What will President Joe Biden’s strategy be for South Asia?

President Joe Biden signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington/ Photo REUTERS

SALEEM SAMAD

Hours after President Joe Biden took oath in Washington DC, the leaders of South Asia showered tribute to the new leadership of the United States.

Months before the formal swearing-in on January 20, there were frantic exchanges of diplomatic cables from the capitals of South Asian countries to the United States capital, eager to know the 46th US president’s strategy for South Asia.

Most South Asian think-tanks were of the opinion that the policy would be different from the outgoing president, Donald Trump. The regional leaders and think-tanks have mixed feelings on Trump’s policy on South Asia, which was dubbed as “out of focus.” Most of the think-tanks on South Asian affairs were confident that Biden’s foreign policy would be far more pro-active and pragmatic.

The new US president is likely to engineer a full-scale foreign policy plan to augment cooperation with the 8-member South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), 11-country Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), 55 member states of the African Union, 21-member state Organization of American States (OAS), 22-member Arab League, 6-member Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and so on and so forth.

Michael Kugelman, deputy director for the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington, DC, believes that Biden will fully back a rapidly growing US–India partnership that enjoyed much forward movement during the Trump years -- just as it had throughout every previous administration back to the Bill Clinton era.

Incidentally, Biden is a long-time friend of India’s, who once described the US–India partnership as the defining relationship of the 21st century.

On the other hand, thousands of bipartisan Indian expats in America, who are effectively influential in American politics and administration, were able to churn hard facts into a pro-active foreign policy towards India in South Asia.

The two countries have a shared concern over combating terrorism and the challenges that the emerging Chinese hegemony pose -- these will have Biden’s full-throated support. He will also increase pressure on Pakistan to shut down the India-focused terror networks on its soil, especially with the receding US footprint in Afghanistan.

Nevertheless, Washington’s delicate relationship with Pakistan won’t be upended by abrupt moves, such as a sudden decision to cut security aid. Like Trump, however, Biden strongly supports total withdrawal from Afghanistan.

However, when he was vice president of Barack Obama’s administration, he was a vocal opponent of his policy regarding additional troop deployment to battle the Taliban and the remnants of Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

He is expected to toe the line of Trump for a workable relationship with Pakistan that revolves around securing Islamabad’s diplomatic support in advancing a fragile peace process in Afghanistan with the jihadist Taliban.

Meanwhile, the rest of South Asia will receive strategic focus, as it did during Trump’s era. The attention will be largely framed through the lens of the US-China rivalry and, increasingly, the India–China rivalry amid Beijing’s deepening footprint across the region, fuelled by its controversial Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), says Kugelman at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre.

Washington’s radar will once again lay emphasis on democracy and human rights issues in South Asian states, an emphasis which was often overlooked by the previous administration.

Biden is likely to go relatively easy on India for strategic reasons, but Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka could find themselves subjected to sharp and frequent criticism.

Fortunately, climate change is another priority for Biden, which is a major threat to South Asia, especially Bangladesh, Maldives, India, and Sri Lanka, and this offers an opportunity for less tense US engagement in the region.

In short, the South Asian policy under President Joe Biden will be a rare case of a continuity program. It will definitely have an impact upon the incoming administration and will reset the US foreign policy, presenting both new opportunities and fresh challenges for the region.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 26 January 2021

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Should China apologise to Bangladesh?

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman greeted by Mao Tse Tung, chairman of the Peoples Republic of China, during his goodwill visit to Beijing in 1957

SALEEM SAMAD

The Chinese were desperate for a kind of “wolf-warrior” diplomacy to take diplomatic and economic ties with Bangladesh to a new height during the post-Mujib era. In subsequent years, China emerged as the major economic partner in mega-infrastructure development projects in Bangladesh.

In the meantime, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina told her officials that Bangladesh should give a second thought regarding any multi-billion dollar development projects offered by China. 

Not very long ago, she reassured the Indian journalists that India is an “organic” friend of Bangladesh; they jointly shed blood during the brutal birth of Bangladesh, and China is a development partner -- there is no conflict of interest with the two countries.

Recently, the PM reiterated that marauding Pakistani troops must make an apology for committing war crimes during Bangladesh independence. Pakistan had received unlimited military supply and political support from China to suppress the people in Bangladesh. The brass-coated “Made in China” bullets were responsible for several million martyrs -- for a crime to dream of an independent Bangladesh.

The architect of Bangladesh’s independence, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman took charge of a war-ravaged nation with a promise to feed the hungry people and the task to rehabilitate the millions of refugees that slowly trickled back home from India. However, even after the return of Bangabandhu from Pakistan’s prison, China continued to politically and diplomatically harass the newly independent nation.

The trouble started when Bangladesh sought membership in the United Nations in 1972. China vetoed Bangladesh’s membership at the UN when the country desperately needed international aid for rehabilitation of the returnees from India. 

To withstand China, Sheikh Mujib, to add diplomatic clout, joined the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the Commonwealth, and the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), which helped strengthen Bangladesh’s image.

Even after diplomatic recognition by Pakistan under the duress of Islamic nations’ leaders in 1974, China continued to intimidate the government of Sheikh Mujib.

Overtly, the pro-Beijing communist parties in the country received political blessings from CCP. Why? Because the left parties opposed the Liberation War and expressed dissent on the government of Sheikh Mujib, blaming him to be a “stooge of Indian expansionist ideas.”

Mujib, as he stated in his book Amar Dekha Naya Chin (New China As I Saw) had visited China twice. First, in 1952 and the second visit in 1957. During his visit, he met the founder of New China, Mao Zedong, along with Zhou Enlai and other key figures of CCP. 

He was confident that the Chinese leaders would listen to his request to recognize Bangladesh.

Sheikh Mujib opened diplomatic channels to win the hearts of CCP. Pakistan’s veteran envoy to Beijing (1969-1972), Ambassador Khwaja Mohammad Kaiser was Mujib’s special emissary to Chinese leaders. Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai confided to Ambassador Kaiser that he should understand his difficulties. Kaiser, however, returned to Beijing, as Bangladesh Ambassador in 1984 for two years.

Mujib also dispatched journalist and poet Faiz Ahmed to Beijing. Faiz had friends in high places among CCP leadership when he was working in Radio Peking (now Beijing) Bangla Service in the 1960s. Faiz, despite being a radical left, was Mujib’s play-card partner in prison during 1966-1969. Unfortunately, he too returned home with an empty hand and the mission reached a dead end.

China was among the last few countries to recognize Bangladesh on August 31, 1975. Well, not to an elected government of Sheikh Mujib, but after his brutal assassination in mid-August 1975. China, unfortunately, recognized an illegal regime headed by the assassins of Bangabandhu.

China should admit certain responsibility for the genocide perpetrated by Pakistan’s military hawks in Bangladesh due to CCP’s policy for providing military aid to Pakistan during the Liberation War. CCP should also regret intimidating Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s government.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 19 January 2021

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter@saleemsamad

Madness, mayhem, and manipulation

It is a grim outlook for a new year, but it is not completely hopeless

SALEEM SAMAD

Should the citizens of the global village expect anything in 2021?

Does it not seem that it will be another series of new episodes, like last year, beset by the madness, mayhem, manipulation, and tyranny that dominated 2020.

For most, the future will be knitted from experience gathered from a year of facing the coronavirus pandemic.

While the regimes were busy doing damage control, everything seemed to have gone haywire; they were unable to control the virus outbreak, or the frustrations of the people. The governments, both in developed and developing countries, gradually took charge of the crisis.

The world leaders were left defenseless in the face of government bureaucrats and elected officials who dance to the tune of their corporate overlords and do what they want, when they want, with whomever they want, all at taxpayer expense.

Now that the people have slowly begun to trust scientists, pharmaceutical producers, United Nations bodies, development economists, health care experts and services, and development partners, the governments with advisers and politicians need to get back on the drawing board to redo the plans on how to live with the Covid-19 virus.

In the broad political spectrum, politics and politicians must come forward with sustainable solutions to the new dimensions of global crises, which is impacted by the pandemic.

Such rethinking has surfaced when the nations’ history, politics, and politicians add problems due to attempting quick-fix solutions, which are not sustainable.

Let the politicians and bureaucrats understand that people will not digest any kind of hypocrisy, double standards, or delusional belief. Nonetheless, the politicians and bureaucrats initially had hiccups when the pandemic was ravaging the economy. There is also no denying that the government wasted crucial time, funds, and effort to get things back on track.

Citizens of developing countries have tolerated injustice and abuse which befell upon them due to the government machinery such as police harassment and brutality, corruption, criminalization of politics, robberies from infrastructure development projects, forcible occupations and invasions of homes and properties of the weak and the minorities by politically-backed hooligans, state security surveillance, unfair taxation -- and the list grows on and on.

Global citizens have been utterly helpless in the face of government injustice meted out, both at home and abroad. Indeed, the systemic violence being perpetrated by the state and non-state actors demoralises any nation-state, writes John W Whitehead, founder and president of The Rutherford Institute.

Until we can own that truth, until we can forge our path back to a world in which freedom means something again, we are going to be stuck in this wormhole of populist anger, petty politics, and destruction that is pitting us against each other.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 12 January 2021

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Peace remains elusive for hill people in the CHT

SALEEM SAMAD

The Adivasis continue to suffer in pain and agony for non-compliance of the much talked about peace accord signed 23 years ago with the autonomy seeking armed ethnic minorities of the Chittagong Hill Tracts.

For the hill people, peace continues to remain a far cry as the Bangalee settlers from the floodplains, on the behest of the Bangladesh Army, continue to enjoy blessings of the military, civil administration and ruling party politicians.

When the peace accord was signed on 2 December 1997, the BBC Bangla radio and Dainik Ajker Kagoj interviewed me for my long experience reporting on the insurgency and peace process since 1980. I said the treaty will not be implemented even after 25 years, because of the nonchalant military and civil bureaucracy.

However, my comment was taken seriously neither by the government nor by the Shantu Larma led Parbatiya Chattragram Jana Sangati Samity (PCJSS). Both parties dismissed my concerns and claimed they would start implementing the accord soon enough.

That soon never came into the life of Shantu Larma — the supremo of Shanti Bahini. His party created a paramilitary force waging a bush war across one-tenth of Bangladesh.

It was understood that after the surrender of Shanti Bahini combatants along with their weapons, who once reigned unchallenged in the hill forest, that the accord would see the light of the day.

After several years, the accord was only implemented through the piecemeal measure of ‘pick and choose’ which frustrated several groups, mostly youths, leaders and former combatants.

The youths and student leaders launched a violent movement to pressure the government to realise the accord’s implementation, which reached a critical stage.

Eminent citizens of the country at various events, marking the 23rd anniversary of the CHT Accord in 2020, commented that the expectations created in 1997 through the signing of the CHT Accord have turned into frustration and anger as it has not been implemented even after 23 years and the Jumma people are being ruled, exploited, deprived and oppressed.

Bangladesh authority did not take much initiative to implement the CHT Accord. Not a single meeting of the CHT Accord Implementation Committee, the CHT Land Commission and the Task Force, formed under the CHT Accord, was convened.

Nonetheless, only a few clauses and sub-clauses of the accord have been implemented in the last 23 years since the Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh and the PCJSS signed the historic CHT Agreement. Two-thirds of the clauses remain in grey section.

The fundamental provisions of the accord are either ultimately unrealised or have been partially implemented.

A formal meeting of the CHT Land Commission was scheduled to be held at Bandarban on 3 February 2020. However, the event was cancelled when the Bangalee settlers backed by local administration blocked the entrance.

Nevertheless, countrywide coronavirus outbreak, extended official holidays and lockdown overshadowed the government’s activities in 2020.

There is no respite from the operations of the military, paramilitary border guards and other law enforcement forces in the CHT even as the pandemic rages.

Thus in 23 years, the expected resolution to the CHT conflict remains elusive. Instead, according to the PCJSS annual statement released in the first week of January, the problem has become more complicated.

The PCJSS laments that, following the previous governments, the current government has been implementing Islamisation policy and intensified the CHT’s militarisation —threatening the Jumma people’s national, religious and cultural identity.

It has been alleged that all matters of general administration, law and order, development of the CHT, have been handed over to the army and security services deployed in the region.

The annual report also said that the army has undertaken initiatives to revive the camps once withdrawn after the CHT Accord. Many camps had been reconstructed on the same site in the last few years, including seven new camps in 2020.

In CHT, apparently, a de facto military rule continues, and ‘Operation Uttaran’ has not been withdrawn, even though it was agreed in the accord to stop targeting the hill people. The authorities are engaged in anti-accord activities with the settlers as an excuse to provide security and protection.

On the eve of the accord’s silver jubilee, not a single full-fledged Hill District Council has been formed by direct votes. The interim Hill District Councils were formed with hand-picked ruling party members last December. This undemocratic and partisan path demonstrates the lack of political commitment on the part of the government.

The PCJSS blames the ruling Awami League government, which deserves credit for getting the rebels to sit for peace talks, signing the accord, and organising a surrender ceremony at Khagrachari. However, it has not taken enough measures to implement the CHT Agreement.

In recent years, it has been alleged by PCJSS that, with knowledge of the security forces, government agencies are sheltering the JSS (MN Larma) known as Reformist, the UPDF (Democratic) and the Mog Party.

Widespread human rights abuses, including illegal detention, extrajudicial deaths, enforced disappearances, legal harassments and assaults against the hill people continues unabated.

The Bangalee settlers were responsible for inciting sectarian tensions in the region and remains upbeat with the moral support of the military and the civil administration.

Parbatya Chattagram Nagorik Parishad (CHT Citizens’ Council) has gained notoriety for forced conversion of Adivasi girls into Muslims, kidnapping for ransom, looting farm produces from the hills, grabbing of lands of the ancestors and the list goes on and on.

The refusal to register cases against the settlers is an everyday norm, especially when the Adivasis go to a police station. When the hill people approach the military with complaints, they are asked to back off and are treated as a potential threat to the military.

Instead of a political and peaceful solution to the CHT crisis by implementing the CHT Accord, the government has taken the initiative to solve the problem through repression like the previous regimes. So far, there are no signs of the government opting for an alternative, peaceful path in the foreseeable future.

First published in the Shuddhasha portal, Norway on 11 January 2021

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist and media rights defender. Recipient of Ashoka Fellow and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

The Earth speaks but we refuse to listen

Sunderbans/Photo: SYED ZAKIR HOSSAIN

When will society wake up and take climate change seriously?

SALEEM SAMAD

Remember the three wise monkeys -- Japanese pictorial maxims, embodying the proverbial principle: “See no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil.”

The three monkeys are Mizaru, who sees no evil, covering his eyes; Kikazaru, who hears no evil, covering his ears; and Iwazaru, who speaks no evil, covering his mouth.

Human beings have taken a weird position regarding the Earth's destruction, which ushers imminent ecological disaster. Unfortunately, the people refuse to listen, to see, and to speak up. 

There is no doubting the scientific and academic evidence and information about climate change -- global warming, deforestation, pollution of water, degradation of soil, and extinction of wildlife are all obvious signs that society has created an unsustainable world for future generations.

Remember when illegal miners extract sand from the river beds, the river, in vengeance, tears down villages and croplands, erodes vast tracts of the banks, and changes its course.

The ancient civilizations on the banks of the Indus and Euphrates vanished after the wise men forcibly exploited the river resources for economic gain to sustain the kingdom.

The civilisations on the Nile and Yellow River ("China's Sorrow") remain in history and archaeological discoveries. Nature does strike back in anger for overexploitation of its natural resources.

Most of the deltas and mangrove forests such as the Sundarbans are endangered because of human interference for economic exploitation. 

The government, politicians, multinational companies, and the bourgeoisie society to get rich quickly are plundering natural resources and there are clear signs of a refusal to adopt a green and sustainable mandate.

Most governments and politicians in developing countries also do not feel the urgency to fix the problem. When state and non-state actors ignore their social responsibility, this threatens humanity, leading towards a dysfunctional society.

The stakeholders also deliberately ignore the warning signs, for which we don’t need a scientist to interpret and get it published in the media to cater the messages to the grassroots. Despite the deteriorating air quality in urban areas, food security, and the crisis of safe drinking water, it appears that it is not enough to shake up humanity.

Interestingly, when a group of people takes time off for the ancient practice of meditation on hilltops under the open skies, they are spiritually connected with the earth. Amid tranquil surroundings, the meditation practitioners can exchange and interact with nature -- feel, hear, and listen to the earth.

It's time for the government, politicians, and the society at large to reconnect with the earth.

Dr Michael A Bengwayan, a practising environmentalist and writer based in New York, writes that nature has been waiting for this connection, this healing, since the moment you were born. “As you reconnect, no matter how many years you have been in your absence, you will find that you will not be scolded, reprimanded, or punished.”

Social scientists have said that when people are disconnected from humanity, they cannot listen, hear, and see that the Earth is groaning in pain.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 5 January 2021

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad

'Pandemic' word of the year 2020

SALEEM SAMAD

The word ‘pandemic’ has become a part of all our lives now

The task to decide a single word or words in the year 2020, roiled by a public health crisis, an economic downturn, racial injustice, climate disaster, political division, and rampant disinformation -- was a challenge.

For the editors at Dictionary.com, the choice was overwhelmingly focused. From our perspective as documenters of the English language, one word kept running through the profound and manifold ways our lives have been upended -- and our language so rapidly transformed -- in this unprecedented year.

The editors, based on online searches, concluded that the “2020 Word Of The Year” was “pandemic” and defined it as “a disease prevalent throughout an entire country, continent, or the whole world.” The year 2020 was indeed painful. And yet, the loss of life and livelihood caused by Covid-19 pandemic defies definition.

Nearly 80 million confirmed cases, the pandemic has claimed over 1.75 million lives across the globe and is still rising to new peaks with the fresh outbreak dubbed as Covid-20.

No doubt the pandemic has severely dented social and economic life on a historic scale and scope, globally impacting every sector of society -- not to mention its emotional and psychological toll.

All other events for most of 2020, from the protests for racial justice to a heated US presidential election, were shaped by the pandemic. Despite the hardships, the pandemic also inspired the best of humanity: Resilience and resourcefulness in the face of struggle.

Languages evolve and adapt to new realities and circumstances. This deadly coronavirus outbreak has been reflected in our language, notably in the word pandemic itself. As the world was shaken from the pandemic, the searches for the word “pandemic” skyrocketed 13,575% on Dictionary.com compared to 2019.

It appeared to have jumped out of history textbooks, and joined a cluster of other terms that users searched for in massive numbers, whether to learn an unfamiliar word used during a government briefing or to process the swirl of media headlines: Asymptomatic, CDC, coronavirus, furlough, nonessential, quarantine, and sanitizer, to name a few.

"The pandemic, despite causing havoc, agony, and trauma among millions worldwide, surprisingly has united the world of vocabulary into one global village, eagerly waiting for the vaccine and an eventual solution for the pandemic."

As the pandemic upended life in 2020, it also dramatically reshaped our language, requiring a whole new vocabulary for talking about our new reality.

Among all searches, the volume for pandemic sustained the highest levels on-site over the course of 2020, averaging a 1000% increase, month over month, relative to previous years. Because of its ubiquity as the defining context of 2020, it remained in the top 10% of all lookups for much of the year.

Glossary and vocabulary researchers, based on a prediction by epidemiologists to virologists agree that the pandemic defined in 2020 will dominate the years to come. It is a consequential word for a consequential year.

In the spring, the pandemic introduced a host of new and newly prominent words that, normally, only public health professionals knew and used.

Expanding the glossary for daily life included: Air bubble; antibody tests; antigen test; antimalarial drugs; asymptomatic; conspiracy theory; contact tracing; corona-cure; Covid-dedicated hospitals; Covid-19; Covidiot; debunk fake news; diagnostic tests; disinformation; distance learning; endemic; epidemic; epidemiologist; face masks; fake health remedies; fake health tips; flatten the curve; frontliner; hand sanitizer; handwashing; health facilities; healthcare; herd immunity; hydroxychloroquine; infodemic; isolation; lockdown; mutation; N95; novel coronavirus; PCR test; PPE; public health; quaranteam; quarantine; second wave; social distancing; strain; superspreader; take-out; vaccine; ventilator; virologist; virtual court; webinar; work remotely; Zoom; so on and so forth.

The resilience and resourcefulness people confronted the pandemic with also manifested itself in tremendous linguistic creativity. Throughout 2020, the editorial teams of various dictionaries have been tracking a growing body of so-called “corona coinages” that have given expression -- and have offered some relief from tragedy, some connection in isolation -- to the lived experience of a surreal year.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 29 December 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

"How long can Pakistan hold out in the east (Bangladesh)”

SALEEM SAMAD

A conversation between Henry Kissinger and General Westmoreland about the birth of Bangladesh

Three days after a full-scale war between India and Pakistan in the eastern frontier and Bangladesh-India jointly against Pakistan in the eastern theatre, Henry Kissinger asked how long could the Pakistan troops hold in Bangladesh.

The meeting held in Washington DC, in the morning of December 6, 1971, was attended by senior officials of departments of state, defence, joint chief of staffs, CIA, USAID, and others.

US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, at the onset of the meeting asked Gen Westmoreland: “What is your military assessment? How long can Pakistan hold out in the east” (Bangladesh war zone)?

Gen Westmoreland candidly said up to three weeks. Once the Pakistan Army runs out of supplies, all the troops in East Pakistan [Bangladesh] will become hostage. The officials discussed whether there were any possibilities of Pakistan troop's evacuation. Gen Westmoreland responded in negative.

A senior official of the State Department asked Gen Westmoreland that assuming the Indians took over Bangladesh, how did he think it would happen?

Gen Westmoreland replied, “I think their primary thrust will be to cut off the seaport of Chittagong. This will virtually cut off any possibility of resupply. Then they will move to destroy the Pakistan regular forces, in cooperation with the Mukti Bahini. They will then be faced with the major job of restoring some order to the country. I think there will be a revenge massacre — possibly the greatest in the twentieth century.”

Kissinger asked whether the Indians would withdraw their army once the Pakistan forces were disarmed.

Gen Westmoreland replied that he thought they [Indian] would leave three or four divisions to work with the Mukti Bahini, and pull the remainder back to the West.

The officials expected that the Indians would pull out as quickly as they could. Once the Pakistan forces were disarmed, the Indians would have a friendly population. They could afford to move back to the border areas quickly.

Another official predicted that after the Indian Army had been in Bangladesh for two or three weeks, they would be accepted as a “Hindu army of occupation.”

Kissinger asked: “What will India do with Bangladesh? Will they see it as an independent state or have them negotiate with Islamabad?”

An official responded that India had already recognized Bangladesh as an independent country. Kissinger said then that there was no hope for Pakistan to negotiate with Bangladesh. The objective of the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s government was to force a surrender of the Pakistani troops in Bangladesh within 10 days.

In a telegram from New Delhi on December 6, US Ambassador Kenneth Barnard Keating reported that Indian Foreign Secretary Triloki Nath Kaul had expressed “disappointment, shock and surprise” that the United States had tabled the resolution it did in the UNSC.

On December 5, the Soviet representative on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) vetoed an eight-power draft resolution that called for a ceasefire and mutual withdrawal of forces, as well as intensified efforts to create the conditions necessary for the return of refugees to their homes.

The United States sriously wanted to stick with withdrawal and ceasefire, not a surrender of Pakistan troops. Kissinger assured the Pakistan regime that they were doing the best they could do diplomatically.

The resolution, which was tabled by Argentina, Belgium, Burundi, Italy, Japan, Nicaragua, Sierra-Leone, and Somalia, garnered a vote of 11 to 2 with 2 abstentions but was not adopted because of the negative vote of the Soviet Union (USSR). However, the UN Security Council accepted on December 6 that an impasse had been reached in its deliberations on the conflict in South Asia, and referred the issue to the General Assembly.

An estimated 93,000 Pakistan troops and civilians made an unconditional public surrender in Dhaka on December 16, 1971, which is observed as Victory Day each year.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 22 December 2020

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad

Thaw in Bangladesh, Pakistan, relations?

SALEEM SAMAD

The Pakistani press deliberately avoided the exchange between the Pakistan High Commissioner to Bangladesh Imran Ahmed Siddique and the Bangladesh PM.

There was lots of enthusiasm in the national press in Pakistan and among the Hawks in Islamabad, regarding the ‘quiet diplomacy’ of a rare meeting of Pakistan’s envoy with Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina.

The Hawks in Islamabad failed to realise why Hasina cleverly gave an appointment in December at her official residence Gonobhaban.

Bangladesh observes 16 December as ‘Victory Day’ when 93,000 marauding Pakistan armed forces and civilians surrendered at Dhaka in 1971, and Bangladesh was liberated.

The Pakistani press deliberately avoided the exchange between the Pakistan High Commissioner to Bangladesh Imran Ahmed Siddique and the Bangladesh PM.

Hasina during the parley maintaining social distancing in the wake of coronavirus pandemic, did not hesitate to state that “The incidents of 1971 can’t be forgotten. The pain will remain there forever,” says official news agency BSS.

She also referred to the volumes of a book titled “Secret Documents of Intelligence Branch on Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman”, the prime minister said people can learn historical incidents that occurred during 1948-1971. The documents describe how Pakistan junta interpreted his political activities and intermittently put him behind bars years after years.

She said both the English and Urdu version of the book “Unfinished Memoirs” by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman is one of the bestsellers in Pakistan. “It’s also well-read in Pakistan apart from other countries.”

When the diplomat raised that different bilateral and regional forums have remained inactive for some time and sought Dhaka’s initiative to reactivate the Foreign Office consultations (FCO) between the two countries, Hasina responded that as she believes in regional cooperation and there is no problem in the functioning of the forums.

Hasina, daughter of the architect of Bangladesh independence, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman reiterated Bangladesh’s foreign policy “friendship to all malice towards none”, and said she believes in continuing relationships with other countries too.

Well, the daily newspapers Dawn, Express Tribune, and other online newspapers published spoon-fed news tailored by the Press Information Department in Islamabad –what the citizens of Pakistan would love to hear.

Both Urdu and English press welcomed Hasina’s meeting with the Pakistan diplomat. Whereas she refused to meet the outgoing Indian envoy during the coronavirus lockdown.

The parley was interpreted as yet another sign suggesting warming up of nearly a decade old tensions between the two countries since Bangladesh bifurcated from Pakistan after a bloody war of independence in 1971.

Kamran Yousaf writes in the Express Tribune that the meeting of the Pakistani envoy with the Bangladeshi PM was the result of a ‘quiet diplomacy’.

The ice melted first in July when the Pakistani High Commissioner held a meeting with the Bangladeshi Foreign Minister during the coronavirus outbreak at its peak. The meeting that raised eyebrows in India, the wise-man writes.

A similar circus occurred when Imran Khan and his Bangladeshi counterpart spoke by phone.

What the press in Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad censored was that Hasina, confidently told the Naya Pakistan leader Khan, that his country must express apology for war crimes committed by the Pakistan military during the brutal birth of Bangladesh in 1971.

The diplomatic relationship between the two countries was experiencing hiccups after Pakistan repeatedly condemned the verdicts of the International Crimes Tribunal against the war criminals who are Bangladesh born and possess the nationality of Bangladesh.

Hasina was furious after recurring outlandish statements by Islamabad on war crimes trials were issued. In 2016, Pakistan’s parliament passed a unanimous resolution condemning the “politically motivated” trials.

Bangladesh protested to Pakistan’s condemnation, and diplomatic relations began to deteriorate. The ties sank in a quagmire.

She decided to call back the Bangladesh High Commissioner from Islamabad and lower the diplomatic status of the mission.

Her anger could be understood when she wanted to close down the Bangladesh mission in Islamabad and severe diplomatic relations with Pakistan.

Hastily at the request of India, Saudi Arabia, and the United States, Hasina changed her mind and instead kept the status low by withdrawing High Commissioner, Deputy High Commissioner, and other senior diplomatic officials.

The final blow comes when an official announcement that no tourist visa would be issued except for official visits and business visas. Pakistan also reciprocated the visa regime no visa is issued from Dhaka. Thus the only air connectivity by PIA had to cancel the flights for lack of passengers.

Despite Pakistan’s academia in Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad, intellectuals, rights groups, and mainstream Urdu and English language media often write about Pakistan debacles in Bangladesh war theatre, war crimes trial, and advocates for a thaw in the estranged relationship between two countries. Still, some reactionary elements, mostly Islamist groups, remained negative about the Bangladesh war crimes trial.

The Pakistan media admits that the strained relationship occurred after Bangladesh went ahead with the trial of the war criminals in 2009.

However, the politicians and Islamist parties argue that Sheikh Hasina is settling scores against her opponents and Islamic evangelist and key leaders of the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami.

The politicians do not say that political leaders of the ruling Awami League, Jatiya Party, and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) were also indicted and given maximum punishment.

Not surprised that the nationalist movements in Balochistan and Sind eagerly urge Bangladesh to raise the crime against humanity in their provinces at the international forum. Especially the enforced disappearances, torture, and atrocities against the Baloch and Sindhi nationals.

Recently the human rights abuses against Pashtun nationalists and human rights activists have sharply risen.

Well, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is a dangerous country for religious minorities, especially the Ahmadiyya, Christian, Sikh, and worst are the Hindus. The Hindu teenage and minor girls are victims of abduction, forced conversion, and married to elderly polygamist husbands, happening mostly in Sindh.

Finally, Kamran Yousaf writes that the statement issued by the Bangladeshi Prime Minister’s Office said the incidents of 1971 cannot be forgotten and forgiven. This shows that the Bangladesh government is still adamant that Pakistan must formally apologise over the events of 1971.

To bury the past and thaw the relationship among two South Asian countries, Islamabad must seek a public apology for committing war crimes and thus open a new chapter with Bangladesh.

First published in news portal Shuddhashar, published from Norway on 18 December 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleemsamad@hotmail.com>; Twitter @saleemsamad

An unsung martyr missing since 1971

Col Ziaur Rahman with wife Ferdousi Chowdhury and Shahreen Rahman Lubna (centre)

SALEEM SAMAD

An unsung martyr missing since 1971Col AF Ziaur Rahman, principal of Sylhet Medical College was abducted by the Pakistan army and never was seen again.

Possibly thousands of unsung martyrs have not been properly documented. Their names are not mentioned in speeches of a politician, nor are they mentioned in textbooks, and not even documented in liberation war history.

Lieutenant Colonel Abul Fazal Ziaur Rahman, of Pakistan Army Medical Corps (AMC), is one unsung hero, missing since 1971.

Col Zia was posted as Principal and Superintendent of Sylhet Medical College (now Sylhet MAG Osmani Medical College) in 1968.

Despite being cautioned by his well-wishers and family, he ignored official protocol and wearing military uniform joined the countrywide anti-Ayub student protests in 1969. Incidentally, one of Ayub Khan's favorite playing card partners was a young army doctor Zia in Rawalpindi.

He was often visited by Col Osmani, senior Awami League leaders at his official residence in Sylhet for his outspoken support for independence from the shackles of the Pakistan junta.

Born in Araihazar Upazila, Narayanganj in 1926, and studied medicine at Campbell Medical College (now Nil Ratan Sircar Medical College), Kolkata. After graduation in 1947, he joined Pakistan Army Medical Corps in 1949.

He was visibly angered when General Yayha Khan, Chief Martial Law Administrator (CMLA) and President of Pakistan on March 1, 1971, cancelled the maiden parliament session scheduled to be held in Dhaka.

The cancellation sparked the nationwide street protest. The Sylhet Medical College was overwhelmed with wounded protesters and treated for bullet wounds and other injuries. Col Zia was an experienced surgeon and took care of the patients at the Operation Theatre himself.

One day in early March, Col Zia responding to a phone call from Col Sharfaraz of Sylhet Regional Martial Law Administrator, barked at him and said "It is simple, I will not treat [your soldiers]. You are shooting our innocent civilians [Bangalee] right and left and you are asking for treatment?"

He argued: "Your soldiers are CMH entitled, so take them to CMH," according to a short biography by his wife Prof Ferdousi Chowdhury, published in Shadhinata Juddhei Army Medical Corps (2010).

In another round of heated argument erupted with the Punjabi officer visited the medical college the same day. Troops accompanying Sarfaraz urged order to shoot Col Zia when he was defending Banglaee nationalism and demanded that Pakistan troops should withdraw from his motherland.

From somewhere he got a small flag of independent Bangladesh on March 3 and while driving Sylhet city the flag fluttered in his official car. Another flag was hoisted at his residence.

His wife Prof Ferdousi, believes that the display of the flag on his car and residence had invited him trouble. Similarly, another AMC officer Shaheed Lt. Col. Hye dared to display the flag in his car and was brutally killed.

His home radio was seized and was unable to hear the historic public speech of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on 7th March at Race Course Maidan. He heard the summary of the speech at the hospital.

He told his colleagues as well as the Pakistani soldiers that all directives have been given by Bangabandhu, now it's time to join the struggle for independence.

Five days after the "Operation Searchlight" crackdown by Pakistan troops to smash the rebellion, on 1 April, a fire-fight occurred at Punjab Regiment in Sylhet. An army vehicle dropped a grievously wounded Bangalee military officer and a doctor.

On April 9, Pakistan troops raided the hospital on information that officers who defected and joined Mukti Bahini were being treated and sheltered in the college.

The unwarranted death of his two colleagues made his blood boiling further heightened his anger and hatred towards the Pakistanis.

Col Zia was confined to his residential quarter and not allowed to buy essentials and daily groceries. His family along with his wife, their daughter, and son starved. The soldiers denied buying milk for his youngest son.

During his confinement, Col Zia often told his wife that "Bangabandhu can be compared with Mahatma Gandhi only."

They were rescued from confinement by a parent of a former student of Col Zia. After a few days, they felt that the shelter was not safe. They decided to return to the staff quarter of the medical college, where most of the residents have fled for safety. They broke open the door of a resident doctor and stayed from 7 April.

Shahreen Rahman Lubna, the only daughter of Col Zia was playing with dolls in front of the quarter. A Lieutenant arrived with few soldiers and asked the whereabouts of Col Zia.

She volunteered to take them upstairs where they were leaving as a refugee. On that day, Col Zia desired to eat 'bhuna-khichuri'. When Ferdousi was preparing his favourite menu, he went to take a shower.

The young officer said he has been asked to report to the military camp immediately. Zia was expecting this, so he quickly changed into a shirt and a pair of trousers. The 'khichuri' was lying on the dining table while he was escorted away.

Like thousands of victims of enforced disappearance by the Pakistani occupation force on 14 April, none have returned home.

At least 15 doctors and 122 healthcare staff of the Army Medical Corps were martyred. Ten members of AMC received gallantry recognition by the state.

A student's hostel at Osmani Medical College has been named after Shaheed Lt Col Zia, which heartens his family members.

Ferdousi Chowdhury retired as Head of Geography from Begum Badrunessa Government Women's College and also was a teacher of Geography at Eden Girls College. She died of old age complications in May 2017.

Lubna was five years old on a fateful day. Since then she never observed Pahela Baishak. The celebration of Bangla New Year's festivity does not arouse feelings in her life. She misses her father who loved her the most.

On that day she remains in solitude and silently weeps the whole day.

First published in The Asian Age, 16 December 2020

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Austerity, economic recovery, and the debt trap

SALEEM SAMAD

Why developing nations such as Bangladesh must be especially wary of how they seek to recover from the Covid-19 fallout

Development economists and civil society organizations (CSOs) argue that austerity measures adopted by the governments of third-world countries are not a solution during the coronavirus crisis.

They raise questions about austerity, gradually imposed after the Covid-19 crisis due to the massive debt contract. Immediate suspension of debt payments and better still, cancellation of debt, must take priority.

Instead, they advise governments to opt for economic recovery. The economic recovery will only be possible from “debt relief” and “debt justice.”

Bangladesh and other developing countries have given special attention in the wake of the coronavirus crisis and engaged in servicing external debts to international financial institutions.

The governments are deliberately diverting funds from education, human development, and infrastructure development sectors, whereas the health and safety net programs are implemented under a shoe-string budget.

According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the pandemic has pushed another 32 million people in poor countries into abject poverty.

Another report by the International Finance Institute highlights the $272 trillion global debt, a new high, in the third quarter of 2020 and warns us about the “attack of the debt tsunami.”

There are issues in which countries while seeking assistance from international financial institutions, are often imposed conditionalities that have not necessarily been negotiated with borrower states. These conditionalities are even seen in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The government deliberately does not involve the citizens to participate in consultations, discussions, or negotiations. Such conditionalities increase the country's chances of falling into a “debt-trap.”

Ultimately, it is the people that have to foot the debt repayment after authorities impose additional taxes and levies to recover from the vicious cycle of debt.

According to standards of international law, international financial institutions should be held responsible for complicity in the imposition of economic reforms that violate human rights, which is well documented.

Governments and major multilateral institutions like the World Bank, the IMF, and regional development banks have used repayment of public debt to generalize policies that have damaged public health systems.

This has meant job cuts in the health sector, job instability, reduced numbers of hospital beds, closing down neighbourhood health services, increased medical costs both for care and medicines, under-investment in infrastructure and equipment, and privatization of various sections of the health sector along with public under-investment in research and development for treatment, which is to the advantage of big private pharmaceutical groups and companies.

Even before the Covid-19 pandemic broke out, these policies had already led to an enormous loss of human lives, and all around the world, health personnel were organizing protests.

Neither the World Bank nor the IMF have cancelled any debts since the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic.

Although they have made endless calculated declarations to give the impression that they are taking very strong measures. This is completely false.

Worse still, since March 2020, the IMF has extended the loan agreements that entail continuing with the structural measures enumerated above. As for the World Bank, since March 2020 it has received more in debt repayments from developing countries than it has paid out to finance either donations or loans.

Eminent development economist, Dr Atiur Rahman states that “We want to fight the coronavirus and, beyond that, improve the health and living conditions of populations, [for which] emergency measures must be taken.”

Immediate suspension of debt payments and cancellation of debt must take priority, suggests former Bangladesh Bank’s governor Dr Rahman.

The austerity measures do not contribute to economic recovery, but instead have negative consequences in terms of economic growth, debt ratios, and equality, and routinely result in a series of negative human rights impacts.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune, 8 December 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

A prisoner’s tale

SALEEM SAMAD

Of fictitious cases, police brutality, and state-sanctioned intimidation

“Saleem Samad, a freelance reporter and local correspondent for the international press watchdog Reporters Sans Frontiers, was arrested earlier today (November 29, 2002) in connection with Channel 4,” writes The Guardian newspaper.

My arrest was made three days after British journalist Zaiba Malik and Italian cameraman Bruno Sorrentino who were commissioned by Channel 4 TV to produce a documentary on terrorism for its Unreported World, were also arrested along with their interpreter Priscilla Raj.

Journalist/film-maker Shahriar Kabir was also arrested under the sedition case. The rightist regime was enraged by his campaign for the trial of the war criminals of 1971.

The regime to harass critics also accused Advocate Rana Das Gupta (presently prosecutor of the International Crimes Tribunal) and former Dainik Janakantha’s Cox’s Bazar correspondent Tofael Ahmed.

During the repressive regime during 2002-2006 of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s (BNP) coalition with Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami, at least 80 journalists were arrested and tortured -- another 200 journalists were slapped with trumped-up charges.

Scores of journalists were brutally attacked and were hospitalized, mostly in the southern districts -- from Satkhira to Bhola. Many fled their district for their safety, either after being physically attacked or receiving death threats.

The infamous Hawa Bhaban was the mastermind of harassment and intimidation -- which led to numerous arrests, including war crimes historian Prof Muntassir Mamun, Enamul Hoque Chowdhury (present editor of the Daily Sun), and journalist Barun Bhaumik Nayan, among many others. Both the journalists were brutalized during interrogation to sign fictitious confessional statements.

In a shameful move, the pro-government journalist leaders of Bangladesh Federal Union of Journalists (BFUJ), Dhaka Union of Journalists (DUJ), and National Press Club refrained from protesting the arrests, torture, and intimidations of hundreds of journalists. Instead, the journalist leaders, spearheaded by Shaukat Mahmood, a journalist turned politician desired to “teach the journalists a lesson” with the blessing of Hawa Bhaban, the office of Tarique Rahman, and the rogue son of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia.

It felt as if a thunderbolt struck me when Mozzem Hossain, a journalist of BBC Bangla in Bush House, London told me that the foreign journalists, Priscilla Raj, and the driver of a rented vehicle were arrested under a fictitious sedition case.

I quickly gave my first reaction to both BBC Bangla, BBC World Service, and numerous international media. The daily newspapers and private news channels had been agog with the sensational news of the detention of foreign journalists.

The news also splashed in major global media, as the regime’s “Operation Clean Heart” was squarely blamed for extra-judicial deaths and enforced disappearances of hundreds of opposition members deemed a threat to the ruling party. Janakantha newspaper reported that the FIR filed with Motijheel Police Station had only four names -- foreign journalists, an interpreter, and the name of a driver. 

Next to the driver’s name was the handwritten name “alias Saleem Samad.” My name was blue-pencilled by the Home Affairs Ministry, by the hybrid journalist leaders. 

My defense lawyers, Barrister Amirul Islam and Barrister Tania Amir, explained that I was neither aged 28, nor a driver by profession, and my parent’s name and address do not match the one mentioned in the police report. 

On the fourth day, the home of my parents in Pallabi, where I also lived with my family, was thoroughly searched for 28 (RPT 28) hours. 

My family was on the run, as security agencies wanted to retrieve the spare hard-disk from my son Atisha Rahbar. My parents were locked downstairs, while every inch of the two-storied house was thoroughly searched. All the books and documents were carefully scanned. 

On the fifth day, in the wee hours of Friday during the month of Ramadan, I was picked up by detectives from a flat in Uttara belonging to a Crack Platoon veteran, my school-mate Ishtiaq Aziz Ulfat. 

I was brought to the Detective Branch office at Mintoo Road. A delinquent police officer Kohinoor Miah attacked me with a baton and, also brandishing his service pistol on my forehead, accused me of betraying the country and slandering the image of the state. Well, it was Khaleda’s regime that smeared the country.

After 55 days, on the order of the High Court, I was freed on January 18, 2003.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 1 December 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

The depths of debt

SALEEM SAMAD

Developing countries such as Bangladesh are struggling to balance fighting Covid-19 and keep up with their growing public debt

The global leaders have realized that the coronavirus crisis has jolted the world from a slumber, to understand that the crisis has unveiled the spectre of a larger global crisis.

The health care crisis and its cascading economic consequences are predicted to further plunge many countries in the developing world into an unprecedented crisis, further pushing millions of people into poverty and starvation.

These conditions shine a strong light on the continuing debt problem that stands in the way of people’s survival -- the fight against inequality, the realization of their human rights, sovereignty and the self-determination of people, economic, gender, and ecological justice, and the pursuit of a dignified life.

Hundreds of international, regional, and civil society organizations (CSOs) including Action Aid, CADTM International, Oxfam, Third World Network, joined by 120 Bangladesh NGOs led by Coast Trust, are demanding to suspend the realization of debt instalments for all public debts of developing countries combating the Covid-19 pandemic so that the ongoing coronavirus crisis is not aggravated.

They call upon world leaders, national governments, and financial institutions both public and private, to take urgent action in compliance with their obligations and responsibilities, and commit to unconditional cancellation of public external debt payments.

The CSOs demanded the suspension of all instalments of public debt for at least the financial year 2020-2021 so that countries can develop the capacity to combat the pandemic and overcome the impact of this disaster on its citizens’ health, food, and economic vulnerabilities.

An international statement issued during Global Week (October 10-17) of action for debt cancellation sought the decisive and full solution to the debt problem as part of the profound transformation of economic and financial systems that the present crises so urgently demand.

Meanwhile, the CSO network appealed to the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), Asian Development Bank (ADB), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and other bilateral, regional, and multilateral development financiers of Bangladesh.

Bangladesh’s economy is severely under stress due to the additional burden of pandemic management, while the country has a budget deficit of $17.65 billion in the current financial year.

The CSOs in Bangladesh are trying to urgently bring to global attention that the government of Bangladesh for the current financial year is being forced to allocate $6.20bn for servicing external debts to international financial institutions.

They are urging the multilateral, regional, and bilateral financial institutions to strictly follow the suggestions made by the World Bank and IMF and suspend the servicing of the public debts for 2020, so that the government can use its resources to fund initiatives to help the people in overcoming the Covid-19 challenge.

On the other hand, the G-20 governments announced the Debt Service Suspension Initiative (DSSI) -- not a cancelation but merely an eight-month delay of up to $12bn worth of payments for public debts.

Much of this debt is illegitimate, the CSO network argues. The international creditors lend irresponsibly and unfairly, driven by predatory lending. The money is used to finance harmful projects and policies, failing to comply with legal and democratic requirements, is saddled with onerous and unjust terms, and incurred by private corporations but assumed by governments or incurred through public guarantees of private profits.

The conditional loans, including cuts in public services and social protection, and severe austerity programs, have also caused as great if not greater harm than debt servicing, especially on women and girls, indigenous people, and the most impoverished and vulnerable people and communities.

CSOs argue that the demand is much more than “debt relief,” but also for “debt justice.”

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 24 November 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, and recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter @saleemsamad

Feeding the children in coronavirus pandemic

Children School Meal Policy/Photo: Latif Hossain

SALEEM SAMAD

The coronavirus pandemic severely dents free meal programme to help mitigate hunger and malnutrition amongst the most vulnerable school children

In 240 government and BRAC-run educational institutions for children in Trishal, Mymensingh, thousands of school students enjoyed attending classes as the authorities provided a free midday meal.

The cooked food ingredients include rice, lentils, and mixed vegetables -- in total 178 grams which costs Tk10.50. The school students’ nutritional intake of calories was 545 kcal and protein 11.46 gm. The hot cooked meal is culture-specific and nutrition-rich. Dietary diversity is ensured through a change in the recipe to maintain appetite.

The midday meal in rural and urban schools mitigates short-term hunger -- for most students, it was the only full meal.

A study by key civil servants in Bangladesh known as MATT (Managing at Top Team) showed that almost 60% of children go to school hungry. 

In the third year, the school attendance in urban areas in BRAC-operated midday meal projects increased from 55% (2011) to 81% (2013), and in rural areas, attendance increased from 64% (2011) to 92% (2013).

Basanta Kumar, Kar chief of Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition (GAIN) in Bangladesh pushed the idea of a midday meal in schools with the Bangladesh government in 2011 after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s political pledge in Vision 2021 articulated a strong priority on primary school education and nutrition to ensure food security.

However, the Covid-19 crisis has contributed to a child rights crisis. For children, the costs of the pandemic were immediate.

In Bangladesh, like most developing countries, accessibility and affordability of food and nutrition become challenging, while keeping staple food distribution and local food markets is an uphill task for the governments amidst a lack of accountability and weak transparency.

The brunt of the suffering when it comes to access to adequate nutrition with depleting income sources falls on the children, adolescents, and women.

According to the Primary Education Census (2011), there are 20 million primary school-age children, of which 18.4 million children are enrolled in primary schools.

Various studies show that quality education in primary school is hindered by a high dropout rate caused by hunger and malnutrition and widespread micronutrient deficiencies.

The provision of nutritious food improves the cognitive and physical development of children, remarks Basanta. An estimated 20.9% have sub-clinical Vitamin-A deficiency, 19.1% are anaemic, and 40% are iodine deficient.

To ensure the sustainability of the free-midday meal in schools in Trishal, local government representatives, school committees, and participation of mothers of the students have ensured accountability of free mid-day meals in schools.

Unfortunately, after the departure of Basanta, the fruitful negotiations with development partners and international multilateral donors have become weak.

The pioneering program initiated by GAIN with development partners BRAC and Banchte Shekha emerged as a “game-changer.” Recently the government renewed commitment to replicate and scale up the school feeding model nation-wide in primary schools.

“It is critical to ensure food diversity and adequate nutrition, including key micronutrients and fortified staples,” Basanta said.

On Universal Children’s Day which is on November 20, the United Nations claims a definite impact has been found in investing in children. In response to the global nutrition crisis, school feeding programs can be adapted and scaled up to reach the most vulnerable children.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 17 November 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He can be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad

Myanmar polls a step closer to China

Will a Suu Kyi win help Myanmar stay in China’s good graces?

SALEEM SAMAD

When the world was extremely preoccupied with the tense Trump-Biden American elections, Myanmar held its parliamentary polls on Sunday (November 8), which are expected to deliver a government with a strong popular mandate in Southeast Asia.

Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party (NLD) won a landslide in 2015 and established the first civilian government after 50 years of global isolation and ruthless military regime. Five years later, Suu Kyi remains popular, but 2020 has widened the image from 2015.

Suu Kyi has fallen from the grace of world leaders and is no longer a democracy icon, primarily because she mishandled the rogue military crackdown against the ethnic Rohingya Muslim population, which the United Nations said had “the hallmarks of genocide.”

More than a million Rohingya fled from Rakhine State into neighbouring Bangladesh in 2016 and 2017 after the military waged a campaign of persecution, which the United Nations dubbed as “textbook ethnic cleansing.”

The Rohingya’s citizenship rights were deliberately and permanently erased, restricting them to vote under the discriminatory 1982 Citizenship Law. Even the Rohingya political parties were banned from contesting the elections.

In the face of global criticism, last year Suu Kyi defended her country’s military crackdown and denied genocide at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, explaining that the claims were “incomplete and misleading.”

Many international observers fear that the November elections will not be free, fair, and credible, citing disenfranchisement and campaign restrictions imposed by the Union Election Commission (UEC).

Military chief Gen Min Aung Hlaing’s warnings to the UEC on electioneering directives soured relationships with the government. President U Win Myint stated that the military’s “remarks over the election were inciting instability and causing public concern.”

Bertil Lintner, a Swedish journalist who has written extensively about Myanmar’s armed conflicts, politics, and ethnic crises for nearly 40 years, says it is unfortunate that elections have been suspended in several constituencies, primarily in ethnic areas where armed conflict rages against the Myanmar regime.

China wants Suu Kyi to win Myanmar’s polls. China’s interests will be better served by the Suu Kyi-led status quo than a return to military-dominated rule. Much has changed since the leaders in Beijing favoured Myanmar’s authoritarian military regime and were deeply suspicious of then opposition leader Suu Kyi.

The Chinese Communist Party has made no secret that they would prefer to see Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy (NLD) win and are wary of the military top brass, whom they find increasingly difficult to influence and control.

Lintner also agrees that the Myanmar foreign policy will likely take its course after the poll -- towards a stronger and closer relationship with China. While the Tatmadaw sees it as their pledge to defend the nation’s sovereignty and seeks to lessen dependence on China, Suu Kyi turned to Beijing for the economic and controversial Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) after her allies and admirers in the West distanced themselves from her over the Rohingya refugee crisis.

First published in the Dhaka Tribune on 10 November 2020

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com. Twitter @saleemsamad