Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Editorial «
Op-Ed «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The Rapid Action Battalion has crossed its infancy and will hopefully be growing steadily. Meanwhile people seem to have a lot of opinions about its performance. How people look on RAB may possibly be viewed from two different angles based on the groups who gave out the opinions.
   Before coming RAB on the scene, the common people passed their days and nights in constant fear. They were seen every moment apprehensive of the muggers, kidnapers and the extortionists.
   Political agitation and unrest are a part of our life. They were always there and are still persisting, but with a little difference this time. Earlier, as a matter of routine, strike calls by the opposition used to be eventful; setting fire on buses, thus roasting men alive, and wild cat rampage by the opposition cadres were common features. Even now strike calls by the opposition parties are no less frequent, but then they seem to be practicing some restraints these days. Newer forms of protests, somewhat milder in nature, are coming into practice, namely, human chains, human walls and sit-in-strikes. Human chain formed by the opposition this year from Teknaf to Tetulia was generally peaceful. The RAB, however, was absolutely vigilant, tracking down the track along the human chain.
   The incidents of mugging, kidnapping, killing and extortion do occur now, but not frequently. Some statistics given by the police reveal that the crime rates have come down below fifty per cent. That sounds an appreciable decline in the crime rates in less than a year. In this short span of time the RAB has recovered 752 fire arms, including sophisticated arms like AK-22 and M-16 rifles, besides 5000 ammunitions, few grenades and dynamites and 200 bombs (Data source: New Age, March 25). If matched with the results of ‘clean heart operations’ the performance of RAB has been tangible, objective specific and quick. The overwhelming majority of the people are happy with the results. They look on RAB as an elite force worth its name guiding a drowning sheep ashore.
   We must not forget at the same time that the elite force is formed with people from our society, and that all of them are not immune of vices like greed and lusts. But what we must take notice of is the check and balance system instituted in its system of operation. Already RAB has taken stern action against 222 of its members for misconduct and antisocial activities; also, plans are underway to give the battalion more power to prosecute and punish any of its delinquent members as done in the armed forces.
   The main opposition party leaders are extremely vocal against the performance of RAB. They look at it from a different angle. If the law and order situation is seen improving, they might not find people joining them for purposes of political agitation and forcing the government to step down.
   Others skeptical about the RAB and its performance are those known to us as intellectuals, and human rights activists. They are men with connection and are well placed in the society; also they are well beyond the reach of the muggers and the killers. Fortunately for them, and unlike the commoners, they put on shoes which do not prick, so it is very likely that they should dream of a utopian society where every action should follow rules as prescribed by law.
   But the commoners have some questions for the intellectuals and the human rights activists to answer. What are the recommendations they have when the criminals take law in their own hands, killing and plundering the innocent and the helpless? The people hardly see merits in hollow statements only, that there should not be any extra judicial deaths. They demand specific recommendations and plan of action that might deny the criminals of taking law in their own hands. Thus far there have been about a hundred deaths in crossfire, mostly the noted killers and extortionists and the outlaws. These deaths have saved thousand others among the commoners who otherwise might have been killed by those who died in crossfire.
   The big question is for whom is the law of the land — for the killers and plunderers who take law in their own hands, or for those who help protect law abiding people, innocent and helpless, and help restore law and order back on track?
   Moni Khan
   Dhania, Dhaka
   

Your editorials on Muktijuddho Jadughar (March 24) and those of March 26 set me in a reflective mood.
   As an early (60’s) dreamer of Swadhin Bangla and as a humble participant of the Liberation War, I reflect on your comment, ‘the spirit which once impelled this entire Bengali nation’ and wonder what was that spirit. Was there really a single spirit shared by all the participants and the supporters of the war?
   If so, then how can we explain that within five years of liberation the same nation managed to kill the Father of the Nation, the top leadership of the wartime government, and some of the most decorated war heroes? And how within a decade, the nation killed and hanged a dozen other war heroes?
   And how within years of liberation, the nation appointed prominent collaborators of the Pakistani army to the position of prime minister and other cabinet positions, and vanished Bengali nationalism (‘the ideal of the war’) from the constitution?
   And how within decades accepted the criminal enemies of the Liberation War as the major partner in running the state?
   And how and why Syed Badrul Ahsan’s assurance (March 26), ‘This morning, it is the old song of Joi Bangla, heard aeons ago, we hear once again’ is drowned by the noise of ‘Zindabads’ all over TV, radio and the state functions?
   I think we need to pause and reflect. Was the War of Liberation a simple historical event or was it a more complex affair? We need to look at the history from a broader perspective., keeping in mind historian Brian Tierney’s comment, ‘Written history that was cold factual and apparently undisturbed by the passion of the time served best the cause of those who did not want to be disturbed’.
   History in some way is like a rearview mirror. It gives us an image of the reality we left behind. This image is not only ‘virtual’, but also somewhat distorted, as the mirror in question is nothing else but our own mind. We all have our own little mirrors and view history differently.
   In my own mirror, I see that there were many shades of ‘spirit of 1971’ — representing various socio-political parties, groups and factions and the individuals. At the height of the war, these shades merged into at least two distinct groups:
   1. A group propelled by the primordial force of Bengali nationalism to establish a separate state for the Bengalis, a secular, egalitarian state whose primary base would be the ethos of Bengali culture along with its religious plurality. Slogans like ‘Joi Bangla’, ‘Padma-Meghna-Jamuna-Tomar-Amar Thikana’ came from their heart.
   2. A group propelled mainly by the brutal and barbaric attack of the Pakiastani army on the night of 25th March. They had minimal emotional connection with their Bengali identification and a slogan like ‘Joi Bangla’ was accepted as an expedient.
   The two groups shared a common goal — to defeat the Pakistani army and establish a new state of their own.
   After the victory was achieved, the two groups not only fell apart but also disintegrated into further factions and later a bloody power struggle ensued between the various factions.
   This may be one way we can begin to explain the bizarre history of post-independence Bangladesh.
   This may also give us a clue to the puzzle why a nation-state achieved through such a bloody struggle and sacrifice ended up as one of the most corrupt, poor and ill-governed countries of the world.
   Bilayet Hossain
   Oklahoma, USA

The UK general elections are probably going to be held on the 5th of May, and it is expected that this year the elections will be a much closer contest than the previous two Labour landslides (in 1997 and 2001). The key issues are economy, national security, immigration, crime, education, healthcare and terrorism.
   As with many Western countries, post 9/11, national security and terrorism is a key issue in the general elections.
   Labour Party, under Tony Blair, has made it clear that they would be the ‘tough on terror’ party, which prompted the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Bill to be passed, after concessions were made and agreements reached between Labour and the two other  major parties — the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats.
   Immigration is certainly one of the biggest issues in Britain, and recent polls carried out by The Independent and The Times show that this is an issue where the main opposition party - the Conservatives - are well ahead.
   Michael Howard, the leader of the Conservatives, has revealed that he would introduce a ‘quota’ on immigrants and asylum-seekers, to control the present deplorable state, where even Labour MPs and Ministers have admitted that they cannot even guess how many ‘illegal’ immigrants are presently in the UK. Howard will introduce an Australian-style immigration system based on points scheme.
   On the economy however, Labour is very strong, but there are fears that Chancellor Gordon Brown (who is tipped to takeover the Labour leadership after Blair steps down) will raise taxes and the Tories, who are traditionally known as the ‘low-tax’ party will probably appeal to those voters who are in fear of higher taxes under a Labour Government.
   The only issue where the Liberal Democrats, under Charles Kennedy, have an advantage is the Iraq War, as they were the only party who were consistent in opposing the military intervention to
   topple the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein.
   The Lib Dems are however portrayed as the ‘weak’ party in issues like crime and security, and post 9/11 (terrorist attacks in the USA) and 3/11 (terrorist attacks in Spain) these have become key issues for the British electorate.
   This election would definitely be a close one, and probably the first election in recent years to be contested by three political parties.
   ‘There is everything to play for’ as the Conservatives say, and a Lib Dem vote might mean a vote for the Tories (because most swing voters in Lib Dem would come from ‘Old’ Labour); a Labour vote might mean a vote for Brown and not Blair; and a Tory vote -the most uncomplicated one of all-would mean to replace Howard with Blair in No.10 Downing Street. Let the battle begin...
   Aranya Syed
   Member, Conservative Party
   London, UK.

In your sports report titled ‘Shahadat, Shahriar in, Kapali out’ on March 31, you write the following: ‘In addition Shahriar had a superb series in English conditions when he visited there last year with Under-19 team.’ As a matter of fact, Shahriar had a woefully poor series in England last year with the Under-19 team. In the Test matches against England Under-19, he scored 61 runs in five innings at an average of 12.20 and a highest score of 26!
   In the warm-up one-dayer against the Hampshire 2nd XI, he scored 5 runs and in the lone one-dayer against England Under-19 (two were washed out), he scored 24!
   I don’t know how that translates to a superb series, so I assume you mixed him up with another player, which would also be difficult since none of our batsmen had a very good time in that series.
   Shameran Abed
   On e-mail

I read your news item on March 18 on MP’s blasting the foreign ministry for cold ties with some countries with interest. The press has also joined the MPs and has cornered the foreign ministry on this issue. The vernacular press has been particularly severe in this criticism.
   There is no doubt that as the ministry in charge for conducting the country’s foreign relations, the foreign ministry perhaps deserves a lot of the criticisms. However, as far as the press goes, they should do a bit of investigative journalism and find out how much the foreign ministry should be held responsible for the failures of Bangladesh’s foreign policy under the BNP Government.
   Without being more than a layman in understanding and analysing foreign relation matters, there are certain matters with the conduct of our foreign relations by the Government that no one can miss. The first of this is although it is presumed that the foreign ministry should be conducting foreign relations, in actual practice it is not. Otherwise, why would the prime minister and the finance minister should be talking with the press on the serious issue of some envoys meddling in our politics and the foreign minister telling the press he has no comments? Why would the finance minister be having breakfast with the US and British envoys and not the foreign minister?
   This Government has made a mess in handling foreign relations by, first, giving the ministry to the wrong people to lead and then having done that, interfered with the foreign ministry all the time, destroying its competence and confidence. The Standing Committee for Parliamentary Affairs, if it really wants the foreign ministry to do its part, should first ensure that on foreign affairs, no one but the foreign ministry speaks. Then, the Committee should guarantee professionalism in the ministry and for that bring all matters related to foreign relations under one umbrella instead of letting such matters be dealt by all in tidbits, that adds to making Bangladesh’s handling of foreign relations perhaps the most non-professional imaginable.
   Then, why should the Standing Committee also not be made responsible for failing to play its role at the appropriate time? The Foreign Ministry needs to be placed in the hands of people that the Government has confidence in. Once this is done, it should be allowed to do its job without interference from all and sundry, particularly a Finance Minister who these days does not seem to know what he is talking about.
   Shahjahan Ahmed
   Dhanmandi, Dhaka

It was a delight to see aerial photographs of the newly commissioned Khilgaon Flyover. Sitting here in the San Francisco Bay Area where we are surrounded by many architectural marvels, it wasn’t just the spaghetti junction-like on and off-ramps of this civil construction that impressed me. It was something much more personal.
   I grew up in Khilgaon as a child and used to hang out on the very spot that now boast this modern flyover. In fact my grandfather used to take me on mandatory long daily morning walks straight after Fajr prayers. We walked several miles from Khilgaon Government High School all the way up to the thriving market where this flyover now sits. Images of scattered colourful saaris blowing in the wind and khaki and blue police uniforms being left hung to dry in the scorching heat of late afternoons by the local launderers in the yesteryears flashed through my mind. A few friends and I formed a ‘sports-club’ and bought bamboo sticks and nets to mark our territory so we could play badminton there; many a times I even tested theories of turning coins into magnets by putting them on the nearby railway tracks as speeding trains approached in the hope that someday it might work.  The only thing we worried about back then was getting caught playing in the heat and being so fearless! My story would be incomplete if I didn’t mention the poor homeless dwellers who lived in the large roadside concrete pipes destined to become part of sewers that lie beneath today’s ‘Biswa Road’; their morning chatters and the smoke bellowing from their make-shift cookers burning leaves and papers were a quintessential part of the organic social cocktail of that transient community.
   The generation before me was uprooted from where the Kamlapur Railway Station now sits and rehabilitated in today’s Khilgaon; whenever they told me stories about what Kamlapur used to be like before the terminal was built, my young mind never quite managed to grapple with the image of where my grandparents raised their family. ‘How can you have a house on train tracks?’ I recall asking myself. ‘Were their houses on wheels?’ I guess now I know what it feels like to see modernity take over from the lush green grass where my fond childhood memories lay!
   I never thought this was possible.  Like the prime minister said, features like this will indeed go a long way to create a positive impression of Bangladesh in the eyes of foreign visitors and investors instead of the hurtful words ‘shanty town’ used by an old Philippino friend from my Maltese boarding school to described the city of my birth as after making a whistle stop back in early eighties. ‘Shabash Bangladesh!’
   Shabbir A Bashar, PhD
   San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA