Happy encounters with Prof Anisuzzaman

SALEEM SAMAD

It would be an aspersion to write an obituary of a stalwart like Professor Anisuzzaman, who is embedded in the history of Bangladesh. He may not be a tall person, but the gigantic litterateur had a loud voice indeed, which had been heard in all the regimes which governed the country.

He never compromised to speak up to establish a secular nation and also demanded justice for those marauding Pakistan army henchmen for committing crimes against humanity during the brutal birth of Bangladesh. Prof Anisuzzaman, popularly known as 'Anis Sir', was a bitter critic of giving political space to Islamist parties advocating 'political Islam' regime in a secular, tolerant and pluralist society. Well, it was summer in Kolkata. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies, India (MAKAIAS), a state-run think-tank, organised a seminar on Bangladesh and India in 1996 at the colonial era majestic Great Eastern Hotel.

Dr. Ranabir Samaddar, a leading Indian scholar and Director of MAKAIAS selected me to present a paper. He cautioned that the paper should be taken seriously as it was an academic exercise, not journalism. My presentation was scheduled for the second day. I was excited to learn that the session would be chaired by the revered personality Prof Anisuzzaman. He flew from New Delhi, where he was on a stint as Visiting Scholar at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU).

On the podium, he was quickly introduced to the paper presenters from Jadavpur University, Kolkata University and from Punjab University. He was visibly confused when he heard that I was a journalist and the paper was my first.

He told the gathering of eminent academics that as the last speaker I would speak for five minutes only. I was embarrassed and to express my anger I abruptly stopped my presentation on the fifth minute, seeking an apology from the audience due to time constraints. Within moments there was pandemonium in the seminar room. The chairperson hesitantly extended another five minutes for me.

This time I retorted, "I request the chair for another 15 minutes, please." Hearing the murmuring in the room, which included several senior journalists from Kolkata, he said: "Okay, another 10 minutes only, but please finish up!" Moments after my speech, the floor was opened for questions and comments. Unfortunately, not a single question was directed towards the three academics.

My paper was on rural women in Bangladesh who violently protested the donor dictated development projects. At that time the exiled writer Taslima Nasreen's book Lajja (Shame) by Penguin India had been published. The Indian media were vocal about her ordeal in Bangladesh. My thematic paper drew a barrage of comments. Finally, Anis Sir patted me on the back and softly said in Bangla to take notes.

Like a reporter, I wrote down the issues raised in the hall. Despite being nervous, I confidently responded that there were thousands of Taslima Nasreens in Bangladesh's villages. Then why were we only talking about the feminist writer? This comment caused another round of uproar in the hall, but it was time for a lunch break.

While leaving the podium Anis Sir asked, 'Have we met in Dhaka?" I  smiled. "Sir, we met several times, but me as a reporter."  I quickly added that two of his favourite students, who were senior teachers in universities in Chittagong and Dhaka, were my childhood friends. He asked me, "Who?" I replied again, "Sir, your best students you love the most."

Months later one of his favourite students related to me what Anis Sir had told him: "I have never heard of a journalist who would impress a room full of academics."

One morning in 1997, he called me and requested me to visit his quarters at the Dhaka University campus. On my arrival, he said he had returned from Kolkata. He gave me the book, "State, Development and Political Culture: Bangladesh and India", edited by Barun De and Ranabir Samaddar and published by Har-Anand Publications, New Delhi, 1997. He said, "I have read your article with deep interest in the book, which you presented at Kolkata.

It's indeed a brilliant piece. I never thought the agitations of village women against foreign projects could be a unique research theme." I smiled in appreciation. While living in self-exile in Canada I had an opportunity for an unlimited "jompesh adda" with him in Toronto for a couple of days in the summer of 2008. I quietly said, "Sir, do you remember you wanted to elbow me out at the Kolkata seminar?" He heartily laughed and told others that was when he accidentally met me! Laughter again!

Well, twice I met Prof Anisuzzaman early this year. On 19 February at a reception in honour of his 83rd birth anniversary at Dhaka Club hosted by Khondoker Rashidul Huq (Naba Bhai). Final exchange of pleasantries was on 11 March at the launching of singer Anamika Tripura's musical album on Rabindranath Tagore at the National Museum.
Thus I will never hear Anis Sir say: "Saleem, sob khobor bhalo toh!"

First published in the Asian Age, 21 May 2020

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. Twitter @saleemsamad; Email:saleemsamad@hotmail.com

Politics in Bangladesh: No quick fixes

David Lewis

Bangladesh’s political problems are unlikely to be solved soon, whether or not there are fresh elections.

The Awami League’s (AL) Sheikh Hasina was sworn in on 12 January for a third spell as Bangladesh’s prime minister after her party swept the polls, which had been boycotted by the opposition Bangladesh National Party (BNP). Hasina argues that her win in elections held on 5 January is legitimate, despite the BNP boycott and the fact that at least 26 people were killed during the election, making it the deadliest in Bangladesh’s history. Khaleda Zia, the leader of the opposition BNP and two-time former prime minister, has termed the election a ‘scandalous farce’ and rejected the outcome.

According to the AL, the party won up to 80 per cent of the seats contested in an election that saw a nearly 40 per cent turnout in the 147 districts (out of 300) where voting took place. But according to neutral election observers, these figures are suspect. They estimate a voter turnout of approximately 20 per cent (or even as low as 12 per cent), and also point to widespread ballot-stuffing in the AL’s favour. Turnout was also likely affected by the fact that more than 1,000 BNP activists have been arrested in recent weeks. Given that voter turnout in the previous election in 2008 was 86 per cent, it is a stretch to say the electoral outcome reflects the will of the people of Bangladesh.

It remains unclear how long Hasina will be able to hold on to power in the face of a full-blown political crisis and increasing pressure from the opposition and international community for a new election. Since 8 January, the BNP has been blocking roads, railways and waterways in an effort to topple the government. Zia, who was under house arrest for the first two weeks of January, continues to demand that fresh elections be held under a neutral caretaker government to minimise the risk of poll rigging.

After the relatively successful elections that have taken place regularly and returned the opposition to power each time since the military was overthrown in 1990, some suggest Bangladesh has edged closer to a situation that is reminiscent of the one-party state that had emerged in the mid-1970s, and the various sham elections held by the military during the 1980s.

The underlying problems that have brought this situation to a head are complex and unlikely to be solved soon, whether or not there are fresh elections. The first is the continuing polarisation of deeply held views around the legacy of 1971 in relation to the need to secure justice and reconciliation, and the use of religion in politics.

The second is the centrality of an entrenched patron clientelist politics that has led political parties and their supporters into the confrontational style of ‘winner takes all’ politics. This has helped create an illiberal democracy since the 1990s, making political party reform almost impossible and keeping the country’s much vaunted civil society relatively weak.

The third is the international context in which Bangladesh’s politics is evolving: Jamaat-e-Islami’s links with the Middle East; India’s broad support for the AL government; the United States’ preference for the BNP over the AL; and the growing importance of China as it seeks to build influence in the region. Bangladesh’s growing geopolitical importance may bring both opportunities and dangers, but the country will be unable to tackle these as long as its political crisis deepens.

First published in the London School of Economic blog, January 17, 2014

David Lewis is Professor of Social Policy and Development at LSE and author of “Bangladesh: Politics, Economy and Civil Society“

Bangladesh: Are our leaders at war against citizens?

Otherwise how can they be so destructive?

MAHFUZ ANAM

In wars, enemies not only destroy the soldiers and weapons of their opponents but also each other’s industries, agriculture, roads, bridges, food supply chain, etc., with the express purpose of making the common people of the opponent’s country suffer.

The way our two leaders are refusing to reach any compromise, the indifference they are showing about the impact of their actions on our industry, agricultural products, income of the poor, disruption of food supply chain, etc.,  force us to ask the question as to whether or not they are at war against a country called Bangladesh. Is it their wish to make our common people suffer? Is it their wish that our productive capacities built at huge expense and with exceptional leadership be destroyed? Is it their wish that we return to the label of a ‘basket case’ after having proven so determinedly and forcefully that the original remark was based on false premises?

If not, then how can they be pushing the country and its people towards an end that everybody knows will be disastrous? How can they be disrupting education of all levels of students and demoralising them in ways that are making them lose faith in the future of the country? How can they continue to call hartals and blockades for weeks, pushing more and more people below the poverty line? How can they knowingly create a situation which will inevitably lead to RMG buyers shifting to other countries? How can they set fire to public transport, killing and burning innocent travellers and commuters? How can they be destroying state and private properties in the way that mercenaries do inside enemy territories? How can they be just onlookers while our dream for a better future slowly but surely fades?

Some of us may brush aside the above questions as rather exaggerated. Bangladesh, they will say, has seen similar political crises before and has survived. So will it again. While we hope that they prove to be correct, we still have reasons to believe that the situation is far graver than before.

The level and cruel nature of the violence that we have seen this time around has surpassed the violence of the past in intensity and fury. Throwing petrol bombs into a running bus full of passengers can have only one purpose — kill people. Setting fire to vehicles with people inside cannot but have only one aim — kill people. From January till date, 174 people have been killed and more than 4,600 injured. This makes for an average of 14.5 citizens of Bangladesh killed per month and 383 injured. These deaths are from political violence alone. The question is: Why should even a single citizen die just because our two leaders refuse to compromise?

What are these two leaders fighting for anyway? Sheikh Hasina wants to stick to the present constitution and Khaleda Zia wants to go back to the previous version     of it.

What is the reason for Sheikh Hasina’s sudden love for this constitution? Because she amended it to her liking in 2011, without consulting anybody, and abolished the caretaker government system meant to oversee national elections every five years. Why is an election time government so vital? Because our history says that every government uses the state machinery to influence the election. If we recall, it was Sheikh Hasina and her party that popularised the idea of the caretaker government and forced Begum Zia and her party — vehemently opposed to the idea — to incorporate it in the constitution in 1996.

The reason was as clear as it was simple. The incumbent government cannot be trusted to hold a free and fair election. So the incumbent government must go and be replaced with a neutral caretaker government that will hold a free and fair election. People accepted this argument and went along with the AL and its chief’s proposition.

Today, ironically, the situation stands totally reversed. The original proponent has now abolished it and the original opponent now wants it. And we, the people, must die because they cannot agree about it.

What is most disgusting is the duplicity and immorality of it all. The very arguments that the AL is putting forward today against the caretaker government system — continuity of the constitution, unelected people running the government, etc — were the very ones (in fact the wordings are the same) given by the BNP in 1996. And, conversely, what the BNP is saying today in favour of the caretaker government were the same arguments given by the AL to justify why its leaders wanted it. Both have shifted their respective positions because it increases their chances of, for one, retaining power and, for the other, capturing it.

Thus there is no principle, no ideology, no moral or ethical questions involved in today’s standoff between Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia. It is a clear case of fighting for power and the people and the country be damned.

As a freedom fighter and as a proud citizen of this country, I feel ashamed that a UN envoy has to shuttle between our two supreme leaders to bring about an understanding between them so that people are no longer brutally killed, an outsider has to plead with them to compromise so that our people suffer less, so that our factories can run, our children can go to schools, our doctors can attend to their patients, our poor day labourers can earn enough to feed their families, so that we can again walk on our streets with a modicum of security. I feel a thorough sense of betrayal knowing that a foreigner has to fly in to teach us how to be civil to each other. Even so, we will be grateful if we learn.

We can no longer afford to be victims of the vendetta between these two leaders.

First published in The Daily Star, Dhaka, Bangladesh, December 10, 2013

Mahfuz Anam is Bangladesh 1971 liberation war veteran and editor of The Daily Star

The haunted Hindus of Santhia

Saleem Samad in Santhia, Pabna

As she loiters past damaged houses in Sahaparha village, 5-year old ‘Orgho’ fumes over her smashed water mug, plastic chair and, most loudly, about the damaged television in her house.

She blames the Nov 2 mayhem on Kali Puja day on 'dustu chelera’ (naughty boys).

Her mother is cautious, as she recollects how she hid in a smelly toilet for three hours to escape an armed mob of fanatic Muslims.

A part of her house was smashed to smithereens.

The State Minister for Home Shamsul Hoque Tuku had gathered at Karamjat madrasa ground to thwart Opposition protests, barely 10 kilometres from Bongram bazaar at Santhia.

That was just before the Muslim mob, fuming over a reported Facebook posting denigrating Prophet Muhammad, went on an orgy of violence in Santhia.

Sahaparha was one of the worst affected because the Facebook posting was blamed on Rajib Saha, a resident of the village.

The conspirators deliberately chose Saturday, a weekly haat-bazaar day.

On the day hundreds of photocopies of an alleged Facebook posting were distributed, indicating that Rajib Saha had insulted the Prophet.

The distribution left Muslims of all parties inflamed.

What followed was hours of violence in which atleast 40 Hindu homes were ravaged.

The young women are yet to return to villages, as fear grips the Hindus in the area.

They are worried because those suspected of perpetrating the mayhem have not been arrested.

Worse, the Hindus now suspect that many who made up the violent mob enjoy protection of senior Awami League politicians including local MP and State Minister for Home Shamsul Hoque Tuku.

This is what has shocked them most -- how could those attacking them enjoy Awami League protection!

Tuku has also been blamed for letting the police on Awami League dissidents close to senior leader Prof Abu Sayeed, one time close confidante of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

But what about the alleged Facebook posting!

Like many similar so-called Facebook postings that inflamed Muslims and led to anti-minority violence elsewhere in the country like Ramu, this one allegedly by Rajib Saha also appeared a complete fake.

Journalists in Pabna argued that the photocopy of the Facebook ostensibly posted by Rajib was 'photoshopped' from a fake account “Innocent Rajib”.

Much like the alleged Facebook posting at Ramu in Cox's Bazar in September last year, in which hundreds of Buddhist homes were vandalised and scores of pagodas desecrated.

The miscreants in both Ramu and Santhia seem to have lost no time to loot valuables and cash in the second wave of violence following the initial fury.

Superintendent of Police (SP) of Pabna Mirajuddin Ahmed promised that the perpetrators would be brought to justice.

But he was quick to add that the attackers had not been identified. Except for those who spoke to Rajib's father Babul Saha in the morning.

Have the conspirators been arrested? ‘No,’ said Babul Saha who filed the case with police.

Ataikula Police Station OC Rezaul Karim claims they have arrested several of the suspects. Three cases have been lodged including one by police for obstruction to perform duty.

Police officials told visiting civil society groups, rights activists and journalists that those named by Babul Saha have been arrested.

But Saha said he had only heard of the arrests and was not able to confirm them.

Deputy Commissioner of Pabna Ashraf Uddin explained it was a 'police matter' and progressing “very well”.

But he said the civil administration had nothing much to do, except for initiating a confidence-building process after the violence.

The victims of Bonogram, Sahaparha and Goshparha have rejected the district administration’s offer of relief of 30 sacks of rice (each weighing 28 kg).

Rajib's uncle Kartick Saha says they need protection, not rice which they can afford to buy.

Like the Buddhists in Ramu, the Hindus in Santhia want the government to compensate them for the damaged temples to facilitate reconstruction.

A RAB platoon and two platoons of armed police have been deployed in Santhia. Police presence, says the SP, will deter a repeat of Nov 2.

He added a permanent police camp will be established there.

Local journalists say minister Tuku received news of violence in 10 minutes. But he did not do enough to protect the Hindus.

A small police contingent arrived within 30 minutes after desperate phone calls from Babul Saha.

But the larger force of police and RAB came only after three hours of intense violence, the elders complain.

Most Hindu elders do not remember when they had faced violence like they did on Nov 2.

Some recollect violence during 1971 by marauding Pakistan army and their local collaborators.

As most Hindus here had fled to India for safety, they did not have any direct experience of violence -- not until Nov 2.

Like other planned attacks on religious minorities elsewhere in Bangladesh, the perpetrators targeted the house of worship to break the morale of the minorities.

It is a pattern that has often been repeated -- at Taindong (Khagrhachharhi), Ramu and Ukhia (Cox’s Bazar), Sathkira, Begumganj, Gaibanda, Lalmonirhat and other places.

But the biggest worry -- leaders of all political parties belonging to the majority community, despite their political differences, seem to take the same line of connivance or indifference when minorities are attacked.

First published in BDNEWS24.COM, 11 Nov 2013

Saleem Samad, is an Ashoka Fellow for journalism, an award winning investigative reporter, is a freelance contributor to bdnews24.com

Bangladesh Bloggers Face Constant Death Threats Since Government Labeled Them 'Atheist'

Photo by Munir Uz Zaman/AFP/Getty Images: Islamists burn an effigy of a blogger in Dhaka, Bangladesh, during a Feb. 24, 2013, nationwide strike demanding that the "atheist" bloggers be hanged

EMRAN HOSSAIN

Even though Rasel Parvez is out of prison, he isn't out of danger.

"They have pushed my life to a state in which I cannot walk free. I remain in self-confinement day after day, and my social relations are mostly snapped," said Parvez, 36, in an interview with The Huffington Post.

He is talking about the Bangladeshi government, which arrested him and three other bloggers last month for "derogatory comments about Islam." Parvez, who is currently out on bail, has been branded with the label "atheist" blogger because he dared to criticize the abuse of religion by politicians.

It took Parvez and Subrata Adhikary Shuvo, 24, another arrested blogger, more than a month to obtain bail. The other two -- Mashiur Rahman Biplob, 42, and Asif Mohiuddin, 30 -- remain in jail.

But Parvez's own home in Dhaka, Bangladesh's capital city, has become something of a prison, as he fears for his life whenever he steps outside.

After his release from jail, some of his most vociferous critics took to Facebook to offer rewards to anyone who killed Parvez, with one offer as high as $12,871 in U.S. dollars. (Per capita income in Bangladesh in 2010 was $641 a year.)

"Who knows -- some of them may be waiting just outside my house," said Parvez.

His wife, Asma Begum, said she's at her wit's end. She does her best to protect Parvez -- among other things, preventing him from taking phone calls until she has checked the caller's identity.

"His insecurity means the entire family is in danger," Begum said.

"I don't know if he could go to the office again. I am not sure if it is safe now to shift our home and find a new address. And how long should I expect him to live an imprisoned life like this?" she asked.

Newcomers to Bangladesh's blogosphere consider Parvez a first-generation blogger. A graduate in physics from the University of Connecticut, he has tried to use science to challenge religious doctrine in his home country. But he said he has never written anything that was intended to defame the Prophet Muhammad.

The term blogger, let alone "atheist" blogger, was barely known in the country before February of this year, when activists took to a busy intersection in Dhaka, demanding that all war criminals from Bangladesh's 1971 battle for independence be hanged. An online call by bloggers, dissatisfied over the sentencing of a war criminal to life in prison -- even after his complicity in war atrocities was proved -- touched off the protest known as the Shahbagh movement.

Since then, bloggers have found themselves in the cross hairs, with death threats becoming part of the job. One of them was killed in February by Islamist fundamentalists, who justified the murder by saying the blogger was a nonbeliever. More broadly, a massive smear campaign was launched targeting bloggers.

Following a demand by a little-known Islamist party called Hefazat-e-Islam, the government arrested the four bloggers, including Parvez, in early April. Even before any formal charges were brought against them, the men were labeled "atheists" and paraded before the media.

"While standing before the media after my arrest, I could feel how this exposure would endanger my life," said Parvez, adding, "I have yet to get an idea about the extent of the jeopardy I am in. I need to know how well-known I am by the identity of an 'atheist' blogger."

But Parvez started to get a feel for his dangerous situation while in jail. The bloggers were put in a 10x10 foot interrogation room with other prisoners -- including individuals who clearly wished them ill, according to Parvez.

"Three of them had been arrested for a January attack on Asif [Mohiuddin], who needed 56 stitches to close the wounds inflicted in his neck and parts of his body upwards," said Parvez.

Along with Mohiuddin's attackers, the cell also contained a handful of activists with Jamaat-e-Islami, the Islamist party whose top leaders are facing war crimes charges. They were furious at the sight of Mohiuddin and proceeded to curse and threaten all the bloggers for approximately two hours, Parvez recalled.

He said the other prisoners taunted them with such threats as, "Even if we could not kill them you, our brothers will definitely succeed. Those standing against our religion deserve to be assassinated."

That wasn't all the bloggers had to endure while incarcerated. When they were transferred to the local prison, the news of their arrival proceeded them, according to Parvez, and other Jamaat-e-Islami supporters, already in prison, gathered to scorn them.

"They knew Asif, as his photograph was published in the media after he was attacked.

They became sure of our identity, seeing Asif with us. They used all kinds of derogatory and dirty language as they talked. They even threatened to harass us sexually; some threatened to rape us," Parvez recollected.

The bloggers were kept confined to their cells around the clock for the first three days.

Now, the government suggests the bloggers should agree to stay in prison for the next five years for their personal security.

"How can I stay in jail for five years when I have kids and a family?" lamented Parvez.

"I have heard about the rewards announced to get my head," he said. "The amount of money promised is enough to encourage at least a thousand killers to get the job done, given that sometimes only 2,000 taka [about $25.74] can get your enemy killed in Bangladesh."

First published by The Huffington Post, May, 18, 2013

Emran Hossain is a journalist with BDNews24.com in Bangladesh. He is a 2013 Daniel Pearl fellow at The Huffington Post as part of a program with the Alfred Friendly Press Partners emran.hossain@huffingtonpost.com