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

Can Bangladesh shun political Islam?

SALEEM SAMAD

For millions of people in an impoverished Bangladesh, it seems to have ushered a political blessing. The nation which fought a bloody war of independence in 1971 against Pakistan to establish secularism and democracy was obliterated by subsequent military juntas and pro-Islamic governments.

The first constitution has enshrined secularism, democracy, socialism, and nationalism as the key political philosophy of the independence of Bangladesh, which reflects the spirit of the independence war when the eastern province severed from Pakistan in 1971.

After the assassination of the architect of Bangladesh independence Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in a military putsch in 1975, the military-backed government of General Ziaur Rahman, a former Mukti Bahini commander, with a swagger stick doctored the constitution’s guiding principle and scribbled “Bismillah’ir Rahman’ir Rahim (Faith in Allah)” in 1979 to establish legitimacy of his military government.

After Mujib’s daughter Sheikh Hasina, leader of the Awami League swept to power in 2008 pledged to restoration of secularism and the trial of war criminals.

The Supreme Court in its landmark verdict forbids political parties that advocate political Islam. The apex court also asked to reinstate the four key principles in the constitution.

In separate voluminous judgements in July and August of 2010, the apex court pulled down the Fifth Amendment of 1979 and Seventh Amendment of 1986, including provisions that allowed religious-based politics, which was legitimized by tyrannical rules from 15 August 1975 to 9 April 1979 and 24 March 1982, and 10 November 1986 respectively.

The court in a ruling said the Seventh Amendment retroactively legitimized the very acts that successfully engineered the coups by former Chief of Army Staff Lt. Gen. Husain Muhammad Ershad unseated an elected government of President Justice Abdus Sattar in March 1982.

General Ershad in a bid to woo moral support of majoritarian Sunni Muslims had rewritten the constitution which determines “Islam as state religion” of a once secular nation.

The higher court judges noted, “The proclamation of martial law and its regulations and orders and all actions under this law shall remain illegal until Qayamat (the Last Day of Judgment). “The martial law was beyond the mandate of the constitution and will be invalid for eternity,” and said, “a usurper is a usurper.” It is deemed that the judgement squarely blamed both the military leaders have acted as a usurper to grab the state power.

The apex court’s verdict on the Fifth Amendment said, “The perpetrators of such illegalities should also be suitably punished and condemned so that in future no adventurist, no usurper, would dare to defy the people, their constitution, their government, established by them with their consent.”

The court dubs the “extra-constitutional adventurers” as predators of democracy who ushered military regimes.

General Zia was assassinated in a military coup d’état in 1982 and General Ershad was ousted in 1990, after a bloody pro-democracy revolution. He served a prison sentence for corruption but is a key ally coalition of the ruling party and died last year of old age complications.

Excited by hearing the superior court verdict Shahriar Kabir, a secularist, researcher and staunch advocate for the trial of the war criminals said the people’s mandate in the last general election for the restoration of secularism and trial of perpetrators responsible for the crime against humanity in 1971.

“Religious based politics was prohibited after brutal birth of Bangladesh. We have seen youths belonging to Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) were engaged as henchmen of marauding Pakistan military. They raised Al-Badr, a death squad to kidnap and murder hundreds of intellectuals who could not escape for their safety and security,” he explained.

All the JeI leaders of the secret militia group Al-Badr were handed down maximum punishment for war crimes and crimes against humanity by the International Crimes Tribunal.

The journalist and film-maker Kabir said General Zia, after the assassination of Sheikh Mujib in a bid to gain political support, withdrew the ban on religious politics and allowed Islamic parties to regain grounds.

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party founded by assassinated General Rahman, presently led by his widow, Begum Khaleda Zia appealed the apex court’s first ruling on the Fifth Amendment last January and lost her in a crucial legal battle which was detrimental to her party.

Notwithstanding, Bangladesh is a Sunni Muslim-majority nation, most people practice a moderate version of Sunni Islam. In the long run, the country’s politicians want the country to transform into a secular democracy rather than “Islam as State Religion”.

Pending a verdict from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, the Bangladesh Election Commission has struck off the name of Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) as a political party. Officially the Islamist party was unable to participate in the 2014 and 2018 general election. Unfortunately, the Islamist party failed to satisfy the Election Commission that it is a Bangladesh origin party, upholds the Bangladesh constitution, and expresses solidarity with the independence of Bangladesh.

JeI handbook and various published documents, the party did not accept the state constitution and demanded to override it with Quran and Sharia Law upon 164 million secular and moderate Muslim majority nation. Unfortunately, the party failed to muster moral support of the majority.

Besides, the party didn’t recognise Bangladesh independence. JeI was politically, morally, and physically supported by the marauding Pakistan military.

Regarding banning of Islamic parties, Sheikh Hasina told the Jatiya Sangsad (parliament) said the Islamic parties will not be banned, while “Bismillah’ir Rahman’ir Rahim” and state religion Islam will remain in the constitution.

Social justice activist Kabir is visibly disturbed regarding the delay in banning of religious-based political parties, especially JeI which opposed the independence of Bangladesh.

He said the prime minister’s statement in parliament has confused the nation and contradicts the verdict of the superior court. The Islamic parties would continue to function and overtly campaign against the war crimes trial.

First published in The South Asian Digest on 6 August 2020

Author is an independent journalist, media rights defender in Bangladesh. Recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award

Weaponizing Media Regulation

S. BINODKUMAR SINGH

On May 16, 2020, Police arrested two people from the Lamchari village of Matlab Dakkhin upazila (sub-District) in Chandpur District in a case filed under the Digital Security Act (DSA). The arrestees – Sumon Biswas and Adhir Chandra Mallik – had been allegedly making derogatory comments about Islam, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the Bangladesh Police on Facebook for the preceding few days.

On May 6, 2020, the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) arrested cartoonist Ahmed Kabir Kishore, writer Mushtaq Ahmed, and two others – Didarul Islam Bhuiyan, an activist of a platform called 'Rashtrachinta', and Minhaz Mannan Emon, a businessman – under DSA, allegedly for making anti-Government posts on Facebook, from the capital, Dhaka city. A total of 11 persons were accused in the case filed under DSA. The seven others accused in the case were Tasnim Khalil, Shahed Alam, Saer Zulkarnain, Ashiq Imran, Phillipp Schuhmacher, Shapan Wahid and Asif Mohiuddin. These seven live outside Bangladesh.

On May 5, 2020, Mahtab Uddin Talukder, Sunamganj District correspondent of private television channel SATV, was arrested from his residence under the DSA for posting a status on his Facebook page allegedly defaming Sunamganj-1 Constituency’s ruling Awami League (AL) Member of Parliament (MP) Moazzem Hossain Ratan. The MP had been interrogated by Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) officials on February 18, 2020, for his alleged involvement in money laundering and the casino business.

Among various provisions of the Digital Security Act, the followings are the more alarming:

Section 17 Punishment for Illegal Entrance in Critical Information Infrastructure, etc.-(1) If any person intentionally or knowingly in any Critical information infrastructure - a. Illegally enters, or b. By means of illegal entrance, harms or destroys or renders inactive the infrastructure or tries to do so, then the above activity of that person will be an offense under the Act. (2) If any person of Sub Section (1) - a. Commits any offense within the Clause (a) then, the person will be penalized by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years or by fine not exceeding BDT 2.5 million or with both. b. Commits any offense within Clause (b) then, the person will be penalized by imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years or with fine not exceeding BDT 10 million or with both. (3) If any person commits the offense mentioned in sub-section (1) for the second time or recurrently commits the offense then, he will be punished with lifetime imprisonment or with fine not exceeding BDT 50 million or with both.

Section 29 Publishing and distributing defamatory information, etc.-(1) If a person publishes or distributes any defamatory information mentioned in section 499 of the Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860) via a website or any other electronic format, they will get a maximum penalty of 3 years in jail or BDT 5 lakh in fine, or both.

Section 32 Offence and penalty for breach of Official Secrets-(1) If a person commits a crime or assists someone in committing a crime under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (Act No XIX of 1923) via a computer, digital device, computer network, digital network or any other digital media, they will get a maximum penalty of 14 years in jail or BDT 2.5 million in fines, or both. (2) If a person commits a crime mentioned in the sub-clause 1 for a second time or repeatedly, they will be sentenced to life in prison or a maximum fine of BDT 10 million, or both.

• In addition to the sweeping provisions themselves, it is the protracted jail sentences prescribed that are a cause of worry and source of intimidation. According to the International Federation for Human Rights, there have been more than 1,000 cases filed under the DSA since it was introduced in 2018.
• Indeed, the Sampadak Parishad (Editors' Council), a nationwide professional association of newspaper Editors, has been protesting against the DSA since it came into effect on October 8, 2018. The Editors' Council identified fundamental flaws in the DSA:
• In trying to make a law to prevent crimes through digital devices and provide security in the digital sphere, the act ends up policing media operations, censoring content and controlling media freedom and freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed by our constitution.
• The act gives unlimited power to the police to enter premises, search offices, bodily search persons, seize computers and networks, servers, and everything related to the digital platforms. According to the Act, the police can arrest anybody on suspicion without warrant and do not need any approval of any authorities.
• The act suffers from vagueness and uses many terms that can be misinterpreted and used against the media.
• DSA will create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation which will make journalism and especially investigative journalism virtually impossible.
• Other than media professionals, the law will create panic among all users of computers, computer networks, etc.

On June 18, 2019, Asia Internet Coalition, a Coalition of which Facebook, Google, Amazon, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Yahoo!, among others, are members, pointed out that Bangladesh’s DSA creates several obstacles to the conducive use of the internet ecosystem due to several vague obligations, unchecked powers, disproportionate penalties, and unworkable compliance requirements.

DSA has become a custom-made judicial weapon for silencing ‘troublesome’ journalists and has created an environment of fear and intimidation under which normal functioning of journalists has become extremely risky, if not impossible. Not surprisingly, since the enactment of DSA, self-censorship has reached unprecedented levels because editors are reluctant to risk imprisonment or the closure of their media outlets.

Further, blocking access to news websites and consequently stifling press freedom is another developing phenomenon in Bangladesh. In December 2019, authorities in Bangladesh blocked access to Netra News, a Sweden-based investigative journalism portal, within three days of the outlet carrying allegations of corruption against Obaidul Quader, the country’s Minister of Road Transport and Bridges, and General Secretary of the ruling AL. In March 2019, the Bangladesh Government blocked Al Jazeera's English news website hours after it published an article detailing the alleged involvement of Tarique Ahmed Siddique, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's Security Adviser and head of the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), the country's military intelligence agency, in the disappearance of three men as part of a business dispute involving his wife. In December 2018, the Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) had ordered 54 news portals to be blocked to prevent spread of propaganda ahead of the December 30 National Election. In November 2017, Indian news website The Wire was cut off after it published a story on the alleged role of the DGFI in the disappearance of an academic, Mubashar Hasan.

Meanwhile, radical Islamist militants continue to murder journalists and bloggers who dare to defend an overly secular vision of society. According to partial data compiled by the South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP), a total of at least 36 journalists and bloggers have been killed since the commencement of the 2013 Shahbagh Movement. The last incident of killing was on June 11, 2018, in which Shahzahan Bachchu (60), an outspoken proponent of secular principles and owner of a publishing house 'Bishaka Prokashoni' was gunned down in his ancestral village, Kakaldi in Munshiganj District.

Unsurprisingly, Reporters Sans Frontières, in its 2020 World Press Freedom Index dropped Bangladesh to 151st out of 180 countries – the lowest ranking it has ever received. It was at the 150th position in 2019 and 146th in 2018.

Legitimate concerns regarding the abuse of the Internet and social media, particularly by extremist and terrorist formations as well as by unscrupulous political and criminal elements, do require legislation for the regulation of these media. But the sweeping provisions of DSA, and the use against journalists carrying out legitimate investigations and reportage, cannot be part of a legitimate response to these concerns. The arbitrary arrests and a crackdown on freedom of expression under the draconian DSA raise critical questions of intent and accountability of the Government. Ensuring the freedom of the Media, as well as the safety of media professionals and the civil discourse, both from state intimidation as well as from the threat from radical Islamist forces, even as the state is empowered to act against intentional malfeasance, must be the objective of both legislation and practice with regard to regulation of the Media. Freedom of the Media and acceptance of criticism are crucial for the survival of democracy in Bangladesh.

The article was first published in the Volume 18, No. 47, May 18, 2020 of SOUTH ASIA INTELLIGENCE REVIEW

S. Binodkumar Singh is a Research Associate, Institute for Conflict Management, New Delhi, India

Iran Abuse Of Human Rights

SALEEM SAMAD

There is no quick-fix for the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the few countries which are governed by strictest Sharia laws, which other Muslim leaders cautiously debate.

Nevertheless, the protests in Iran are continuing after nearly two months of street protests in major cities. The uprising was sparked in mid-November last year when the regime announced that fuel prices would be increased. The move angered the Iranians who have faced so much economic crisis in the past.

For many months, society has been simmering with discontent and there have been sporadic protests, strikes, and anti-government demonstrations calling for the overthrow of the government in Iran and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Also, hundreds of young women in Iran had been many silently and some overtly protesting forced to wear Hijab, a mark of thumbs down to say no to Iran's Islamic dictates.

Widespread protests erupted across Iran because of the fuel price hike. The protests which first started because of the price-hike soon turned to become a widespread uprising targeting Ayatollahs and demanding the overthrow of the Islamic Iran regime.

The ground reality is such that the people are explicitly angered with the leadership of the Mullahs (clergies) that has brutally suppressed their choice for freedom for decades, plundered the country's wealth and led some horrific policies that have plunged parts of the Middle-East into crisis at the expense of pubic exchequer of Iran.

"There is no doubt these protests are serious, in terms of their scale and scope," said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran programme at the International Crisis Group.

The people's anger is obvious. After a few weeks of street protests, the people were embracing the risk of arrest, imprisonment, injury and even death to make their voice heard - loud and clear.

Hundreds of people have been killed by the violent suppressive forces and anti-riot police, many of them shot in the head or chest, sometimes at point-blank range and from behind. Many were attacked by goons of the Ayatollahs who reigned the regime illegally for more than four decades.

The Iranian regime has made all attempts to downplay the gravity of the situation, with some officials saying that the protests have not had wide participation.

However, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) one of the other Iran-Protest campaigns is determined to continue the movement to a level of no-confidence against the clerics in Tehran.

Furthermore, thousands of people wounded and thousands more arrested, coupled with internet services blocked by the regime to hide under the carpet the state-led crimes in Iran.

The regime's decision to block the people's access to the internet demonstrates that the regime is terrified of the world finding out about its appalling human rights abuses under wraps for the regime.

Not denying that the regime is under fire from the United States and several Middle-East countries and are starting to realise that the US might have a genuine reason for keeping Iran under pressure.

Several other banned opposition groups are behind the pro-democracy Iran-Protest. The Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MeK) has many "Resistance Units" spread across the country. They are in contact with the Resistance located outside Iran and it has never been too difficult for information to be shared, no matter how hard the regime tries.

Iran's protests have managed to continue in spite of the most brutal government repression throughout the country. Not only have the protests continued, but activities of the MeK resistance units in major cities have escalated the Iran-Protest movement.

The outcome of this uprising depends largely on the reaction of the international community. The world leaders are slow to react to dreadful human rights abuses taking place in Iran.

The international community has a responsibility to ensure that the Iranian regime should be held accountable for flouting human rights and denial of democracy.

First published in the New Nation, 5 February 2020

Saleem Samad, is an independent journalist, media rights defender, recipient of Ashoka Fellow (USA) and Hellman-Hammett Award. Twitter @saleemsamad, Email saleemsamad@ hotmail.com

Bangladesh journalist expresses discontent over low turnout in elections hit by political turmoil

Dhaka, Jan 31 (ANI):

Bangladesh journalist Saleem Samad on Friday expressed discontent over low turnout in the recent violence-plagued elections, which were marred by clashes and strikes as the opposition, Bangladesh Nationalist Party boycotted the polls. 

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's Awami League ended with more than two-thirds of seats in a contest that was shunned by international observers as flawed and derided as a farce by the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

With fewer than half the seats contested, the outcome was never in doubt. Talking to a reporter in Dhaka, Samad said the polls were first in the last 42 years which were not only low from voter's point of view but also from the candidates'.

Samad said the voter turnout was low due to the fear instilled by the opposition.

First published in the Business Standard, 31 January 2014