Politics in Bangladesh: Back to normal

An inauspicious rebirth for parliamentary democracy

PARLIAMENT IN Dhaka was this week restored to its intended use; parliamentarians, sadly, returned to their old abuses. A makeshift prison for much of the two years, ending in December 2008, that Bangladesh was ruled by an army-backed interim government, the parliament complex housed the leaders of the two big political parties: Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League (AL) and Khaleda Zia of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

On January 25th, however, a month after the league won a general election by a landslide, parliament reconvened for the first time. True to old form, the opposition BNP walked out in protest. The reason was bizarre: it claimed that the president, Iajuddin Ahmed—whom the BNP had picked in late 2006 as the head of a caretaker government to oversee (and rig) an election due in January 2007—had violated the constitution by failing to hold the vote on time. Three days later, it walked out again, miffed at seating arrangements.

On January 22nd the league had won another landslide victory; this time in elections in the country’s 481 upazilas (subdistricts). Candidates it backed won more than two-thirds of the seats. But unlike the general election, these polls were dodgy. Stuffing of ballot boxes, “capturing” of polling booths and voter intimidation were rife. Three people were killed, 150 injured. Observers blamed both parties.

Both BNP and AL governments have failed to hold local elections, preferring to grant MPs complete control over lucrative development spending in their fiefs. The interim government forced the parties to hold them in the hope of reforming the highly centralised political structure.
The new AL government presents itself as the agent of “change”. But its policies mostly rely on institutional improvements made by the interim regime: an effective Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC); an independent Election Commission and judiciary; and the reform of the country’s hugely inefficient public sector. The government is also to ratify most of the laws made by the interim government (otherwise, doubt might be cast on the validity of the election it won). But the fear is that it and the BNP will shake off the straitjacket designed to prevent their return to their past confrontational excesses.

Mercifully for the new government, the impact of the global economic downturn has so far been limited. The capital account is in effect closed, which has proved a blessing. But the economy is built on clothing exports, and remittances from the Gulf. Both will inevitably suffer. The government has vowed to reduce the number of poor people from 65m to 45m during its five-year term, tackle inflation, terrorism and a crippling power crisis, and pursue better relations with India, its huge, economically important neighbour. This month it slashed fertiliser prices by half, cut the price of diesel, and revived powers to fix the prices of essential commodities.

The government’s other ambitious project is the prosecution of those accused of war crimes during the war of independence in 1971. Many of the alleged perpetrators are still active in politics, mostly as members of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a large Islamist party that did badly in the election. The interim government did not pursue war crimes, in part because of the feared economic ramifications: Saudi Arabia, a big source of remittances, objects to trials. But Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Mujibur Rahman, the murdered independence leader, said this week that she was “pledge-bound” to bring war criminals to justice. #

First published in The Economist, January 29, 2009

Why “No Thanks” to everyone?

RIPAN KUMAR BISWAS

NO THANKS for President Dr. Iajuddin Ahmed. Nobody was thanked either former President Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, President Abdur Rahman Biswas, or President Professor AQM Badruddoza Chowdhury, who had been forced to step down from the presidency following a disagreement with the then BNP government on the question of “principle.”

Thanks make a difference. Gratitude, thankfulness, or appreciation is one of our most fundamental human emotions. When we appreciate and support the great deeds of others - we feel good and boost the others to work harder. We never lost anything in appreciating others - instead we become a better person. Appreciating others will help us to enhance our skill; it will also boost the doers to contribute more for the good of the people. Cultivate a culture of appreciation, words of praise or thanks are important. But thanks were missing towards any of the past Chief Advisers of the caretaker governments including the most recent Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed. Whether it has been neutrally appreciated or not, the Election Commission of Bangladesh has been always accused by the loser party of being partial towards the winning part.

Though US President Barack H Obama inherited two wars and the worst economic conditions in three generations from former President George W. Bush when he took the oath of office on January 20, 2009, but he didn’t forget to thank his predecessor. “I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition,” Obama praised and nodded towards Bush at the very beginning of his inaugural speech.

In latest as it is regular in the Bangladesh’s politics, Awami League (AL) lawmakers in parliament on February 1, 2009, accused President Professor Iajuddin Ahmed as according to them, he violated the constitution and conspired against democracy in the last two years. But this time as it is seldom to see, people of Bangladesh experienced a different type of “no thanks” attitude while BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) -led opposition also accused and lashed out at President Ahmed with the same charge and even walked out of the Parliament ahead of his inaugural speech in protest against his failure to hold the ninth parliament elections within 90 days. And in a dramatic U-turn, BNP, which elected Iajuddin as President following AQM Badruddoza Chowdhury's resignation in June 2002, now wants him to be impeached.

President Iajuddin Ahmed, however in any sense, can stand accused of violating the constitution of Bangladesh. Under article 58C, President opted for the six and the last option of the provisions and assumed the office of the chief adviser (CA), in addition to being the president without exploring other alternatives, including popular non-political figures mentioned in the constitution after seeing the impasse as an opportunity and not succeeding with the first step which asserts “the immediate past chief justice will be the head of the caretaker government.” It is much clearer to everyone that he did it under the guidance of the BNP and its alliance and was cautiously welcomed by the Al-led 14 party alliance at the beginning of his concurrent functions both as President and CA.

Blaming President as traitor and violator of democracy, AL is adamant to keep the tradition of “not saying thanks” as regular as before in thanksgiving motion on his inaugural address to parliament. BNP, in addition, is in advance by proposing impeachment whether General Moeen U Ahmed revealed that President wasn’t able to do his job neutrally as he was guided by some unidentified quarters in his recently published book “Shantir Swapney.”

Although Bangladesh started its political journey with a parliamentary system right after independence, but it failed to sustain it. In late 1990, autocratic rule was ultimately defeated by a popular uprising and a general election was held on 27 February 1991. A truly representative House of the Nation (Jatiya Sangsad) thus came into being. But it was faded right after its inception. Regardless of which party was in power, the main opposition party boycotted most of the parliamentary sessions, alleging government repression and impediments to voicing its views. The 2006-2007 political crises and the state of emergency weren’t staged due to the President Iajuddin Ahmed. None of the political parties felt national interest and showed utmost patience to come under a common platform.

Practicing gratitude can change people by changing brains that are wired for negativity, for noticing gaps and omissions. But in 2001 after 8th general election, AL repeatedly criticized former President Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed of being biased towards BNP as they failed to clinch the ruling seats in the parliament and started practicing boycott of Parliament. But it doesn’t have anything to say about the 1996 Caretaker Government and the then government administration because it won a simple majority and formed a government. When BNP was in opposition, it too boycotted parliament.

Democracy is morally desirable at all. But it’s not for one to do whatever one chooses against society and get away with it. In this changing world and modern shape of democracy, people are now very much concerned about how a person or a group or a political entity behaves with each others. A living democracy is characterized by strong, well-functioning democratic institutions, by the exercise of public power with respect for human rights, by everyone having good opportunities for access, influence and demanding accountability, and an independent, broad range of voluntary associations, which were hardly found in Bangladesh. Since democracy is a collective decision process, responsibility for democracy does not reside only within the government alone, or within any individual person.

Although President Iajuddin Ahmed publically acknowledged that nobody is beyond criticism, but we are obviously not here to defend him whether he was under pressure or not as he is holding the country’s most respectable and significant post. We are worried about practicing “no thanks” culture in the politics of Bangladesh. The very mention of the word, thanks followed by mention of the word giving, creates along with them a spectacular vision that weaves good health, hope, peace, love, happiness, harmony and joy at all instances and in all contexts all across the universe which is so wonderful along with it’s tremendously wonderful and loving People.

Politics may be a thankless job. Certainly, there are some rules, regulations, and procedures by which a democratic accountability works in a parliamentary system. But the word “thanks” is a word where there is a bountiful accolade of abundant good wishes expressed and intended right from the heart. If we don’t start giving thanks right now, Zillur Rahman, who is a veteran AL leader and is set to be elected next President of Bangladesh on February 16, 2009, would be in line of next “no thanks” recipient. #

First published on February 4, 2009, New York

Ripan Kumar Biswas is a freelance writer based in New York. He could be reached at: Ripan.Biswas@yahoo.com

Letter to PM Sheikh Hasina with Recommendations to Improve Human Rights in Bangladesh

January 29, 2009

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina
Prime Minister's Office
Old Sangsad Bhaban
Tejgaon, Dhaka-1215
Bangladesh

Via facsimile:

Re: Human Rights in Bangladesh

Dear Prime Minister,

Congratulations on your recent election success. As you know, Human Rights Watch has consistently raised human rights issues with the interim government put in place and supported by the army from January 2007-December 2008. We have also raised concerns with its predecessor, the coalition headed by the Bangladesh National Party.

The Awami League and its allies have a unique opportunity and the responsibility to address major human rights problems that have been ignored by successive governments. We hope that with the strong mandate you and your party have obtained that you will tackle the very serious abuses that Bangladeshis face at the hands of the security forces and others.

I urge your government to use the February session of the UN Human Rights Council's Universal Periodic Review to show the priority it places on addressing longstanding human rights problems by making concrete and specific commitments. We offer suggestions below. This will be an early test for your government.

In order to ensure that Bangladesh lives up to its obligations under the Bangladeshi constitution and international human rights law, we urge you and your government to give high priority to the following issues:

Extrajudicial executions and torture
Since the establishment of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in mid-2004, RAB and the police have jointly executed well over a thousand people in what they often refer to as "crossfire killings." Many, and probably most, of those killed in "crossfire" have been killed not in crossfire but have been executed in custody after being subjected to torture.

Torture generally appears to be a routine feature in criminal investigations, as well as a means for law enforcement officials to extort money. Legal provisions that give the authorities a broad mandate to arrest and detain people without a warrant have contributed to these problems.

An agency of particular concern is the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), which has been used by successive governments to silence opposition politicians and other perceived government critics. The agency has over the years been responsible for numerous arbitrary arrests and acts of torture.

Since the establishment of Bangladesh as an independent state, members of the security forces have committed violations of human rights without being prosecuted for their actions. This has resulted in almost total impunity for human rights abuses.

Arbitrary detentions
As you and members of the Awami League, the opposition Bangladesh National Party, and others experienced under the caretaker government, arbitrary detentions are a widespread problem in Bangladesh. But this is not a new problem. Many Bangladeshis, whether prominent individuals such as yourself or average rural dwellers, have for many years experienced the scourge of arbitrary detention by the security forces. We hope you will make ending this practice among the highest priorities of your administration.

In particular, we urge you to repeal the Special Powers Act, 1974, which has over the years been misused for political and other reasons to keep thousands of people detained for long periods of time without due process and a chance to challenge their detention before an independent tribunal. Detentions have often been based on mere allegations or politically motivated grounds. Under the military-backed caretaker government, the Special Powers Act was frequently used. The Act and its implementation have been repeatedly criticized by the Supreme Court, but remains in force despite past commitments by the political parties to have it repealed.

Many other individuals have been also been arbitrarily detained in situations in which the Act has not been invoked. They have been denied the right to counsel, denied the right to be produced in court in a timely manner, denied their right to a speedy trial without undue delay, and denied the right to trial before an independent tribunal.

Protection of Minorities and Women
Ethnic and religious minorities have since long been victims of intimidation, discrimination and land grabbing. According to one study, more than one million Hindu households have lost their land over the past 40 years through abuse and arbitrary application of the Enemy Property Act 1965 and the Vested Property Act 1974. The Vested Property Return Act of 2001, which provides for property to be returned to its original owners, has been ineffectual and land loss has continued at an alarming rate. There are continuous reports of indigenous groups, in the Chittagong Hill Tracts and other parts of the country, being subjected to land grabbing, unlawful evictions in the name of development, and destruction of their homes and property.

The Ahmadis have been subjected to violent attacks as fundamentalists demand that they be declared non-Muslims, thereby violating their religious freedom.

Discrimination against women is common in both public and private spheres. Domestic violence is a daily reality for many women and dowry-related crimes are reported to be increasing. Sexual minorities are also subject to discrimination and consensual homosexual conduct is a crime.

Corruption
Bangladesh has long been considered one of the most corrupt countries in the world (routinely placed at or near the bottom of Transparency International's index). Corruption has had a severely negative impact on the Bangladeshi people's enjoyment of economic and social rights. It is essential that the government undertakes effective measures to address the problem of corruption and that it ensures that all such efforts are undertaken with full regard to international human rights norms and international and domestic fair trial standards. The counter-corruption efforts of the caretaker government were marred by arbitrary and illegal detentions and reports of torture and mistreatment in custody in order to obtain confessions. These practices must end.

Counter-Terrorism
The Anti-Terrorism Ordinance, 2008, sets out an overly broad definition of terrorist acts, including mere property crimes as well as attacks targeting individuals, contrary to United Nations recommendations. It criminalizes speech meant to support or "bolster the activities of" a banned organization, without showing that such statements constitute incitement of criminal conduct. The new law also allows convictions for financing terrorism based on mere suspicion of criminal conduct, violating the basic criminal law requirement of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Human Rights Watch expressed its concerns about the Ordinance in a June 2008 statement (see http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/06/29/bangladesh-repeal-new-terror-law). Parliament should either allow the Ordinance to lapse or amend it to bring it into conformity with international law before codifying it into Bangladeshi law. The government and parliament should also ensure that any new laws drafted on the subject are developed through a thorough public consultative process.

Death penalty
There are currently about one thousand people on death row awaiting execution. Through a resolution adopted in December 2007, the UN General Assembly has called for a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty. As the death penalty is a punishment of an inherently cruel, inhuman and final nature, we urge the government to take immediate steps to abolish it.

RECOMMENDATIONS
To address the above problems, Human Rights Watch urges the government to:

• Take all necessary measures to put an end to the security forces' involvement in extrajudicial executions, acts of torture and other abuses of human rights.


• Address impunity by ensuring that all human rights violations are thoroughly investigated and that those responsible, regardless of rank and political affiliation, are prosecuted and brought to justice.


• Disband RAB which has since the outset based its operating culture on practices such as extrajudicial killings. In the event RAB is retained we urge you to establish an independent commission to assess RAB's performance, to identify those believed to be responsible for serious violations such as extra judicial killings who should be excluded from a reformed RAB and prosecuted, and develop an action plan to transform RAB into an agency that operates within the law and with full respect for international human rights norms.


• Disband DGFI which has too long depended on illegal practices such as arbitrary detentions and torture. In the event that DGFI is retained we urge you to establish an independent commission to assess DGFI's performance, identify those believed to be responsible for serious violations such as torture who should be should be excluded from a reformed DGFI and prosecuted, and develop an action plan to transform DGFI into an agency that operates within the law and with full respect for international human rights norms. DGFI's operations should be strictly limited to lawful military intelligence activities and in no circumstances should it engage in surveillance of the political opposition and critics of the regime.


• Amend Section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and any other legal provisions that give the authorities overly broad detention powers which facilitate torture and other human rights abuses.

Human Rights Watch urges the government and parliament to change existing law to:

• Amend the military legislation currently in force and the Armed Police Battalion Ordinance to ensure that members of the armed forces and RAB involved in violations of human rights are tried under the civilian criminal justice system.


• Amend all legal provisions, such as articles 132 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which in effect shield law enforcement officials from being held to account for violations of human rights.


• Initiate a process, in accordance with stated intentions, for bringing to trial those responsible for war crimes such as acts of murder, rape and wanton destruction and pillage of civilian property, in connection with the 1971-war.


• Repeal the Special Powers Act, which has been used to carry out arbitrary detentions for many years.


• Review existing legislation, such as the Vested Property Act, which has allegedly contributed to large scale land loss among members of the Hindu minority. Take effective action to ensure that ethnic and religious minorities are protected from land grabbing, intimidation and discrimination.


• Provide training on gender sensitivity to all law enforcement officials.


• Finalize the draft law on domestic violence and ensure that it is consistent with international standards and that it is implemented effectively.


• Repeal Section 377 of the criminal code, which criminalizes consensual homosexual conduct.

Human Rights Watch further urges the Bangladeshi government to make international legal commitments to promote and protect human rights by:

• Acceding to the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.


• Acceding to the Optional Protocol to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


• Acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


• Ratify the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.


• Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.


• Ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.


• Remove declarations and lift reservations made to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the Covenant on Civil of Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

We know this is a big agenda. But we also know that with the majority your government enjoys in parliament you have an historic opportunity to engage in long overdue reform. We urge you and your government to grasp this opportunity to bring real change to the lives of Bangladeshis.

Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to discussing these and other human rights issues in greater detail with you and the members of your government.

Sincerely,

Brad Adams

Executive Director

Asia Division

Cc: Minister of Foreign Affairs: Dr. Dipu Moni; Minister of Home Affairs: Advocate Sahara Khatun; Minister of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs: Barrister Shafique Ahmed

Bangladesh election reviewed by American scholars

The U.S. Bangladesh Advisory Council (USBAC), and Johns Hopkins University-SAIS South Asia Studies, cosponsored a panel discussion today on “Bangladesh Elections and Beyond: Democracy, Security and Development”. The largely attended event was participated by students, academics, government officials, NGOs, diplomats and others interested in Bangladesh.

The panelists included SAIS PhD student and International Republican Institute’s 2008 Election Observer Joshua White, Advisor to the Honorable Sheikh Hasina, Mr. Sajeeb Wazed, USBAC Board Member Dr. Imtiaz Habib, and National Democratic Institute’s (NDI) 2008 Election Observer Peter Manikas. Dr. Walter Andersen, Director-SAIS moderated the event. Mr. Shabbir Ahmed, Chair, and Ms. Shamarukh Mohiuddin, Executive Director of USBAC welcomed the participants and briefly outlined USBAC’s mission- including improving US Bangladesh relations through public policy.

Dr. Andersen, a former State Department official, observed that Bangladesh, an important country, if only because of its sheer size, often goes unnoticed because it is near the two most populous nations, China and India.

Bangladesh Mission Chief to the United States, Ambassador Humayun Kabir, speaking as Special Guest said that by having free and fair elections, Bangladesh has set itself up as a “peace entrepreneur” in South Asia. He also said that “when people are democratically empowered, they are most equipped to fight poverty and extremism.” He reminded the audience that Prime Minister Hasina has promised to form a regional task force to fight terrorism in Bangladesh and the United States “should work on lifting their relationship to a new level and fight poverty, climate change and terrorism through a new bottom-up strategy.” He invited the Obama administration to work together with Bangladesh to play a constructive role in reaching out to the Muslim world.

Mr. White said the December 2008 election went reasonably well and the results reflected the will of the people. He said that in terms of polling, two steps that the Bangladesh government took were worth emulating by other countries- having photos on the voter IDs and the posting of voting results at the polling stations immediately after the count. He said that in the coming years, the relationship between the majority and the minority parties will be crucial to watch and will determine progress in the country.

Mr. Manikas, who has been observing Bangladesh since early 1990s, accompanied a team of 60 NDI election observers to Bangladeshi capital, Dhaka, this election. He spoke elaborately of the successes and failures of the caretaker government and concluded that the 2008 elections were “well-run.” He felt that the two-thirds majority won by the Awami League (AL) will now affect how politics develops, and will pose a challenge to the ruling party in terms of forging meaningful participation from the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Alliance. He suggested that Bangladesh could follow the example of South Africa where the opposition was offered an equal number of seats in parliamentary committees but not the same voting rights. He also wondered if AL will limit the reach of the Anti-Corruption Commission, which “seems to be operating independently.”

Mr. Wazed said that the Awami League is a reform-oriented party and should take credit for many of the reforms that the caretaker government undertook. He refuted Mr. Manikas’ assessment that the change in the electorate was a “swing;” rather he said it was a “shift” toward the Awami League. He said that it would only be a “swing” if the margin of victory was close to 5% to 6%, but this time it was 18%. He noted that there was almost no violence against the minority community after the elections, which is very different from 2001. He also noted that AL is taking a “conciliatory approach” toward the opposition, offering them the post of Deputy Speaker and committee chairmanships in Parliament. He said that ultimately the AL will need the help of the opposition to move forward. Mr. Wazed expressed pleasure that the BNP had participated in the inaugural session of parliament, which they had earlier threatened to boycott. According to him, the AL will proceed in a different manner from the past. For example, AL’s members of Parliament and Ministers have been warned that anyone who gets a “bad reputation will be replaced.” He stated that extra-judicial killings in Bangladesh have already stopped and that AL would keep it that way. According to him, AL has already stated that they will not interfere with the Election Commission if they should take steps against any AL Member of Parliament and also promised not to interfere with the Anti-Corruption Commission. They would take steps to root out terrorism and train the police force. He said that we have a “very, very poorly trained police force.” He noted that AL would also bring down the price of food and essentials by de-linking prices from the world market.

Dr. Habib sketched a history of Bangladesh’s experience with religious extremism and pointed out that radical Islamist thinking, though limited in reach, is a fairly recent phenomenon. He expressed dismay that while civil societies around the world have expressed outrage at the Mumbai incident, “there has been no public expression of outrage or condemnation by Bangladeshi civil society.” According to him, there are about “11 registered political parties which are built exclusively or indirectly on a program of Islamic revival.” In fact, he noted, there are more religious parties in Bangladesh than non-religious ones and one of these parties fielded the highest number of candidates in the elections. Bangladesh is not immune from terrorism. He noted that over the past decade terrorist attacks were carried out by some of these groups. He quoted a Dhaka University economist who calculated that enterprises run by fundamentalists earn about 12 billion Taka ($171 million) and that the “fundamentalist sector” has a growth rate of 7.5—9% compared to the 4.5—5% in the mainstream national sector. He gave several reasons why there are Islamist ideologies in Bangladesh.

One of them, he said is the “intellectual and cultural intolerance on the part of the growing and increasingly impatient educated Bangladeshi civil society” which actively rejects “any kind of religious regimen in public life.” He suggested that those with ideologies different from the powerful social mainstream can feel a sense of deprivation and humiliation which can then lead to extremist, irrational thinking and behavior. Dr. Habib explained that this does not mean appeasing fundamentalist or terrorist thinking. He urged initiation by Bangladesh civil societies of a national climate of rational and respectful political discourse that allows space for political opinion of all varieties. Only then would all political groups feel included and not gravitate towards extremist thinking, and eventually terrorist violence. He strongly advocated for an implicitly pluralist political culture and said that Bangladesh should strive to live up to its early historical tradition of being an inclusive, tolerant, and prosperous, society. #

First published January 28, 2009, WASHINGTON, D.C.

India has a chance to rebuild its relationship with Bangladesh

ASHOK MITRA

THE COUNTRY has a new minister for home affairs, one shoved off the ministry of finance. The earlier home minister had a reputation for passivity. The fresh incumbent has evidently taken upon himself the task of removing traces of the infamy his predecessor was the cause of. The ardour of activism can, however, sometimes have disastrous consequences.

The ministry of home affairs is charged with the responsibility of ensuring the country’s internal security. Such security, the new minister has concluded, is impeded by the inflow, from across Bangladesh, of agents of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence and of other saboteurs. The minister has seemingly no doubts regarding how to take care of the problem. Too many visas, he has growled, are being issued to Bangladeshi citizens. He wants to do something about it. Slash the quota of visas for Bangladeshis, and, hey presto, a dramatic improvement is sure to take place in our internal security.

Do our cabinet ministers operate on their own, or do they occasionally talk to one another on matters, which involve concurrent jurisdiction? For instance, did the home minister bother to discuss with the minister of external affairs before he unburdened himself of the issue of visas for Bangladeshis? Consider the awkwardness of the situation. After a long, long while, Bangladesh has a government whose architects have been, of all political formations in that country, the most favourably disposed towards India. Sheikh Hasina Wajed, the presiding deity of the Awami League, is Sheikh Mujibur Rehman’s daughter. The league as well as she personally have had friendly relations, at both official and non-official levels, with Indian personalities. In fact, during the campaign for the just concluded elections in Bangladesh, one main charge hurled against Wajed by her opponents was that she was India’s stooge. Her installation in the prime ministerial office in the neighbouring country is certainly a great slice of luck coming India’s way.

This development should be — and still could be — the forerunner of happier possibilities. What is called for from the Indian end at this juncture is cool watchfulness and sobriety. India’s intelligence agencies may have their worries about the nature of infiltration — either actual or prospective — from across Bangladesh. Instead of airing them openly and on a high pitch, wisdom demands that these concerns be tucked in for the present and confidential talks arranged between representatives of the two countries. Other options would always be available in case these meetings prove infructuous from New Delhi’s point of view.

Patience is not the strong point of our minister for home affairs though. He has, on the contrary, chosen the path of bluster and name-calling. In case he is not exactly speaking out of turn and has the prime minister’s backing, raising a few further questions becomes unavoidable. Now that the nuclear deal with the United States of America is a reality, is it New Delhi’s view that India is the cock of the road in south Asia and has therefore the prerogative to treat all its neighbours as dirt?

Or is it henceforth New Delhi’s established policy not to give any quarter to any country, which has a population with a Muslim majority? Nothing could be more disastrous in the long run than this genre of sectarianism. Given the state of our uneasy relationship with Pakistan, the uncertainties in Nepal and pervasive speculation over the implications of China’s resolve to be the most powerful nation in the world next to the US, would it not on the other hand be prudent to exercise some restraint while dealing with other strategically placed nations such as Bangladesh? The opportunity to rebuild the relationship with Bangladesh would never be greater than what it is today. And that opportunity might not be long-lasting. For despite the Awami League’s entering office after winning a convincing majority in democratic elections, the shadow of the military would not be quite dispelled from the Bangladesh sky. Those in charge of the armed forces there have for the present bestowed their favours on the Awami League. But the circumstances could change fast. If the provocative remarks of our home minister lead to an outburst of anti-India hysteria in Bangladesh and embarrass Wajed and her regime no end, the ISI would have the last laugh.

The home minister’s nervousness over the large number of visas issued to Bangladeshi citizens, in fact, betrays his ignorance of some of the ground realities. Yes, quite a few Bangladeshis have tended to visit India in recent years. More than 90 per cent of them come on short visits, mostly to West Bengal. These visitors could well include an infinitesimally small number of espionage masters. The bulk of them are, however, householders visiting relatives in India, students, university and college teachers, singers, film personalities, poets, writers and suchlike. Why deny it, the bond of language and culture persists between the middle classes in West Bengal and the neighbouring country in the east. This may not be to everybody’s liking, but to try to thwart the tide of natural urges would be altogether foolhardy. What is much more relevant, close cultural relations between the peoples of Bangladesh and West Bengal make a positive contribution to the cause of Indo-Bangladesh amity, and is therefore an effective instrument for combating the machinations of species such as the ISI.

Another matter is worth a mention too. Not as famous or as strategic as the Silk Route from China to Europe, there was, at least, for 3,000 years, a long winding Cattle Route in existence, starting in Baluchistan, travelling all the way across the northern terrains of India, and finally terminating in Bengal. Cattle of the finest stock bought in Quetta would be disposed of in Sindh; cattle, a shade of a lesser quality, but still of excellent breed, bought in Sindh would be sold off in Punjab, the local stock in Punjab would be brought for sale to Rajasthan, from Rajasthan the route would proceed to locations like Indore and Gwalior, and then turn north into Bulandshahr and Oudh. Selling and buying cattle would proceed uninterrupted at each centre, the quality of the cattle steadily deteriorating until the route reached the Bihar-Bengal border. By then the cattle offered for disposal had gone down precipitously in quality, but the rickety lot would still have some demand in Bengal, either for purposes of agriculture or for meat, and would fetch a respectable price. Bengal, however, would pay for the cattle not by offering a ricketier breed — none was available — but by barter, exchanging foodgrains, textiles and locally produced pots and pans against the cattle that were bought.

The Cattle Route was rudely disturbed by the partition of the country in 1947. And yet, the upheaval in political geography did not quite finish it off. Rickety cattle continue to be smuggled across from West Bengal into Bangladesh in exchange for grains, utensils and textiles. This often takes the shape of small-scale, informal activity, otherwise known as smuggling. However determined the Border Security Force might be, to crush this relic of a great historical route is not that feasible a proposition. Visa or no visa, people will travel between Bangladesh and West Bengal, as much for reasons of culture as for the sake of livelihood.

The home minister of the country has recently acquired the habit of shooting from the mouth. That can cause the country a great deal of trouble. The nuclear agreement notwithstanding, the US administration, it is now more than obvious, would not play favourites between India and Pakistan. We therefore badly need friends in the region to buttress our security. A minister who creates obstacles in the search for such friends is a bit of a menace. #

First published in the Telegraph, January 19, 2009

Ashok Mitra is a former Finance Minister of West Bengal state in India and a former Member of Rajya Sabha . He was minister in communist government led by Jyoti Basu but resigned from the ministership during the late 1980s following a difference of opinion with the Jyoti Basu and the party leadership

GPS, beyond network barriers

RIPAN KUMAR BISWAS

IT WAS thick. We couldn't even see 15 feet in front of us. It was also dark. The fog was so thick on the river and we didn't know what direction we would go. Me and my friend were curious and awaited to see how the Staten Island ferry would run 5.2 mile between the Whitehall Terminal in lower Manhattan and St. George Terminal in Staten Island despite dense fog.

A thick, wet, and chilling fog rolled in from the New York harbor and totally surrounded us. We even couldnʼt see the safety lights that were closed to us and could hardly see two boat lengths in front us and where the shore was. But we were thrilled casting our worries aside when we found we were moving ahead. Yes, the ferry made it all the way and we reached at the St. George Terminal within the allocated time, 25minutes, leaving behind the Statue of Liberty and Governors Island.

So how did the Staten Island ferry ease its way despite thick fog? For the most basic navigation in fog, a vessel needs a detailed chart, a compass, a sound producing device, a VHF radio (Very high frequency is the radio frequency range from 30 MHz to 300 MHz), and a good set of ears. Itʼs obviously a good idea to hoist a radar reflector for collision avoidance as it provides eyes-on-the-water when captain can no longer see due to fog. Besides these arrangements, the Staten Island ferry is included some additional electronics onboard to assist it in further substantiating its position and the location of other vessels around it. With GPS (Global Positioning System) and the magic of satellites, a vessel can locate its exact position at all times. By interfacing GPS and radar, radar can indicate graphically to the vessel where its next waypoint should appear. Other boats, buoys and the shoreline all show up clearly and give a fair warning of what to expect.

Although GPS allows navigating safely, even when caught in a heavy fog and can easily avoiding known hazards while staying steady on course, but if possible, itʼs good to avoid fog by staying in harbor as fog is one of the scariest situations at sea or river. But as long as the technology makes navigating the open seas and rivers accessible to even the novice boater, are the vessels and river transportation systems in Bangladesh fully equipped with modern technology because while fog affects motorists, its economic impact on highway systems is relatively minimal when compared with its impact on river or sea shipping or sailing?

Almost in everyday during this heavy foggy season, a good number of water transports are being stuck on water on shoals for hours in different water routes in Bangladesh as dense fog cut visibility. As for example like other days, several hundred vehicles, including passenger buses and goods trucks, got stranded on the both sides of Paturia-Doulatdia and Mawa-Kawrakandi routes on Wednesday, January 14, 2009 as ferry services were interrupted for hours due to dense fog. Water transports carrying thousands of passengers and goods on 28 different regional and inter-district routes of the southern region stranded in different points on their way and stuck on under water shoals for hours as navigability and visibility in different river routes rapidly lost after dense fog started falling.

Some 3,000 ferries ply the delta Bangladesh's hundreds of rivers and are a key means of transport. Although accidents are frequent, with most blamed on overloading, ageing boats, fail to meet basic safety standards, or unskilled skippers, but there is also a lack of modern technology available on the boats or ferries. Ferry accidents occur frequently in riverine Bangladesh and hundreds of people die every year. Last year on May 12, 2008, 44 people were found dead after a ferry carrying nearly 150 passengers capsized in the Ghorautura River, nearly 180 Km (113 miles) from Dhaka. In May 2002, at least 450 people were killed when a ferry with around 500 passengers on board capsized during a storm in the Meghna River. According to a rough statistics nearly 5,000 people died in ferry disasters in last 32 years since 1977.

Bangladesh is covered by a network of about 24,000 km of rivers, canals, creeks and lakes and there are 8,833 kilometres river ways in Bangladesh. At present, 72 million passengers travel by inland waterways every year. To make it more accessible to the commuters, there are a lot of things to take care of, but one of the main task is to march the vessels with modern technology.

Today is the age of fast and automated system and in every part of life people want the automated system. In communication system, this automated system is vastly needed. Good nautical charts and GPS mapping make planning easy. One can gather information about sights to see, places to visit, navigation waypoints, anchorage information, lists of marinas in the area, and a whole host of other information. By studying the charts of the region prior to departure, skipper can make a tentative route and can trace all of the alternate anchorages and approaches just in case he/she has to change his/her plans mid-trip.

GPS is a satellite-based navigation system made up of a network of satellites placed into orbit by the US Department of Defense between 1978 and 1994. The US government made the system available for civilian use in 1985. It works in any weather conditions, anywhere in the world, 24 hours a day. It receivers, normally hand-held battery-powered devices about the size of a small TV remote, take the information transmitted by the satellites and, using triangulation, calculate the user's exact location. The receiver compares the time a signal is transmitted by a satellite with the time it is received. It allows a person to know where he/she is without ambiguity. GPS has become a widely used aid to navigation worldwide, and a useful tool for map-making, land surveying, commerce, scientific uses, and hobbies such as geo coaching.

However, GPS satellites have some limitations: the radio signal is weak and does not penetrate some places like caves or inside buildings. Everything should be uniquely identified to be located through GPS. GPS receiver, however, isnʼt costly, but GPS technology isnʼt free for Bangladesh. Bangladesh has to buy or rent some space or time in the GPS satellite. But there is little argument among experts in the field that GPS technology has revolutionized navigation.

GPS is a nascent technology in Bangladesh, with only a handful of GPS receivers in the country; Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh, Bangladesh Army, and Bangladesh Police are in line to acquire GPS equipments. The huge traffic control of Dhaka city can be included in this serial.

Improving river transportation system with modern technology such as GPS and other networking peripherals will be an ideal example of 'Sheikh Hasina's call to build a digital Bangladesh. #

First published on January 17, 2009, New York

Ripan Kumar Biswas is a freelance writer based in New York. He could be reached: Ripan.Biswas@yahoo.com

Charter for Change now belongs to the nation

MOZAMMEL H KHAN

INCIDENTALLY, it was also in a December day some 38 years ago, following the historic verdict in favour of the famous Six-Point program in the general election of 1970, the then AL chief, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman declared: "The AL's Six-Point program is not a program of AL anymore; it belongs to the nation. AL has no right to deviate from it."

Bangabandhu kept his word and we got the independent and sovereign Bangladesh, albeit at a very high price. The grateful nation crowned him with the supreme laurel -- father of the nation.

Many political pundits have drawn a parallel between the victory of AL in the just concluded general election and that of 1970. This time around, it is a resounding mandate in favour of the "Charter for change," the election manifesto of AL. Bangabandhu's Six-Point program was formulated in the backdrop of deprivation of the Bengalee people within the state of Pakistan, predominantly in the arena of political rights, and less on any specific agenda on economic emancipation, albeit the former is an indispensible pre-requisite to achieve the later.

This time around, however, the AL"s charter for change is primarily an economic platform to free the nation from the yoke of poverty, corruption, terrorism and the abuse of state authority. The manifesto is very much a forward looking document, outlining specific sector by sector targets (a bit ambitious at times), and it attracted the voters' attention and the subsequent creation of enthusiasm, especially among the younger ones, which apparently translated into the AL-led alliances' massive victory in the election.

This is probably for the first time in the history of Bangladesh that an election manifesto had generated so much interest in the electoral domain of the country. The unbridled corruption, terrorism, and wanton disregard for the rule of law by the strong and the powerful in the past BNP-led government collectively contributed to the desire for change among the masses.

In addition, the AL chief has run more or less a flawless campaign throughout, mostly outlining her vision for the nation until 2021, the golden jubilee of the birth of our nation. In the process, it seems that the AL chief has also transformed herself to lead not only the AL but also the nation to its destiny.

Last July, I had the distinct honour of acting as the lone speaker (beside her local party activists) in a largely attended congregation arranged in her (she claimed to have read all my articles in DS while in jail) honour in Toronto, where she outlined the draft of her "vision 2021," which was subsequently included in the charter for change.

In her speech, by addressing the dream of the future generation, not the next election, she rightfully portrayed herself as a statesman, rather than a politician. It would not be any exaggeration to note that her articulation in the recently delivered speech (I watched it live on TV) in a business forum would remind anyone of the same exhibited by Barack Obama in the recently held US election.

Aside from her programs, which affect the day to day lives of the citizens, economic uplifting of the toiling masses and a promising future of our next generation, one the most striking aspects of the manifesto was the bold inclusion of the pledge to try the war criminals. While formally announcing the salient features of the manifesto in a local hotel, it would be only incumbent on the wisdom of the soon-to-be prime minister to recollect that she received the most thunderous applause from the audience when she declared that the "war criminals will be tried."

Due to the relentless campaign of the Sector Commanders' Forum, in conjunction with the conscious citizens, there has been a huge resurrection of the hatred against those who directly collaborated with the perpetrators of one of the worst genocides of human history, especially among the members of the new generation, thereby virtually annihilating all the alleged war criminals and their patrons from the electoral map.

Since it is an extremely dominant issue that has made its rightful place in the election platform, the massive approval of the people to try the war criminals is very loud and clear. It is now the responsibility of the would-be government to initiate the process, including the solicitation of help from the UN and the international war crime tribunals. Any faltering or dilly-dallying would be tantamount to going back from the Charter for Change, which now belongs to the nation, not to the AL any more.

While analysing a few points of the BNP's 36-point election manifesto in a piece entitled, "A manifesto of mockery" for DS (December 18), I wrote: "The election manifesto is a big challenge to the memory of the people, who are the ultimate arbiters in deciding the fate of a political party." In fact, the "shock-and-awe rout for the BNP" on December 29 clearly proved that the people were in absolute control of their memories while delivering their verdict.

If the AL leadership fails to take proper cognisance of the brazenly broken promises behind BNP's disastrous fate this time, it will only pave the way for the history to repeat itself. #

First published in the Daily Star, January 1, 2009

Dr. Mozammel H. Khan is the Convenor of the Canadian Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Bangladesh

Bangladesh enjoys a pretty clean election and a decisive result

The tenacity of hope

It went better than anyone dared hope. On December 29th Bangladesh held its first general election for seven years. It was well-attended, with a 70% turnout, well-organised, largely peaceful and, despite some vote-buying and other malpractice, far cleaner than its predecessors. It produced an astonishing, massive landslide for the alliance led by the Awami League of Sheikh Hasina Wajed, prime minister from 1996-2001, and daughter of the country’s murdered independence leader.

YET, AS always, the voting was the easy part. After two years under an army-backed “caretaker” government, the return to democratic rule is unlikely to be smooth. The army staged an unannounced coup in January 2007 amid street violence ahead of a scheduled election that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), in power from 1991-96 and 2001-06, was rigging. Both the BNP, led by Khaleda Zia, widow of an assassinated former general and president, and the Awami League had run corrupt, inept governments.

The two parties had debased the country’s politics into a Punch-and-Judy show of non-co-operation and vindictive retaliation. The army hoped to purge them, jailing both Sheikh Hasina and Mrs Zia for a year on corruption charges, along with some of their senior henchmen, and trying in vain to send the two “begums” into exile. But the parties and their leaders proved to have stubborn roots, and the army had to relent. The begums were freed and Bangladeshi politics has resumed its five-yearly anti-incumbency cycle.

The election, however, was something of a triumph. The voters’ list had been shorn of 11m “ghosts”, and 81m genuine voters registered, with their photographs. The campaign saw far less violence than in the past. The spread of mobile phones, many with cameras, produced an army of unofficial campaign monitors, alert to any violation. On polling day the mood in Dhaka was calm, proud and even jolly.

Countless lamp-posts, telegraph poles and trees had been draped with lines of string festooned with small, tattered black-and-white election flyers (an unintended if predictable consequence of a ban on colour posters and wall-pasting). At polling stations long segregated queues, with many women in their finest saris, waited patiently to vote. Ballot boxes were translucent (in 2001, 111 polling stations recorded more votes than voters). Foreign observers were impressed.

For one-third of voters this was their first election. A further 23% had the vote just once before, in 2001. The BNP-led coalition that won then proved unusually venal and incompetent even by local standards. Voters punished it severely. The BNP’s share of the 300 seats contested has fallen from 193 to around 27. It seems also to have been hurt by its alliance with Islamist parties, the largest of which, Jamaat-e-Islami, was reduced from 17 seats to just two. This will be welcomed by those worried about the spread of radical Islam in Bangladesh. Just before the election, seven members of a banned extremist group were arrested, and a large cache of explosives seized. A vast majority of Bangladesh’s more than 150m people are Muslims. But the BNP’s calls to voters to shun the more secular League in order to protect Islam seem to have backfired.

The League now finds itself with a huge parliamentary majority—some 230 seats on its own (up from 62) with a further 30-odd won by its allies. The BNP, more of whose leaders were targets of the interim government’s anti-corruption drive, and which had said only cheating could make it lose the election, is likely to cry foul. There is a risk of a traditional response: mass protests; general strikes; and a boycott of parliament. That is why some neutrals hoped for a close result.

So huge is the BNP’s defeat, however, that its protests will hardly be credible. A bigger danger may be that the scale of the victory goes to Sheikh Hasina’s head and makes her high-handed. During the campaign, she promised a new bipartisan approach, offering the opposition the chairs of some parliamentary committees. She might now be tempted to renege. Her long, bitter feud with Mrs Zia has not abated. The army forced the begums to meet at an Army Day reception in November. They managed to exchange courtesies, but not to make eye contact.

Nevertheless, optimists hope that the relative peace of the two-year interregnum, the chastening experience of detention and the enthusiasm the election itself generated might make it hard for the parties to return to their bad old winner-take-all ways. And they know that the army x will be looking over their shoulders.

Asked what they wanted from a new government, most voters—of whom some 45% live on less than a dollar a day—had a simple answer: cheaper food. In this one respect, the government may be in luck. A good rice harvest and lower international prices for fuel and other commodities have already dented inflation. But in the current global slump, Bangladesh’s economic growth is also expected to fall, from about 6.2% in 2008.

On past form, Bangladesh’s voters might expect their new government to devote itself not to their welfare but to persecuting its rivals and looting the public purse. During the campaign, Sheikh Hasina pushed the fashionable slogan of “change”. The result is the clearest possible endorsement of that call. One 80-year-old, voting for the first time, saw the result as Bangladesh’s brightest day since the assassination of Sheikh Hasina’s father in 1975. With such hopes invested in her, she is almost bound to disappoint. #

First published in The Economist, December 30, 2008

Verdict against graft, war crimes, militancy

BISWADIP DAS

Voters lifted Awami League and its allies to unprecedented gains on a groundswell of feeling against patronage, corruption, war crimes and militancy in Monday's election.

THE PEACEFUL polling, with record turnout gave Sheikh Hasina's Awami League a stunning haul of 230 seats, a big enough majority in parliament to overcome procedural hurdles and pass legislation, and even tweak the country's constitution.

Observers are waiting to see how the party, which campaigned with the mantra of 'Change' to cut across social classes, will go about its business of governing the country that has runaway prices weighing on people, with most analysts saying the Hasina administration should attach priority to economy in the wake of the global recession.

Price hikes that began with the past BNP-led government from 2001-2006 and AL's hammering on graft—the reputation of former prime minister Khaleda Zia's sons and cabinet colleagues for using political perches to benefit themselves and their friends—were major reasons for the four-party's downfall in this election.

That women and religious minorities could cast their ballots without fear may also have been reason for the catastrophic losses suffered by BNP's ally Jamaat-e-Islami in particular, the party gaining only two seats in the next parliament.

Anti-war criminal sentiment that built up over the past two years also played havoc on the four-party alliance's polls prospects.

"Relentless campaigning against war criminals is the reason for the downfall of Jamaat," says Dhaka University history professor Syed Anwar Hossain.

Both BNP and Jamaat leaders have also been accused of aiding and abetting the Islamist militants who carried out attacks on Hasina and British envoy Anwar Choudhury, in a bid to shut their rivals out.

Their deeds over those five years likely prompted first-time voters, all post-independence generation, to reject hard line politics.

New voters, estimated at 30 percent of some 8 crore enrolled, were also drawn to young and new faces among AL candidates.

"People suffered during the four-party government and the issues of price hike, militancy and lack of good governance resulted in their losses," Hossain told bdnews24.com.

"People used the first tenure of the AL regime as a comparison yardstick, and the first four years of the first Awami League tenure were marked by success stories," he added.

"BNP's organisational weakness, image crisis due to the anticorruption crackdown contributed to its failure in securing a solid ground," Hossain observed.

"Bangladesh is a tilting nation, this time it has tilted towards AL."

"Hopefully, AL will establish a cautious, controlled and future oriented government."

Khaleda, Hasina's fiercest foe, after an emergency meeting with her policymakers the day after BNP's unprecedented polls debacle, stopped short of "rejecting" the election results but said the Election Commission's "staged results" were unacceptable.

There was concern that the BNP and its allies, which governed for five turbulent years until they stepped aside in October 2006 for a caretaker government, might contest the loss by calling mobs into the streets.

They cried foul play as the voting closed, alleging irregularities and slow voting.

But few of Khaleda's followers seemed to believe that the Election Commission, praised by international observers for its impartiality, would overturn the results on the basis of their spotty allegations of abuses.

The victory of the AL, and its allies, including former president HM Ershad's Jatiya Party, which polled 27 seats, appears increasingly likely to be accepted without a recurrence of the turmoil and violence that have often marred past elections in Bangladesh. #
First published by BDNews24.com, January 1, 2008

How would Khaleda Zia react to peoples’ verdict?

A.H. JAFFOR ULLAH

The election for the 9th Parliament was held on December 29, 2008 in presence of thousands of outside observers. The caretaker government, which took power on January 11, 2007 through army backing, must be congratulated for a job well-done. This caretaker government had reformed the Election Commission, prepared an honest voters list, make ready the voters’ photo ID, and finally conduct a fair election. The electorates have given their verdict by casting their votes in a free and non-threatening environment. It is now up to the losing party or alliance of parties to gracefully accept the verdict of voters.

IN OTHER democracies around the world, the losing party is the first one to give the concession speech, which is usually short. The losing candidate or party offers the proverbial olive branch to the victorious candidate and then assures the winner his or her help to move forward the country in the right direction. This happened on November 3, 2008 in the U.S. Senator McCain did not wait for the last precinct to be reported. When he saw that Senator Obama has come out victorious in many states and had garnered over 50% of the electoral votes, Senator McCain thought it was appropriate for him to give that concession speech. He was gracious, polite, and his tone was conciliatory. In fact, he gave one of the best concession speeches in recent times.

Now, would this happen in Dhaka this time around? The parliamentary election in allover Bangladesh took place on December 29, 2008. Within hours of the closing of all polling places, results were percolating through the media. In the wee small hours of December 30, 2008 the media was reporting that the parliamentary candidates from the grand alliance of Awami League were coming out victorious with a wide margin. It looked as if the grand alliance may secure about 80% or more of the total parliamentary seats. But the leader of the losing party and its alliance kept her deafening silence. Understandably, it was a tiring day for Khaleda Zia; therefore, no concession speech came out from her. As the day will wore by, is it possible that Khaleda Zia will address the nation and offer her concession speech? If the past gives us any clue, it won’’ happen anytime soon. In fact, it may never happen!

On the contrary, we may hear from her speech the following:
1. The election was rigged a big time.
2. Many voters favoring her party could not cast their votes.
3. There was a conspiracy hatched to take away the victory from her party and the alliance.
4. The election officials favored the other party as per the blueprint worked out by an invisible hand.

Now, why am I writing all these in advance? The reason is simple. I have watched the leading politicians of Bangladesh in recent times. And I have seen that the losing party’s lead person always say that the election was engineered in a way to take away victory from them. Moreover, only a few days ago in her stump speeches allover Bangladesh , Khaleda Zia said that her party and alliance would capture over 75% of the parliamentary seats. No pre-election poll was cited as reference. But that hardly matters in Bangladesh .

On the contrary, I read one poll released by ‘New Age’ English daily and another report published by ‘Daily Star’. Both of these newspapers had reported that the grand alliance of Awami League was favored to garner more popular votes and parliamentary seats. The question which arises naturally — was Khaleda Zia not reading the pre-election polls taken by independent bodies?

This too much expectation of securing more seats in the parliament has its down side as well. The pride gets into the head of the political boss and she simply won’t buzz from the view that her party would have secured an absolute majority had it not for the “widespread rigging” that took place in all precincts. It is granted that when 80 million voters would cast their votes in about 35,000 to 40,000 polling places, then there would be some irregularity in a handful of polling places. But that should not grant a license to the losing party to characterize the entire election as some kind of charade.

There were other factors for a wide swinging in the election results that favored Awami League and its alliance. The previous election was held in October 2001; therefore, in the last 7 years many young Bangladeshis were eligible to vote. How these young voters would cast their votes is a subject of much conjecture. Obviously, the new voters being young and idealistic would prefer to cast their votes in favor of candidates who say “changing the status quo” would be his or her mantra. In this election cycle, the grand alliance of Awami League’s election mantra was for “Change” while the four-party alliance of BNP sticks to their old mantra of “Sovereignty” of the nation. This writer never understood which nation intends to gobble up Bangladesh ! The electorates in Bangladesh bought the message of “Change” over “National Security” many a time and the election results affirm this quite succinctly.

The other reasons Khaleda Zia’s alliance did very poorly were inclusion of Jamaat-i-Islam, the party many Bangladeshis equated with Razakars, the enemies of 1971 Liberation War, and Fifth Columnists. Also, many BNP politicians who made tons of illegal money during 2001 through 2006 ran in the election as BNP-alliance candidate. The voters maybe unsophisticated, but they are not dumb. Predictably, they rejected those candidates as if they were vermin of some sorts. Taken all these factors together, one could clearly see that the political wind was blowing against the BNP and its alliance. Under these circumstances, to obtain more than 50% of the parliamentary seats would have been a task only reserved for a magician or a politician deft in soothsaying.

In summary, the electorates have spoken in one loud voice and they soundly rejected the party that housed some criminals who camouflaged as politicians. These parliamentary members have been engaged in wholesale looting of the public goods including raw cash. Khaleda Zia had grossly underestimated the power of ballots. Rather than acting as if nothing wrong has happened a la the proverbial ostrich that buried its head in the sand, she should gracefully accept the verdict of her countrymen. She should also cleanse her party by giving a good riddance to all the politicians who were engaged in wholesale thievery during 2001 and 2006, and reform her party by infusing new blood. Finally, she should dissociate her alliance from Jamaat-i-Islam - the party that betrayed the spirit of 1971 when it acted as the Fifth Columnists during the dark days of 1971. A new BNP without razakars, looters, would most certainly be a good start. Let us see if Khaleda Zia moves in that direction. #

First published in Mukto-Mono.com
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=64

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

Bangladesh stunned by Awami League's victory

SABIR MUSTAFA

Bangladesh is set for a government with the biggest parliamentary majority since 1973, following Monday's general elections designed to bring an end to two years of military-backed rule.

In an election marked by high turnout and few incidents, the centre-left Awami League - headed by former prime minister Sheikh Hasina - and its allies pulled off a stunning victory, winning a two-thirds majority in the single-chamber national assembly.

The Mohajot (Grand Coalition) alliance practically demolished its rivals, the centre-right Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its Islamist ally the Jamaat-e-Islami. All top leaders of the Jamaat lost their seats.

The sheer scale of the Awami League's victory has left people searching for an explanation. Even the party's leaders appear to be taking a pause for thought.

"We were certainly expecting victory, but perhaps not as big as this," said Abul Mal Abdul Muhith, a senior Awami League leader from the Sylhet region who is tipped to become the next finance minister.

"This is clearly a major challenge for us, we have to deliver," Mr Muhith told the BBC Bengali service in an interview.

People's will?
As results came through from different parts of the country, pundits and analysts dug deep to construct a plausible cause for the BNP's debacle.

"It is clearly a robust expression of people's will," said Mahfuz Anam, editor of the Daily Star newspaper.

"First-time voters made up nearly a third of the total, and these young voters rejected the BNP's negative campaign based on religion and fear."

A rejection of the BNP was not the only factor in the result. The Awami League, which led Bangladesh to independence in 1971, is often accused to living in the past. But this time they surprised everyone with a new-look campaign and softer rhetoric.

"The Awami League was seen as an unfashionable, rather rustic party in the 1980s," said Muzammil Hussain, deputy editor of the daily Samakal. "But the party's manifesto this time as well as its campaign strategy had touches of modernity which appealed to the young."

It is rare for Bangladeshi politicians to offer a vision to the young, but veteran journalist Amanullah Kabir agreed that the Awami League leader appeared to have done just that.

''Sheikh Hasina's call to build a digital Bangladesh, with specific goals for economic development, gave the young something to dream about, and they have voted en masse for that dream'', said Mr Kabir.

Such big victories please the party faithful, but the neutral are always a little fearful.

They point out that the BNP and its alliance won a two-thirds majority in 2001, and produced what many people considered to be the most corrupt government in the country's history.

Awami League leaders were quick to calm fears that its overwhelming majority would make it autocratic in power.

''We have a great victory, but no matter how few seats the opposition have, we will make every effort to include them in policy making,'' Hasan Mahmud, a close aide to Sheikh Hasina, told the BBC Bengali service in an interview.

'Guns and goons'
The elections mark a personal triumph for Sheikh Hasina, whose political career seemed at an end last year when she was jailed on charges of corruption.

Ms Hasina had often been bracketed with her bitter rival Khaleda Zia of the BNP, with both being accused of allowing "guns and goons" to become part of the country's political fabric.

Their rivalry became known as Battle of the Begums, the term for a woman of high social rank.

Detractors claimed that Bangladeshi politics could be reformed only if the two ladies stepped aside.

This deliberate policy to remove the the two ladies became known as the Minus Two formula.

The caretaker government in 2007 used its emergency powers to try and force Ms Hasina and Ms Khaleda into exile. The effort failed miserably.

The next attempt was to try and get the two parties themselves to ditch their leaders. They found no takers.

Next came attempts to split the major parties and create "reformist" factions with an aim to effect changes in leadership. It only made reform a dirty word in Bangladeshi politics.

In a final throw of the dice, the government sent both the ladies to jail, and slapped a number of corruption charges against them. An impression soon took hold that they would be convicted and thus disqualified from holding office.

But by then the government's failure to halt spiralling food prices had ended the public's infatuation with the army-backed regime. A sense of drift had gripped the caretaker regime with no clear goal in sight.

Price to pay
It was not long before the caretaker government began searching for a way out.

Elections were seen as the only plausible exit strategy, but such elections would only succeed if the two major parties, led by the two Begums, took part.

The government had already set December 2008 as the target date for general elections, and it stuck to the time-table. But there was a price.

The political reforms they had promised did not materialise. They had to largely soften their their much-trumpeted anti-corruption drive. The two Begums, far from being sidelined, were put back into the equation.

Monday's elections mark not only the triumph of one and the defeat of the other.

It also marks the total failure of the Minus Two formula.

There is one silver lining in the cloud for the men and women who have ruled Bangladesh since a state of emergency was declared on 11 January 2007.

These elections are likely to go down in history as the first universally-credible polls in the country's history.

The defeated BNP has already raised questions about alleged polling irregularities.

But these complaints are unlikely to find any support outside their party offices. #

Sabir Mustafa is chief of BBC Bangla Service and files this report from Bangladesh capital Dhaka

First published by BBC NEWS online, December 30, 2008

© BBC MMVIII

Shiekh Hasina wins Bangladesh majority

Photo: Azizur Rahim Peu, DRIK News

MARK DUMMETT

The BBC journalist in Bangladesh capital, Dhaka, says although official results of the parliamentary poll will be known soon, supporters of the Awami League are already celebrating landslide victory.

Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's Awami League has won a substantial victory in Bangladesh's election, with almost all results declared.

Election officials have said the Awami League has won more than three-quarters of seats in the 300-seat parliament.

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party of Ms Hasina's arch-rival Khaleda Zia has won barely a tenth of that number.

Turnout was high in the first election for seven years, which came after two years of army-backed rule.

The win for the Awami League is a dramatic reversal in fortunes for the two parties.

Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia have dominated politics in Bangladesh for years and are again vying for power after two years of army-backed rule.

A win for the Awami League will be a dramatic reversal in fortunes for the two parties, says our correspondent.

Tight security
Provisional figures show Sheikh Hasina's alliance has taken more than 150 of the 300 seats in parliament.

Our correspondent says the early results also suggest that the BNP's ally, Jamaat-e-Islami, has lost most of its seats.

A leader of Khaleda Zia's BNP said its supporters were kept from voting in various parts of the country, and it planned to file a complaint.

"We have reports that BNP supporters were barred from coming to polls and also were driven away from polling stations in many places," BNP leader Rizvi Ahmed told local television, the Reuters news agency reports.

Election officials say more than 70% of Bangladesh's 81 million voters are thought to have cast their ballots in a poll intended to return the country to democracy after two years of rule by a military-backed government.

Security was tight throughout polling day, with about 50,000 soldiers and 600,000 police deployed to guard against election fraud and violence.

Chief election commissioner Shamsul Huda said he had complete confidence in the election process and there was "no scope for fraud of vote rigging".

He went on: "So it will be difficult to reject the election result this time. We expect people will elect a parliament, which even if not a dream parliament, it will be a good one."

Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia - both former prime ministers - were jailed for suspected corruption but released to contest the vote.

During campaigning, the two rivals pledged to lower food prices, and to tackle corruption and terrorism in the nation of 144 million people.

They also both promised to end the confrontation, strikes and violent street rallies that have marked Bangladeshi politics for years. The two women alternated in power for 15 years until 2006.

Anti-corruption drive
No serious violence was reported during the election, and our correspondent says the mood at a polling station he visited was festive.

Some 200,000 electoral observers, including 2,500 from abroad, monitored the national vote.

The army cancelled elections due in January 2007 after months of street protests and battles between gangs of rival party supporters spiralled out of control.

The army-backed caretaker government then tried to root out corruption from the country's elites.

Our correspondent says the newly-empowered Anti-Corruption Commission sought to prosecute the top politicians and businessmen who had earned Bangladesh its reputation as one of the world's most corrupt countries.

More than 11 million phoney names were purged from the voter roll.

"This time we feel that there is an opportunity to proceed towards democracy," one voter told the BBC.

"I'm feeling very happy that there is this peaceful atmosphere for casting votes."

A simple majority of the parliament's 300 seats is enough to secure victory, but analysts have said that if no clear winner emerges, it could lead to fears of unrest if supporters of the rival parties take to the streets. #

First published in BBC NEWS, December 29, 2008

© BBC MMVIII

Bangladesh: Ready to Vote Again

ISHAAN THAROOR

On Dec. 29, Bangladesh voters will cast their ballots in the nation's first general election in seven years. The polls have been a focal point of the country's politics ever since a military intervention in January 2007, which postponed scheduled elections in order to end escalating violence between followers of two rival political parties. In the interim, a caretaker regime of technocrats has set about trying to tackle Bangladesh's wretched record of corruption and reform its volatile electoral politics. Results have been mixed, but the government now looks ready to deliver on its promises for free and credible polls — an effort that's not going unnoticed. Earlier this month, U.S. Senator John McCain, the defeated Republican candidate for President, declared on a visit to Dhaka that "this has the possibility of being the fairest election, perhaps, in the entire world."

MUCH OF that optimism has to do with the efforts of the well-educated, mild-mannered bureaucrats running the caretaker government for the past 23 months. On Wednesday, the government announced that the state of emergency will be finally lifted on Dec. 17 so that parties can campaign and assemble freely. During its tenure, the government has taken to task the country's crony-state politics, strengthened regulatory bodies like the election and anti-corruption commissions, and documented and photographed the more than 80 million people eligible to vote in elections — a stunning feat in this vastly impoverished nation OF 150 million where many remain illiterate.

Still, others fear a more gloomy result this month: a return to the way things were before. The aborted election two years ago saw some 12 million fake names on the voter roll, which, among other allegations of fraud, led to disputes and running street battles between the country's two main political parties, the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). The interim government rode into power on a tidal wave of popular anger and exasperation with the AL and the BNP and their demagogic, warring leaders, Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia, who ran these behemoth parties as their personal fiefs. Both Hasina and Zia were arrested and imprisoned, charged on various counts of graft and abuse of power. Some of their closest political allies were also convicted of corruption as the caretaker government vowed to shake things up in Dhaka.

But not all has gone the reformers' way. The two begums, as Hasina and Zia are known, still command huge swathes of support — and, after ceaseless political pressure from their cadres, both are now free from detention and contesting the upcoming polls. Initially, the caretaker government attempted to encourage prominent figures from civil society to form a "third way" to break from the country's two-party system. That project failed, as did efforts to weaken the begums' networks of patronage that assured their grip on power. After two years out in the cold, Hasina or Zia could very well snatch the reins again, and perhaps roll back the charges leveled against them and key allies.

Few desire a return to cronyism. "People don't want to see the kind of polarization, the dysfunctional government that they witnessed in the past," says Peter Manikas, director of Asia research for the National Democratic Institute, a Washington-based think tank that has sent a delegation to monitor the elections. Since the 1990s, Hasina and Zia have swapped rancorous terms in office, leaving legacies of divisiveness and a trail of scandals of alleged kickbacks and bribery. "There was a winner-take-all mentality," says Manikas.

This election, all candidates for the 300 parliamentary seats that are up for grabs have been made to submit answers to a 16-page questionnaire, detailing personal assets and business interests. Both the AL and BNP have been pressed to become more transparent and to allow greater levels of internal dissent so the party machinery revolves less around the cult-like stature of their leaders. The military, for its part, has deployed some 50,000 troops to safeguard voting stations and intends to suspend civilian mobile phone signals on election day, which it claims will make mob takeovers of polling booths and vote-rigging — both hallmarks of elections in the past — more difficult. According to a poll by the Daily Star, a leading Dhaka English language newspaper, 95% of Bangladeshis believe they can cast their ballot without coercion.

The cooperativeness of the nation's military, which has a long history of interrupting democracy in the country, has been a pleasant surprise. Just half a year ago, the international community and Dhaka's civil society looked at the armed forces, including army chief Gen. Moeen Uddin Ahmed, with a degree of apprehension. During emergency rule, dissidents were arrested, journalists muzzled and political assembly was banned. A wing of the military intelligence was accused by prominent human rights groups of torturing activists. Moeen himself made troubling statements about the efficacy of democratic rule in a country as turbulent as Bangladesh. But as he has quieted down in recent months, fears that the caretaker government was a dictatorship in civilian clothing have subsided. "The best thing that [the army] has done," says Ali Riaz, chair of the department of politics and government at Illinois State University, "is reduce its visibility." As the two begums ready for their return to the limelight — a prospect few among the military brass would have stomached months ago — observers are confident that the election's results will be respected and accepted by the nation's soldiers.

Now it's up to Hasina and Zia to make the best of their second chance. Both are making a cantankerous go of it in the run-up to elections, including playing up threats to their lives. But there is hope that the aftermath of the polls may be less stormy. Hasina's AL look like the favorites at this point, and in recent weeks, have made the right noises about sharing power and pushing toward a more consensus-driven politics. One AL declaration suggested that the opposition — whoever it may be — retain certain prominent seats in parliament, such as that of the deputy speaker. "There needs to be a proper participatory parliament," says Riaz, of Illinois State University. "Democracy cannot function without a really vibrant and an effective opposition."

The need for a functional, democratic government could not be more urgent. Bangladesh remains one of the poorest countries in the world, with 40% of its population living on less than $1 a day, and its government must act effectively to deal with inflation and soaring food costs that are making life miserable for the rural poor and urban working classes. Now, experts warn, is not the time to be settling personal vendettas or consolidating power. "Bangladeshis, including me, hope that the [two begums] think with a larger vision, and strengthen institutions," says Riaz. "Then both should have a graceful exit from politics." #

First published in TIME magazine, December 12, 2008

Bangladesh battle of familiar foes

MARK DUMMETT

For Bangladesh's eunuchs, river gypsies and prisoners, Monday's general elections will be a unique experience. It is the first time any will be allowed to vote.

But for the vast majority of the country's 81 million voters, the elections will mark a return to Bangladeshi politics as normal, after two years of emergency rule when an army-backed caretaker government tried to rewrite how things are done here.

In many ways it failed, and unless something extraordinary happens, it is certain that one of the two former prime ministers, Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League, or Khaleda Zia of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, will be voted into office once again, despite the government doing all it could to drive them out of politics.

It came to power promising to clean things up, after months of street protests and battles between gangs of rival party supporters spiralled out of control.

The Awami League accused the BNP of planning to steal the elections that were supposed to be held in January 2007.

But with the support of many Bangladeshis, and foreign governments, the army intervened, declared a state of emergency and cancelled the elections.

New register
Encouraged by leading members of Dhaka's civil society, and senior army officers, who had grown enraged at the corruption of the politicians, the caretaker government then embarked on an ambitious programme to sort Bangladesh out.

"Under these two illiterate women, democracy had collapsed," one senior caretaker official told me at the time.

"Mafia-like thugs, teachers, politicians, lawyers and journalists. Everyone was invited to join their parties to get rich. And there is no way we are going to allow them back," he said.

The Election Commission set about drawing up a new voter register to ensure that the coming elections would be fair, and took more than 11 million fake names off the roll.

The newly empowered Anti-Corruption Commission sought to prosecute the top politicians and businessmen who had earned Bangladesh its reputation as one of the world's most corrupt countries. Dozens were arrested, along with their wives and children who had helped stash their money.

The government signalled it was not afraid of going after even the biggest names when it arrested Khaleda Zia's son, Tarique Rahman, who many Bangladeshis believe embodies everything that is wrong with the winner-takes-all political culture.

It then tried to drive the two party leaders into exile, but when that failed, had them arrested on corruption charges.

From then on things started to go badly for the caretakers and their friends in the army, who carefully kept to the background. They tried and failed to create a "third political force", and then tried and failed to engineer serious splits in the two main parties.

Draconian emergency laws kept trouble off the streets, but lost the government friends in the media who felt bullied by the army into censoring their reports, and the only 24-hour news channel was shut down.

The politicians complained that the anti-corruption drive was itself political, and many Bangladeshis felt that the treatment of the two leaders was vindictive.

Lawyers for Tarique Rahman said he was so badly beaten by army officers when he was in jail that he might not walk again.

"This is a revolution in slow motion," the official told me. "This is not a popularity contest."

But by the end of its first year, with anger at food prices also mounting, the government felt obliged to change its strategy and concentrate on holding acceptable elections within the year.

It soon found that unless Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina were out of jail, neither party would agree to participate. So after months of negotiations, they were allowed out, and so were their cronies.

'Political history'
The government, which had promoted reforms protecting the independence of the judiciary, now pressured the courts into suspending cases, and the anti-corruption drive ran out of steam.

"It did not meet its expectation, and in that way you can say that a good chance was missed," the head of the Anti-Corruption Commission, Hassan Mashhud Chowdhury said.

"But then it happens when you are dealing with a problem of this nature, in a scenario like Bangladesh politics. You cannot be sure that if you start a thing well it will finish well," he said.

A popular feeling in Dhaka is that the caretakers correctly spotted what is wrong with Bangladesh's politics but were the wrong people to try to reform it.

"To fix democracy you need more democracy, not less," a friend told me.

They also underestimated the enduring popularity and strength of the two party leaders.

"When you look at these two ladies, they are not just people, they also reflect the political history of Bangladesh," Dr Mizanur Rahman Shelley, a political analyst, said.

"They represent important social and political forces."

Those forces will be back in play from 29 December when a record number of voters are expected to turn out and vote for a return to Bangladesh's flawed democracy #

First published BBC News, December 28, 2008