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

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The concerns expressed by Christina Rocca are, let us say once more, those of the country as a whole. The fundamental issues of extra-judicial killings and violence against the Ahmadiyya community are matters which have in the past three years exercised the minds of the nation. Therefore, when the visiting US assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs informs the Bangladesh authorities that clear and decisive action must be taken on these and related issues, we hardly need reminding ourselves that these are precisely the subjects which have led to intense trouble for us before the global community. The very fact that the visiting American official chose to travel down to Dhaka yet once more and speak on matters she did earlier reflects the persistent feeling in the country that not much has been done by way of resolving the problems around us. Inquiries into the 21 August grenade attack on an Awami League rally and the murder of former finance minister Kibria are some of the issues that need to be addressed swiftly given that a failure to deal with them has given a bad name not just to the government but to the nation as a whole.
   We at this newspaper have consistently made our views known on the issues. We have always believed in the principle that a prerequisite for good, purposeful governance in the country is the establishment of rule of law and its maintenance in every possible way. If indeed politics had moved along such lines in the country, we would not be in the pass in which we find ourselves today. That is why it becomes imperative for us to now have the authorities move into full-scale action on the issues about which Ms. Rocca and others outside as well as inside the country have been talking about. Simply stated, the systematic attacks that have been carried out against the members of the Ahmadiyya community are something that should never have been allowed to happen. But once it became clear that the bigots clustered around the Khatme Nabuwat and other such organisations were determined to persecute these largely peaceful people for no reason other than their convoluted notions of religiosity, it should have been for the authorities to come down hard on the fanatics. In much the same fashion, the failure to nab the likes of Bangla Bhai has turned out to be an albatross around the neck of the government, the weight of which is only now beginning to be felt. Where the issue of extra-judicial killings by the Rapid Action Battalion is concerned, we have made our position as well as that of the nation clear. These killings have considerably dented Bangladesh’s image as a modern political entity, so much so that we have now grown uncomfortably accustomed to the sight of foreign diplomats in Dhaka upbraiding us over the issue of human rights. Ms. Rocca’s concerns were only a more substantive addition to the plethora of problems we have on our plate.
   In the overall sense, the time has now come for the government to take the issues seriously. The cavalier manner in which it has so long dealt with them, indeed the ostrich-like attitude it has adopted towards the problems building up around it, are positions that must be dispensed with if Bangladesh’s self-esteem and respectability are to be restored in the global community.

English at higher levels

Despite the fact that we love and feel proud of our mother tongue, we must accept that in the modern world, with globalisation touching almost all countries and all spheres of life, English as a mode of communication and as tool of commerce, business and employment stands out with singular distinction.
   The situation is such that knowing English is now interlinked to the efforts of a country aspiring to be a global player. Unfortunately, in Bangladesh the state of English at the moment is downright pathetic and the condition is so dire that even students with the top most degrees from our university are struggling to go abroad for higher education; and the sole reason is their English is frustratingly lacking in standard.
   Against such a backdrop, the government took up a policy to introduce English as the mode of education at the higher level of education in the country and asked the opinion of the public universities. Reportedly, three universities, Dhaka, Rajshahi and Chittagong, vetoed this proposal and now the move is almost certainly faced with a premature demise.
   But, as we keep on resisting English and deliberately undermine its importance, we are in fact arresting our move towards progress. In this regard, the impact of a vulnerable foundation of the language can be seen at all levels starting from educational institutes to the administration. We are failing to compete in the international education arena and though we have quite a few young people who can contribute to the global IT boom, it is a fragile basis of English that is confining us within a small and a very unrewarding market. A similar situation can be noticed in other technical and science related fields where talented young people are unable to expand their horizons only because they fail to communicate their abilities to overseas organisations.
   It is relevant to mention that of late, the common trend among parents has been to have their children educated at English medium schools and we see that many organisations while employing people prefer an A level English medium student rather than a student with an MA degree. The message this sends should be loud and clear – a strong foundation of the English language is mandatory for building a career.
   Keeping this in mind we must ensure that the medium of instruction at the higher level is English because when a student is in touch with the language for at least five years, s/he will inevitably form a standard not only in the subject but also in the language. However, to ensure that students from Bangla medium schools pick up instructions at later stages of education without difficulty, emphasis must be paid to increasing the standard of the language at the school and college level.

In the much publicised and hotly contested election held on Monday (9 May, 2005), ABM Mohiuddin Chowdhury was re-elected as the Mayor of the port city of Chittagong by a huge margin of 91,481 votes over his nearest rival Mir Mohammad Nasiruddin. He bagged 3,50,891 votes while Mir Nasir managed 2,59,410 votes. Of the total 11, 38,318 voters, 55.8% cast their ballots at the polling stations.
   The Chittagong election is significant for several reasons. Although the local and municipal elections in Bangladesh are officially held on non-party basis, the present election was a clear-cut contest between the candidates belonging to the opposition Awami League (AL) party and the government Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). AL president Sheikh Hasina, Gono Forum president Kamal Hussein and their allies in the form of Nagorik Committee waged continuous campaigns on behalf of Mohiuddin Chowdhury, while the top leadership of BNP and their Jamat-e-Islami allies campaigned for Mir Nasiruddin.
   Mir Nasir is not only an influential leader of Chittagong BNP but also minister of state in charge of Civil Aviation and Tourism in the Khaleda Zia government. So the election results may be interpreted as a kind of ‘disapproval’ of his ministerial performance by the electorate. Allegations of irregularities in the management of the national airline Bangladesh Biman under his ministry have not been helpful.
   The people of Chittagong have given the verdict that Mohiuddin Chowdhury is serving them reasonably well and he should be given another term as Mayor. He is considered as a leader open to the public. In the past, he opposed, against his own party policy, the US request for building an exclusive ‘container port’ at the estuary of the Karnafully river. This stand was very popular with the traders and port workers of Chittagong, since they did not want any foreign stranglehold on ‘their’ seaport that provides them with their jobs and livelihood. The local (as well as national) economy depends on the port-centered activities and export-import trade, and naturally the people of Chittagong were very pleased with Mohiuddin Chowdhury’s principled stand. Nobody really knew about the position of Mir Nasir on this sensitive issue.
   Another significant reason behind Mohiuddin Chowdhury’s victory is said to be his easy and open approach to public relations. During long years of his two Mayoral tenures, he was easily accessible to the general public, whereas Mir Nasir was seen to be too much ‘bureaucratic’ and distant from the common citizens. Mir Nasir was considered as a man from ‘Dhaka’, whereas Mohiuddin was seen as one of the ‘locals’. It is true that Mohiuddin is not an angel or does not have a ‘totally clean’ past, but compared with Mir Nasir, he was accepted as a ‘man from the next-door’, more sociable, and who could be approached at the time of need. He was also equally acceptable to the voters of both the Islamic and Hindu faiths, a clear advantage over the rival candidate alleged to be in the pocket of the Jamat-e-Islami. Personal closeness to the neighbourhood gave him a clear edge over his rival.
   It is generally accepted that in Bangladesh politics winning elections depend to some extent on the nature of alliance with smaller parties. This is true in several ‘marginal’ constituencies where the main contending parties AL and BNP have nearly equal electoral strength. The victory in such cases depends on the support from the smaller parties, whether on the right or left. But their actual impact should not be overemphasised. Wrong emphasis may spell disaster.
   For example, in the Chittagong election, Islami Okya Jote had its own candidate who received an abysmally small number of votes. This party and its outspoken leader Mufti Amini have been agitating against the Ahmadya community, even leading attacks against their places of worship. Their pronouncements and activities against the ‘minority’ Ahmadya community, in defiance of the official government policy, have attracted considerable media attention both at home and abroad and helped paint Bangladesh as an ‘intolerant’ and ‘fundamentalist Islamic’ state. This small party has proved to be a liability for the BNP. The main ‘Islamic’ party, Jamat-e-Islami, which claims to have a huge following in the Chittagong area, is reported have spearheaded the election campaign of Mir Nasir, but without any tangible success. Some analysts think that too much reliance on Jamat-e-Islami support ignoring the main BNP organisational base was also, at least in part, responsible for Mir Nasir’s debacle.
   The poll results indicate that the two main candidates pulled a total 96% of the votes cast (Mohiuddin Chowdhury 55.2%, Mir Nasir 40.8%), leaving only a bare 4% to those outside the main platforms. This suggests that Bangladesh politics is nearly totally dominated by two main players, AL and BNP. In the present situation there is hardly any possibility of a ‘third force’ (whether ‘religious and rightists’ or ‘secular and leftists’) making any significant electoral headway outside BNP or AL leadership.
   For obvious reasons, there is a tremendous joy within the AL camp but terrible disappointment within the BNP-led alliance at the outcome of the election. There would be attempts at finding scapegoat for the miserable performance of Mir Nasir, since few elements within that party were ‘sure’ of winning the election by presenting dozens of ministers. They may even try to discover the ‘hands of conspirators’ mainly within their own camp. But the BNP leadership should not be misled by any such excuse. For their own sake, they must think coolly and rationally to understand and analyse the reasons behind the Chittagong debacle. It is absolutely necessary that the real reasons for Mir Nasir’s defeat are investigated and rectified before it is too late.
   The AL is scenting ‘victory’ in its long campaign to dislodge the Khaleda Zia government. It has been very good for the country in a way, since if the government-backed candidate had won, even legitimately, the AL would immediately plunge the country into street agitations and hartals. Mohiuddin Chowdhury’s victory has put a stop to that potentially destructive scenario at least for the time being. Sober elements within the AL may now persuade the more ‘militant’ leaders to wait for people’s verdict until the next general elections.
   At the present time, nobody really knows how far the AL would go to ‘realise’ its recently adopted demand for ‘reforms in the caretaker government’. One can only hope that it would show some restraint not to plunge the country into further turmoil and uncertainty. It may take comfort in the fact that if the lack of direction, inefficiency, corruption, arrogance, failure to implement the most important electoral pledges continue within the government, then it may win back the state power it lost in 2001 to the BNP-led alliance.
   The voters of Bangladesh are more mature and sensible than the political leaders in casting their ballots. This has been proved by many elections in the past, in 1946 (Hindustan/Pakistan referendum), 1954, 1970, 1991, 1996, and 2001. People made correct choices in all those occasions. Unfortunately, the defeated parties and their leaders have always shown reluctance to accept the people’s verdict by blaming their opponents for some sort of ‘conspiracy’, but they did never carry out any objective analysis to identify the actual reasons for their defeats. This has been a serious limitation to the honesty, integrity and commitment to democracy on the part of our political parties, particularly, the top leadership.
   The Chittagong election is apparently a defeat for BNP-led government and certainly a victory for the AL-alliance. In reality, however, it is a victory of our people and their commitment to democracy. Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, LGRD minister and BNP Secretary General Abdul Mannan Bhuyian and even the defeated candidate Mir Nasir have all accepted the verdict of the people without any reservation and joined with Sheikh Hasina, Dr Kamal Hussein and other opposition leaders to congratulate the winner. Those who predicted doom and gloom before the election have been proved to be wrong. The Election Commission and relevant authorities have performed an excellent job of holding this very crucial election under very difficult circumstances. Whispers of vote rigging by the government or somebody else are no more in the air. This gives us some hope for the future. Let the spirit of peaceful competition, rather than violent confrontation, remain the cornerstone of the political process in Bangladesh.
   The writer is an academic and author, and writes from Cardiff, Wales UK
   Chintagrosto is away

The blood of the ‘faithful’ and ‘infidels’ mingle, in death at least, in the harsh streets of Baghdad and those in other cities while desperate, if not disparaging, attempts are being made indoors to form a government that will rule Iraq for a considerable period of time and until the next election. These first steps might resemble those of a toddler’s. Nevertheless, they should be appreciated as sincere attempts to give the country a chance to steer itself towards the path of democracy and self-rule. But the vision of democratising a country can become a reality only when law and order will return substantially on the streets and an environment of trust, security and tolerance will set in and prevail for a conducive parley among all the parties. On the other hand, the mayhem that is being perpetrated on a daily basis can only justify occupation by the coalition forces, giving more excuse to press the Iraqi forces to train themselves up and take charge.
   Why are the insurgents so desperate to deny the newly formed government any move towards self-rule, where Shiias, Sunnis, Kurds, Christians and other splinter groups will sit together and discuss what is best for the country? Why do they refuse to allow their own countrymen to plant the seed of democracy and take control of their own fate? The logical deduction of the political developments in post-Saddam Iraq is that no matter who helped to topple a ruthless dictator like Saddam Hussein from ill-gotten power and whoever may be angry about it, the shots will be called from here on by the Shiia population and their representatives in the future Parliament since they constitute the majority in Iraq. During the Saddam era a minority group ruthlessly dominated the majority population for over two decades. By any political theory, eastern or western, this could not have gone on forever. The inevitable finale of such misadventure and misdemeanor always turns out to be violent, painful and shameful. The history of many nations, including that of Bangladesh, has worthwhile examples to support this fact.
   The escalation in attacks in the last few weeks brings no good message for the ordinary Iraqis, especially when ethnic communities are being targeted, as has happened on the Kurds in Irbil. Observers have identified former Baathists and members of the Sunni community among the insurgents. To defuse Sunni anger or irritation the Shia prime minister and the Kurdish president are lobbying for the inclusion of the Sunnis in the cabinet. The Sunni community that enjoyed power for so long, rightly or wrongly, will have to accept certain truths in a changed regional and world order. They will have to learn to share power and show respect to the fundamental rights of others, minority or majority. The majority Shiias will also have to make it clear that they do not put all Sunnis in the same bracket with the Saddam loyalists. All Sunnis did not support the Baath party. If the new government can make good use of the talents of the Sunnis and Shiias alike it will not be difficult for them to revive the glory of Babylon once again.
   Despite the attacks, deaths and mutilation, a general election was held in January and now a government has been formed with the full mandate to govern the country as per the wish of the people and their representatives. And yet Thursday’s attack on a recruitment centre illustrates the way in which the insurgents are targeting the most critical function of the new government - its ability to provide security.
   Attacks had increased in the run up to the 30 January election but then appeared to have dropped back slightly - although they were still at about the same level as a year ago, according to General Richard Myers, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, with about 400 attacks a week. This figure covers everything from major bomb blasts to smaller incidents with no casualties. But a spate of attacks in the last week indicates that we may be encountering a new spike closely related to political manoeuvrings in Baghdad, as insurgents try to destabilise the new government.
    The sophistication and scale of some of the attacks appears to be increasing, including the use of tandem bombings, when one device is timed to go off soon after another as rescuers rush to the scene.
   Along with the political tasks, the other key challenge for Iraq in trying to stymie the insurgency is developing its own security forces.
   With a newly elected government at least partially in place, building up the ability of the Iraqi forces remains the key determinant of how long US, UK and other coalition forces stay in the country.
   But trying to establish the real strength of these Iraqi forces is not easy, not least because the raw numbers can be misleading.
   On 6 April 2005, the Multinational Command in Iraq reported there were more than 150,000 men in the Iraqi military, security and police forces.
   Recently, the Pentagon has had to lower its estimate for the number of Iraqi security forces - because the US had been counting police and soldiers who were technically on the payroll rather than those actually reporting for duty, and had been counting those who were not yet fully equipped.
   One military planner admitted that tens of thousands still included might still actually be absent.
   The repeated attacks on recruitment centres - as with Thursday’s suicide bomb - are clearly an attempt to undermine morale and recruitment as well as the ability of the security forces to combat the insurgency.
   And, as Anthony Cordesman of the US think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, points out: ‘The bad news is that such head counts say nothing about combat power.’
   He estimates that most of the national guard is still too lightly equipped and trained to perform more than limited security missions.
   In other words, even if the numbers are at last picking up, the capabilities are still a long way from matching those of the multi-national coalition, and allowing them to take greater responsibility.
   ‘The key point as people rush to talk about early exit strategies, and timelines for US withdrawal, is that creating Iraqi forces does not make them combat-effective or capable of ending crime,’ wrote Mr Cordesman in a recent report.
   Thursday’s attack may also increase pressure from the Kurdish and Shia communities to use their own well trained militias to put down the insurgency.
   But the fear is that sending Kurdish troops into predominantly Sunni towns may only further fuel sectarian tension.
   The election in January was a success. But the challenge was always going to be building on it, in order to stabilise the country in the long term and quell the insurgency. That challenge still remains.
   The writer is a senior journalist