son of the former Prime Minister, the alleged ring leader of the country’s organized crime, in jail. The government traced a huge amount of money that had been laundered through foreign banks, especially shocking to the world. Just imagine, while the country was supposedly receiving foreign aid to bolster its economy, its officials were engaged in illegally transferring money out of the country! Estimates of such laundered money are in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

The other contentious issue was how to set up an impartial and fair election process in the country. This challenge had earlier led the two leading parties to settle for a caretaker government that would oversee a period of three months leading up to an election. Yet this unprecedented deal failed to bring fairness to the political process because the party previously in power found ingenious ways to leave its many cronies in power to manipulate elections. This time, when the initial caretaker government’s decision to hold election under questionable circumstances led to a crisis, the President was obliged to declare an emergency and install a truly independent caretaker government.

Immediately after taking power, the present government pledged to bring necessary reforms to end the prevailing system in which politics is influenced not by the free will of the people, but by the manipulation of elections through money and muscle. The two major political parties, Awami League and Bangladesh Nationalist Party, remained the country’s key players in the political arena. Following the assassination of their former paramount leaders, the daughter and wife of those leaders were inducted to these parties’ leadership positions in order to contain feuding among party elders. Eventually, both women assumed autocratic power within their parties, and both also held state power at one time or another. But neither one’s administrative record is free from corruption or manipulation of political events. In fact, the present crisis in the country was indisputably caused by these two politically inept women. It is for this very reason that many believe that true political reforms would not be possible while they remained at the helm of their parties. Subscribing to such a theory, the current caretaker government seems to have taken an impromptu decision to exile them, thinking that it might be easier to send them abroad than to prosecute them for their alleged crimes. In the face of outside pressure, the government subsequently reversed its decision to exile them. But serious controversy over the future political roles of these two women lingers.

Contrary to popular belief, Bangladesh is a resource-rich country, and has remained so even after years of exploitation by a number of foreign powers, including the Mughals, the British, and the Pakistanis. The country is filled with rich coal and gas reserves, and it also has a competent workforce. After gaining independence, it has stayed poor and has failed to reach its potential mainly because of its corrupt political system. Even under such trying circumstances the country has achieved 5 percent annual economic growth during the past decade. This is precisely why a great sense of hope has prevailed in the country following the declaration of the state of emergency and the formation of the present caretaker government. Except for a small section of people who had plundered state wealth and are now facing justice, the general public is pleased with the turn of events in the country. Intellectuals both at home and abroad have described the current situation as a new opportunity for the country to cleanse its political system so that it can move forward.

Currently, under emergency rule all political activities in the country are banned, but pressure especially from outside is mounting to lift this ban, and at the same time to schedule a new election as soon as possible. The government has pledged to schedule the election by the end of 2008, or soon after election reform is completed. The country’s intellectuals and constitutional experts have supported the decision.

But the leaders of the two influential parties see this delay as a great danger for them, because the present government continues to investigate their past misdeeds. Their clamor for early election is not with the country’s best interests at heart, but in order to save themselves from ongoing investigations and further embarrassments. To bring progress to Bangladesh, the need for a fair election could not be overemphasized. But pressuring the government to schedule an early election without necessary election reform might bring more harm than good. Considering the ominous circumstances under which the present caretaker government was brought to power, the world should dismiss the idea of a snap election. An election without electoral reform would simply reestablish the old system where money and muscle once ruled. Such a system should neither be desirable nor acceptable to the democratic world.

Bangladesh is clearly at a crossroads. The world has a great responsibility to help it to choose and stay on the right track, and not create obstacles for its reform. If the country fails to move forward, the future of the country will be greatly jeopardized. The present caretaker government can use help and guidance in setting up proper reforms leading to a fair election, in bringing corrupt former officials to justice, and in recovering illegally laundered money from abroad. Help in these areas would go a long way toward establishing democracy and putting the country on the path to prosperity. A prosperous Bangladesh would be beneficial to the world. #

This article was published in American Chronicle, on May 8, 2007

Professor Chowdhury teaches Economics at C.W. Post Campus of Long Island University, USA. He has wide ranging experience in international business and commerce, and has written on failure of communism and problem with developing countries. He was born in Chittagong, Bangladesh and has written extensively on his home country. His book, "Economic Exploitation of Bangladesh", addresses the economics of developing countries, using Bangladesh as a case study. He could be reached Mahfuz.Chowdhury@liu.edu

Bangladesh Permits Ex-Premier to Return; Hasina face charges

NORA BOUSTANY

A defiant Sheikh Hasina, former prime minister of Bangladesh, arrived in the capital, Dhaka, on Monday after the government lifted an entry ban that had stranded her in London on her way home from the United States. She was greeted at the airport by thousands of well-wishers who ignored official orders against political rallies.

Hasina's longtime rival, Khaleda Zia, prime minister in the previous government, remained under house arrest after four weeks with no working telephone lines to her home, as the government of former central bank governor Fakhruddin Ahmed prepared summary trials of prominent political figures.

"No one can stop me," Hasina, head of the Awami League, told reporters at the airport, according to news service reports from Dhaka. "This is my country, they cannot keep me from coming back."

Hasina faces charges of extortion and supporting bloodletting during street scuffles between followers of the Awami League and activists loyal to Khaleda Zia's Bangladesh Nationalist Party. Hasina denies the charges.

On Monday, she declined to say whether she planned to run for office again.

As street violence mounted last winter, an interim government declared a state of emergency Jan. 11 and canceled parliamentary elections scheduled for Jan. 22, citing international concern over the validity of voter registration lists. With approval of the army, authorities have promised to clean up the political system, targeting political figures they accuse of corruption.

On Monday, Ahmed reaffirmed plans to hold elections before the end of next year and promised to ensure a free press. Some journalists and intellectuals in Bangladesh expressed skepticism that his military-backed government will carry out those promises.

It remains unclear who and which parties would take part in elections. Last Thursday, Grameen Bank founder and Nobel Peace laureate Muhammad Yunus announced he was abandoning plans to form a party and run for office, saying that individuals who had promised to support him had backed out.

One of the politicians arrested in sweeps that followed January's street violence is Mohiuddin Alamgir, 66, a former civil servant and Awami League member. The charges against him have changed from treason to extortion to corruption, according to his son Jalal Alamgir, a political science professor at the University of Massachusetts in Boston. The rights for bail and an appeal have been withdrawn, Jalal Alamgir said.

Mohiuddin Alamgir told his son by telephone in recent days that he was to be the first to appear in court on Wednesday and that he did not know whether his attorneys would be allowed to make a statement. It is the only conversation he has had with his father since his arrest in February, Jalal Alamgir said, and was due to the kindness of a police escort who offered the prisoner a cellphone.

"My biggest fear is that those will be kangaroo courts, since the government has another set of rules for these tribunals," said Jalal Alamgir. "The drive against corruption is legitimate, but it has also been used as a cover against people who may be vocal against military rule and an authoritarian takeover." #

This article was first published in the Washington Post, May 8, 2007; page A20

Facts vs Fads: Democracy and Economic Performance

ABDUL MOMEN

"THROUGH the 36 years after independence politicians gave us nothing good," declared Moeen U. Ahmed, the Army Chief, at a gathering in late March, 2007. It is fashionable in these days of disinformation and army-backed government to blame politicians for all evils. A section of the local intelligentsia is also happily endorsing such views of the interim government without question.

But the facts tell a different story. Read on, let the information sink in, and then ask: what is the ulterior motive in such a disinformation campaign?

The actual record of democracy
The table below compares the major macro-economic indicators of Bangladesh for its periods of authoritarian rule (1975-1990) and electoral democracy (1991-2005). Even with corruption and periodic political chaos due to polarization and rivalry between the two "Begums," democracy produced significantly better economic performance than what was generated by military rule.

Growth in per capita GDP during democracy (5.9 percent per annum) was a whopping 59 percent better than per capita GDP growth during civil-military authoritarianism (3.9 percent per annum). Overall GDP during democracy grew by 5.1 percent annually on average, but during authoritarian rule the growth rate was 3.2 percent.

The investment rate almost doubled during democracy vis-à-vis military rule. Even more prominently, the savings rate during democratic rule (37.5 percent) was more than triple of what the authoritarian rulers were able to achieve (11 percent).

During democracy, Bangladesh's exports grew much faster. And inflation, the main worry of poor people, was kept far better in check during democratic governance. The trend today is also consistent with this performance. Under authoritarian economic management now, inflation this year is expected to reach 10 percent.

Liberal policies and economic effects
The higher growth rates were achieved in part because of other liberal policies undertaken by political governments. A free press, private television channels like Channel I, ATN Bangla, and NTV, and the entire telecommunications revolution in Bangladesh made famous by GrameenPhone was spurred during democratic rule. The better flow of information and communication not only generated economic benefits, but also enhanced public consciousness dramatically, allowing the media to raise issues of accountability that we take for granted now.

Despite chaos, commerce flourished during democracy. Photo by Julien MaillerIn addition, the historic Ganges Water Treaty and the Chittagong Hill Tract Peace Deal were both completed by the Awami League government, producing significant economic benefits in the northwest and southeast regions of the country respectively. Authoritarian governments of Bangladesh had raised the Ganges water sharing issue even at the UN General Assembly, and spent tons of money on the Farakka issue both home and abroad, but with no avail.

In the last 36 years, non-democratic governments ran the affairs of Bangladesh for almost 16.5 consecutive years (the first 3.5 years can be considered a reconstruction period after a massive war). It is during this time that institutions of governance were destroyed, and corruption became a prominent part of the economy. There is no denying that both Major General Ziaur Rahman and Lt. Gen. H. M. Ershad showed the path of corrupting the administration with their hand-picked cronies.

Beware the blame game
The record is very clear. Despite all the blame conveniently put on the politicians, they actually have performed far better than authoritarian rulers in improving the economic condition of the country. Just scapegoating politicians is a disservice and escapism. But worse, it is probably being done deliberately to hide the destruction to both the economy and the values of the country that were brought on by the military-led governments between 1975 and 1991. As we enter another authoritarian period, intelligent citizens must keep in mind the historical record, so that they do not fall prey to the blanket anti-politician propaganda being spread nowadays. #

Dr. Abdul Momen, a professor of economics and business management, Boston, USA

This article was first published in www.ProgressiveBangladesh.org on April 30, 2007

Don't Mess Up the Cleanup Job in Bangladesh

TERRENCE FRAZER

TO us foreign observers, the authoritarian takeover in Bangladesh seemed necessary. There was no other way to clamp down on corruption. Sheikh Hasina, the former prime minister from Awami League, herself noted that if elected to power, her party could not have done anything concrete against the influence peddlers of Hawa Bhaban.

Tools of the trade
The government’s success against the war of corruption has been based ultimately in two things that would be absent in a usual elected government.

First, a strong and visible military force backed it. Every high-profile arrest was done with precise choreography. Truckloads of soldiers surrounded the site of arrest, disconnected phones and lines, stayed up to 12 hours to “raid” and gather documents, and then apprehended and led away the suspects with calm determination.

Second, the government has been doing all this under a state of emergency with fundamental rights suspended. It is using the emergency as cover also to enact a series of laws to create a special legal environment to try the corruption suspects. As some commentators have noted, the goal seems to bypass due process so that guilty verdicts can be handed down quickly and easily while making it difficult for the defendants to prove innocence.

An inconvenient truth
Neither of these luxuries would be available easily to a normally elected government. But by relying so much on authoritarian methods, the government has been weakening its legitimacy, and many among foreign observers are now beginning to doubt its true motives.

On April 17, the US Under-secretary of State, Nicholas Burns, said, "The interim government in Bangladesh has become occupied with unnecessary issues although its prime business is holding a free and fair elections" and noted that such activities may become unacceptable to the international community.

In a press briefing on April 24, Sean McCormack, spokesperson of the US State Department voiced worries about the situation: "if the caretaker government doesn’t take the right decisions, then this — there is a real possibility that this can threaten Bangladeshi democracy."

The reason is not the anti-corruption drive, but the politicization of it. (In some ways perhaps that is expected -- most things in Bangladesh tend to become politicized quickly.) For savvy observers, a good indication of this is looking at the type of cases being filed.

For example, a surprise inclusion in the government's first round of corruption-related arrests was Dr. Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir, a former planning minister in Awami League’s administration who has a history of being vocal against authoritarian governments. The government filed sedition, not corruption, charges against him, probably to silence him by keeping him in jail.

The arrest of Moudud Ahmed also proceeded comically. Newspapers report that the initial charge brought against him is illegal possession of alcohol: 32 cans of beer and a few bottles of liquor.

Filing murder charges against Sheikh Hasina for violence that took place during a large political rally is equally ludicrous. The names listed on the murder charges were hurriedly “corrected” at the last minute, and her name was forcibly included.

Then the government barred her from returning to Bangladesh, but at the same time termed her a fugitive, fleeing from law. Within days, the government reversed its decision, and the police withdrew the charge sheet for further investigation. The only explanation for these shenanigans is political motive, not real charges.

By framing these far-fetched scenarios—treason, murder, drinking—the government is making a mockery of its real effort to fight corruption. Not only do these undermine the integrity of the much-needed cleanup effort, but these, along with the new laws to suppress due process, are also beginning to expose a more malicious intent of "political purging."

Forcing politicians out of politics
Aside from corruption charges and summary trials, intimidation is an additional method of forcing retirement on the old guard of politicians. I am told that Anwar Hossain Monju, a veteran politician has declared retirement from politics under threat. Such pressures have been created apparently on leaders from other parties too.

There can be only one goal for this purge: force existing politicians out of politics and then pick preferred candidates. When I asked a Bangladeshi historian about this, he laughed and agreed, noting that this was the same formula by which General Zia had created BNP and General Ershad had created Jatiya Party.

For this government, the preferred party is probably Nagorik Shakti, led by Professor Muhammad Yunus, the 2006 Nobel peace laureate. With its political purge, the government is basically trying to clear the field for him as much as possible. Faced with politicized cases and intimidation, the only way for veteran politicians to survive may be by joining Dr. Yunus’s party.

Stick to the job, please
Voters in Bangladesh, as well as those of us who analyze politics in South Asia, were no doubt fed up with the endemic corruption and political wrangling. So there is strong support for cracking down on corruption, but I believe there is little appetite for these types of political meddling. But that’s what the interim government is creating, by harassing and intimidating politicians on all sorts of questionable grounds.

In addition, if the interim government begins to favor newcomers, it runs the risk of losing popular support. When that happens, the fight against corruption will suffer a premature and tragic death.

So the government will be wise to just stick to its core tasks—getting the country ready for elections and getting well-known corrupt people to justice on the basis of sound and credible evidence. The more "political" the government becomes, the more it will mess up the clean up job, and eventually its own survival. #

Terrence Frazer analyses South Asian politics for a risk research organization. He resides in New York and Singapore, and travels frequently in South Asia. Views expressed here are his own

Islamist takeover stopped in Bangladesh?

RICHARD L. BENKIN

THREE and a half years ago, anti-jihadist Muslim Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury blew the lid off secret Islamist efforts to take over Bangladesh. He published his revelations in an article that, unfortunately, the Bangladeshi press refused to touch. But he persevered, and when "incubating ultra-radicalism" started appearing on websites, the government struck. Using a minor offense as a pretext to detain him, it held Choudhury under deplorable conditions. He was hauled in and out of court numerous times, always returned for "interrogation." That meant torture, which his openly Islamist captors applied in an attempt to extract a false confession that he was a spy for Israel.

Islamists had preparing to take Bangladesh for decades. They infiltrated Bangladeshi society, buying up print and broadcast media, banking, business, even the judiciary and police. Since 2001, they had been part of a coalition government with a stated policy of appeasement. But as of January, that government appears out of power for good, and the nation's current leaders have announced an "anti-radical" agenda. Were Islamists stopped in their attempt to take over the world's third-largest Muslim country? Maybe; and here's how.

The system that brought the Islamist fox into the government henhouse ended soon after 2007 began. I arrived in Bangladesh to extensive street violence with the center-left opposition calling for more. The ruling coalition had rigged the upcoming elections so transparently that every Western democracies urged that they not be held, an odd circumstance to be sure. With neither party offering a way out of the growing chaos, the interim government with military backing called a State of Emergency and canceled elections. Good thing, too, because almost every analyst predicted further Islamist gains were they held.

Except for some May Day bombs designed to make noise rather than cause damage, the Islamists have been silent. Three of their ilk have been executed and many arrested. Sources confirm further anti-Islamist action on the way. But to seal this victory, the government has to eradicate radical influence among the people. While the West stood by, Islamists capitalized on Bangladeshis' suffering and the country's massive corruption much as Hamas did in Gaza. A social service network where the price of a meal was continuous Islamist hate speech was just the beginning. Radical mosques were funded by notorious "charities." I witnessed that first-hand traveling incognito outside the capital – after the January events. My Bangaldeshi companion sneered at the streams of people we saw entering radical mosques and noted, "We give [them] a choice of that or being a bug."

Bangladesh's legendary corruption has also driven the people to the Islamists. It was so endemic that there was palpable joy in Dhaka when the country was named "only" the third-most corrupt on earth. By vigorously pursuing corruption and putting former corrupt leaders in prison, the government is beginning to restore the people's faith in traditional Bangladeshi values. It must finish the job and continue to arrest those who have plundered the nation for decades. Nor will it succeed without expelling its fifth column of Wahabi funded "charities." If, on the other hand, Dhaka takes the advice of groups like Human Rights Watch, which has complained to U.S. lawmakers about the arrests, the people will again look to the Islamists.
January also spelled the end of open appeasement in Dhaka with the Islamist-laced coalition's death. The government has jihadi organizations that bombed courtrooms, intimidated minorities and journalists, and promised the country Shariah law in its crosshairs. But Islamists and their toadies are still in key areas, especially the judiciary, according to on prominent member of the bar there. Capital charges of "sedition, treason and blasphemy" against Choudhury remain – charges that several officials of the last government admitted to me were maintained only to pacify radicals. Choudhury's attorney, professor Irwin Cotler, whose clients have included Nelson Mandela, Natan Sharansky and others, has identified eight violations of Bangladesh law in the prosecution. And the government recently received a congressional resolution demanding that they drop the charges "immediately." The government promised to do so. But will they? Because Choudhury went public with his pro-American and pro-Israeli stance, Islamists have made his case a centerpiece for intimidating Muslims who oppose them. Whether or not Dhaka follows through with its promises will indicate whether Islamist appeasement is really dead.

As I reported in WorldNetDaily last summer, a coalition of Nepalese Communists and Islamists cooperated in finding al-Qaida forces safe havens around Bangladesh after U.S. forces dislodged them from their Afghan strongholds. Despite their differences, the two groups are cooperating to replace the existing nation-states with their own internationalist ideologies. They remain in the area, although their plan to stuff Bangladeshi ballot boxes for Islamist candidates is now moot. They are also unsure now what sort of reception Dhaka's military might give them or what kind of clandestine support they have. This is quite a turn of events from those prevailing before January when the BNP certified phony voter lists that were tailor made for Islamist interlopers looking to cast illicit votes. Terrorist forces, however, remain in place waiting for a return to business as usual.

The New York Times called the current Dhaka government a "military dictatorship," comparing it to Pervez Musharraf's Pakistan, based on unreliable sources. If anything, paying heed to these unsubstantiated allegations threatens the demise of this nascent anti-Islamist victory. Sources inside Bangladesh suggest that some members of the government are looking to follow the Turkish model, in which a strong military guarantees a secular, pro-Western government. The Bangladeshis should proceed seriously with their anti-corruption and anti-Islamist campaigns and drop the charges against Choudhury, which were brought to mollify Islamists. In exchange, the U.S. and other anti-terrorist nations should acknowledge the significant events taking place in South Asia and provide assistance to those who are standing with us in our fight in the form of trade and business, as well as security cooperation to defeat our common enemy. #

Dr. Richard L. Benkin is the special adviser to the Intelligence Summit on Bangladeshi Affairs and a correspondent for Weekly Blitz and Amader Shomoy, both of Dhaka. Benkin also led the successful fight to free Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury from prison. His website is InterfaithStrength.com

Bangladesh among other undemocratic watch list failing on religious freedom

SALEEM SAMAD

THE United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) in 2007 report has included Bangladesh for the third consecutive year, along with seven other countries in the Watch List for appalling religious freedom situation.

The Commission’s Watch List includes Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, Egypt, Indonesia, Iraq, and Nigeria and recommends to monitor those countries due to nature and extent of violations of religious freedom engaged or tolerated by the governments.

Launching of the religious freedom report at Washington on Wednesday, April 2 has expressed concern that the predators and perpetrators of repression and persecution have not been punished and the victims never received justice.

In October, the Commission held a public forum at Washington on the scheduled 2007 elections in Bangladesh and on promoting democracy and protecting rights in a Muslim-majority country.

The commission was also pressing for free and fair elections in Bangladesh and ensure the religious minorities vote without fear and intimidation.

Recommendation was made after the Commission’s visit to Bangladesh during February-March 2006. The Commission heard concerns that members of religious minority communities might be excluded from the voters lists, intimidated from voting, or targeted by anti-minority violence such as had followed the last national election in October 2001.

Bangladesh recently experienced major political and constitutional crisis, the resolution of which will determine whether religious freedom and other human rights will be protected by the rule of law or the country will continue on a downward spiral toward authoritarianism and intolerance.

In January 2007, a state of emergency was declared, normal political activities banned, and previously scheduled national elections indefinitely postponed. Recent deviations from democratic norms and reports of serious human rights abuses raise troubling questions about the future prospects for respect for a range of freedoms, including potentially freedom of religion or belief.

The Commission placed Bangladesh on its Watch List in 2005 due to a number of concerns about increasing Islamist radicalism and violence and the threatening conditions for and discrimination against religious minorities, specially Hindus, Christians, and Ahmadiyyas.

The failure to investigate and hold perpetrators to justice for violence and persecution against members of religious minorities. Inadequate police response to violent campaign against the minority Ahmadiyya Muslims;

Discrimination against members of religious minority communities in public employment and access to government services. Also repeated and sometimes fatal attacks against journalists, authors, and academics for debating sensitive social or political issues or otherwise expressing opinions deemed by militants to be offensive to Islam.

The Commission urges the United States government to pay particular attention to the poor situation for religious freedom in these countries, as the Commission itself will continue to do. #

Take the news of who did the bombings with a salt of grain

A.H. JAFFOR ULLAH

THERE is no denial of the fact that three simultaneous bombings took place in three railway stations, namely Dhaka, Chittagong, and Sylhet on May 1, 2007. The bombs were crudely made and lacked firepower to do extensive damage. One rickshawalla, however, was injured in Chittagong as per news report.

The press is trying to blame al-Qaeda right away. Some jihadi literature was found near the blast site. These are facts but how the press or law enforcement authorities came to their conclusion pronto that these bombings are the handiworks of religious zealots is not known. What is the basis for such early conclusion?

Ever since the leaders of the Islamist outfit of JMB were arrested, the incidence of bombings in Bangladesh stopped without further delay. There were no bombing incidents that took place after the caretaker government assumed power in late October 2006.

The military-backed interim government let the six JMB men walked the gallows not too long ago; however, the Islamists did not retaliate. The intelligence department expected some bombing in the aftermath of the hanging of JMB leaderships. But no such unpropitious incident took place. Consequently, our countrymen collectively heaved a sigh of relief. When the nation was going through a calm period, we heard the May Day bombing in three places.

Immediately, finger was pointed without spending any time towards Islamists having no hard evidence at hand. This is a fact that the culprit put some propaganda material adjacent to the bomb site. The crux of the matter is who planted the bomb? I am not convinced that Islamists struck this time. Could it be a copy cat bombing to divert attention from all the real problems that Bangladesh is facing now?

In English there is such a term call “red herring.” The term means - something that draws attention away from the central issue.

Anything is possible at this time in Bangladesh. The military-backed government is now passing through a tough time. Even though there is a ban on politics, but enough miasmas were created in the political landscape by government’s doltish policies to implement their “minus two” plan. Consequently, Sheikh Hasina received a worldwide publicity and the government buckled under world pressure. Khaleda’s luck also favored and she must have thanked Hasina from the bottom of her heart for all the help.

The caretaker government is now in disarray; therefore, the most vocal adviser, Mainul Hosein, said the day that the nation is going through a tough time. This spate of recent bombing will give the authorities a respite and breathing room they badly need.

I am inclined to think that we should not take any news coming out of Bangladesh at its face value. Superficially, it looks as if the bombings were done by the Islamists. But honestly, it could be staged by others rather facilely to draw the citizens’ attention away from the central problems such as inflation of common staples and foodstuffs, squishing of civil rights of citizens, uncertainty about the timing of the next parliamentary election, and lack of transparency in the governance by the interim government. The sooner the present oligarch (technocrats) holds the election and transfer the power to elected body, the better.

Dr. A.H. Jaffor Ullah, a researcher and columnist, writes from New Orleans, USA

BANGLADESH - Khaki politics in Dhaka

THE subterfuge is over. It has now become clear that Bangladesh is under the control of an autocratic military regime. After three months of pretending that it had little to do with the new interim government, set up in early January, the Bangladesh Army’s role in derailing an already shaky democratic process is now obvious. In early April, the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant-General Moeen U Ahmed, gave a speech on the need to design a new political system, his assertions eerily similar to the arguments for ‘Guided Democracy’ that Southasians have heard repeatedly from past dictators. There has been a clampdown on political activity and protests, with many leaders of both the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party arrested on grounds of corruption. Meanwhile, promises to hold elections ‘as soon as possible’ seem on their way to being conveniently forgotten.

The most recent move was the concerted attempt to push Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina Wajed into exile. These mutually antagonistic leaders, alternately presiding over the Dhaka durbar for the past 15 years, have certainly not been models of democratic governance. Both engaged in intense political bickering, looted from state coffers, encouraged a culture of street-lumpenism, and constricted the institutional development of Bangladesh’s democracy. But the one lesson that we have learned from the royal takeovers in Nepal, the military coups in Pakistan, and even the state of emergency in India, is that neat technocratic solutions, backed by the military baton, are almost always unstable – besides being inherently illiberal.

What is happening in Bangladesh follows a familiar script – in countries where democracy has not taken deep roots, the record of corrupt and irresponsible parties leads to public disillusionment with the system itself, and provides the opportunity for conservative rightwing elements to step in. There is initial euphoria among Bangladesh’s urban middle class, which is pleased to see the fear-induced efficiency in some government offices, as well as the protest-free streets. There is a rhetorical commitment to democracy, accompanied with pledges that the current situation is merely a temporary arrangement. But once they take over, military regimes do not withdraw voluntarily; often, a significantly messier campaign is needed to oust them.

Bangladeshis should know this better than most. They have lived under military rule, both before and after the War of Liberation in 1971. They have also watched the consequences of such regimes in Pakistan for six decades. Against this backdrop, it was surprising to see even liberal dailies and civil society in Dhaka welcome the army’s move in January. Only now are they waking up to the fact that this is not a temporary interlude that will teach the two parties to behave better; rather, it is the long haul of dictatorial rule that seems to be in the cards. The government’s decisions to send Khaleda Zia to Saudi Arabia, and prevent Sheikh Hasina from returning to Bangladesh from overseas, will have a disastrous long-term impact on democratic evolution in Bangladesh. The space for legitimate political protest and mechanisms to communicate grievances will shrink, further strengthening extremists.

The Bangladesh Army seems to have been inspired by General Pervez Musharraf in its use of the political tactic of exiling popular leaders. The brass has also learned to make the right noises in front of the international community. We have thus seen the swift execution of six ‘Islamic fundamentalists’ – as a sop to the Americans – as well as promises to create a more liberal investment atmosphere, which is music to Indian ears. While the agitation to send the generals back to the barracks will have to come from Bangladeshis themselves, international actors must not repeat the mistake they have made in innumerable past situations to prop up an autocracy. They must correct their pre-conceived disdain for political parties, which led the Western embassies to get behind the January putsch. The king’s disastrous rule in Nepal and Gen Musharraf’s current troubles in Pakistan should be enough proof that these arrangements are not sustainable. The focus, however, will be on domestic political players, who have an opportunity to shake the state structure and push the military back – as well as to create a more responsible and institutionalised form of democracy. The next people’s movement of Southasia we would wager will be in Bangladesh. #

This commentary was first published in HIMAL magazine, Nepal

http://www.himalmag.com/2007/may/commentary_bangladesh_hasina.htm